Let’s Split a Warship

I am reminded of the Jeep. The winning design was somehow taken over by companies able to produce a lot of them. Far as low number needs for major investments, I wonder if such splits would really work out.

Little things add up and between the Jeep, and the Garand semi automatic rifle, BAR, as opposed to the Mauser bolt action and whatever machine guns the Germans had as common, well, somebody lost.

It was Liberty Ships, and Escort Class aircraft carriers that won. Damn AK47s run the world now.

One thing to know is somebody better make a decision about what to buy when. In war things get real dirty.

"asymmetric threats"
RAOFPMSL
Del <slaps furry head with asymmetric paw>

Del,

Troops in the US AND the UK have learned allot about "asymmetric threats" over the last few years. Where the enemy uses his strongest force against our weakest force. Road Side Bomb deployed against Un-Armored Humvees or a column of guys on foot. Think Trap-Door Spider against a single Ant.

You know this. Sorry. I have a great deal of respect for you and all you contribute. I'm just hypersensitive.

I get tired of this self imposed asymmetry. We have to play nice and pull our punches while those who would kill us can be as ruthless and bloodletting as they want because they are seen as the underdog, or the oppressed, or something. . .

Frankly I think we need this type of boat. A small boat with a BIG gun to rock the badguys back on their heels. I like the idea of a "target of oppotunity" being able to fight back!

-A-

Dropping a bit OT here; so I won't be insulted if someone wants to score me that way.

I think those nations that have major shipping interests and the military wherewithall to enforce their will need to get together and take control of the high seas for the purpose of traffic control and safety. Perhaps the UN should be given the first shot at the job. If they can't make it happen and choose thereby to delegitimize themselves then maybe a separate organization can find roots in the G20 or something like that.

The idea would be to take control of certain shipping lane regions, in an outright territorial grab if necessary, declaring a "no fly" zone for any vessel lacking a proper registration, identification and trip plan. Play along and you get safe passage. Refuse and you get a nasty surprise. Simple transponder technology and a properly positioned satelite would automate a lot of it. There would always need to be local aircraft or high speed vessels to exercise visual reconassaince on "accidental" intruders. But a reputation for a pretty short fuse on the response to contacts that wouldn't cooperate or looked out of place (eg: beatup old fishing boat with a high speed inflatable on deck) would get the word around pretty fast.

I do think the Russians and Chinese among others have the balls to pull this off and give the "bronx sallute" to all the bleeding hearts. I don't know about the Europeans. And the USA is still trying to clean up it's reputation after the period of foreign policy clumsiness in the first decade of this century. Besides, most of these pirate problems are closer to eastern hemisphere commerce that of the Americas.

With respect to the "asymmetric" adjective I'm confused also. Seems the naval vessels in question in this topic are essentially offensive weapons. If you want to take the offensive to the enemy you have to find him first. Did I miss something here?

Ed Weldon

Agreed - If they just sank the Somalis who are in small boats farther than 10 km from the coast the piracy would stop overnight.

This baby sitting the clowns is beyond silly.

Russ

Warfare has always been asymmetric, and always will be. Otherwise it is pointless.

It seems to me that multiple sources can provide equipment faster than one source and the sense of competition will help to create two better ships than just one design and source.