QA回答：為什么美國(guó)仍在建造老舊的阿利·伯克級(jí)驅(qū)逐艦，而中國(guó)卻打算下水75艘現(xiàn)代化的055型驅(qū)逐艦？055型驅(qū)逐艦被認(rèn)為是世界上最好的軍艦。
Why is the US still building the obsolete Arleigh Burke destroyers while China intends to launch 75 modern Type 055 destroyers? The type 055s are considered the best warships in the world.
譯文簡(jiǎn)介
為什么美國(guó)仍在建造老舊的阿利·伯克級(jí)驅(qū)逐艦，而中國(guó)卻打算下水75艘現(xiàn)代化的055型驅(qū)逐艦？055型驅(qū)逐艦被認(rèn)為是世界上最好的軍艦。
正文翻譯
嗯，我不敢斷言055型是“最好”的軍艦。事實(shí)上，我甚至不會(huì)說(shuō)它是最好的驅(qū)逐艦，因?yàn)樵谠S多海軍中都有許多可媲美的驅(qū)逐艦和護(hù)衛(wèi)艦（其中一些具有明顯的優(yōu)勢(shì)和符合其國(guó)家需求的設(shè)計(jì)）。
評(píng)論翻譯
很贊 ( 16 )
收藏
All right, let’s temporarily assume that the statement that the Type 055 is the best warship in the world is true. That’s a pretty bold statement given that warships include these:
好的，讓我們暫時(shí)假設(shè)055型是世界上最好的軍艦這個(gè)說(shuō)法是真實(shí)的?？紤]到軍艦包括以下這些，這是一個(gè)相當(dāng)大膽的說(shuō)法：
Personally, I think I’d rather have a Ford class, but that may just be me.
Did you bother to check how many Type 055s the PLAN has in service?
Here, I’ll do the Google legwork for you: they have eight. That’s one less than nine. In fact, the US has more supercarriers in service than China has Type 055s.
Want to know how many Burke class destroyers are in service? You know what, I’ll let you look this one up.
As far as the proclaimed obsolescence of the Burke class, bear in mind that the ones being built now are not the same as the ones built in the 90s. For that matter, the ones built in the 90s aren’t the same as they were in the 90s. The US military actually upgrades its hardware, unlike some other major powers who will remain unnamed.
就我個(gè)人而言，我寧愿選擇一艘福特級(jí)航母，但這可能只是我自己的想法。
你有沒有費(fèi)心去查一下中國(guó)海軍有多少艘055型驅(qū)逐艦在役？
我來(lái)幫你做谷歌搜索：他們有8艘。不足9艘。事實(shí)上，美國(guó)在役的超級(jí)航母比中國(guó)在役的055型驅(qū)逐艦還要多。
想知道有多少艘伯克級(jí)驅(qū)逐艦在役嗎？你知道嗎，這次我讓你自己去查。
至于伯克級(jí)被宣稱過時(shí)的問題，請(qǐng)記住，現(xiàn)在正在建造的伯克級(jí)與90年代建造的伯克級(jí)并不相同。就此而言，90年代建造的那些也和它們90年代時(shí)的樣子不一樣了。美國(guó)軍隊(duì)實(shí)際上會(huì)升級(jí)其硬件，不像其他一些不具名的主要大國(guó)。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
The following information addresses several mistaken notions regarding US Navy ships as well as those of the Chinese navy:
以下信息旨在糾正一些關(guān)于美國(guó)海軍和中國(guó)海軍艦艇的錯(cuò)誤觀念：
The aging Type 055 destroyers built by China number 9 units at present. The US operates 74 ships of the Arleigh Burke class destroyer. China builds newer ships although it does not achieve the full number of 75 ships which some claim. The United States Navy continues building new vessels while it enhances its current battle fleet.
The Type 055 being the greatest naval vessel worldwide represents individual authorial perception. The strengths of US and Chinese naval ships exist in different domains.
