An enduring feature of naval design debate has been between the alternate concepts of radical change and systematic evolution. Proponents of the former are keen to point out the advantages that can be gained by leaping ahead in technology. However, experience has shown that such programs tend to be plagued with problems and rarely offer the advantages claimed for them. The problems offered by the incorporation of multiple new and unproven technologies in a single hull all too often result in a ship that is years late and over budget. The alternate approach promotes the concept of taking proven designs and adding technology changes on a controlled basis, each being proven before the next is made. Although this may seem prolonged, the methodical evolution of design is a safer choice.rnThis edition of the Warships Forecast looks at several designs that exemplify the evolutionary approach to ship design. This is particularly marked in the case of Japanese submarine design and in the Korean KDX program.
展开▼
