<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/">

	<channel>
	  <!-- main channel info -->
        <title>Only 2 DDX ships?</title>
        <link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/topic/2850/Only-2-DDX-ships</link>
        <description>
        <![CDATA[ Did anyone catch Matt's latest posting on the DD(X) repository thread?

Latest post 5/1

It appears that this proposal is being taken seriously.  If we build only 2 DD(X) -- sorry, DDG1000 ships -- as technology demonstrators, then what next?  How many more billions will we need to spend for the R&amp;D and a new real class of DDGs?

Perhaps this is shaping up to be similar to the SSN-21 Seawolf / Virginia class experience.  Any thoughts?

Ben ]]>
        </description>

		<!-- optional elements -->
		<language>en-us</language>
		<copyright>Copyright 2011, Yuku</copyright>
		<managingEditor>feeds@yuku.com (FeedMaster)</managingEditor>
		<webMaster>webmaster@yuku.com (WebMaster)</webMaster>
		<!-- note: dates need to be RFC 822 formated "Sat, 07 Sep 2002 00:00:01 GMT" -->
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 May 2006 15:13:16 GMT</pubDate>
		<lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 May 2006 15:07:49 GMT</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>Kickapps Feeds 1.0</generator>
		<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
		<ttl>60</ttl>

		<rating>
		{pics-1.1 &quot;http://www.icra.org/ratingsv02.html&quot; l gen true for &quot;http://yuku.com&quot; r (nz 1 vz 1 lz 1 oz 1 cz 1 ) &quot;http://www.rsac.org/ratingsv01.html&quot; l gen true for &quot;http://yuku.com&quot; r (n 0 s 0 v 0 l 0 ))
		</rating>
		<textInput>
			<title>Search</title>
			<description>Search Domain</description>
			<name>q</name>
			<link>http://yuku.com/search/direct/</link>
		</textInput>
		<!-- skip
		<skipHours>
			<hour>23</hour>
		</skipHours>
		<skipDays>
			<day>Monday</day>
			<day>Wednesday</day>
			<day>Friday</day>
		</skipDays>-->
		<!-- extensions -->


		<!-- channel items -->
		<!-- descriptions should be shorter than 500 char to be polite -->
		<!-- html shoud be stripped or escaped -->
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: Only 2 DDX ships? ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39117/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39117</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ The role for the LCS or the LPD-17 derivative isn't going to magically appear once those ships are built, today they are being done already. While under the radar to some, contracts like  N00019-05-C-0045  are currently handling the duties in the meantime...<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39117/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39117">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (Galrahn)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39117</guid>
			<pubDate>Mon, 15 May 2006 15:07:49 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: Only 2 DDX ships? ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39116/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39116</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ In Construction Project Management 101, we were told that if your customer really doesn't know what he wants, tell him to bring lots of money.  He'll need it. 

Etc etc.  

Anyway, something which was left unsaid in the referenced LCS discussion was the q...<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39116/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39116">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (Scott Brim)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39116</guid>
			<pubDate>Sun, 14 May 2006 20:19:21 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: Only 2 DDX ships? ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39115/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39115</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Hi,

I looked over the discussions at the link you provided, and have to say that, although I'm definitely not an LCS enthusiast at this time, I didn't really find the arguments in support of an LPD-17 deriviative very persuasive, for a couple of reasons....<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39115/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39115">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (Unregistered(d))</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39115</guid>
			<pubDate>Sun, 14 May 2006 19:57:14 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: Only 2 DDX ships? ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39114/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39114</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ where Defense &quot;needs to meet requirements&quot; are adjusted to match the budget without openly admitting it... or even changing the public list of &quot;needs&quot;. ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (bager1968)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39114</guid>
			<pubDate>Sun, 14 May 2006 05:01:15 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: Only 2 DDX ships? ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39113/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39113</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Galrahn, in your various responses, you have put your finger on a number of important issues.  I would place these issues into the following context:

(1) The cost in time and money needed to achieve the Navy's ambitious technology goals in support of mul...<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39113/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39113">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (Scott Brim)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39113</guid>
			<pubDate>Sat, 13 May 2006 16:47:50 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: Only 2 DDX ships? ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39112/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39112</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Excellent sources, thank you, exactly what I was looking for.

Ben ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (benbox)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39112</guid>
			<pubDate>Fri, 12 May 2006 15:07:55 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: Only 2 DDX ships? ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39111/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39111</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Quote:Ah, I get it. You're arguing that the Navy's surface fleet plan is too low. It appeared (to me at least) that you were arguing the opposite, based on the VLS metric.

I am not advocating either side actually, what I am advocating is balance within t...<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39111/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39111">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (Galrahn)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39111</guid>
			<pubDate>Thu, 11 May 2006 18:05:57 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: Only 2 DDX ships? ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39110/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39110</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Quote:The problem isn't Congress going after the DD(X) program, the problem is how rediculous the 313-ship plan is, and how it doesn't even meet the Navy's own stated requirements, unless 30% fewer Cruisers and Destroyers is considered within acceptable l...<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39110/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39110">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (benbox)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39110</guid>
			<pubDate>Thu, 11 May 2006 15:01:54 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: Only 2 DDX ships? ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39109/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39109</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Quote:Your argument also assume the 8000 VLS is all that is needed, with out providing proof that 8000 is enough to cover the needed of the navy. 