中國(guó)建造的055型驅(qū)逐艦?zāi)壳坝?艘，這些艦艇正逐步走向老化。美國(guó)海軍擁有74艘阿利·伯克級(jí)驅(qū)逐艦。中國(guó)正在建造更新的艦艇，盡管其數(shù)量并未達(dá)到某些人聲稱的75艘。美國(guó)海軍在增強(qiáng)現(xiàn)有戰(zhàn)斗艦隊(duì)的同時(shí)，也在繼續(xù)建造新艦艇。
055型是全球最強(qiáng)大的海軍艦艇的說(shuō)法，僅代表作者個(gè)人觀點(diǎn)。美國(guó)和中國(guó)海軍艦艇的優(yōu)勢(shì)體現(xiàn)在不同的領(lǐng)域。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Despite its great abilities the Type 055 ship still leaves plenty of operational value for Arleigh Burke destroyers. Since they fulfill US Navy requirements and remain economical ships remain a suitable choice.
美國(guó)海軍艦艇建造的卓越性貫穿其整個(gè)組織體系。新一代阿利·伯克級(jí)驅(qū)逐艦配備了包括異常先進(jìn)的雷達(dá)系統(tǒng)在內(nèi)的多項(xiàng)新技術(shù)。現(xiàn)有海軍艦艇通過維護(hù)保養(yǎng)得以延長(zhǎng)服役周期。
盡管055型戰(zhàn)艦性能強(qiáng)大，但阿利·伯克級(jí)驅(qū)逐艦仍保有大量作戰(zhàn)價(jià)值。由于該級(jí)艦既能滿足美國(guó)海軍需求又保持經(jīng)濟(jì)性，因此仍是適合作戰(zhàn)需求的艦型選擇。
Why is it that when China finishes a new type of aircraft carrier, they immediately move on into another type of an aircraft carrier? Can the US do this? If so, why aren't they doing it?
China is in the “crawl, walk, run” process when it comes to aircraft carriers and has not yet reached its desired endpoint where it would buy several of the same design.
兩國(guó)海軍在海軍資金投入方面采取了不同的方法。無(wú)法確定哪艘艦艇擁有更大的優(yōu)勢(shì)。每個(gè)國(guó)家的軍事艦隊(duì)發(fā)展戰(zhàn)略都遵循不同的優(yōu)先事項(xiàng)。
為什么中國(guó)完成了一種新型航母后，立即轉(zhuǎn)向另一種新型航母？美國(guó)能做到嗎？如果能，為什么他們不這樣做？
中國(guó)在航空母艦方面正處于“爬行、行走、奔跑”的過程中，尚未達(dá)到其理想的終點(diǎn)，即購(gòu)買幾種相同設(shè)計(jì)的航母。
Ding Yufeng
I'm sorry, how could the questioner think that 75 Type 055 destroyers would be built? Currently, only 8 have been built, and even according to uncertain sources, it will increase to 14. According to the American military judgment, similar Ticonderoga-class missile cruisers have only been built for 27 ships, ignoring the 5 ships without vertical launch systems, which is only 22 ships. This thing is very expensive, and it is impossible to build so many.
很抱歉，提問者怎么會(huì)認(rèn)為會(huì)建造75艘055型驅(qū)逐艦?zāi)?？目前只建造?艘，即使根據(jù)不確定的消息來(lái)源，也只會(huì)增加到14艘。根據(jù)美國(guó)軍方的判斷，類似的提康德羅加級(jí)導(dǎo)彈巡洋艦也只建造了27艘，如果忽略掉5艘沒有垂直發(fā)射系統(tǒng)的艦艇，那也只有22艘。這東西非常昂貴，不可能建造這么多。
與伯克級(jí)驅(qū)逐艦類似的是052D型驅(qū)逐艦，已建造了27艘；較小的054A型護(hù)衛(wèi)艦已建造了40艘，總計(jì)約67艘。目前有74艘伯克級(jí)驅(qū)逐艦。伯克級(jí)驅(qū)逐艦的垂直發(fā)射系統(tǒng)發(fā)射井總數(shù)比前兩種艦艇（96個(gè)對(duì)64/32個(gè)）更多，并且在數(shù)量上占優(yōu)。對(duì)于美國(guó)海軍而言，伯克級(jí)驅(qū)逐艦是一種性價(jià)比非常高的軍艦，它們并沒有落后。
The US stopped building the obsolete flight 1 Arleigh Burke destroyers long ago then built the flight 2, destroyers, and it's currently building the new flight 3 destroyers. The original destroyers are still in service, and have been upgraded as much as possible.
