Amphibs, frigates, large combatants, and carriers, yep. But we probably need tankers and tenders more. And shore-based Naval Air (P-8s and F-15EXs). A couple floating dry docks would be nice for peace, and essential for wartime.
And do we really need to mention increased ammunition production capacity?
The Navy needs to look into the KC-767 conversions mentioned on the REFORGER thread, just in case the Air Force won't let them get a few planes from the KC-46 new production line.
Maybe add some Electronic and Reconnaissance and maybe Weather mission kits. There is space inside the airframe and it won't always be needed in the tanker role.
The KC-46 is the Ford-Class of the Air Force....still doesn't work right.
Considering that second and third tier countries have been buying commercial 767s and putting refueling kits on them for three decades, it's strange that Boeing and the US Air Force cannot figure out how to build a tanker.
At this point in the game, the Navy needs presence in the region, which makes the LCS fiasco that much more frustrating. Carriers will be huddled together in their concentrated battle groups roaming their regions either readying for contact or forming up for one. It's the small boys to maintain overwatch in various areas and insure our auxiliaries are safely able to transit, nowhere in this budget is there any increase in FFG-62 production, nor NAVAIR fielding airframes due to expected attrition... has the P-8 evolved enough to get a -B model going yet? F/A-18G Growler production has ended and how many Block-III Super Hornets is the Navy buying?
Weapons development has also been stagnant, particularly anti-surface. LRASM via VLS launch is still an unknown mystery, not to mention slow acquisition rates. Harpoon is being phased out for air launch only, being replaced by NSM which has marginally better capability. SM-6 while impressive performance, delivers a minuscule warhead and slow acquisition rate. Anti-ship Tomahawk blk-V is still a work in progress.
As usual the big blue strategist overlook the "unsexy" auxiliaries. the CLF is short of ships mainly oilers. Their are no sealift ships mentioned and MSC only has a few. The only new line item in the SCN budget was the startup for a new sub tender. The MPS ships are being dumped by Marines who dont know ships and think that ONLY warships can carry troops and cargo
“The Navy shall be organized, trained, and equipped for the peacetime promotion of the national security interests and prosperity of the United States and for prompt and sustained combat incident to operations at sea."
Interesting comment from Title 10 in that it says nothing about "WINING AT SEA". LCS can conduct "prompt and sustained combat incident to operations at sea", you may just need to re-define "sustained" and "at sea". We can do what Title 10 says we're to do with what we have now so what's the big deal?
Looking forward from Ford, DDG 1000, and LCS doesn't give one much hope for a better USN future.
The very thought of losing is hateful to Americans. Battle is the most significant competition in which a man can indulge. It brings out all that is best and it removes all that is base.
Sounds good. Pretty words. Sadly, this is not what I've seen in practice. We have squandered the Martial Ethos of America. We keep seeing the elites all too willing to throw young people's lives at a problem they caused with no desire to really fix it, or win the fight.
Very fair point--but I suspect we'll hear little about LCS and FORD in the years to come as both get wrung out operationally (at least the even hulled LCS), and CPS added to DDG 1000 will be a bid deal. That it is happening at HII gives me confidence also.
The LCS was a US Navy design, it was the staffers and NAVSEA which generated the LCS. I have not seen anything to show those two groups have learned anything about naval ship procurement. How long was the FFG-62 in development pre-award? How many changes have been made post contract award?
My intent was to state the obvious to those in charge of "force structure" in that a plan on paper does not = $$$ and cutting steel, and we don't have the luxury of time to spend 12 years building a class only to junk it before the buy is complete or 16 years per CVN to get it to the point where the big boat doesn't have to be near a land based air station so the air wing can conduct sustained air ops without launch/recovery rate problems.
But you are a he11 of a lot more "in the know" so I will defer to your guarded optimism. I've been painfully wrong once before (over Long Island Ice Tea and RADM Wayne Meyer).
I disagree, the taxpayers pour good money into the LCS and they still have useful lives. I think the LCS-2 will Continue to do well in the Far East and beyond. And I know from first hand conversations, that the LCS-1s are very needed in the Fourth Fleet. The day of thinking the warships as high tech dreadnoughts is OVER.
