BAE can fool themselves if they like, but the writing is on the wall. Its future growth, its future business opportunities, its future is in America.
Time to completely wall off its US branch so that it can become even more competitive. But enough of that check this out....
Time to completely wall off its US branch so that it can become even more competitive. But enough of that check this out....
Sol I think BAE already realizes the US is their key customer as they sell more to DOD than MOD. BAE in the US is separated fairly well from the parent company and has American management.
ReplyDeleteThe only thing wrong with the new naval gun was putting it on a very expensive ship that perhaps is less likely to be risked for NGS. A cost effective NGS ship might have been a 20knot double hulled modern monitor without AEGIS but with more ammo.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIMHO the thing wrong with AGS/LRLAP is that it's a very large, heavy, expensive and complex way to fire a 155mm diameter missile at a target.
ReplyDeleteNo other standard 155mm projectile will work with AGS and it has very little utility outside of NGFS.
OTOH, 70+km GMLRS has been combat-proven, and tested out to 120km.
Designing a navalized MLRS and putting it on a dedicated, low-cost hull seemed like a much cheaper and less risky way to get a similar capability.
Naval MLRS would also let you fire ATACMs too.