Unfortunately our Navy is a result of our national policy. The Democrats place little value on a strong navy. Why? Look at the melting pot from which they come. It is in part a cultural issue where there is a tremendous difference in values, norms and priorities; i.e., social welfare programs, religious differences, muslim, vs. christian, etc.. Another "weak link" in the policy stems from their ideology which favors socialism. Our beloved navy is in the same shape as our national borders - broken.
The "Scoop" Jackson wing of the Democratic Party took flight some half century ago and hasn't been heard from since. On the other hand, Jackson hatched Republican neoconservatives like Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle who have served the nation for good or ill ever since. Pick your poison—it's the American way.
Pete, give the Houthis their due. Along with other Iranian proxies in the region, they play an important role in Jake Sullivan's strategy of maintaining Shia Iran as a regional counter-balance to the largely Sunni nations of the Middle East.
The exceptional peace and political stability which has been the norm in the Middle East since 12:01 PM of January 20th, 2021, is a testament to the effectiveness of Jake Sullivan's vision for how American foreign policy in that region should be conducted. It's such a welcome change from when Orange Man Bad was in control of America's military, foreign, and domestic agenda!
Just think of what might be accomplished between now and January 2029 if only Jake Sullivan can be given another four years to finish out the work he started in January 2021!
The rules-based international order, and the many benefits it has for America, cannot survive without him! And so when November 2024 comes around, be sure to mark the ten ballots you receive in your mailbox for Joe Biden! You'll be very glad you did!
Oh, it’s worse than that unfortunately. I could tolerate the man if he was simply Junior League and incompetent.
Sullivan is the architect of the JCPO - the “Iran deal”.
He is a committed believer to the premise that the only way you reduce conflict in the Middle East is by creating an alternate power structure to equal out Israel’s overwhelming capability.
He’s living in a world of abject, cognitive dissonance that refuses to consider as valid the idea that the Iranians might actually use nuclear weapons against Israel, because in his worldview, all world leaders are rational, and none of them actually believe any of that religion silliness, because he doesn’t. He is a textbook case of how US diplomatic elites failed to understand, irrational, extremist, ideologies.
He’s not second rate. He’s dangerous. And he’s also a coward.
This isn't a D v. R issue and trying to paint it as such simply ensures we will never see the targeted spending necessary to rebuild our maritime base. We are where we are because of greed, short-sighted national strategies, and an inattention to the sea.
The citizens of the United States, outside of some select areas in the Northeast, are not a maritime people. Even Mahan understood this. We rely on the sea for defense and trade but do not think about it when times are good. Our history is a testament to this. Lack of national attention and care allows a small group of interests to profit at the nation's expense.
A national fleet, both naval and merchant (because these things are inherently linked), requires government spending. This is not "socialism", it is a primary function of any government regardless of type. The United States is a wealth nation, we can "have it all." We can afford basic social welfare programs and also pay for a navy and merchant marine. I personally think the defense budget should be adjusted to get away from the focus on equal spending on Army, Navy, and Air Force. The Army had 20 years of focus in the GWOT. The next major conflict will be maritime, not land based. Its time the Army received a smaller piece of the pie, shrunk the standing size of their force, and we then shift that money to support a larger fleet and maritime industrial base.
The United States Gayvy? They can't even prevent piracy. It's pretty bad when the pirates see a Naval Destroyer and attempt to attack it. Our navy would rather promote mentally ill people than fight a war. Bottom scale, for sure.
I saw on the news a few days ago some female reporter saying that the Houthi will regret the response from the U.S. if they ever hit one of our Destroyers with a rocket or missile. WHAT? Does she mean it'll take an actual lucky hit from the low tech junk they're launching to evoke a response from our leadership? That sailors must die first? That a gaping hole at the waterline is part of the checklist on the ROE? How about...they shoot at us, we destroy them utterly? If I was a sailor out there in harm's way being trailed as bait, I would shun the Career Counselor's pleadings. "Va fangool, Bucko, Imma flip me some burgers."
Once again, were I in a position to make it happen, it'd be "Arc Light" time, and I'd be buying Mk 82's to keep it up until nothing stirred along that entire coast.