A prime example of that is the DDG-1000 decades in development, years in service, now descoped and still not at the New IOC
"Just maintaining the status quo (11) requires a new carrier to be built every four years. "
Reading the USNI story that Nimitz will be decommed in 2026 and Eisenhower in 2027, will Vinson be next before 2030? Has the Ford even started a full deployment yet ten years after launch? The USS Nimitz was launched in 1972 and started a seven-month Med cruise in 1976. Yes, I know - Ford in more complex than any other warship in history. Isn't that the problem though? New carrier every four years - pffft. In a pigs eye.
No bets here. Navy/DOD have continually lied about the Ford just as they did with LCS, Zumwalt, F-35. Hmm, let's add the Fitzgerald, McCain, Fat Leonard, BonHomme Richard, surrender at Ford Island to that list. The Chinese may soon put us to the test.
The Navy did not lie, they just didn't know HOW to procure an advance marine vessel. Speaking of the first two ships you listed. The USN refuses to procure a semi-submersible for BDR. The Navy is putting two little used T-ESDs out of service which could instead be modified to serve as - tada- semi-submersible ships for about three mission to include BDR
Running Mate has a son-in-law onboard a CVN in Norfolk, The waterfront gouge is this: USS Ford will deploy to Mediterranean Sea this summer and early autumn. Then return in time for Thanksgiving, football seasons, Christmas, New Years, playoffs in both College and Pro football, Super Bowl parties, etc. Meanwhile.... USS Ike, CVN 69 will deploy to Mediterranean in early October and miss all the above events, while remaining in Sixth Fleet for 6 to 8 months. If you had a choice, would you select USS Ford summer vacation for 6 months ? or USS Eisenhower long, dreary, winter, endless deployment ?
USS Bush, CVN 77 is returning to Norfolk from the Mediterranean after an 8 month long deployment. US Navy has no carriers in the Med, Sixth Fleet, nor in Fifth Fleet op areas at all now. Perhaps, USS Ford CVN 78 might soon commence her upcoming summer cruise overseas ? Wonder if this Med vacation will last longer than 6 months ?
What bothers me about that picture is McKee (AS 41) sitting there in Category X status. She's the youngest of the three Emory S. Land class tenders, yet she's been out of commission for over twenty years while her two sisters are still out there. That ship is needed.
My understanding is she's been kept in-place, welded to their pier at Portsmouth to serve as a floating machine shop. Those closer can comment if that's the case or, they Navy just doesn't want to pay to move her up to Philly.
Would love your thoughts on the fact they haven't designed it and the budget number is real expensive for an auxiliary, yet real close to the price of an LPD.
The two still in commission are sorely lacking when it comes to supporting SSBNs. They can do HM&E work, but not support the D5 missiles and associated systems. The tenders that did that in places like Holy Loch and Kings Bay are long gone. Those older tenders like the Simon Lake and Canopus had missile magazines and shops to work on them, along with a Marine Det to provide security. Hopefully the new tenders will have the ability to support SSBNs. Being able to do that away from the big, fixed targets known as Kings Bay and Bangor would be a very big plus.
The Navy decided to extend the tow AS it has and scratch its (axx) head before procuring anymore. The Navy has given up on steam propulsion prematurely
BZ on the analysis. Only politely hinted at is the fact that this administration will never budget enough money to allow the Navy to get anywhere near the force level it needs to fulfill its duty. Administration priorities--are reflected faithfully (or even slavishly) by DOD direction. Those priorities are Climate change, social welfare and remolding the US society into a genderless no fault and Woke brave new world.
The alternative was Hillary. I held my nose and voted for Trump in the general election. He was much the lesser of two evils and I don't regret that vote one bit.
Except for the border which he did get under control.
His comments on Putin? Had you and your peers been around in 1942? Would you have jumped Churchill's shit for acknowledging Rommels abilities in Parliament?
This is the last comment I'll make on matters disconnected from the essay. Say what you will about my vote in the state of Maryland...but I worked my ass off twice to beat Obama, including both fund-raising and policy work. You are entitled to your opinions, just not your facts.
Between Trump and Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton-Bush, there was and is no contest.
