美國海軍首長：或許是時候重新服役退役戰艦了

正文翻譯

原創翻譯：龍騰網 翻譯：翻譯加工廠 轉載請註明出處

論壇地址：http://www.ltaaa.com/bbs/thread-447233-1-1.html

-------------譯者：kfab-審核者：Wendypanying------------

In a speech before the Naval War College yesterday Chief of Naval Operations Admiral John Richardson said that the Navy is looking at "every trick" to grow the fleet more quickly toward the Navy"s goal of 355 ships including extending the lives of ships already in the fleet and "bringing ships back." And one of the candidates for a comeback Richardson said is the Oliver Hazard Perryclass frigate. (The Iowa-class battleships despite political posturing by President Trump during the election campaign have not yet been mentioned.)

美國海軍作戰部長約翰·理查德森上將昨天在海軍軍事學院的演講中講到美國海軍正在盡一切辦法來實現總數355艘軍艦的艦隊規模的目標包括延長在役軍艦的壽命和修復退役戰艦.其中有可能重新服役的戰艦就包括了奧利弗·哈澤德·佩里級護衛艦。(儘管特朗普總統在競選活動期間有過表態要恢復戰列艦服役，但是衣阿華級戰列艦並未被提及)。

-------------譯者：ygytnt1001-審核者：龍騰翻譯總管------------

The Perry class ships were the Navy"s equivalent of the Air Force"s A-10 Thunderbolt II—workhorse ships that lacked the glamor of larger more capable commands that performed missions essential to the fleet. They were originally built as guided missile frigates (FFGs) intended to provide a combination of air and antisubmarine defenses for carrier battle groups. The few ships being considered for reactivation were all built in the late 1980s and decommissioned over the past five years. About 10 are held in the Navy"s Inactive Fleet Inventory designated for foreign sale while the remainder are slotted to be scrapped or sunk as targets.

佩里級護衛艦在海軍的地位相當於空軍的A-10雷電2攻擊機——那種缺乏大規模指揮能力但又執行艦隊必須任務的主力艦。它們最初是作為制導導彈護衛艦(FFGs)，目的是為航母戰鬥群防空和反潛。正在考慮重新啟用的都是些建造於上世紀80年代，並退役於最近5年的戰艦。大概有10艘停放在海軍備用艦庫，準備外售。剩下的準備廢棄或者作為靶艦。

The Australian Navy has managed to keep three of its original Perry-class frigates (known as theAdelaide class) in service through upgrades to its power plants and other life-extending maintenance. Several other navies still operate former US ships of the class.

澳大利亞海軍對其海軍中保有的三艘佩里級（即阿德萊德級）進行了火力系統和其他延長服役期的升級。一些其他海軍還在沿用原來的該級別戰艦。

-------------譯者：ygytnt1001-審核者：jacy99------------

But the US Navy moved to decommission all of its Perry FFGs to make room for the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) classes claiming heavy wear from overuse had rendered them too expensive to keep afloat. The move has been seen as more political than operational by many analysts because the Navy"s leadership had neglected the ships for so long—putting off upgrades to the missile system and then dispensing with it altogether and replacing it with M242 Bushmaster automatic cannons. The Navy instead spent its budget on newer larger more capable ships (the Arleigh Burkeclass guided missile destroyers) and on the LCS with its "modular" mission capabilities.

但是美國海軍為了給新的瀕海戰鬥艦騰位置，聲稱由於過度使用而造成的沉重磨損使得佩里級護衛艦的維護成本過高。此舉已經被分析證實政治意味大於實際情況。因為海軍領導層長久以來忽視此艦——擱置了升級它的導彈系統並把預算用在更利害的艦艇（阿里·伯克級制導導彈驅逐艦）和瀕海戰鬥艦的「模塊化」任務能力上。

Regardless of the reasoning behind the neglect the Perry ships were put into mothballs faster than the Navy could replace them leaving a major gap in the US fleet.

不管背後的真正原因是什麼，在海軍還不能完全替換佩里級護衛艦時就把它過快退役，造成了美國海軍的青黃不接的現狀。

評論翻譯

原創翻譯：龍騰網 翻譯：翻譯加工廠 轉載請註明出處

論壇地址：http://www.ltaaa.com/bbs/thread-447233-1-1.html

-------------譯者：ygytnt1001-審核者：yuchen------------

Beery 10 hours ago

Probably still more reliable that the newest class I"m always reading about breaking down.

可能是要比新艦更可靠，我經常看到新艦出問題的報道。

Adam 10 hours ago

The Perry hulls should be serviceable with upxed drives and electronics installed. There are many mothballed that haven"t been dismantled.

佩里級如果裝上新的電子設備和動力系統還是可以一戰的。還有很多封存起來的沒拆呢。

mark 10 hours ago

When you consistantly grossly overpay for subpar "newer" crap that cant perform the tasks it was designed for and then spend years and even more money to get those capabilities you end up sacrificing proven platforms and shooting yourself in the foot.

