Do you think developing new ships, instead of fixing old ones, is helping or hurting the Navy?

LTJG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 13 Dec 2017 08:03:37 -0500

The Navy has poured a lot of money into building the latest and best vessels; from new DDGs to Submarines. However, ships in the fleet are breaking component wise and are outdated. Do you think the navy should focus on refurbishing older vessels with new technology or just completely replace the ship? Same goes for any other refurbishments in the other branches.

Response by SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth made Dec 13 at 2017 8:07 AM

SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth — Wed, 13 Dec 2017 08:07:23 -0500

Tough question there sir, it depends on what the cost of refurbishing and updating would be compared to new built.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 13 at 2017 10:57 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 13 Dec 2017 10:57:28 -0500

I don't claim to be a great Navy mind, but it seems to me that there are forces within the Navy (and Congress) that want to keep building new hulls as a way to keep the shipyards operating. It seems wasteful on it's face considering it was not that long ago that we had vessels operating for many, many years just fine with regular refit and yard time.
I say follow the money. It will inform a more cogent answer.

Response by LT Brad McInnis made Dec 13 at 2017 11:47 AM

LT Brad McInnis — Wed, 13 Dec 2017 11:47:43 -0500

There is a law of diminishing returns on ships. Bringing back the Perry class FFG's, in my mind, is a non starter. You would need too much money to get them to integrate with the rest of the fleet, and to put a "modern" weapons system onboard. On the other hand, modernizing the DDG's, while the early models are getting long in the tooth, are still capable platforms. My real concern with ship building, is this idea that we can't be a great superpower if we can't make our own ships. Look at the LCS program. There were imminently more capable and PROVEN ship designs that we could have bought and made our own. Instead we decided to build 2 different hulls in 2 different shipyards, neither one of which works as designed. I could go off on my soapbox here, so I will stop before I write the next great novel!!!

Response by Sgt Martin Querin made Dec 13 at 2017 12:40 PM

Sgt Martin Querin — Wed, 13 Dec 2017 12:40:14 -0500

I concur with SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth, LTJG Private RallyPoint Member; it is a complicated question that is probably ship and mission specific. As long as the "old" ship can be economically and efficiently refurbished and be successfully deployed to accomplish it's mission then it's probably better to refurbish it than design and build a new hull and superstructure. Often the problem is working space. So many conduits and pipes fitted into the small spaces it becomes difficult to access and reroute things.

It's also more fun for politicians and Admirals to build new ships and then put a new name on it.