It is silly to suggest that "Climate change, social welfare and remolding the US society into a genderless no fault and Woke brave new world" were DJT priorities. That was all DoD and Big Navy
The big issue is budget and recruiting. No Money, No Mahan. Congress wields ultimate authority over the budget, they need to start using it.
I'll add that a "Navy Get Well Fast" plan will probably be aviation-based. We can build airplanes, train aviators, and fill out the carrier air wings a lot faster than we can build ships.
They mandated keeping the cruisers and provide more funding than requested every year. What we need is them not pushing their own districts programs for jobs.
New mission requires more, faster! But how many more? Current plans don’t even maintain current deficient levels. BZ to Bryan for his consistent message. More, faster.
Wonder if the Sea Control Ship/Escort Carrier will be revived? Squadron of F-35s, squadron of ASW helicopters, some UAVs for ISR and refueling, just the thing for plugging a gap between islands.
If Ford works, its maintenance schedule is to be less than a Nimitz upping availability from a theoretical 19 to 28%. That was part of the sales pitch a long time ago.
The USS Ford was commissioned in November, 2013. Almost ten years ago now. She got underway on her own power in 2017. Still not fully mission capable.
Assuming we could wave a magic wand and FIX everything that needs fixing, the ford is 20-25% through it's life cycle right now, before it's first fully mission capable deployment.
So a Ford replacing a Nimitz is not an improvement in the real world.
Congress simply has to be convinced,.... forcibly, immediately, thoroughly......that WAR is certainly coming; and far, far more soon than a 6" rise in sea level............
Based on the staff Kabooki Theater w/in the Pentagon, DoD leadership does not believe war is coming. DEI, Climate CRISIS, and inter-service fighting for cash and cachet tells me they are not true believers. You cannot argue women are equal fighters to men, transexual rights are prime and the climate is the mostest, scariest, deadliest thing EVAH, and sell the American taxpayer that you actually are a warrior and prepared to win wars. We all know this, even though we do not verbalize it, and should not have to. We just had the NFL Combine. How many women are we prepping to be middle linebackers? What was their vertical? What was their 40 time? How are those women to men trans cats fairing in men's sports? Why are men pretending to be women dominating women's sports? Speaking of the NFL, why is a game taken more seriously than survival, death and killing?
Never read Title 10 until now. But back on staff duty as an enlisted man in the readiness section, my O-6 boss lectured me on the mission of the Navy. He said, "...Prompt and sustained combat operations at sea in support of national policy". Looks like he was paraphrasing Title 10. "...in support of national policy" would seem a catch-all to support what our Navy does in peacetime. Looking through a link provided by Mr. McGrath above it is sickening to me to see the Army and Air Force nibble away the Navy's rice bowl by adhering to the letter of the law in Title 10. Legal but picayune. FOGO's playing a Washington contact sport with little sense of teamwork.
How sick are you at the Navy's wasting tens of Billions of $$ on LCS, Zumwalt, Ford and losing irreplaceable time and man hours? Any Senior Officers lose their jobs over this waste?
19½ years of sea duty, never sea sick. But I still might have that Dramamine I bought for the wife and two daughters (age 5 &6) when our Frigate had a family cruise out of Long Beach. Dramamine has a shelf life like plutonium, I think. Yeah, I feel that sick, Ron. About that cruise. I was OOD for that day excursion. I seated my daughters at the helm and let them steer the ship and work the throttle lever. Under strict supervision, of course. Didn't last long, as the Captain had a kind of squinty-eyed look. Kids are in their 40s now and still remember driving a Guided Missile Frigate. Later in the day the Captain called a man overboard drill to demo to the families how we'd rescue their loved ones at sea. When he called it, I instinctively commenced a Y-backing maneuver..."Right full rudder! All back full...(shudder, shimmy, shake)...etc". Afterward, the Captain told me he had expected the more laid back Williamson Turn but didn't fault me for going with my training. The Y-backing maneuver is as good as any theme park ride. OHP FFG's were very agile. It was a big hit to the families. We recovered Oscar PDQ. That's all that mattered. Capt. Robert Hines was a great CO.
(Let an old WWII Navy vet steer the ship too. His smile was a delight. No eye daggers from the Captain for that.)