No one knows what happens during a naval conflict. The last time there was a conflict, that required a lot of naval support, it was the Falklands.
The pride of the Argentine navy , the General Belgrano, was sunk by a submarine, and 7 British warships were sunk by Argentine aircraft.
More recently the flagship of the Russian black sea fleet was sunk, by missiles or drones. 5 large landing ships, 2 corvettes and a submarine, were also sunk. This on top of more patrol boats, gun ships, and landing craft than I can count. This is in a war, with a huge land border, where a navy isn't required, but could be an added bonus.
美國(guó)很久以前就停止建造過時(shí)的第一批阿利·伯克級(jí)驅(qū)逐艦，然后建造了第二批，現(xiàn)在正在建造新的第三批驅(qū)逐艦。最初的驅(qū)逐艦仍在服役，并已盡可能地進(jìn)行了升級(jí)。
沒有人知道海軍沖突中會(huì)發(fā)生什么。上一次需要大量海軍支援的沖突是馬島戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)。
阿根廷海軍的驕傲，“貝爾格拉諾將軍”號(hào)被潛艇擊沉，7艘英國(guó)軍艦被阿根廷飛機(jī)擊沉。
最近，俄羅斯黑海艦隊(duì)的旗艦被導(dǎo)彈或無(wú)人機(jī)擊沉。5艘大型登陸艦、2艘護(hù)衛(wèi)艦和一艘潛艇也被擊沉。除此之外，還有數(shù)不清的巡邏艇、炮艇和登陸艇。這是一場(chǎng)擁有漫長(zhǎng)陸地邊界的戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)，海軍并非必需，但可以錦上添花。
Almost none of these ships were lost in classic naval battles. They were mostly lost due to drones or missiles.
That was a bit of a wakeup call for the worlds military. How do you land and supply troops, if the enemy can sink your troop ships, and supply ships.
The US built the Zumwalt, saying that they needed a stealth ship, then cancelled it. Partly because of cost, but mostly because they said that the world had changed and the Zumwalt was now an easy target, and didn't meet their needs.
It appears that the plan is to have so many well equipped ships, that the enemy can't sink them all, before they achieve their target. So the best warship, might very well be one we haven't even thought of yet.
If the US and China come to blows over Taiwan, we will probably see a major change in how the world views navies.
烏克蘭海軍也損失了許多艦艇，包括其旗艦，那只是一艘護(hù)衛(wèi)艦。
這些艦艇幾乎沒有一艘是在經(jīng)典海戰(zhàn)中損失的。它們大多是由于無(wú)人機(jī)或?qū)椂鴵p失的。
這對(duì)世界軍事界來(lái)說(shuō)是一個(gè)警醒。如果敵人能夠擊沉你的運(yùn)兵船和補(bǔ)給船，你如何登陸和補(bǔ)給部隊(duì)？
美國(guó)建造了“朱姆沃爾特”級(jí)，聲稱他們需要一艘隱形艦艇，然后又取消了它。部分原因是成本，但主要是因?yàn)樗麄冋f(shuō)世界已經(jīng)改變，“朱姆沃爾特”級(jí)現(xiàn)在是一個(gè)容易被攻擊的目標(biāo)，并且不符合他們的需求。
看來(lái)，計(jì)劃是擁有如此多的裝備精良的艦艇，以至于敵人在它們達(dá)到目標(biāo)之前無(wú)法全部擊沉。因此，最好的軍艦很可能是一種我們甚至還沒有想到的艦艇。
如果美國(guó)和中國(guó)在臺(tái)灣（地區(qū)）問題上發(fā)生沖突，我們可能會(huì)看到世界對(duì)海軍的看法發(fā)生重大變化。
Let's refrx your question.
