"Will the Columbia SSBN Break the Bank?" Topic
4 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Ultramodern Warfare (2006-present) Message Board
|
 Editor in Chief Bill   | 20 Jul 2017 7:34 p.m. PST |
Placing the Columbia before all else requires serious reconsideration. First, it is generally accepted that the cost of the Columbia program could break the Navy's other shipbuilding plans into the 2030s if the National Sea-based Deterrence Fund fails to be fully funded by Congress. Second, the conviction that Columbia remains the Navy's top priority seems both a misinterpretation of the "Cooperative Strategy" and out of step with a growing international competition for sea control. Third, in the long term, the Navy's continued contribution to the nuclear triad should be questioned… link |
 David Manley  | 20 Jul 2017 9:03 p.m. PST |
Put the money from the pointless replacement strategic bomber into the sub programme for a start. That would help. |
| Khusrau | 21 Jul 2017 1:46 a.m. PST |
You mean the orbital weapons platforms won't be ready by then? I personally think tat tech advances are going to render submarine based missile systems very vulnerable within the next couple of years. It would be a shame of billion dollar subs were rolling out the yards just as they were clearly obsolete and easily detectable by autonomous underwater systems. AI controlled drone systems have a range of advantages, not least there is no need for life support. I do hope that a bunch of research is going on into how to disable small submersible semi autonomous weapons. |
| Lion in the Stars | 21 Jul 2017 8:40 a.m. PST |
It would help if the USN's annual/operational budget was separate from the shipbuilding budget, considering that ships last for 40-50 years. |
|