Love the comment about letting a WWII Vet con the ship. That should warm the cockles of any warship Captains heart. Darned few of those WWII vets left now.
“The Navy shall be organized, trained, and equipped for the peacetime promotion of the national security interests and prosperity of the United States and for prompt and sustained combat incident to operations at sea."
Fortunately, the BHR was pierside and not at sea.
"Secretary of the Navy touts climate as a top priority"
Editorial Note: while I tend to give a lot of running room in comments - I would like to remind everyone of a few bright lines on the chart.
- Sharp elbows and contrary opinion, including those related to your host, are more than welcome. Green range. "Your ideas are on this topic are wrong and stupid." - that is OK. "You are a nazi." - that is not OK.
- Personal attacks against the host, Front Porch member or guest of the blog that are of a violent or psycho-sexual nature, or are considers an insult to honor will result in a deletion of comment, temporary ban, or permanent ban depending on the nature and severity of the comment. Appeal can be made by email is so desired.
I'm glad you posted that, but it would be nice if you would tamp down a bit on the flame wars. Things have gotten out of hand over the last year or two. The Porch used to be much more civil.
Bound to happen as this blog became more visible and linked to by more popular blogs/websites. Attracts a wider audience, including new visitors who were not part of the original front porch and don't yet understand the culture here.
In the 1980's we were building five Aegis ships a year (mix of CG 47's and DDG 51's). My memory (I was in NAVSEA 05 at the time working on DDG 51 Flight upgrades) was that the constraint was at the LM facility in Moorestown, not the shipyards. I'm curious what has happened since then. BIW has had significant upgrades in their facilities since then. I understand that Ingalls has a lot going on with the DDG, LHA, LPD and NSC production lines but BIW doesn't seem to have other programs. It would be interesting to see a historical analysis of what has happened taking into account the combat system and other suppliers as well.
Perry's Last Supper set the sequence of events which have led to the Monopolistic Defense Industry of today, which pretty much dictates what DoD is going to buy at what price.
BIW went from building Flight IIA DDG's, to DDG 1000, back to Flight IIA DDG's to Flight III DDG's all across a short period of time. They need a little time to get back to steady production of a hull they know well.
Amphibs, frigates, large combatants, and carriers, yep. But we probably need tankers and tenders more. And shore-based Naval Air (P-8s and F-15EXs). A couple floating dry docks would be nice for peace, and essential for wartime.
And do we really need to mention increased ammunition production capacity?
Is our dry dock still 'missing' in China?
And the Navy needs to buy or at least fund big-wing (KC-46 size) tankers for their primary use. There are not enough to go around.
Yes! I realized after I posted I should have added tankers.
The Navy needs to look into the KC-767 conversions mentioned on the REFORGER thread, just in case the Air Force won't let them get a few planes from the KC-46 new production line.
Maybe add some Electronic and Reconnaissance and maybe Weather mission kits. There is space inside the airframe and it won't always be needed in the tanker role.
It could be the LCS of airplanes. WREKC-767
[*SLAP*]
Sorry, a momentary lapse of reason.
The KC-46 is the Ford-Class of the Air Force....still doesn't work right.
Considering that second and third tier countries have been buying commercial 767s and putting refueling kits on them for three decades, it's strange that Boeing and the US Air Force cannot figure out how to build a tanker.
At this point in the game, the Navy needs presence in the region, which makes the LCS fiasco that much more frustrating. Carriers will be huddled together in their concentrated battle groups roaming their regions either readying for contact or forming up for one. It's the small boys to maintain overwatch in various areas and insure our auxiliaries are safely able to transit, nowhere in this budget is there any increase in FFG-62 production, nor NAVAIR fielding airframes due to expected attrition... has the P-8 evolved enough to get a -B model going yet? F/A-18G Growler production has ended and how many Block-III Super Hornets is the Navy buying?
Weapons development has also been stagnant, particularly anti-surface. LRASM via VLS launch is still an unknown mystery, not to mention slow acquisition rates. Harpoon is being phased out for air launch only, being replaced by NSM which has marginally better capability. SM-6 while impressive performance, delivers a minuscule warhead and slow acquisition rate. Anti-ship Tomahawk blk-V is still a work in progress.