Why does Toyota keep building obsolete Camrys. Afterall the Camry was first built in 1983.
Just as with the Camry the Burkes get upxes every few years with major upxes for the Burkes being called ‘flights’.
When speaking of ships they tend not to get obsolete in that they are refitted with more modern equipment every few years or so.
As to quantity, I don't think the number built is actually relevant. What matters is if enough are present to meet the requirement. So if comparisons are in order while I do think the Navy might like more Burkes, they probably have enough Burkes. It would be a challenge though to say the PLAN has enough type 055s given there are fewer than a dozen of their type 055s in service.
讓我們重新審視你的問題。
為什么豐田會(huì)一直生產(chǎn)過時(shí)的凱美瑞？畢竟凱美瑞最初是在1983年生產(chǎn)的。
就像凱美瑞一樣，伯克級(jí)驅(qū)逐艦每隔幾年就會(huì)進(jìn)行更新，而伯克級(jí)的主要更新被稱為“批次”。
說(shuō)到艦艇，它們往往不會(huì)過時(shí)，因?yàn)樗鼈兠扛魩啄昃蜁?huì)重新裝備更現(xiàn)代的設(shè)備。
至于數(shù)量，我認(rèn)為建造數(shù)量實(shí)際上并不重要。重要的是是否有足夠的艦艇來(lái)滿足需求。因此，如果需要進(jìn)行比較，雖然我認(rèn)為海軍可能希望擁有更多的伯克級(jí)，但他們可能已經(jīng)擁有足夠的伯克級(jí)。然而，鑒于中國(guó)海軍在役的055型驅(qū)逐艦不足一打，要說(shuō)他們擁有足夠的055型將是一個(gè)挑戰(zhàn)。
China intends to make 2 batches of 8 Type 055. If you are gonna use NATO namings, you them correctly. The Type 055 is a cruiser not a destroyer. It is an expensive ship that China cannot really afford to make such huge numbers during a peace time. It is expensive to make, harder and more expensive to maintain, takes up more crew to man and requires more supplies to be fully operational. People often forget that things like this require a lot of money.
中國(guó)計(jì)劃建造兩批共8艘055型。如果你要使用北約的命名，請(qǐng)正確使用。055型是巡洋艦而不是驅(qū)逐艦。這艘軍艦造價(jià)昂貴，中國(guó)在和平時(shí)期無(wú)法真正負(fù)擔(dān)如此龐大的數(shù)量。它的建造費(fèi)用高昂，維護(hù)更困難、更昂貴，需要更多的船員來(lái)操作，并需要更多的補(bǔ)給才能完全投入使用。人們經(jīng)常忘記，這樣的事情需要大量的資金。
另一方面，伯克級(jí)是一艘較小的艦艇，已經(jīng)存在了幾十年，這使得所有與維護(hù)相關(guān)的過程都更容易，因?yàn)橛写罅康挠?xùn)練有素的人員和備件。伯克級(jí)也經(jīng)歷了多次升級(jí)，目前Flight III型擁有世界上最好的雷達(dá)——SPY-6。另一個(gè)方面是兩國(guó)的軍事學(xué)說(shuō)。伯克級(jí)不一定是進(jìn)攻性資產(chǎn)，而是防御性資產(chǎn)。它旨在防御來(lái)自空中的任何威脅，并且比055型更適合。中國(guó)的同類艦艇既是進(jìn)攻性資產(chǎn)，也是防御性資產(chǎn)。它比伯克級(jí)擁有更多樣化的進(jìn)攻性武器，但防御能力卻小得多。
With what capacity and what technology?
The Chinese can build modern ships at a fast pace because it literally has 200+ the shipbuilding capacity as US.
