Does US navy need the "Ghost"

Discussion in 'Warfare / Military' started by Same Issues, Aug 28, 2014.

  1. Same Issues

    Same Issues Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2014
    Messages:
    1,559
    Likes Received:
    530
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Is the Navy missing the boat on the stealthy Ghost warship?
    http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/27/us/ghost-stealth-warship-prototype/index.html?hpt=hp_bn1
    Sancoff is CEO of Juliet Marine Systems — maker of a futuristic-looking, 21st-century warship that he says can protect large Navy ships from attacks by small boats.
    Simply put, Ghost looks a lot like an F-117 "stealth" attack jet — on skis.
    The USS Cole remembers its deadly past
    U.S. tests coolest amphibious vehicle
    Military robot navigates through woods
    A year after unveiling Ghost and pricing it at $10 million per boat, the Navy has unofficially expressed interest, Sancoff said, but nothing more.
    Longtime Washington-based defense policy expert John Pike, director of GlobalSecurity.org told CNN, "It's hard to see what problem [Ghost] solves that hasn't already been solved several other ways."


    *****************************

    Not sure if its useful for the navy to buy these in large numbers. The tech is interesting design wise but as stated above there are other solutions to the problems it is made for.

    Maybe it would be useful in shallow waters to protect a fleet by engaging directly? Anyone else have an opinion.

    At 10mil it seems kinda cheap for military naval gear, and with other countries showing slight interest it could be interesting to see where this goes.
     
  2. Nightmare515

    Nightmare515 Ragin' Cajun Staff Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,132
    Likes Received:
    4,899
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If the US Navy can find a practical use for it then Im all for it. $10 mil is extremely cheap for military hardware especially naval hardware and especially stealth hardware. That thing doesn't cost much more than an Abrams tank.

    To be honest when I first read it was only 10 mil I thought it was a typo and they meant $100 mil per boat. Just think a B-2 stealth bomber is something like $740 million per plane and an F-22 is like $150 mil per plane. $10 mil for a stealth boat is a great price.

    Plus it looks cool it kinda looks like the shuttle craft from Star Trek lol.
     
  3. AlpinLuke

    AlpinLuke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2014
    Messages:
    6,559
    Likes Received:
    588
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It's too cheap, this is why US government is not that interested [! You know politicians and public expenses ...].

    A part an easy joke, I'm reasoning about which could be the advantage to have such a vehicle on board of a wider unit.

    It's stealth. Ok, but for what?

    To attack surface enemy units? Subs are there ... stealth fighters are there [and F35B costs enough to be embarked on carriers!].
    To approach enemy coast lines to deploy special units? Stealth silent helicopters are already there [and they don't stop in front of a coast].
    To spy enemy hostile inland following a river? Stealth drones are there and they fly without the limitation imposed by having to follow a river.

    Honestly, a part it's cool, I don't see a great necessity to have this "ghost" [not only for US Navy, but for navies in general].
     
  4. tkolter

    tkolter Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,134
    Likes Received:
    598
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Its cheap, can be operated remotely allowing for special payloads like a nuke, is cheap, is cool and the government spent not a dime developing it and I'm sure if we don't buy them other parties will a drug cartel might get one to move narcotics at the price these are easily affordable by the best criminal organizations.
     
  5. AlpinLuke

    AlpinLuke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2014
    Messages:
    6,559
    Likes Received:
    588
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    If they add an hovercraft propulsion system to make the ghost able to run also above soil, it will become more expensive [first of all!] and it would improve a lot its operative capabilities.
     
  6. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,497
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I can see it as part of a forward defense and warning system.

    But don't look for this to replace any of our surface combatants.
     
  7. Strasser

    Strasser Banned

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    4,219
    Likes Received:
    526
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sad but true, mostly. As for the other costs cited, if political hacks could be moved to implement rigorous auditing oversight and accounting from contractors, those costs could be cut by 50% to 70%. Fat chance of that; visit DC some time and see all the big law firms paid handsomely to prevent such tragedies being inflicted on our poor hapless defense industries and the hacks who spend most of their day running around with both hands out. This sort of business as usual is as big a threat to our national security as there is on the planet, yet not a thing is ever done to change this.
     
  8. AlpinLuke

    AlpinLuke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2014
    Messages:
    6,559
    Likes Received:
    588
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Thinking to patrolling purposes I can see a lack: the unit misses an air observer. For example Italian Navy has invested in many light units carrying a helicopter to patrol the seas to intercept boats with illegal immigrants.

    The ghost could be useful if it would have a little deck to make a helicopter take off and take land, otherwise, better fast boats ... [so it would be bigger].
     

Share This Page