\Flashback\ I recollect standing watch in CIC in the GoT. We'd get a NOTAM shout-out on 243.0 from a flight of B-52's. We'd plot the coordinates, get a bearing and then time it so we could go topside to watch the Arclight in action some 50 miles away. The light of the explosions would illuminate the clouds and if you stayed long enough you could hear the steady low bass rumble. I was 21-23 years old and pretty much a uni-dimensional beer & mission focused individual then and I thought it awesome. Today, I'd think it the Götterdämmerung. *snif* ...you kind of had to be there, right, Boat Guy?
"20 February 1966: Brigadier General James M. Stewart, United States Air Force Reserve, flew the last combat mission of his military career, a 12 hour, 50 minute “Arc Light” bombing mission over Vietnam, aboard Boeing B-52 Stratofortress of the 736th Bombardment Squadron, 454th Bombardment Wing. His bomber was a B-52F-65-BW, serial number 57-149,¹ call sign GREEN TWO. It was the number two aircraft in a 30-airplane bomber stream. "
Too many in “leadership” think since we have a nuclear capability to wage war, we don’t really need all the conventional weapons anyways. After all, there is no way China will use force! We have nukes don’t ya know!
C'mon, Pete. The CDR said the chart was 3 years old. No man could have been that prescient. Not even with a Ouija Board. Sometimes realities must be denied to keep a grip on sanity. Last thing we want is for some guy to climb a tower with a scoped .30-06. It was bad when Whitman did it. It'd be worse if it was a Navy Officer.
Two thoughts; 1) Whitman was partially brought down by Texans grabbing rifles out of their trunks and returning fire - NOT very likely in today's Austin;
2) How many Naval Officers are proficient in Battle Rifle-caliber marksmanship?
Who can say? Not me. Most of my retired friends are Enlisted. My friends have been collecting milsurp battle rifles for decades. One of them, an IM2 at the time, won the Navy/Marine 1000yd contest with an M-14 back in the 70s. He won a G.I. issue M-14 out of it and the trophy was handed to him by a Marine Colonel who genuinely congratulated him. I'm sure the Marine team was ruck marching barefoot that night with 80 lbs of kit. I have a nice old pre-64 Winchester Model 70 in .308 w/ iron sights, several SKS's, a WASR-10 and 6 Mosin Nagant's. The rest of the milsurps, I sold off. I can't do prone or sitting anymore and am only good for a few standing shots until I get fatigued. Have a good supply of ammo, stripper clips and mags...I'd be OK in supplying suppressing fire for younger shooters.
Last time I shot in the Navy, in fact the only time in 26 years, was when I was a LT. 1989.
Was trying to qualify for the pistol ribbon. A friendly GMG2 at the NAS Pensacola range handed me a rattly old Ruger Service-Six in .38 Special. Making some minor allowance for the condition of the gun I got my ribbon. So did the dozen or so instructors who were off-block and tagged along too. Fun day.
Given that my son was an CPO and LDO in at least one of those MCB's I'm not too worried. Given that there are no " Battle Rifle-caliber" rifles in any MCB TO&E (do we really have an ACB anymore, if so YAY!), I'll stand by the statement.
Down to 1 ACB... ACB2 decommissioned late last year. What do you define as "battle rifle caliber" because the TOA of an NMCB at full deployment strength was a crap load of M-16s back in the day along with 88 mm mortars, M2's (oh sweet merciful heavens), M-60s and a few crates of LAWS rockets which are a real hoot.
Have a cousin who is a retired BUCS, a S-i-L who was an EO1; worked at the County Engineering Office with a retired BUCS and BUC, a LCDR SeaBee, 2 retired LDO Seabees (LCDR & CDR) and my boss was a retired CWO4 SeaBee. None of them duds. Both of the retired LDO's had great Vietnam stories. One of the problems they had was when their guys heard gunfire in the distance, they grab their rifle and run to the sound. It really hurt deadlines, and they said there were plenty of Marines to handle minor flair ups. But they just couldn't keep the SeaBee's bloodlust down. The LCDR said they liberated a 106mm Ontos vehicle and patrolled in their spare time. Yeah, SeaBees. Whenever I got assigned as Chief of Shore Patrol, a 2 or 3 time a year curse, I'd grab a SeaBee to partner with. Protect the quarterback.