Oh and the Chinese don’t have a military industry complex that is devouring money (though certainly not as much as the healthcare industry has been devouring US economy).
Not to mention the only two other reasonable sized shipbuilding nations (Japan and South Korea) were both deliberately kept weak by US, so they’d be reliant on US for their military need.
And the sad part is that younger Americans keep dreaming that Japan and South Korea would be on their side. Don’t they even know what US did to Japan in the 1990s and why so far only one South Korea president over the past 70 years has kept himself out of the jail?
Well, we found out that apparently the 1.6 billion budget for negative news about other nation can’t magically prevent their main competitor (again, with 200+ times of their shipbuilding capacity) to build powerful naval vessel. Who knew?
憑借什么能力和什么技術(shù)？
中國(guó)人能夠以快速的速度建造現(xiàn)代艦艇，因?yàn)樗麄兊脑齑芰?shí)際上是美國(guó)的200多倍。
哦，而且中國(guó)人沒有一個(gè)吞噬金錢的軍工復(fù)合體（盡管肯定沒有醫(yī)療保健行業(yè)吞噬美國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)那么多）。
更不用說(shuō)，另外兩個(gè)規(guī)模合理的造船國(guó)家（日本和韓國(guó)）都被美國(guó)故意削弱，因此他們將依賴美國(guó)來(lái)滿足其軍事需求。
可悲的是，年輕的美國(guó)人還在夢(mèng)想日本和韓國(guó)會(huì)站在他們一邊。他們甚至不知道美國(guó)在20世紀(jì)90年代對(duì)日本做了什么，以及為什么過去70年里只有一位韓國(guó)總統(tǒng)沒有入獄？
嗯，我們發(fā)現(xiàn)，顯然，用于散布他國(guó)負(fù)面新聞的16億美元預(yù)算，并不能神奇地阻止他們的主要競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手（再次強(qiáng)調(diào)，造船能力是他們的200多倍）建造強(qiáng)大的海軍艦艇。誰(shuí)曾料到呢？
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Lets presume that PLA-Navy puts its hand on the best Arleigh Burke and further improve it .
Make the friking Death Star.
They will have 3 issues..
First, no experience to operate such ships,USN has 200+years of accumulated experience and tradition.(see Midway,where all the US carriers continued to operate even if hit,the bran new IJN ships just blow up and sank)
EXPERIENCE,TRADITION IN NAVAL WARFARE COUNTS.
I dont believe in the last 100 years if US lost a naval battle.
Second,the men and women,totalitarian regimes are affected by corruption,its a cleptocracy not a meritocracy,so theres an issue of quality.
Third,the ability of the crew to take decisions,junior or middle hierarchy has no possibility to take decisions ,they will freeze like a deer in headlights ,?n emergency situations
讓我們假設(shè)解放軍海軍掌握了最好的阿利·伯克級(jí)，并進(jìn)一步改進(jìn)它。
造出那該死的死星。
他們將面臨3個(gè)問題……
首先，沒有操作此類艦艇的經(jīng)驗(yàn)，美國(guó)海軍擁有200多年的經(jīng)驗(yàn)和傳統(tǒng)積累。（參見中途島戰(zhàn)役，所有美國(guó)航母即使被擊中也能繼續(xù)作戰(zhàn)，而全新的日本聯(lián)合艦隊(duì)艦艇卻爆炸沉沒）
經(jīng)驗(yàn)和海軍作戰(zhàn)傳統(tǒng)很重要。
我不相信在過去100年里美國(guó)輸?shù)暨^一場(chǎng)海戰(zhàn)。
其次，人力方面，極權(quán)主義政權(quán)受到腐敗的影響，這是一個(gè)竊取政治，而非精英政治，因此存在質(zhì)量問題。
第三，船員的決策能力，初級(jí)或中級(jí)指揮官?zèng)]有決策的可能性，在緊急情況下他們會(huì)像被車燈照到的鹿一樣僵住。
This question is an example of a common mistake in reference to any kind of military combat weapons platform - tanks, airplanes, ships - modern weapons make the kind of launch platform unimportant. An 80 year old B-52 can carry 24 cruise missiles and launch them from 1,500 miles away from the target. A C-130 can carry and launch 36 large drones and hundreds of smaller drones at dozens of targets, each drone independently controlled by an AI computer. Ships have become forward launch platforms for BVR (beyond visual range) missiles.
