It's all right there
DC has trouble with planning ahead 5 years, let alone 50. So of course their response will be slow at best.
DC is not. It’s the crab pot, and we haven’t had a competitive service strategy since Goldwater-Nichols. We’ve got a realistic likelyhood of losing the Big One in the next few years.
I certainly hope they are reading this;while the West ties its energies to bizarre political and social ideologies they continue to build.Western nations and in particular U.K. take notice and act.
So, the 600 ship global Navy under Reagan was good because we are the good guys, but the Chinese buildup under Xi in their own backyard is bad because they are the bad guys? Anybody ever consider the possibility that we come to an agreement with the other great powers instead of trying to impose a Pax Americana on the world?
That's an interesting read. I'm worried that we aren't ready for the "blind" part as I imagine that we have grown fat, dumb and happy in synch with the exponential growth in ISR capabilities over the last 25 years+ since I served. Not just ISR either, navigation, command & control and weapons systems are all very dependent on modern tech that has never really been "contested." Data links can be fragile things. Beyond the physical destruction of important assets, there will surely be some jamming/EW surprises that nobody has anticipated. God's Eye will be more like a Polyphemus after his meeting with Ulysses. Best we get to work on those autonomous robot platforms. Maybe call it Skynet.
Maybe the Roman Republic had the right idea when they required that officials spend time in military command. They had skin in the game.
"a grand networking scheme that ties everyone in the battlespace together —"??? Anyone else get a little shiver running down your back? How many network security failures have we had in the US Guvmint in the last 5 years? How many IT parts are out there still collating and mirroring network traffic? With China as the culprit. Anytime anyone tells you a highly classified network is "secure" just run away. Your network is only as a secure as the dullest tool in your IT shed (Jack Teixeira immediately comes to mind).
I give the "grand networking scheme (now there's a predictive word) less than 12 hrs after the balloon goes pop.
“…What we are walking into…”
Amended to: “…what we are SLEEP walking into…”
Well, what's the short-run solution, say 0-5 years? Well, this has probably been thought about before but what about low-cost mother missiles, launchable from surface ships. These mother missiles would carry n (some number) of anti-ship missiles (Harpoons?). The mother missile's role, obviously, is to get her angry babies in range of surface targets. The idea is to be able to deliver anti-ship missiles in the thousands.
As for the surface ships why not acquire used AFRAMAX tankers (80,000 - 120,000 metric tons) -- think of them as low cost arsenal ships. They cost about $40+ million used. Just how many launchers and missiles could you put on just one of these?
To speed up getting such a system in service, offer a $1 billion dollar prize for the best working prototype of the mother missile along with a production line design for their manufacture in one year.
I'm just another guy with an opinion -- imagine what the really creative men, women and others could come up with along these lines?
Are those in DC responding properly?
Word of the day for August 30th; Somnolence.
We had a Navy suitable for an empire with Lehman's nearly 600 ship navy. That was always at least part of the rationale among the deep state cognoscenti , not simply having enough ships for duk'n it out off Murmansk and Pete.
Now? Meh, not so much.
And the surrender of PBs to Iranians, groundings, fires, and global warming worship ain't making us look 10 foot tall to the ChiComs either.
How 'bout next year the Navy Academy football team be 50/50 male/female and beat the snot out of Notre Dame to prove there's something to that 'diversity is our strength' stuff our leaders in uniform have been preaching at every chance.
That photo makes me fondly recall those shots of a half dozen or more Spruances building or fitting out at the same time...
Probably could use that again about now.
If we lost 50,000 in Vietnam how many might we lose in China?
We always measure capabilities, not intent....however as pointed out, this type of capability development reveals intentions. My one question would be how well trained the people on the ships could possibly be with this quick of a buildup, generating personnel quickly, and relatively sophisticated weapons - really an evolutionary step for them. I think that and coordinating the force will be their major difficulties if they try to fight...which they will try to do under their shore based missile umbrella, not in open waters.
Our intent will be to choke off trade from a distance and strike their fleet from outside their ability to interdict our actions with LRASM-ERs and such from multiple platforms...while also preserving/conserving our ships and personnel.
We spoke about drones for fleet defense on another topic yesterday, possibly carried on LTAs for dropping when the fleet is threatened with recovery of the drones (at least the onese not exploded) for cyclic operations. But the LTAs could also provide a forward radar (SPY-6?) for over the horizon detection of any incoming missiles - and that time would make a difference in defending a fleet. We could also carry a LOT of SM-3/6 or LRASM-ERs (Rapid Dragon concept) on LTAs with heavy lift capacity (and yes, they are faster than ships...and can rise and drop very quickly - not sitting ducks at a distance).
This could be a quick force multiplier for our side to make up for hulls and VLTs.
The PRC is building a war winning Fleet. They intend to own the world.
And no one is doing anything about it.
It will come down to Nuclear exchanges to fight it on our part.
DC can think as far as the next election and is driven to enforce they/them pronouns above actual warfare training.