Naval programs can separate money from deployable capability through several institutional routes. Britain may build ships 'fitted for but not with' equipment and never fund the later installation, while Russian corruption can leave a vessel without systems it was supposedly refitted to receive. In the United States, legally purchased troubled systems and requirements added to a basic frigate can raise cost and complexity until they obstruct the ship the navy originally needed. The mechanisms differ, but the common test is whether procurement produces enough working ships with the systems and roles the fleet actually requires.
Notable Point · 1:37:46-1:39:09
Three ways naval procurement can lose capability
British unfunded fits, Russian refits that fail to deliver promised equipment, and American requirement growth can all leave fleets with less usable capability than their spending suggests.