Re: [GZG] FTverse colinies

["John Atkinson" <johnmatkinson@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 5:15 PM, Oerjan Ariander
<orjan.ariander1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>  Certainly. As one of the South African defence companies used to advertise:
>  "80% of the capability for 60% of the cost" :-) (Which in itself is
>  refutation of Robert's idea that monetary costs and combat power are
>  proportional to one another...)

They are, but not linearly.  :)  The last couple percentage points are
hideously expensive.  Hence only cost-effective for countries with
more money than expendable manpower.

You also have to consider that no procurement decision is made in a
vacuum.  Countries with the luxury of knowing precisely who they will
fight and where they will fight them have a different set of
priorities than a country which must project power across the globe
against unpredictable adversaries.  If your opponent's air force is
flying MiG-21s and MiG-23s, is it more cost-effective to buy a single
squadron of top-of-the line-fighters, or a couple squadrons of a less
capable, but more easily maintained aircraft?  There's also lifecycle
costs to consider--initial purchase price of a piece of military
equipment can be a relatively minor fraction of the cost of operating
it over a 10 or 20 year period.

Besides, most modern technology is less in the airframes and chassis
than in the electronics.  And electronics are often upgradable over
time.

John
-- 
"Thousands of Sarmatians, Thousands of Franks, we've slain them again
and again. We're looking for thousands of Persians."
--Vita Aureliani

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l