Latest budget puts real money into weps...but it has to be consistent.
Logistical support and Ship repair and replacement will be the Achilles Heel of the Navy in a future maritime peer-to-peer fight.
As usual the big blue strategist overlook the "unsexy" auxiliaries. the CLF is short of ships mainly oilers. Their are no sealift ships mentioned and MSC only has a few. The only new line item in the SCN budget was the startup for a new sub tender. The MPS ships are being dumped by Marines who dont know ships and think that ONLY warships can carry troops and cargo
“The Navy shall be organized, trained, and equipped for the peacetime promotion of the national security interests and prosperity of the United States and for prompt and sustained combat incident to operations at sea."
Interesting comment from Title 10 in that it says nothing about "WINING AT SEA". LCS can conduct "prompt and sustained combat incident to operations at sea", you may just need to re-define "sustained" and "at sea". We can do what Title 10 says we're to do with what we have now so what's the big deal?
Looking forward from Ford, DDG 1000, and LCS doesn't give one much hope for a better USN future.
The very thought of losing is hateful to Americans. Battle is the most significant competition in which a man can indulge. It brings out all that is best and it removes all that is base.
Sounds good. Pretty words. Sadly, this is not what I've seen in practice. We have squandered the Martial Ethos of America. We keep seeing the elites all too willing to throw young people's lives at a problem they caused with no desire to really fix it, or win the fight.
Losing is pretty much all we have done since '92. Most Americans appear to be more concerned with pronouns, equity, and Climate change."
Very fair point--but I suspect we'll hear little about LCS and FORD in the years to come as both get wrung out operationally (at least the even hulled LCS), and CPS added to DDG 1000 will be a bid deal. That it is happening at HII gives me confidence also.
What about the frigates? Will we hear about the latest silly design based on unlearned lessons of the LCS?
The LCS was a US Navy design, it was the staffers and NAVSEA which generated the LCS. I have not seen anything to show those two groups have learned anything about naval ship procurement. How long was the FFG-62 in development pre-award? How many changes have been made post contract award?
I haven't seen anything that showed senior leadership has learned anything about warfare, period.
My intent was to state the obvious to those in charge of "force structure" in that a plan on paper does not = $$$ and cutting steel, and we don't have the luxury of time to spend 12 years building a class only to junk it before the buy is complete or 16 years per CVN to get it to the point where the big boat doesn't have to be near a land based air station so the air wing can conduct sustained air ops without launch/recovery rate problems.
But you are a he11 of a lot more "in the know" so I will defer to your guarded optimism. I've been painfully wrong once before (over Long Island Ice Tea and RADM Wayne Meyer).
Keep the follow-ups coming!
I disagree, the taxpayers pour good money into the LCS and they still have useful lives. I think the LCS-2 will Continue to do well in the Far East and beyond. And I know from first hand conversations, that the LCS-1s are very needed in the Fourth Fleet. The day of thinking the warships as high tech dreadnoughts is OVER.
A prime example of that is the DDG-1000 decades in development, years in service, now descoped and still not at the New IOC
"Just maintaining the status quo (11) requires a new carrier to be built every four years. "
Reading the USNI story that Nimitz will be decommed in 2026 and Eisenhower in 2027, will Vinson be next before 2030? Has the Ford even started a full deployment yet ten years after launch? The USS Nimitz was launched in 1972 and started a seven-month Med cruise in 1976. Yes, I know - Ford in more complex than any other warship in history. Isn't that the problem though? New carrier every four years - pffft. In a pigs eye.
Title X...BFSAR...
Yawn.
What matters more at the moment is this:
We shall see if the Ford actually slips her lines and makes it to the Med next month.
And...if that wondrous event occurs...if her Air Group will be an actual contributor once there.
Without having to be landed at Sigonella so it can actually operate.
Over/Under on that?
No bets here. Navy/DOD have continually lied about the Ford just as they did with LCS, Zumwalt, F-35. Hmm, let's add the Fitzgerald, McCain, Fat Leonard, BonHomme Richard, surrender at Ford Island to that list. The Chinese may soon put us to the test.