Therefore I ask you to prove that less that the 8000 missile level you think is enough? 

Where did my argu...<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39109/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39109">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (Galrahn)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39109</guid>
			<pubDate>Thu, 11 May 2006 14:25:01 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: Only 2 DDX ships? ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39108/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39108</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Your argument also assume the 8000 VLS is all that is needed, with out providing proof that 8000 is enough to cover the needed of the navy. 

It should be remembered that one reason for building  DD21 was to replace a great deal of CAS with surface missil...<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39108/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39108">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (g lof2)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39108</guid>
			<pubDate>Wed, 10 May 2006 21:04:47 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: Only 2 DDX ships? ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39107/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39107</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Quote:Isn't it usually countered with the &quot;only x # of hulls available, and we need them in x + 1 regions of the world&quot; argument?

Didn't the Navy concede that argument when the number of hulls was reduced from 24 to 7?

With the number of hulls...<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39107/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39107">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (Galrahn)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39107</guid>
			<pubDate>Wed, 10 May 2006 20:10:33 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: Only 2 DDX ships? ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39106/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39106</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Interesting, I had not considered counting VLS cells as a measure of fleet sufficiency.  

I can see the validity of it, but in a narrow sense.  Isn't it usually countered with the &quot;only x # of hulls available, and we need them in x + 1 regions of th...<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39106/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39106">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (benbox)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39106</guid>
			<pubDate>Wed, 10 May 2006 14:59:17 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: Only 2 DDX ships? ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39105/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39105</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ I have a different take on the changes, mostly due to the compelling Testimony given to both chambers regarding the results of the QDR, the questions raised regarding the 313 ship plan, and the Navy making the decision to lower R&amp;D costs while committ...<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39105/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39105">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (Galrahn)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39105</guid>
			<pubDate>Wed, 10 May 2006 03:29:02 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: Only 2 DDX ships? ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39101/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39101</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Hi,

Ive seen a couple people suggest that they think the LCS will eventually turn into some form of Frigate or light destroyer, but it is unclear to me what they really mean.  As I understand it, the original LCS program was to build a couple Flight 0 ...<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39101/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39101">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (Unregistered(d))</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39101</guid>
			<pubDate>Sun, 07 May 2006 14:42:33 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: Only 2 DDX ships? ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39102/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39102</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ I think that the US armed forces are going to end up going to their historic &quot;peace time&quot; levels, which is probably on the order of 2% of GDP (vs about 4% now, according to www.cia.gov/cia/publicati....html#Govt ).

The biggest long term threats...<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39102/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39102">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (emc)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39102</guid>
			<pubDate>Sat, 06 May 2006 21:13:22 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: Only 2 DDX ships? ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39100/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39100</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Quote:LCS will evolve into a somewhat more capable frigate replacement within the hi-lo mix

Most probably.

Quote:but DDX/DDG-1000 will not be cancelled since the program feeds too many Congressional districts

The USN has been procrastinating on adoptin...<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39100/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39100">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (seasick)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39100</guid>
			<pubDate>Sat, 06 May 2006 20:13:47 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: Only 2 DDX ships? ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39099/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39099</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Quote:Prediction: DDX goes away, and the LCS is expanded into a more capable &quot;DEX&quot; type design. The hi-lo mix are Burkes (including probably a Flight IV) and the resulting DEX...
LCS will evolve into a somewhat more capable frigate replacement w...<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39099/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39099">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (Scott Brim)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39099</guid>
			<pubDate>Sat, 06 May 2006 17:19:54 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: Only 2 DDX ships? ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39104/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39104</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ The Senate Armed Services Committee completed its markup of FY07 National Defense Authorization Bill yesterday (05/04/2006), which contains no provision for a 2-ship limit on DD(X) :

FY2007 NDAA - SASC Mark-Up (05/04/2006) ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (MattReloaded)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39104</guid>
			<pubDate>Fri, 05 May 2006 11:13:25 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: Only 2 DDX ships? ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39103/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39103</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ FY2007 NDAA - Summary of Committee Mark-Up (05/03/2006)

Congress Daily Article (04/27/2006)

Aerospace Daily Article (04/28/2006)

MARINELOG Article (04/28/2006) ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (MattReloaded)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39103</guid>
			<pubDate>Thu, 04 May 2006 12:46:16 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: Only 2 DDX ships? ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39098/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39098</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ the cost of the Army and Air national guards; no surprise there.

 My guess is that by the FY 09 budget, we'll be looking at a 50 percent cut in the current OOB, all branches - the Navy and Marines will probably come out the best, the Army in the Middle...<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39098/Only-2-DDX-ships#reply-39098">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (Brad Smith III)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/39098</guid>
			<pubDate>Thu, 04 May 2006 05:05:02 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Only 2 DDX ships? ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/topic/2850/Only-2-DDX-ships</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Did anyone catch Matt's latest posting on the DD(X) repository thread?

Latest post 5/1

It appears that this proposal is being taken seriously.  If we build only 2 DD(X) -- sorry, DDG1000 ships -- as technology demonstrators, then what next?  How many mo...<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/topic/2850/Only-2-DDX-ships">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (benbox)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/topic/2850</guid>
			<pubDate>Tue, 02 May 2006 15:13:16 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
    <!-- end items -->

  </channel>
</rss>
