![]() And this could all be for naught, so instead of serving a productive purpose, it continues to suck in more money in a failed concept. It's possibly the sunk-cost fallacy at work.īecause it's going to cost money to put a railgun on a Zumwalt, train the Zumwalt crew, put new equipment into the Zumwalt and likely have to detach the turrets already on the Zumwalt to facilitate this all. And if they don't, they've just compromised the extremely expensive stealth technology of a whole Zumwalt by mounting a test weapon on it that can be easily picked up on radar. Not to mention the Zumwalt is a stealth ship, which mean the railguns might also need expensive stealth technology integrated into them if they choose to accept them as weapons for the Zumwalt. ![]() ![]() The money spent on R&D and construction of the ships is already spent, they might as well serve a productive purpose.īecause it's going to cost money to put a railgun on a Zumwalt, train the Zumwalt crew, put new equipment into the Zumwalt and likely have to detach the turrets already on the Zumwalt to facilitate this all. ![]() How is the cost of the Zumwalt relevant to the budget of the rail-gun technology, which I’m assuming is a separate project? This is a case of developing a new technology for wider application by the Department of Defense, and it makes complete sense to use the new, advanced ships with the preexisting systems to support it as the testbed. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |