(07-18-2020 02:52 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  To easy: LCS. If you get the Ford's elevators working you can just fly F-35B and V-22 off of it. The Zumwalt's were $7B dollars, but that was because the line was truncated from 30 to 3. The diminished lot size was also why the ammo was cancelled as its price point was driven up as well. The Amphib design IMO are an acknowledgement that near peer assault is a dead mission. But the LCS has done irreparable damage the surface navy. It was the impetus for retiring two classes of ships (DD's and FFG's) and left the fleet without competent ASW assets.

$15B for a STOVL carrier seems a huge waste. As does $7B for Zumwalts. And the LCSs are a total waste. I'd say give them to the Coast Guard, but they don't want them.

The LHA/LHD is to me the worst. It was not an admission that assault is a dead mission, or else why spend $3.5B apiece on them? What it is, is the reason why assault is a dead mission. It can carry a lot of Marines and a lot of equipment, and is probably a pretty comfortable ride. But it can't get any tanks or artillery ashore. So the Marines are abandoning tanks and artillery.

The LCS may destroy the surface navy. The Fords won't destroy the airedale navy but they hurt it. The Zumwalts are just wasted money. But the LHAs/LHDs are destroying the Marine Corps.

Quote:Because they retired beforehand and found employment with NNSY, GD, and LM afterward for their 'service'.

True. It's a tough question. On the one hand they have a lot of expertise that it could be useful to keep around. On the other hand, that expertise may not be useful if their loyalty is to HII, GD, or LockMart.