Originally Posted by
Capt Kremmen
I am aware that there are some modest differences between an advanced man of war and a cruise liner but, if my figures quoted are even nearly correct the disparity is to my understanding barely credible. Can it really be explained by the number and quality of the systems required for what looks like an admittedly impressive flat top ?
Perhaps one answer could be to build luxurious cruise liners on the 'cheap' and equipped with a flight deck. In other words dual purpose. We'd have a huge fleet of impressive touristy warships which, on account of their numbers would not be too much missed when one or two of Mr. Putin's guided torps began circling like tummy rumbling sharks !
People very often underestimate technical things, don't they? Isn't that why so many technical programmes are late and over budget? Obviously anyone who presents a realistic estimate won't get the contract because the people buying it, like you, think they can build once-off (or twice) bespoke things somehow for the same as things that are produced in volume (give or take some gold sink taps).
I mean, lets just be absurd and compare the price of a bulldozer and a tank? 200k for a bulldzer, lets guess, and 8 million for a tank. What a plan! "just" put a gun on a bulldozer and hey presto! I mean both have tracks so what's the problem?