Bob Work on DDG-1000

This weekend over at DANGER ROOM, I posted the results of a conversation with naval analyst Bob Work about the DDG-1000 stealth destroyer (illustrated). The Navy had hoped to buy seven DDG-1000s for up to $3 billion apiece, but decided to end the class at just two ships, citing the high cost and the ship’s unsuitability for firing and guiding air-defense missiles.

Then the Navy added a third ship, apparently to appease senators representing big defense contractors.

I quoted Bob saying that the need for more ships fitted for Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) truly drove the DDG-1000 cuts, despite defense contractor Raytheon’s claim that its DDG-1000 radar could in fact guide BMD interceptors.In the Navy’s assessment, BMD requires more of the older, cheaper DDG-51 class of destroyers.

I also relayed Bob’s comments that the current Navy chief, Admiral Gary Roughead, has long been opposed to the DDG-1000 but couldn’t say so in public until he had won over the costly vessels’ Pentagon supporters.

Now Bob writes in with some clarifications and additions. I mined his comments for an update over at DANGER ROOM, but I provide the whole message for reference here:
War is Boring

How interesting, now people can continue to refuse to allow ground based interceptor, while at the same time demanding that the US maintain a destroyer along their costal waters, and have all the missile defense benefits, and none of the stationed imperial troops drawbacks.

It's just like Will said, "wink, wink!"