We also need honesty about what we are seeing in the Virginia class maintenance. If they won't hold up as well as a 688 that's a reason to focus on a flight made of sterner stuff or to get moving to the next class with how to afford and maintain in mind.
Well said. A VERY interesting piece in the WSJ this morning by Rahm Emmanuel(!!!!) advocating shifting some USN ship maintenance to Japan. Based upon my (admittadly dated) personal experience, that would be a win-win in many ways.
Read GAO-22-105448. From 2008-2018 the subs lost 10,000 days of underway operational time due to maintenance issues. And the next glass house to fall is Battle Damage Repair. No parts stocked, no yards available, no workers available. China can build 200 (!!!) ships to our ONE.
Austin must be relying on all those captured UFOs and their technology that can fly trillions of mile thru time warps only to run into a peak somewhere out West, cuz he sure doesn't act too concerned about the next 4 years versus China (maybe he is on the Jo Bai Den China payroll plan too)
Honestly I didn't know that an "awaiting maintenance" category existed, despite the many articles on this site stating so. That chart puts the issue into crystal clear context. Scary not good situation we got ourselves into with no obvious solution.
So "awaiting maintenance", that implies to me to be a serious operational capability or a safety related issue, else why not keep it crewed and sailing?
Re: your point #1. When I was in grad school at MIT (‘79-‘82j one of my classes wasAdvanced Hydrodynamics. The class had 10 students - 3 Navy officers, 2 USCG officers, and 5 PRC Ph.D candidates. Stupid then. Stupid now.
Yes to all, but maybe more. Sal always does the math and shows his work (the Mk-48 math is pretty depressing). Whatever we think about qualitative advantage, the quantity factors in the math. Do we know what they are thinking as they do the math- number of ships in theater (I appreciate I&W, but I respect the low likelihood of a save the date for the start of the war). The numbers that matter are those I’m the theater of war. Do we have any idea of what they may expend in a fight? If our ship and crew is twice as good (pure speculation), what if they have committed 4 to 1? Rather than how long, might we ask how quickly?
Back in 2014 or 2015 I wrote Senator Toomey to complain about the delays the Hartford was experiencing at Electric Boat. A six month yard period ended up taking 18 months. Responded to my inquiry with a note from the Navy saying, essentially, everything is OK. He didn't press the issue. Until our Congress cares, nothing will happen.
We are going to need refit locations when the torpedoes run out. South Pacific island chains are already being compromised by China. Are we producing more 48’s? Not that I can see. Are we going to have enough TLAMs to shoot? Not that I can see. Are we going to have trained crews sitting around while their boats are waiting on maintenance? Yep, see Connecticut, and A handful of others. It’s a shitshow. Our best promise was the subsurface branch.
"They have more ships than we have MK-48" - It's been a fun week watching everyone in the press scream about CBU being substituted for 155MM.
Anyone who had one quarter of a functional hind brain recognized over the last 30+ post cold war years that warshots would quickly be expended way beyond the ability of the "MIC" to replenish them.
So, welcome to the peace dividend. You don't need them until you need them.
BTW, what's the real world shelf life of that thar torpedo thingy? Cause we can have all the SSN in the world and if their muntions have aged out? (Well, at least we can hum a few bars that rhythm with Mark 14.)
We also need honesty about what we are seeing in the Virginia class maintenance. If they won't hold up as well as a 688 that's a reason to focus on a flight made of sterner stuff or to get moving to the next class with how to afford and maintain in mind.
Well said. A VERY interesting piece in the WSJ this morning by Rahm Emmanuel(!!!!) advocating shifting some USN ship maintenance to Japan. Based upon my (admittadly dated) personal experience, that would be a win-win in many ways.
Read GAO-22-105448. From 2008-2018 the subs lost 10,000 days of underway operational time due to maintenance issues. And the next glass house to fall is Battle Damage Repair. No parts stocked, no yards available, no workers available. China can build 200 (!!!) ships to our ONE.
Austin must be relying on all those captured UFOs and their technology that can fly trillions of mile thru time warps only to run into a peak somewhere out West, cuz he sure doesn't act too concerned about the next 4 years versus China (maybe he is on the Jo Bai Den China payroll plan too)
Honestly I didn't know that an "awaiting maintenance" category existed, despite the many articles on this site stating so. That chart puts the issue into crystal clear context. Scary not good situation we got ourselves into with no obvious solution.
So "awaiting maintenance", that implies to me to be a serious operational capability or a safety related issue, else why not keep it crewed and sailing?
Asking for a friend...Who isn't Chinese
This is the only thing that matters. Nothing else comes close--across the whole military.
If we can’t keep the apex predators out at sea during this period, -everything- else is irrelevant.
And we seemingly can’t and it’s too late to do anything so... Time to get hot on fielding some nasty UUVs?
Excellent article. Naval Reactors long ago exhausted Rickover's fumes and is now living in a Tom Clancy fantasy world.
Re: your point #1. When I was in grad school at MIT (‘79-‘82j one of my classes wasAdvanced Hydrodynamics. The class had 10 students - 3 Navy officers, 2 USCG officers, and 5 PRC Ph.D candidates. Stupid then. Stupid now.
At present, we could not win a blue water conflict in the Gulf of Mexico.
Yes to all, but maybe more. Sal always does the math and shows his work (the Mk-48 math is pretty depressing). Whatever we think about qualitative advantage, the quantity factors in the math. Do we know what they are thinking as they do the math- number of ships in theater (I appreciate I&W, but I respect the low likelihood of a save the date for the start of the war). The numbers that matter are those I’m the theater of war. Do we have any idea of what they may expend in a fight? If our ship and crew is twice as good (pure speculation), what if they have committed 4 to 1? Rather than how long, might we ask how quickly?
Sigh... just sigh...
Lorain Yard, North Charleston Yard, and at least one other...
Time to start full Mk. 48 production.
And where the f&ck is the demand for additional tenders?
Back in 2014 or 2015 I wrote Senator Toomey to complain about the delays the Hartford was experiencing at Electric Boat. A six month yard period ended up taking 18 months. Responded to my inquiry with a note from the Navy saying, essentially, everything is OK. He didn't press the issue. Until our Congress cares, nothing will happen.
Hulls
Maintenance
Staffing
All are deficient
We are going to need refit locations when the torpedoes run out. South Pacific island chains are already being compromised by China. Are we producing more 48’s? Not that I can see. Are we going to have enough TLAMs to shoot? Not that I can see. Are we going to have trained crews sitting around while their boats are waiting on maintenance? Yep, see Connecticut, and A handful of others. It’s a shitshow. Our best promise was the subsurface branch.
"They have more ships than we have MK-48" - It's been a fun week watching everyone in the press scream about CBU being substituted for 155MM.
Anyone who had one quarter of a functional hind brain recognized over the last 30+ post cold war years that warshots would quickly be expended way beyond the ability of the "MIC" to replenish them.
So, welcome to the peace dividend. You don't need them until you need them.
BTW, what's the real world shelf life of that thar torpedo thingy? Cause we can have all the SSN in the world and if their muntions have aged out? (Well, at least we can hum a few bars that rhythm with Mark 14.)