這個(gè)問題是關(guān)于任何軍事作戰(zhàn)武器平臺(tái)——坦克、飛機(jī)、艦艇——的常見錯(cuò)誤的一個(gè)例子?，F(xiàn)代武器使得發(fā)射平臺(tái)的種類變得不重要。一架80歲的B-52轟炸機(jī)可以攜帶24枚巡航導(dǎo)彈，并在距離目標(biāo)1500英里外發(fā)射。一架C-130運(yùn)輸機(jī)可以攜帶和發(fā)射36架大型無(wú)人機(jī)和數(shù)百架小型無(wú)人機(jī)，攻擊數(shù)十個(gè)目標(biāo)，每架無(wú)人機(jī)都由人工智能計(jì)算機(jī)獨(dú)立控制。艦艇已成為超視距（BVR）導(dǎo)彈的前沿發(fā)射平臺(tái)。
We are in the transition period when fighter, bomber, interceptor, recon, and ground attack aircraft and destroyers, cruisers, battleships and even carriers will be replaced by arsenal ships and aircraft - launch platforms for BVR missiles, cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, drones and drone-launched smart bombs will dominate the military combat weapons systems. Arsenal trucks and tanks will do the same for the Army.
無(wú)論型號(hào)或艦齡如何，只要能搭載并發(fā)射最新導(dǎo)彈的美國(guó)驅(qū)逐艦，其戰(zhàn)力都遠(yuǎn)勝于無(wú)法做到這一點(diǎn)的中國(guó)驅(qū)逐艦。
我們正處在一個(gè)轉(zhuǎn)型期：戰(zhàn)斗機(jī)、轟炸機(jī)、攔截機(jī)、偵察機(jī)、對(duì)地攻擊機(jī)，以及驅(qū)逐艦、巡洋艦、戰(zhàn)列艦?zāi)酥梁侥福紝⒈弧拔鋷?kù)艦”和遠(yuǎn)程打擊平臺(tái)取代。超視距導(dǎo)彈、巡航導(dǎo)彈、彈道導(dǎo)彈、無(wú)人機(jī)及無(wú)人機(jī)發(fā)射的智能炸彈將成為未來(lái)軍事作戰(zhàn)武器系統(tǒng)的主導(dǎo)。同樣，陸軍的“武庫(kù)卡車”和“武庫(kù)坦克”也將徹底改變地面作戰(zhàn)模式。
Well, I would not be so bold as to say the Type 55 is the ‘best’ warship. In fact, I wouldn't even say it is the best destroyer because there are many comparable destroyers and frigates in a wide range of navies (of which a number have obvious advantages and designs that suit their nation's needs).
