不是不想酸你
是懶得酸
若你擺出來要給人打
就仔細看看書上說的
金剛級後三艦由松方正義派與山縣有朋派的川崎船廠與三菱船廠得標
三艦的鋼板由『日本製鋼』派人至英國維克斯船廠學習技術
(出自本多光太郎回憶錄)
鋼爐與硬化專用設備由山本權兵衛派由1911年會計年度特撥款買回
(出自『突擊』金剛級始末)
特別一提的是"比睿"艦之裝甲鋼板完全由維克斯船廠製造後運回日本本土建造
因此：
我聽你這個不學無術，DCN掮客在鬼扯蛋
誰說金剛級的鋼板四艦鋼板強度有差
拿出證據來阿
我拿出來了，你就只會出一張嘴嗎？

你不要google一堆資料就以為自己真的很懂ok？

你知道Aster30真正在C/P出問題的地方是哪邊嘛？算了相信你也不懂，直接說明：

Aster30用的設控系統，尤其是設控雷達性能雖然比美國神盾的SPY-1D好一點沒錯，但是價格卻貴了100%，對就是貴一倍！這還是初期的報價，後期隨著歐元貶值，價位一定更水漲船高。

就拿你舉例的45型驅逐艦為例，就是當初歐盟要跟美國在軍火市場爭，硬採用Aster30/15系統，造成整艘船比柏克級小的多，只有7000頓出頭，但是造價卻比9000頓等級的柏克級貴50%以上。

英國原本要造8艘type45，因為太貴現在有沒有辦法造6艘都是問題。

更慘的是，大家還是要神盾，因為Aster30性能還是頗有問題，歐洲做區域防空還是輸老美，又貴，結果45型驅逐艦角逐澳洲的需求時，澳洲也要求把貴貴的Aster30換掉，改成美國MK45系統，結果因為修改費用太昂貴第一個出局。

---------------------

紙上談兵兄，看到沒，現實世界中，不是只有老共嫌Aster30的CP太爛啊....

最後在來回你這個『小步快跑』的鬼話
是阿你說的沒錯
用個強度只有正牌貨30%強度的山寨品
反正也叫攔阻系統嘛
可以上艦阿
反正上艦後
油壓缸撐不住J15降落壓力崩潰了
就整艘船回大連港當家具嘛
J15攔住後斷了
沒關係人下海餵魚嘛
反正死的又不是我FQ家的人
不求甚解，隨隨便便
難怪郭董在大陸廠都是用軍事化管理
QC的水準真是讓人
唉

挖靠
明明是下議院要求不得超過7000頓
給你說成是飛彈的關係
你可真能凹喔
Aster30是飛彈
type45 的導控Aster和沒關係吧
(不分清楚就真的整個給你騙過去了)
type45是SAMPSON 多重目標追蹤雷達
DCN原廠製造的佛賓級是用S-1850 LR 三維追蹤雷達
但是用的同是Aster 30
Aster 和標準系列相比
Aster後面多的第二節固態推進器還讓他比標準二與標準三更大
標準三與未來的標準六國際報價
USD＄25000k ; 未知的研發錢坑
Aster 30
USD$ 20000k
(出自JDW ship review)
DCN的掮客，你要不要去念點書再來騙？
跟你說話有點累阿

資料1:
金剛の装甲鋼鈑には、ヴィッカース社の特殊鋼板VC鋼板が使用されていた。後に日本で建造された同型3艦にもこの技術は導入され、国産化された。しかし、改装の際、ドリルで穴を開けようとすると、国産3艦はやすやすと通ったにもかかわらず、金剛だけはドリルが折れてしまうということがあったという

http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%87%91%E5%89%9B_(%E6%88%A6%E8%89%A6)

資料2:
戦艦金剛は、帝国海軍が初の超弩級巡洋戦艦として発注した金剛型の１番艦である。日露戦争終結の２年後に建造が決定され当初は装甲巡洋艦として計画されたが、弩級戦艦ドレッドノートの完成と１９０９年の超弩級巡洋戦艦ライオン級の起工を鑑み、ライオン級を凌駕する設計でイギリスのヴィッカーズ社に発注された。ヴィッカーズ社の設計主任ジョージ・サーストンは自信が設計したオスマン帝国海軍向けの戦艦エリンを設計のベースとし、３５６ｍｍ４５口径連装砲を前後２基ずつ搭載し、きわめてバランスの良い軍艦と絶賛される本艦を作り上げた。

また本艦の装甲鋼板にはヴィッカーズ社の特殊鋼版「ＶＣ鋼板」が使用されており、金剛に続く国産の同型3艦にもこの技術が導入されたが改装の際にそれらの３艦はやすやすドリルが通ったにもかかわらず、本艦ではたびたびドリルが折れる場面があったと言われている。
http://orientalprocess.com/english-...warshipsjp.html

----------------------
以上，有需要翻譯嘛？如果只看中文二手翻譯資料的，請不要一下口氣太衝喔...

我是看日文資料的，請問日本的資料準，還是經過不懂軍事的人翻譯的東西準？

我有更專業的日文資料啦，不過不用這麼快就拿出來打人家臉...

