DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**topbonuscasino** · 07-15-2009, 12:24 AM

To get out of harm's way.(I'm serious)

That is actually a very valid point.

It's suppose to be a cheap(ish) way of providing sea control assets for the USN. The idea being that it swaps out "modules" and a "mission crew" for whatever the mission is at hand. If it's suppose to do ASW stuff, it goes into port and loads a ASW module and mission crew. If it's suppose to to anti-surface stuff, it loads that instead.

Really, the driving factor I think is that the USN decided we don't need $2bil Destroyers w/350+crew chasing pirates around. Something like these ? :

http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/fly/
http://www.navalhistory.dk/English/T...%282004%29.htm

I admit they are a bit slower, but it seems that they can hit a bit harder.

07-15-2009, 12:24 AM	#8
topbonuscasino Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 407 Senior Member	To get out of harm's way.(I'm serious) That is actually a very valid point. It's suppose to be a cheap(ish) way of providing sea control assets for the USN. The idea being that it swaps out "modules" and a "mission crew" for whatever the mission is at hand. If it's suppose to do ASW stuff, it goes into port and loads a ASW module and mission crew. If it's suppose to to anti-surface stuff, it loads that instead. Really, the driving factor I think is that the USN decided we don't need $2bil Destroyers w/350+crew chasing pirates around. Something like these ? : http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/fly/ http://www.navalhistory.dk/English/T...%282004%29.htm I admit they are a bit slower, but it seems that they can hit a bit harder.
	Quote