嗯，我不敢斷言055型是“最好”的軍艦。事實(shí)上，我甚至不會(huì)說(shuō)它是最好的驅(qū)逐艦，因?yàn)樵谠S多海軍中都有許多可媲美的驅(qū)逐艦和護(hù)衛(wèi)艦（其中一些具有明顯的優(yōu)勢(shì)和符合其國(guó)家需求的設(shè)計(jì)）。
經(jīng)驗(yàn)豐富的軍隊(duì)中，歷史悠久、發(fā)展成熟的藍(lán)水海軍往往在其艦隊(duì)艦艇中表現(xiàn)出更高的專業(yè)化程度。055型數(shù)量稀少，這符合新興海軍的傳統(tǒng)模式；即傾向于將所有功能都塞到一艘艦艇上，而不是分散資源以最小化風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。
這背后有幾個(gè)重要原因。首先，關(guān)鍵在于快速形成戰(zhàn)斗力——在首次獲取新能力時(shí)，盡早列裝遠(yuǎn)比等待專門設(shè)計(jì)的艦艇完成研制投產(chǎn)更為重要。其次，減少型號(hào)并集中資源擴(kuò)大量產(chǎn)規(guī)模，能夠顯著降低總體成本。
這種做法能通過減少型號(hào)種類來(lái)簡(jiǎn)化備件生產(chǎn)，并借助規(guī)模效應(yīng)進(jìn)一步降低成本。對(duì)于尚未建成大規(guī)模艦隊(duì)、且多數(shù)艦艇較新的海軍而言，這種模式還能降低維護(hù)需求——不僅便于快速擴(kuò)編艦隊(duì)規(guī)模，還能減少維持海軍運(yùn)轉(zhuǎn)所需的專業(yè)技術(shù)人才和領(lǐng)域?qū)＜覕?shù)量。
這種做法的弊端在于，所建造的艦艇往往嚴(yán)重依賴外國(guó)技術(shù)（這在當(dāng)今其實(shí)相當(dāng)普遍），而且相比專用型號(hào)，其在多樣化任務(wù)中的效能往往較低。當(dāng)需要向?qū)I(yè)化轉(zhuǎn)型時(shí)，一個(gè)棘手問題就會(huì)浮現(xiàn)——政客們通常不愿削減那些號(hào)稱"全能型"的艦艇數(shù)量，這可能導(dǎo)致海軍陷入轉(zhuǎn)型僵局：要么停滯在過渡狀態(tài)，要么因保留已被替代的非必要艦艇而承受不合理的高昂成本……
總體而言，這種做法可能導(dǎo)致海軍持續(xù)面臨經(jīng)驗(yàn)豐富的水兵和專業(yè)人才短缺——因?yàn)橐?guī)模臃腫的海軍往往難以維持足夠的人才保有量。此外，這還可能造成部隊(duì)結(jié)構(gòu)臃腫不堪，但支持者始終堅(jiān)稱"數(shù)量多"就是硬道理。
與此同時(shí)，阿利·伯克級(jí)可能仍然是世界上最好的防空護(hù)衛(wèi)艦。它在執(zhí)行對(duì)陸打擊方面也非常有效，特別是在反恐戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)期間這種能力得到了更大的發(fā)展，而且這個(gè)領(lǐng)域正在通過新導(dǎo)彈和更快的再武裝方法進(jìn)行改進(jìn)（美國(guó)在這方面是無(wú)與倫比的）。
我同意，阿利·伯克級(jí)驅(qū)逐艦在外觀上確實(shí)不如許多其他艦艇那樣引人注目，而且在性能方面也正逐漸被其他驅(qū)逐艦趕超，但外表并不是一切，它的戰(zhàn)績(jī)本身就是最好的證明。幾十年來(lái)，通過高強(qiáng)度的訓(xùn)練、開放且貼近實(shí)戰(zhàn)的演習(xí)，以及在各種環(huán)境下與多種敵人進(jìn)行的實(shí)戰(zhàn)，伯克級(jí)的作戰(zhàn)表現(xiàn)已經(jīng)被不斷打磨和驗(yàn)證。
更值得關(guān)注的是，中方慣常出于宣傳和軍售目的夸大其裝備性能，而美方則往往低調(diào)處理實(shí)際戰(zhàn)力——其裝備往往需經(jīng)實(shí)戰(zhàn)檢驗(yàn)才顯真章。此外，對(duì)于那些非賣品裝備，其可靠性常能通過盟國(guó)見證得以佐證：無(wú)論是多國(guó)聯(lián)合軍事行動(dòng)中的協(xié)同作戰(zhàn)，還是盟國(guó)工業(yè)體系間的技術(shù)交融（例如友好國(guó)家專家的交叉賦能），乃至通過人員交流/培訓(xùn)項(xiàng)目提升盟軍戰(zhàn)力或填補(bǔ)美軍短板的深度合作，皆為明證。