$37B Navy Ship Lacks Firepower

And while the Rightie-wackos over at Breitbart.com are obsessing over the cost of the PRIVATELY PAID-FOR Spring Break trip for the Obama children, here's where some of your tax-dollars are going:

$37B Navy Ship Lacks Firepower
Posted: 30 Mar 2013 04:31 PM PDT[/b]

The Navy's troubled "LCS" (Littoral Combat Ship), a vessel intended to be small and speedy for use in shallow waters close to shore, lacks the firepower it needs, a top Navy commander said in a classified memo. Vice Admiral Tom Copeman, the commander of naval surface forces, called on the Navy to consider a ship with more offensive capability after the first 24 vessels are built, Bloomberg reports. Copeman's memo indicates the Navy may be starting to re-examine the $37 billion program. Derided as the Little Crappy Ship by critics inside the Navy, the ship has been beset by troubles, including cracks and corrosion, and its price has doubled since 2005 to $440 million per vessel.

Dang, I hate it when the price of a piece of military junk doubles...in 8 years... and still doesn't work.

Fascinating concept. Is there anything else already in existence that can serve the same purposes?

IMO it has aways been a staffer employment program along with the DDG-X(?) development program.

This ship has become a sore spot with the Navy. The weapons system they put on it, was suppose to be state of the art, turned out to be a huge failure. The ship cost has done nothing but increase in cost and last I heard they are debating if it will even continue. They need to shut it down and get back to the drawing board. This is what happens when military contractors run a muck and get to do whatever and just keep running the cost up. They need to find another contractor that will at least have alittle pride in their product also.

That's not how I remember it CPO. The 27B is not the cost of the ship it is the cost of R&D and development . The Navy shop in charge develops spec.'s and gives them to several contractors for competition and then plays musical spec's with them.

... and $37 BILLION of MY tax-dollars are down the tubes while the clowns at Breitbart and FauxNews worry about a privately-paid-for trip...

Oh, sorry...Please continue your discussion of the ship's armament, and the contractors...

LadyJazzer wrote: ... and $37 BILLION of MY tax-dollars are down the tubes while the clowns at Breitbart and FauxNews worry about a privately-paid-for trip...

Oh, sorry...Please continue your discussion of the ship's armament, and the contractors...

The Obamas paid the salaries of the required secret service detail?

No, they get that required security whether they stay in D.C., go to Camp David, go to Chicago, go to Crawford, Texas; go to Kennebunkport, ME; go to California or the Reagan Ranch... It's a requirement of the office, and EVERY president gets it. And I hate to break this to you, but presidents get take vacations with their families, and the Secret Service is there--whether they are Dems or Republicans.

Grow up and deal with it. And when Obama leaves office, the next president will get the same.

...And personally, I'd rather see my tax dollars go for Secret Service protection than a $37BILLION defense contractor's boondoggle for a piece of junk that doesn't work.

Bob is accurate CPO......the operators develope the spec, NAVSEA buys what the operators want (CNO) and contractors deliver what the operators ask for.

JAZZ as usual is full of BS.

FYI.....while the weenies in SF are cowering under a possible NC attack, their ONLY defense is the NAVY (yes costly - but freedom is not free) AEGIS shipboard ABM system........actually one small nuclear bomb in Honolulu and Obama cakes will have to settle for the Jewish state of Florida.