<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" > <channel><title>Comments on: Navy Faces Big Budget Day</title> <atom:link href="http://www.dodbuzz.com/2010/02/01/navy-faces-big-budget-day/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2010/02/01/navy-faces-big-budget-day/</link> <description>Online Defense and Acquisition Journal</description> <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 11:37:03 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator> <item><title>By: Byron Skinner</title><link>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2010/02/01/navy-faces-big-budget-day/#comment-19270</link> <dc:creator>Byron Skinner</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 01 Feb 2010 22:45:22 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=12725#comment-19270</guid> <description>Good Afternoon Folks,Here we go again the numbers game. The fact that a single DD51&#039;s could sink all the battleship of  WW II without ever being seen doesn&#039;t count. Today modern combat ships are combat multipliers and an individual ship capacity counts more then numbers.The Navy like all the rest of the services is changing. The need for large expensive platforms that can do limited missions is fading quickly into the past. There is no longer any need for a CG 47. Perhaps in the future there might be for a CGN that can stay on station with the CVN&#039;s. Right now the 15-20K haul is no longer needed, the 9.5Kt DD-51&#039;s are replacing it quite nicely. Look to see the FFG replaced by the LCS and the 3-3.5 KT LCS be replaced by the 2-2.5 Kt Corvette.ALLONS, Byron Skinner</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good Afternoon Folks,</p><p>Here we go again the numbers game. The fact that a single DD51’s could sink all the battleship of  WW II without ever being seen doesn’t count. Today modern combat ships are combat multipliers and an individual ship capacity counts more then numbers.</p><p>The Navy like all the rest of the services is changing. The need for large expensive platforms that can do limited missions is fading quickly into the past. There is no longer any need for a CG 47. Perhaps in the future there might be for a CGN that can stay on station with the CVN’s. Right now the 15-20K haul is no longer needed, the 9.5Kt DD-51’s are replacing it quite nicely. Look to see the FFG replaced by the LCS and the 3–3.5 KT LCS be replaced by the 2–2.5 Kt Corvette.</p><p>ALLONS,<br /> Byron Skinner</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Jason</title><link>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2010/02/01/navy-faces-big-budget-day/#comment-19250</link> <dc:creator>Jason</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 01 Feb 2010 21:08:47 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=12725#comment-19250</guid> <description>Sorry, for the Navy shipbuilding. </description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry, for the Navy shipbuilding.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Jason</title><link>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2010/02/01/navy-faces-big-budget-day/#comment-19249</link> <dc:creator>Jason</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 01 Feb 2010 21:08:06 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=12725#comment-19249</guid> <description>Just an update. The 2011 budget calls for $25 Billion.... </description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just an update. The 2011 budget calls for $25 Billion.…</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: BOOMER</title><link>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2010/02/01/navy-faces-big-budget-day/#comment-19233</link> <dc:creator>BOOMER</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 01 Feb 2010 17:45:54 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=12725#comment-19233</guid> <description>The NAVY does need some newer ships, but at the same time they need to stop scrapping and giving away ships still in good operational condition or that could be converted for other uses (i.e. carrier Kitty Hawk converted to Amphibious Assault &quot;helo carrier&quot;). The new carriers they want need to be capable of stand alone missions and should be along the same lines as the Russian Kiev class were with heavy armamnet for shore attacks along with anti submarine, ship, and aircraft capability. Faster and smaller craft to support littoral ops under 150 foot, armed with torpedos - cruise missles - anti aircraft - and heavy deck gun(s) and medium deck guns as well (20 to 30mm). smaller Conventional powered submarines that can operate in shallow waters and support SPECOPS is also much needed to prevent these guys from having to travel so far to deploy.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The NAVY does need some newer ships, but at the same time they need to stop scrapping and giving away ships still in good operational condition or that could be converted for other uses (i.e. carrier Kitty Hawk converted to Amphibious Assault “helo carrier”). The new carriers they want need to be capable of stand alone missions and should be along the same lines as the Russian Kiev class were with heavy armamnet for shore attacks along with anti submarine, ship, and aircraft capability. Faster and smaller craft to support littoral ops under 150 foot, armed with torpedos — cruise missles — anti aircraft — and heavy deck gun(s) and medium deck guns as well (20 to 30mm). smaller Conventional powered submarines that can operate in shallow waters and support SPECOPS is also much needed to prevent these guys from having to travel so far to deploy.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using apc
Page Caching using apc (User agent is rejected)
Database Caching 1/5 queries in 0.004 seconds using apc
Object Caching 640/641 objects using apc
Content Delivery Network via images.dodbuzz.com

Served from: dodbuzz.com @ 2012-02-09 06:59:36 -->