CDR Sal, at the risk of sounding like a pandering sycophant here goes. There's a lot of thought went into this. A couple of careers ago, when I used to write scenarios for big events, we used a DIME / PMESII framework to organize our framing documents; this would fit right in. IMO this model passes the ultimate test...it is USEFUL. Any tool that the average person can use in today's world to help make sense of the tsunami of information they get bombarded with is USEFUL. Speaking for myself, of course; YMMV.
Regarding our allies and partners (with the caveat that is always an "interest of the moment" discussion, and I include NATO in that conversation), few if any can project power with any quantity and / or lengthy of time. Our own capability is diminished from years past, but as you point out is still the overwhelming preponderance of the naval power in the ME. Just as the Spanish Civil War was a precursor, battle lab and TTP developer for WW II, arguably UKR and the ME are doing the same for whatever is to come (pay attention to the Pacific, or course). Drones and swarms and exchange rates of attackers vs defensive munitions are creating threats to the naval status quo that are very troubling. Tanks vs ATGMs and aircraft vs SAMs of all types are lessons learned and TTP gold mines as well.
The electronic / space / IO side is also being closely watched by everyone, especially the Pacific. Speaking of the Pacific, looking at China, Japan, and Korea is fascinating. You have industrial capacity in all three (more than the U.S. arguably, especially in shipbuilding), intense competition economically and geographically, incredibly bad history among all three going back centuries (not just WW II !!!)...and us, perhaps being seen as a less than reliable partner than in decades past.
Japan in particular has publicly upped their game in the naval regime, not familiar with S. Korea as much anymore. While everyone appears to band together as an act of self preservation against China, I still find myself thinking about the end scene in "the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly" when the three main characters faced off in a triangle against each other. SPOILER ALERT for those who haven't seen the movie: The one who cheated the most won, perhaps there is a lesson buried in a great movie somewhere...
I'm not sure our Navy is capable of fighting a 12-month war. Certainly not against a peer. Not sure we can fight a 12 day war, to tell the truth - and dying valiantly is not a rational strategic goal.
The Air Force is in slightly better shape - but we have insufficient tanker assets, insufficient ISR assets, insufficient stocks of bombs (smart and dumb), stand off attack munitions, Come on, sing along!
And until the Navy and US Air Force prep the battlefield, the Army and Marines aren't going anywhere. Not that the Army is in terrific shape itself.
that's unfair. The Army goes and attempts to do what Politicals order it to do. This Admin has the border theatre it wants and the Army hasn't been cast in the show
I believe 81 million ballots and/or ballot images were counted for him. I think there is an exactly zero chance he won the election if all 50 states counted only legally cast ballots, 1 each.
US Navy: Green to borderline Yellow, trending down.
PLAN: Light Red to borderline Yellow, trending up.
Trending towards equal in quality of ships and training. We'll have the experience and an edge in multidomain warfare and Joint operations, but they will have the numbers, home field advantage and the benefit of operating under their A2AD system.
After reading Cdr. Vandenengel’s book, ‘Questioning the Carrier’, I’m more convinced than ever that the appropriate platform for ASW defense of the battle group is the submarine.
No surface vessel can detect submarines as well as another submarine.
We cannot afford enough SSN’s to both protect the fleet from enemy submarines, as well as free them to hunt the enemy fleet.
We need to be building much lower cost, conventionally, powered submarines, like the Japanese Soryu class. Those vessels, with their comparatively shorter legs, would perform the fleet, ASW, mission, freeing our SSN’s to hunt the enemy fleet.
That will then free up an enormous amount of space and capability and training on the surface vessels, which can be prioritized to strike and anti-missile defense capabilities
I don't think that will do it. Our SSNs have the largest ears and the best capability to keep up with the fleet. It might be best to have them quarterback and inundate the battlespace with ASW ISR on the cheap, which we have not attempted. Get those MQ-9Bs out there in numbers. Give MQ-25 a back up ASW mission. Make our ships boats useful for something aside from VBSS. Stick the MH-60R dipping sonar on them with an unmanned system suite. Get those sonobuoy sized UAVs out there with mad sensors. Get a loiitering ASW Tomahawk out there. All these can fit in the price of a SSN.
MQ-25 as an ASw asset is a non starter. The operations won’t allow (tethered to the carrier via modloc) and their operators don’t have the experience in ASW. They also don’t have the sensor capabilities nor the mission planning and post mission analysis spaces required for a foot print onboard the CVN. Lastly, CAG isn’t giving up his Texaco to Zulu for tasking. No how, no way.