突擊是翻譯老共的東西耶，這時又這麼相信老共的山寨資料了？

我看你還是拿你手上的資料出來好了
拿個日文維基
嚇誰阿你
裡頭除了說明是用維克斯滲碳鋼以外
說啥了？(很想罵人騙子，突然間)
突擊文章作者早就有註記資料來源
但我看還是幫你這個不學無術的掮客現在加原始資料來源吧
strategy, tactics, and technology in the imperial japanese navy,1887~1941
annapolis, united states navy institute press

奇怪奇怪
我看到的新聞怎和你看到的不一樣
你是火星人嗎？
我從JDW看到的澳洲皇家海軍基本RFP是ESSM
從來就沒要求過aster 30
你是哪看來的
別老出一張嘴
出證據拉
真煩！你

對啊我都念外文的耶，要不要看研發當時，英國人自己對type45防空系統的評價，這個階段也是老共決定不要用的主要階段，事後諸葛都是無聊的，何況你舉的例子根本有問題，知道在哪嘛？不知道...再去goo一下吧，提示一下喔，Aster30跟標準三根本不是同一個檔次的產品喔？　還看不懂？　那就沒辦法了。

言歸正傳，看看英國佬那時吞下Aster系統之後的苦水...

UK’s Type 45 destroyer: late, expensive and naked :Parliamentary report slams Royal Navy’s latest air-defence destroyer programme


09:13 GMT, June 24, 2009 The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) of the UK House of Commons yesterday issued a report on the UK's Type 45 destroyer programme, which is expected to become the backbone of the Royal Navy's air defence capabilities, but faces a number of serious problems resulting in increased costs and serious delays.

Following an audit by the National Audit Office (NAO), the PAC examined the capabilities provided by the Type 45 destroyer, the reasons for the rising costs and delays, and identified lessons learned for the aircraft carrier project.

The committee acknowledged that the Type 45 would provide the Royal Navy with a world-class military capability. However, the report also notes that serious mistakes have been made in the early stages of the procurement of the Type 45 destroyer, including unrealistic calculations and time objectives. “The project management arrangements on the Type 45 were poor and allowed the culture of over-optimism to persist for too long,” it was noted in the report. Following a far-reaching review of the project, the contract was renegotiated in 2007 and, since then, there have been no further cost increases or delays.


Equipment not introduced in time while budget rises

Although the First of Class will enter service in 2009 – two years later than planed – it will not have the Principal Anti-Air Missile System (PAAMS), also known as known as “Sea Viper”, which will not achieve full operational capability until 2011. Other equipment and capabilities to enhance the ship's ability to conduct anti-air warfare operations will also not be fitted until after the ship enters service. This means that the Type 45 will not have any anti-air capability (which it had originally been built for) until, at least, 2011.

As a result of the delays, the Department had to extend the life of the Type 42 destroyers longer than planned. “These ships are increasingly expensive to maintain, provide a more limited capability than the Type 45 and are more vulnerable to the most up-to-date threats from a modern enemy,” the committee notes.

Beyond that, the report sees the original budget exceeded by some £1.5 billion ($2.45 billion). The report says that the ministry “is confident that it will avoid making the same mistakes in the project management arrangements” on its two new aircraft carriers. “Agreeing [to] a fixed price too early, and not pricing all the requirements at the time of the contract, meant the Type 45 was at risk of cost growth. The [ministry] believes it will not fall into the same trap on the carriers,” the committee notes.

The Minister for Defence Equipment and Support, Quentin Davies, responded to the report by saying: “The Type 45 will be the largest, most powerful air defence destroyer ever built for the Royal Navy. It will set new standards in air defence, capable of defending its company from multiple attacks by the most sophisticated anti-ship missiles and aircraft.”

He also added, “by the time she enters service, the Type 45 will already have proven a level of anti-air warfare performance significantly higher than any other ship. Against this background, the government is surprised and disappointed that the Committee does not recognise the extensive trials that have taken place. In these circumstances, the use of the word ‘disgrace’ obviously makes no sense at all and is absurd.”


Half the number for the same job

The Royal Navy originally intended to procure 12 Type 45 air defence destroyers, designed to replace its Type 42s. However, revised requirements and budgetary pressures saw this number cut, at first, to eight. The report now stated that because of reduced threats, revised planning assumptions and an intended improved network capability, this number may further shrink to just six vessels. However, the reduction in the number of destroyers from eight to six means it will be more challenging for the Department to meet its policy requirement of five destroyers available for tasking at any time, the report states.

Of the six Type 45 Destroyers, four ships are in the water (Daring, Dauntless, Diamond, Dragon) while the other two vessels (Defender, Duncan) will be launched in late 2009 and 2010, respectively. The First of Class (HMS Daring) is currently completing final MOD managed trials and acceptance prior to entering service with the Royal Navy in 2010. The remaining ships will enter service progressively through the middle of the next decade.

The prime role of the Type 45 Destroyer will be air defence: protecting UK national and allied/coalition forces against enemy aircraft and missiles. It will carry the world-leading Sea Viper Missile System designed by EUROPAAMS, a joint venture between Eurosam (66%) and MBDA subsidiary UKAMS (33%) as well as the Sampson multi-function radar, built by BAE Systems INSYTE. The Type 45 warship’s prime contractor is BVT Surface Fleet Ltd.

說真的
太古是國泰的吧
就像華航跟長榮都有自己的維修廠一樣
這個比較是內部控管的關係
就像是鎖螺絲的規格不合那樣