A super-stealthy warship that could underpin the U.S. navy's China strategy will be able to sneak up on coastlines virtually undetected and pound targets with electromagnetic "railguns" right out of a sci-fi movie.
But at more than $3 billion a pop, critics say the new DDG-1000 destroyer sucks away funds that could be better used to bolster a thinly stretched conventional fleet.
Add in the R & D and you get $7 billion. We can afford three. Well, "afford" is the wrong word.
Also consider that the ship would have to penetrate to within range of China's coast all by itself because no other surface ship the Navy has possesses the same stealth features. It would be silly to sail with non-stealth ships, no?
Further, the ship is stealthy--not invisible. Even if a DDG-1000 bombards China's coast, might not the Chinese look for what did it?
Speaking of the bombardment, would the Chinese be able to detect all the projectiles and missiles that pound their shore targets? Or are they all stealth munitions, too?
We have this thing we're calling Air-Sea Battle doctrine. I suggest bombarding China be the air part using long-range bombers with stand-off weapons. And cruise missiles. Lots of cruise missiles.
Honest to God, I think our Littoral Combat Ships are too expensive to send into actual littorals. Yet we will send this 600-foot long ship that displaces more than 14,000 tons--making it longer and half again larger than our current cruisers--and expect it to survive? Good grief, we can't afford it if the paint gets scratched let alone risking scratching one off the fleet list.
I'm going to close my vertical blinds, now, and quietly weep for our Navy.