The Navy did not lie, they just didn't know HOW to procure an advance marine vessel. Speaking of the first two ships you listed. The USN refuses to procure a semi-submersible for BDR. The Navy is putting two little used T-ESDs out of service which could instead be modified to serve as - tada- semi-submersible ships for about three mission to include BDR
Running Mate has a son-in-law onboard a CVN in Norfolk, The waterfront gouge is this: USS Ford will deploy to Mediterranean Sea this summer and early autumn. Then return in time for Thanksgiving, football seasons, Christmas, New Years, playoffs in both College and Pro football, Super Bowl parties, etc. Meanwhile.... USS Ike, CVN 69 will deploy to Mediterranean in early October and miss all the above events, while remaining in Sixth Fleet for 6 to 8 months. If you had a choice, would you select USS Ford summer vacation for 6 months ? or USS Eisenhower long, dreary, winter, endless deployment ?
USS Bush, CVN 77 is returning to Norfolk from the Mediterranean after an 8 month long deployment. US Navy has no carriers in the Med, Sixth Fleet, nor in Fifth Fleet op areas at all now. Perhaps, USS Ford CVN 78 might soon commence her upcoming summer cruise overseas ? Wonder if this Med vacation will last longer than 6 months ?
What bothers me about that picture is McKee (AS 41) sitting there in Category X status. She's the youngest of the three Emory S. Land class tenders, yet she's been out of commission for over twenty years while her two sisters are still out there. That ship is needed.
My understanding is she's been kept in-place, welded to their pier at Portsmouth to serve as a floating machine shop. Those closer can comment if that's the case or, they Navy just doesn't want to pay to move her up to Philly.
Hopefully she's received some care then and not left to rot. I doubt it though since she's been in Category X for so long.
https://www.nvr.navy.mil/SHIPDETAILS/SHIPSDETAIL_AS_41.HTML
Will the two AS in service last until the AS(X) gets to IOC? How far away and how much is that going to be?
Probably. But it will be years and years before the new tenders are in commission and fixing pigboats.
The latest gouge: https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2023/10/us-navy-issues-updated-solicitation-on-asx-submarine-tenders/
Latest budget begins to acquire a new class of sub tender. Too little, too late, but not unimportant.
Would love your thoughts on the fact they haven't designed it and the budget number is real expensive for an auxiliary, yet real close to the price of an LPD.
First one in a long time, big, lotta steel, baby steps.
Current AS are geared to support 688-class and the Ohio boats. I'll let the bubbleheads chime-in about how they do when supporting Virginias.
The two remaining AS were recently refurbished at Mare Island, they are definitely in the twilight of their career.
The two still in commission are sorely lacking when it comes to supporting SSBNs. They can do HM&E work, but not support the D5 missiles and associated systems. The tenders that did that in places like Holy Loch and Kings Bay are long gone. Those older tenders like the Simon Lake and Canopus had missile magazines and shops to work on them, along with a Marine Det to provide security. Hopefully the new tenders will have the ability to support SSBNs. Being able to do that away from the big, fixed targets known as Kings Bay and Bangor would be a very big plus.
The Navy decided to extend the tow AS it has and scratch its (axx) head before procuring anymore. The Navy has given up on steam propulsion prematurely
With the exception of Makin Island, all the Wasp-class LHDs are steam powered.
I am fully confident that we will read how "really smart people" don't have it right again next year.
This annual DC pookie dance is tiresome.
https://youtu.be/twS4fOA2NGs
BZ on the analysis. Only politely hinted at is the fact that this administration will never budget enough money to allow the Navy to get anywhere near the force level it needs to fulfill its duty. Administration priorities--are reflected faithfully (or even slavishly) by DOD direction. Those priorities are Climate change, social welfare and remolding the US society into a genderless no fault and Woke brave new world.
Elections have consequences...
https://warontherocks.com/2016/03/open-letter-on-donald-trump-from-gop-national-security-leaders/
I have never written anything that I am more proud of. And that gentleman did zilch to grow the Navy.
No Trump fan myself..
You reap what you sow Cdr.
I warned the rest of you.
You doubled down in 2020...
