carr wrote:
maxim wrote:
To update nine old ships to get mediocre ships, which are already overaged and could be operated not for long periods, for 200 million each sounds pretty expensive
Rather than work from unsupported viewpoints, let's generate some data.
Nine old ships operated for an additional 10-15 yrs (let's be conservative and say just 10 yrs), at a cost of $200M each gives us (9 ships x 10 yrs = 90 ship-years of naval use) for a cost of (9 ships x $200M per ship = $1.8B.
A new Burke costs around $1.8B and has a lifespan of 35 yrs (notwithstanding the Navy's recent arbitrary and unrealistic redesignation of lifespan to be 45 yrs - like that will ever happen!).
So, a single Burke gives the Navy one ship that can be in one place, doing one thing, at a cost of $1.8B and the Navy gains 34 ship-years of use. By comparison, the nine old ships give us nine ships that can be in nine places, doing nine things, at an identical cost of $1.8B and the Navy gains 90 ship-years of use. Note the nine versus one in terms of number of ships and the 90 versus 34 ship-years.
With some actual data in hand, we can now see that the case for nine old ships is very strong - almost overwhelming.
Be careful with false equivalencies.
No year of an OHP is directly equal to one year of a Burke. So the implied 90 to 34 ratio is a misleading comparison.
Also, you omit manning costs. 9 OHPs for 10 years would require 176 crew x 9 ships x 10 years = 15840 crew years of manning vs. 276 crew x 1 ship x 34 years = 9384 crew years. (crew numbers are Wikipedia number for the purpose of illustrating the ratio. Perry's I worked with commonly carried over 200 and the Burke's closer to 330)
Also omitted are logistics for ships in 9 locations instead of one, and fuel for 9 ships instead of one.
The basic low-cost logic is sound, but beware sweeping comparisons which have too many holes.
What those 90 refit Perry years would actually buy is 90 more Burke years doing higher-end jobs Burke's should be doing by taking their place on the low intensity side.
Buying more Burke is not really the target of the Frigate option.
if 90 Perry years cost $1.8b in material, that needs to be compared to the other option - a new frigate.
9 new Frigates, average cost $1b each, 35 years service life, generates 315 years at a cost of $9b.
On a per year basis, the Perry's cost $20m per ship year, the new FF $28m per ship year.
The refit Perry's would demand replacement (another high capital expenditure) within 8 years to be replaced in 10.
The new FFs would have lower crew and maintenance costs and be more capable.
New is a no-brainer.