On the recordMarch 13, 1993
I can't answer that yet because that's one of the things we have under review. But I will be glad to try to get you an answer from the Defense Department as quickly as I can. The last time I had a conversation about this, there was a general consensus that the design of the Sea Wolf was not necessary in terms of its size, bulk, given a declining Soviet threat and breathtaking drops in production there for their own capacity, but that we still needed and, in fact, were quite dependent on submarine technology to maintain our overall military superiority, but that there ought to be one designed that was smaller and quicker and could do more different things. And so we're working on that. But I don't have--I can't answer the specifics you've asked. Russia
Source
govinfo.gov