Can't complain now
The alternative was Hillary. I held my nose and voted for Trump in the general election. He was much the lesser of two evils and I don't regret that vote one bit.
Except for the border which he did get under control.
His comments on Putin? Had you and your peers been around in 1942? Would you have jumped Churchill's shit for acknowledging Rommels abilities in Parliament?
Trump's problem was he didn't run as a Democrat.
That and being a sociopath.
You almost helped get us Hillary. You did end up helping Obama win the Presidency. It is a binary choice game.
This is the last comment I'll make on matters disconnected from the essay. Say what you will about my vote in the state of Maryland...but I worked my ass off twice to beat Obama, including both fund-raising and policy work. You are entitled to your opinions, just not your facts.
Hate the game, not the player.
You are correct. Mea Culpa. If I have to pay the price, so be it. I committed the deed. One of my many shortcomings.
Between Trump and Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton-Bush, there was and is no contest.
It is silly to suggest that "Climate change, social welfare and remolding the US society into a genderless no fault and Woke brave new world" were DJT priorities. That was all DoD and Big Navy
The joint gorilla is now part of our mission.
The big issue is budget and recruiting. No Money, No Mahan. Congress wields ultimate authority over the budget, they need to start using it.
I'll add that a "Navy Get Well Fast" plan will probably be aviation-based. We can build airplanes, train aviators, and fill out the carrier air wings a lot faster than we can build ships.
They mandated keeping the cruisers and provide more funding than requested every year. What we need is them not pushing their own districts programs for jobs.
New mission requires more, faster! But how many more? Current plans don’t even maintain current deficient levels. BZ to Bryan for his consistent message. More, faster.
Will building another Ford-class every 4 years really help the fleet size?
Even if the plan ever came to fruition, they would never get built every 4 years anyway.
Wonder if the Sea Control Ship/Escort Carrier will be revived? Squadron of F-35s, squadron of ASW helicopters, some UAVs for ISR and refueling, just the thing for plugging a gap between islands.
I'd rather build more faster to build the option for more and then we can choose not to have more rather than no choice at all.
Only by keeping the number of CVNs from declining.
Replacing a Nimitz-class (which pretty much works) with a Ford-class is a net decrease in capability.
If all we are worried about are numbers of hulls, well - lets keep the LCSs! /sarc
If Ford works, its maintenance schedule is to be less than a Nimitz upping availability from a theoretical 19 to 28%. That was part of the sales pitch a long time ago.
The USS Ford was commissioned in November, 2013. Almost ten years ago now. She got underway on her own power in 2017. Still not fully mission capable.
Assuming we could wave a magic wand and FIX everything that needs fixing, the ford is 20-25% through it's life cycle right now, before it's first fully mission capable deployment.
So a Ford replacing a Nimitz is not an improvement in the real world.
Launched in 13 commissioned in 17.
Congress simply has to be convinced,.... forcibly, immediately, thoroughly......that WAR is certainly coming; and far, far more soon than a 6" rise in sea level............
Based on the staff Kabooki Theater w/in the Pentagon, DoD leadership does not believe war is coming. DEI, Climate CRISIS, and inter-service fighting for cash and cachet tells me they are not true believers. You cannot argue women are equal fighters to men, transexual rights are prime and the climate is the mostest, scariest, deadliest thing EVAH, and sell the American taxpayer that you actually are a warrior and prepared to win wars. We all know this, even though we do not verbalize it, and should not have to. We just had the NFL Combine. How many women are we prepping to be middle linebackers? What was their vertical? What was their 40 time? How are those women to men trans cats fairing in men's sports? Why are men pretending to be women dominating women's sports? Speaking of the NFL, why is a game taken more seriously than survival, death and killing?
Never read Title 10 until now. But back on staff duty as an enlisted man in the readiness section, my O-6 boss lectured me on the mission of the Navy. He said, "...Prompt and sustained combat operations at sea in support of national policy". Looks like he was paraphrasing Title 10. "...in support of national policy" would seem a catch-all to support what our Navy does in peacetime. Looking through a link provided by Mr. McGrath above it is sickening to me to see the Army and Air Force nibble away the Navy's rice bowl by adhering to the letter of the law in Title 10. Legal but picayune. FOGO's playing a Washington contact sport with little sense of teamwork.
