Abu Shaleh Rumi
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2018
- Messages
- 2,359
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Does that price includes R&D costs?It is the purchase price for PLA.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Does that price includes R&D costs?It is the purchase price for PLA.
Of course it includes.Does that price includes R&D costs?
First of all, I would say 055 is the "2nd most powerful destroyer in the world" is debatable. There are several contender out there, Type 45, Maya Class, AB Flight 3 or Sejong the Great Class just to name a few, and then if this really do get made or RN do make the Type 83, that would probably be the second most powerful destroyer in the world after Zumwalt. 055 is the biggest of them bunch, but bigger does not always mean better. Otherwise Iowa Class would probably still be in service or have a successor.Take a look at China's biggest destroyer, a $920 million cruiser that's said to be the 2nd most powerful in the world after the USS Zumwalt
The warships, which are also known as Renhai-class cruisers, are the most advanced warships China has ever made.www.google.com
Take a look at China's biggest destroyer, a $920 million cruiser that's said to be the 2nd most powerful in the world after the USS Zumwalt
BTW: 055 costs RMB 6 billion. That is 840 million dollars, not 920 million dollars.
Type 055 is not the second strongest destroyer, it is the strongest. We all know that Zumwalt is abandoned garbage.First of all, I would say 055 is the "2nd most powerful destroyer in the world" is debatable.
lie.Second of all, the price quote is lifetime cost, after that amount is pay, the ship would be said to be "Paid Off" by the Navy. Which mean that's the $$ amount that you have to pay for the ship until you deregister and decommission it. US never uses acquisition cost. They don't buy this destroyer for 3.7 billion dollars each, they are spending 3.7 billion dollars on this destroyer over its lifetime, that's the major difference here.
He is a cheerleader, what do you expect. LolType 055 is not the second strongest destroyer, it is the strongest. We all know that Zumwalt is abandoned garbage.
1st, China Type 055,
2nd, Korea Sejong class,
3rd, USA Burke 3,
4th, China 052D,
5th, Japan Atago class,
6th, Japan Kongo class,
7th, Japan Aikizuki class,
8th, China Type 052C,
9th, Britain Type 45,
10th, French Horizon class
lie.
It is impossible to pay for the maintenance of any warship and the training of sailors in a lump sum.
Type 055 is not the second strongest destroyer, it is the strongest. We all know that Zumwalt is abandoned garbage.
1st, China Type 055,
2nd, Korea Sejong class,
3rd, USA Burke 3,
4th, China 052D,
5th, Japan Atago class,
6th, Japan Kongo class,
7th, Japan Aikizuki class,
8th, China Type 052C,
9th, Britain Type 45,
10th, French Horizon class
lie.
It is impossible to pay for the maintenance of any warship and the training of sailors in a lump sum.
In theory, the Type-055 is the most powerful destroyer in the world.Type 055 is not the second strongest destroyer, it is the strongest.
Zumwalt is not trash or a failed project. The interesting fact is that Zumwalt's failures were created by the American media system.We all know that Zumwalt is abandoned garbage.
The operating cost of the Burke class is 80 million U.S. dollars a year, and the operating cost of DDG(X) is more, and it must work for at least 30 years. $3.4B is definitely not a lifetime cost.Sure, China China Bang Bang number 1. I love China long time. okay??
LOL
That's not a lie, you just know shit about life time cost.
By the way, Training of the Sailor are NOT counted toward of the cost because you don't just train a sailor to just used for that ship, you can deploy them to ANY ship within the navy, if so, how does training that sailor count toward a particular ship??
Well, scratch that, you are probably just too dumb to understand the concept of lifetime cost.
Lifetime Cost: Meaning, Example, Calculation
Lifetime cost is how much it costs to own a particular item, including the initial purchase price, spread over the lifetime of that item.www.investopedia.com
If its operating cost is 100 million usd a year. And continuously for 30 years, 3.4 billion USD is a reasonable number.The operating cost of the Burke class is 80 million U.S. dollars a year, and the operating cost of DDG(X) is more, and it must work for at least 30 years. $3.4B is definitely not a lifetime cost.
Well, considering according to Navy CBO (Congressional Budget Office) stated Zumwalt IS the cheapest ship Navy to operate, I doubt DDG(X) would be higher than the 60 million a year for Zumwalt on both direct and indirect cost.The operating cost of the Burke class is 80 million U.S. dollars a year, and the operating cost of DDG(X) is more, and it must work for at least 30 years. $3.4B is definitely not a lifetime cost.
this data of yours is very peculiar. If you follow Zumwalt's annual operating cost of $60 million and a 30-year working life, the procurement cost of DDG(X) is only $16. The purchase price of the Burke class in 2021 is 1.8 billion US dollars.Well, considering according to Navy CBO (Congressional Budget Office) stated Zumwalt IS the cheapest ship Navy to operate, I doubt DDG(X) would be higher than the 60 million a year for Zumwalt on both direct and indirect cost.
Majority of the Operational Cost is crew salary. Because each crew are going to be pay at least 35000 a year (That's a E-3 salary) to the Captain's $110,000 a year salary (usually an O-6) let's say the average of a ship crew salary is 55,000, Zumwalt, having only 150 crew (less the detachment) compare to AB's 320 complement, you are talking about 20 million a year just crew salary on an AB compare to 8.5 million on a Zumwalt (You don't get pay more if you are deployed on a Zumwalt than any of the AB class destroyer) and that's 1/4 of the entire operational cost for the Burke Class.
So no, It would have been expected the operational cost is less than probably even Zumwalt if the DDG(X) have commonality with other US Navy ship. So this is totally within the range of that price tag for life time cost if you are talking about a 30 years' service life.
Burke Class in 2021 is NOT the Burke Class in 1998 (Which I suspected flight 1 is the model you are using on your data on operating cost)this data of yours is very peculiar. If you follow Zumwalt's annual operating cost of $60 million and a 30-year working life, the procurement cost of DDG(X) is only $16. The purchase price of the Burke class in 2021 is 1.8 billion US dollars.
The 2021 Burke Class is still smaller than the DDG(X) and has far fewer weapons.Burke Class in 2021 is NOT the Burke Class in 1998 (Which I suspected flight 1 is the model you are using on your data on operating cost)
Also, Zumwalt is not the cheapest ship, it IS the cheapest ship TO OPERATE. There are a lot of cost offsetting those operational cost. Which mean if we are talking about 3.7 billion per DDG(X) you are talking about 2 billion per hull (With R&D) and 1.7 billion per operational cost, again, that is well within the possibility.
The 2021 Burke Class is still smaller than the DDG(X) and has far fewer weapons.
You mentioned CBO, and it's interesting that CBO's hull price estimates have been increasing year-over-year.
In contrast, CBO projects the LSC will cost an average of $2.8 billion, about 65 percent more than the Navy projects.
The CBO's estimates are larger than its FY 2019 report. Last year CBO estimated the LSC would cost about $2.3 billion on average per vessel, 30 percent higher than the Navy's $1.6 billion estimate. The report estimated the ships would cost $34 billion more in total than the Navy estimated (Defense Daily, Oct. 19, 2018).).
CBO: Large Surface Combatant May Cost $67 Billion More Than Navy Projects - Defense Daily
The CBO's annual analysis of the Navy’s 30-year shipbuilding plan argued the Large Surface Combatant may cost $67 billion more than the Navy estimates.www.defensedaily.com
The service estimates each LSC will cost an average of $1.7 billion per hull, which the Government Accountability Office noted is the same estimated price for the DDG-51 Flight III ship and $400 million less than the Navy’s LSC estimate in the 2017 plan.