Peacetime repairs count as "training". The savings in peacetime by outsourcing
your repair work is going to be outweighed in wartime by having important
pieces of equipment sidelined for repairs that can't be
done in the field due to a shortage of trained and experienced. If a component
is out of service, the whole assembly is out of service until the component is
repaired. Your serviceability rates start dropping as operation go on, and you
start running out of available units. So you have to have more units available
to keep an acceptable number in operation. And you wind up spending a lot more
than doing the repairs yourself would have.
Not that a civilian budget specialist is likely to look that far ahead.
And this brings up interesting prospects for mercenaries ina
science-fiction setting: repair and logistical specialists. The loss
rate among 'tail' units is lower, so the mercs like it, and experienced
specialists in the supply chain can make the difference in a campaign.
As the Slammer's say, "How much does losing cost you?"
> Glenn M Wilson wrote:
> I can accept that in many cases. It is cheaper in some situations to
IIRC one of the things about present day Mercs in Africa or South America is
that the bring a preventive maintenance mentality. Just being able to do PM on
rifles and MGs can increase the effectiveness of a "local" unit.
Michael Brown
[quoted original message omitted]
> On 19-Apr-02 at 21:46, Michael Llaneza (maserati@earthlink.net) wrote:
One of the major reasons the Navy can have such good repair is there is room
in the ship for machine shops and electronics shops. The other armed forces
don't have that immediate access. It makes sense for them to rely on depot
level maintenance because they can.
Don't know how true it is, but there is a story about the "lost" machine shop
on the USS Enterprise. Seems she was in the yards for a refit when they cut
through a bulkhead to run a cable. Inside they found a complete machine shop
completely seeled to the outside. It had been that way since initial
construction...
In a message dated 4/20/02 12:37:15 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> books@jumpspace.net writes:
> One of the major reasons the Navy can have such good repair is there
The availability of workshops is very much a part of the ability of the ships
crews to do so many repairs. However, a forgotten reason, and one pertinent to
this conversation, is the availability of storage. A ship of frigate size has
a fair amount of hold space, and can carry sheet metal, and metal blanks of
various types for the workshops to start with. Also, any ship larger than a
patrol craft carries a supply of 4x4's for damage control. There is a decent
amount of raw material actually available to the combat unit, which an
infantry/armor unit of similar size would be unable to carry with them.
and a rapidly redeploying Air unit would find just cumbersome.
Back in the late 70's I heard the story about the workshop, and even talked to
people who claimed to have been on board. Never was able to confirm it.
Presumably after the equipment was installed and the next deck built, no one
cut a door into it. But I always wondered how it got past inspections by the
shipwrights who were holding the plans in their hands and looking over the
construction. True or not, its a good story.
John Rebori ETN2 (Discharged)
USN 1976 - 1982
ex-USS Pegasus PHM-1