你心甘情願花大錢搞出那些根本達不到設計目的的「最新」垃圾，然後還要花更多的錢讓它能用。最後的結果就是犧牲那些證明過自己的武器平台，然後搬起石頭砸自己的腳。

Cletus 11 hours ago

Great. If we are turning back the clock on everything else might as well bring back the battle wagons and bi-planes.

好極了。如果時光倒流我們還可以把戰車和雙翼飛機也用上。

-------------譯者：ygytnt1001-審核者：Anunnaki------------

AndrewG 10 hours ago

I"m surprised that we"re not building the Trump class mega-aircraft carrier which would include a hotel and casino of course.

我就奇了怪了為啥我們不造一個特朗普級殲星艦，就是那種帶酒店和賭場的。

THE LAST STAND 9 hours ago

Iowa class battleships are huge missile frigates to start with. Remove the 16 inch navel guns at both ends and install launch platforms for vertical takeoff F-35 fighter jets. Mount rail guns on both sides.

依阿華級戰列艦是巨型導彈護衛艦。 拆下兩端的16英寸炮，並安裝用於垂直起飛的F-35戰鬥機的發射平台。 兩側安裝軌道炮。

Scott 11 hours ago

FTN! glad i got out when i did. you can keep all your homos and trannies.

FTN！（某番號？）我已經索然無味了。你們就繼續搞基和異裝癖吧。（開車？）

Malvado 9 hours ago

Yes I agree these retired warships are not run by computers and a EMP bomb will not affect them at all. There is a movie about this very scenario called "Battleship."

我同意。這些退役戰艦不是電腦運行的，不受EMP（電磁脈衝彈）影響。有一個講這種情景的電影叫「戰列艦」（Battleship）。

-------------譯者：創新-審核者：szj0318------------

The Trickle That Never Was 10 hours ago

Is that unbiased opinion?

那是個公正的的意見嗎？

-------------譯者：ygytnt1001-審核者：龍騰翻譯總管------------

Leigh 8 hours ago

Reagan brought back some boats & they were pretty effective in the conflicts they were deployed in... Love to see a battleship upgraded and back in service. Most hostile issues against the USA can be solved with a sufficient amount of US Naval Fire Power.

里根就利用了一些舊船，他們在我們參與的衝突中很有效...戰艦升級並重新服役是喜聞樂見的。如果海軍力量足夠強大，大部分針對美國的敵意都可以得到解決。

Yahoo Reader 9 hours ago

Why? We already outspend the next 24 nations combined. 22 of which are allies. How about this...stop buying crap like the Ford Carrier and the LCS and buy ships that work and are affordable. I realize that will mean less bribes for the local Congressman but everyone has to sacrifice..

為什麼？我們的海軍預算已經超出了後面24個國家的總和。22個還是盟友。不如這樣...不要再弄福特級航母和瀕海戰鬥艦這樣的垃圾，買一些可以負擔得起的。我明白這意味著一些國會議員的回扣就少了，但是每個人都要做出犧牲。

Vincent 8 hours ago

The answer is Carrier"s Not Battle Ships. War is now Conducted @ Sea from the Air. VJVMD

答案就是航母不是戰列艦。現代戰爭是以空制海的。VJVMD

-------------譯者：xxh911-審核者：龍騰翻譯總管------------

stumpedII 10 hours ago

Don"t be fooled NO ONE has said they need these vessels for security or defense. They are purely just more industrial complex looting of the national treasury. there is no other reason. don"t bother looking for one.

別被那些說需要這些戰艦來確保安全與防衛的人忽悠 。他們純粹的只是要用軍工複合體對國家財富進行更多的掠奪。這根本不存在任何借口，沒有必要專門為此找一個。

KEYVAN 9 hours ago

Why waste tax-dollars on an already bloated defense budget? Considering that even the whole world hasn"t been able to defeat 30000 ISIS fighters what country with the right mind is going to attack US. THERE ARE NO THREATS. Besides whether US has 100 ships or 1000 ships what difference it makes when an attack on US will certainly means the end of the world anyways(WW3). No don"t listen to this admiral who wants job security No don"t bring back those ships based on imaginary threats instead use the money for the people today.

