> While I dont doubt there are efficiencies to be had, I feel they fail to recognise diversity . Any of these weapon systems will have pros/cons. The diversity can be a strength.
You're right! And military planners are keenly aware that a diversity of capabilities is a significant strength and asset.
That said, there is a point beyond which military diversity is a handicap to ongoing operations. 20 types of fighters means maintenance is very complex and requires a lot of specialized crews. 13 types of air-to-air missiles that can't be used by all 20 types of fighters is a significant complication to battlefield logistics. Both mean manufacturing costs are higher than they need to be.
Redundancy in military equipment is perhaps not an ideal situation.
You're right! And military planners are keenly aware that a diversity of capabilities is a significant strength and asset.
That said, there is a point beyond which military diversity is a handicap to ongoing operations. 20 types of fighters means maintenance is very complex and requires a lot of specialized crews. 13 types of air-to-air missiles that can't be used by all 20 types of fighters is a significant complication to battlefield logistics. Both mean manufacturing costs are higher than they need to be.
Redundancy in military equipment is perhaps not an ideal situation.