I was just perusing YouTube this am and saw something about Littoral ships and the Zumwalt Class DDG.
It was the Fluctus channel that was speaking about 'all aluminum' and 'aluminum superstructures' boats. It seems that there has been design flaws in the form of electrolysis between the aluminum (weight saving) superstructures and stainless fittings, especially near the jet drives. Alcan who makes the boats says it's poor maintenance but there was one boat, with an all aluminum superstructure that collided with a carrier not too long ago and the entire superstructure burned down to the steel hull. This seemed to be a primary reason along with cracking from flexing.
The video also touched on the Zumwalt which I believe is all aluminum and it too is having similar issues with electrolysis and accelerated corrosion, not to mention the incredible price of a round of ammo.

In another video, they went into depth about the Air Force's push to retire the A-10 Thunderbolt/Warthog
(I have a good friend who was an A10 pilot) in favor of the F-35 fighter, They argued that the F-35 could do everything the A-10 could do. But an analysis of close air support of troops on the ground shows that the A-10 was better in every category including, accurate targeting, survivability (two engines), low maintenance in the field, fuel consumption, short airstrip takeoff and landing capabilities (closer to the front line), pilot armor/protection, payload capacity, range, slow speed maneuverability, and other reasons. Just another example of the wrong people making decisions based on? AF image? or is there someone who makes the F-35 lobbying ($$$) the AF decision makers to lean towards the F-35 production?

Just my $.02

Great statement, Nick. I believe the LCS ships were a design and build which didn't work out well. I drive by Bremerton a lot and see a couple of them retired which is infuriating. It's a crime that all these millions were spent and the return was so minimal. I wonder if there will be an IG investigation or some other action to prevent this debacle from happening again.

I believe it was Russian Admiral Gorchkov who once stated “better is the enemy of good enough”, speaking to the American submarine force compared to theirs. We need to be the best but I sometimes think the Pentagon folks make decisions with a dart board. And certainly politics come into play. Bigger, better, faster is not always the answer. It’s expensive and often comes with complications.

Aye, Randy. Brings the K.I.S.S. principle to mind.

Decisions in high government circles may be the result of the "reserve principle". King Richard employed it when he directed his general to unleash his arrow men on the enemy even though hundreds of his own troops were among the mix. Hesitant to issue the order, the general asked, "Want we injure our own men?" The king responded, "Oh, we have reserves! And Napoleon, after retreating from Russia with losses in the hundreds of thousands was asked about the huge loss of his soldiers. His reply was reported to be, "They were unimportant". So, the K.I.S.S. principle simply points out that we common crows may not understand or even need to know the reasons behind top government decisions; after all, we have "reserves". A thought to ponder.

Ben, it makes one wonder if those 13 young people unnecessarily killed in Afghanistan were considered part of the “reserves”? POTUS was checking his watch as they were being off loaded.