為什麼要浪費納稅人的錢到這些已經嚴重膨脹的國防預算上呢？ 考慮到即使全世界（聯合起來）都不能夠擊敗30000 ISIS戰士，又有什麼有正常心智的國家會想要攻擊美國。根本不存在什麼威脅。此外，美國擁有100艘還是1000艘戰艦又有什麼區別呢，攻擊美國就意味著世界的終結（第三次世界大戰）。別聽這個只是想要保住自己工作的上將在這瞎扯。別因為那些想像中的威脅而把現在用在人民身上的錢拿去弄這些船。

-------------譯者：加勒比海神-審核者：龍騰翻譯總管------------

g-mac 9 hours ago

May as well go to the mothball fleet since all the new stuff is crap and doesn"t not work. The Littoral ships are all now just "training" ships. The latest nuke carrier can launch but not retrieve. The latest nuke sub has so many sub standard parts in its engine compartment it is a threat to the crew. The $1.5T pos F-35 is grounded again for pilot oxygen supply problems AGAIN the 3rd or 4th time. Russia has and used in Syria a Cruise missile with a 1500 mile range more than twice our Cruise missile range. The Littorals automated fire control system repeated failed and there"s no override nor manual control for the beer can thick hulled ship.

可以去啟用封存的艦隊，因為所有的新武器都是屎而且不能工作。所有的濱海戰鬥艦現在只不過是訓練艦而已。最新的一艘核動力航母可以發射飛機卻無法回收。最新的一艘核動力潛艇在它的發動機艙內存在許多次級零件，這威脅到了艦員的安全。1.5萬億的F-35又因為飛行員的氧氣供應問題而擱淺了，這已經是第三次或第四次了。俄羅斯在敘利亞使用的巡航導彈擁有1500英里的射程，足足比我們的導彈射程大了兩倍。濱海戰鬥艦的自動火控系統又出問題而且對於這個易拉罐一樣厚的雙殼船來說它沒有重置或者手動控制系統。

Ken 1 hour ago

Bring back the battleships as well. Obama put this country to the point where we need everything that can float and fire weapons be ready at a moments notice until we have satisfactory replacement ships. Put our entire moth ball fleet (ghost fleet) back into service.

重新使用舊戰艦是不錯的主意。奧巴馬讓我們國家陷入了可以浮動且發射武器的艦艇都必須隨時進入戰備狀態的境地，直到我們擁有令人滿意的替代艦艇，所以把我們的鬼船都重新啟用吧。

-------------譯者：加勒比海神-審核者：龍騰翻譯總管------------

MaleChauvinistPig 2 hours ago

Oliver Hazard Perry Class nothing but French designed JUNK!

佩里級護衛艦不過是法國人設計的垃圾！

RVN Vet 7 hours ago

The US Navy did FRAM Mk 1 & II upgrades on WWII destroyers and extended their service life to 30 years. The same can be done with decommissioned FFG"s and other surface warfare ships today. I served on a DDR that was commissioned 1/45 and the service life was extended to 1975 and only decommissioned because it had developed cracks in the high pressure steam lines and the Navy deemed the repair cost to be too high .

美國海軍確實在二戰時期的驅逐艦上升級了了mk1和mk2從而將他們的使用壽命延長至30年。同樣的事也可以在已經退役的導彈護衛艦和其他水面戰艦上做。我曾經在一艘DDR驅逐艦上服役，它在1945年入役並且服役年限延長到了1975年，僅僅因為高壓蒸汽管線出現裂縫而退役，海軍認為修復它的代價太高了。

antal 7 hours ago

Regan did it to show strength to the Soviets but the Soviet demise was more contributed to Levi Straus Rock music the Pope and the inefficiency and hardship of the communist gangster system. We had wasted tens of billions or hundreds of billions on the 600 ship navy.

里根通過這種方式向蘇聯展示實力，但是導致蘇聯覆滅的原因主要應該歸功於李維-斯特勞斯（牛仔褲發明者），搖滾樂、教皇還有低效又困難的共產主義系統。我們已經浪費了數百億或數千億美元在600艘艦船上了。

-------------譯者：加勒比海神-審核者：龍騰翻譯總管------------

Foo Yoo Mo Fo 1 hour ago

Old timer here they need to come up with a FRAM program. Fit a VLS and a Raytheon: Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR) a couple of bushmasters and phalanx ciws and do any hull living space and engineering upgrades. If nothing else they can use these as ships to escort cargo ships and to pick up survivors of the LCS after they are sunk

我是老手，應該制定出一個艦艇與飛機修復和現代化計劃了，安裝垂直發射系統和雷聲公司的防空反導雷達，雙聯裝的毒蛇導彈和密集陣近程防禦系統，而且要改善生活艙並且做一些工程上的升級。如果無事可做，他們可以用這些船隻去護衛商船或者在瀕海戰鬥艦沉沒時營救倖存者。

DitheringAlong 9 hours ago

"In the councils of government we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence whether sought or unsought by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist." Dwight D. Eisenhower 1961

艾森豪威爾在1961年說過「 我們必須防止軍工聯合體有意無意的接管了我們的政府，錯位力量的災難性崛起是可能存在的，並且將會一直存在下去。」

喜歡這篇文章嗎？立刻分享出去讓更多人知道吧！