*https://conservativewahoo.substack.com/p/the-mission-of-the-navy
How sick are you at the Navy's wasting tens of Billions of $$ on LCS, Zumwalt, Ford and losing irreplaceable time and man hours? Any Senior Officers lose their jobs over this waste?
19½ years of sea duty, never sea sick. But I still might have that Dramamine I bought for the wife and two daughters (age 5 &6) when our Frigate had a family cruise out of Long Beach. Dramamine has a shelf life like plutonium, I think. Yeah, I feel that sick, Ron. About that cruise. I was OOD for that day excursion. I seated my daughters at the helm and let them steer the ship and work the throttle lever. Under strict supervision, of course. Didn't last long, as the Captain had a kind of squinty-eyed look. Kids are in their 40s now and still remember driving a Guided Missile Frigate. Later in the day the Captain called a man overboard drill to demo to the families how we'd rescue their loved ones at sea. When he called it, I instinctively commenced a Y-backing maneuver..."Right full rudder! All back full...(shudder, shimmy, shake)...etc". Afterward, the Captain told me he had expected the more laid back Williamson Turn but didn't fault me for going with my training. The Y-backing maneuver is as good as any theme park ride. OHP FFG's were very agile. It was a big hit to the families. We recovered Oscar PDQ. That's all that mattered. Capt. Robert Hines was a great CO.
(Let an old WWII Navy vet steer the ship too. His smile was a delight. No eye daggers from the Captain for that.)
Love the comment about letting a WWII Vet con the ship. That should warm the cockles of any warship Captains heart. Darned few of those WWII vets left now.
“The Navy shall be organized, trained, and equipped for the peacetime promotion of the national security interests and prosperity of the United States and for prompt and sustained combat incident to operations at sea."
Fortunately, the BHR was pierside and not at sea.
"Secretary of the Navy touts climate as a top priority"
We are not a serious Navy.
We are not a serious military, or dare I say nation.
I'd be happy to be wrong. I'd rather be wrong.
You're not wrong
1/6
Editorial Note: while I tend to give a lot of running room in comments - I would like to remind everyone of a few bright lines on the chart.
- Sharp elbows and contrary opinion, including those related to your host, are more than welcome. Green range. "Your ideas are on this topic are wrong and stupid." - that is OK. "You are a nazi." - that is not OK.
- Personal attacks against the host, Front Porch member or guest of the blog that are of a violent or psycho-sexual nature, or are considers an insult to honor will result in a deletion of comment, temporary ban, or permanent ban depending on the nature and severity of the comment. Appeal can be made by email is so desired.
Whatever happened to disagreeing without being disagreeable?
I guess someone woked it up?
I'm glad you posted that, but it would be nice if you would tamp down a bit on the flame wars. Things have gotten out of hand over the last year or two. The Porch used to be much more civil.
Bound to happen as this blog became more visible and linked to by more popular blogs/websites. Attracts a wider audience, including new visitors who were not part of the original front porch and don't yet understand the culture here.
In the 1980's we were building five Aegis ships a year (mix of CG 47's and DDG 51's). My memory (I was in NAVSEA 05 at the time working on DDG 51 Flight upgrades) was that the constraint was at the LM facility in Moorestown, not the shipyards. I'm curious what has happened since then. BIW has had significant upgrades in their facilities since then. I understand that Ingalls has a lot going on with the DDG, LHA, LPD and NSC production lines but BIW doesn't seem to have other programs. It would be interesting to see a historical analysis of what has happened taking into account the combat system and other suppliers as well.
This happened...
https://warontherocks.com/2021/01/the-u-s-defense-industry-in-a-new-era/
Perry's Last Supper set the sequence of events which have led to the Monopolistic Defense Industry of today, which pretty much dictates what DoD is going to buy at what price.
BIW went from building Flight IIA DDG's, to DDG 1000, back to Flight IIA DDG's to Flight III DDG's all across a short period of time. They need a little time to get back to steady production of a hull they know well.
NSC is about to wrap up so Ingalls will have more capacity. A second FFG line there would be nice.