We need to develop a UAV swarm capacity for the Surface navy and the Sub guys. Loitering Air to surface missiles have an asymmetrical effect on the enemy battle rhythm and OODA loop.
Then use the Virginia’s to protect the fleet and push the Soryu’s out to hunt. We could build 6 to 8 Soryu’s for every Virginia.
They’ve a range in excess of 6000 nautical miles. If we’re basing them out of Okinawa and Japan, that’s more than enough for combat patrols into the areas of concern.
And they are top-of-the-line AIP. They might actually be more quiet than the Virginia’s.
SSNs would be a real good answer. I suspect we'll be able to see everything, and hit anything we can see, but the number of targets and being able to separate the high value vs chaff / decoys (manned and unmanned) would be challenging in a full out exchange. Flood the zone with everything you've got would make sense, and hope to force a reassessment of the wisdom of continuing by the other guy is a gamble, but likely the best course of action. However, the reality of numbers of platforms, weapons per platform, targets requiring servicing, loss rates, and ability to get in and out of the AOR seem daunting.
ASW is dependent on the water column. Even SSN’s will have serious difficulty in a knife fight. Air ASW allows relative near instant movement to prosecute and detect depending on the skills of the crew. Don’t discount Air ASW.
That worked with U-boats in World War II because they spent most of their time on the surface. It won’t work with modern ASW. Modern submarines are far too quiet. The Chinese aren’t as good as ours, but they have some that are a generation behind. As good as some of the better Russian ones from the Cold War.
If you hammer away with dipped sonar on active, you tell every Chinese sub within 500 miles where you are and where the fleet is, you’re trying to protect.
The submarine has a far greater advantage at ASW because it can sit below the layer and listen with far more powerful sensors and computers
I'm puzzled though...."If you hammer away with dipped sonar on active, you tell every Chinese sub within 500 miles where you are and where the fleet is"
then....a P-8 has no utility?
rather than think of a something like a blimp, flying very slowly and using "dipped" sonar; the vision is something more akin to a P-8 deploying sonobuoys,.....modern, fully rigid, amphibious, airships that can hover like a helicopter, deploy from Denver to South China Sea in 3 days, fly at 100kts from sea level to 20,000', with virtually unlimited unrefueled range and linger capability; crew of a dozen, carrying 27 tons payload of offensive/defensive weapons. do-able, now, and at relatively low costs.
Hopefully, some influential Navy personnel read this blog and will take notice, eventually. preferably soon!
A P-8 using active prosecution is far away from the enemy submarines PIM. A blimp is literally over head. Artifacts are famous on acoustic analysis. Comparing an P8 with a blimp is disingenuous for several reasons.
which is why I write "modern airships". I got a kick out of your "seaplane" reference; although, a modern airship having 27 tons of payload should mean a fair amount of sensors; operators, etc..
That much payload should cover a reasonable defensive suite of weapons, as well.
P8’s spend more time prosecuting passive submarine contact than active. You don’t arbitrarily use active prosecution until it’s time to attack. An airship will be woefully behind the prosecution to conduct any attack: deliberate, urgent or otherwise. Well maybe blind.....
He does a really good job of describing in lay terms without disclosing classified capabilities the difference and dangers with modern submarines and the challenges for ASW.
I’ve always been fascinated with submarines, and so I’ve read every last thing I could get my hands on about them, but even with that, I felt like my appreciation for the challenges, facing surface warfare and aviation in the ASW fight, was greatly improved by reading his book.
Personally, I think a lot of folks in the Navy are going to be horrifyingly disappointed at how ineffective surface and aviation ASW are at prosecuting the best Chinese submarines
Yes, they have a lot of older crap that we’ll hear coming. There’s a very good chance that while we’re hunting those easy targets, some of their better boats will slip through. And they are improving at an amazing rate.
Norfolk - '87 or so, they brought back "old timers" to deal with reactivation of the BB's and to train the crews... What a nightmare effort to get those sailors up to speed and to get ready for deployments to the Gulf. I don't recall if they even had the schools ready with the requisite curriculum to do the training required...
Few people understand the nuance with hammer vs passive prosecution and why each had its own place in Detection, tracking, localizing and if required attacking.
true, but the limitation is that both sides are restricted to using their standard tube SPG's for 'front line' engagement only.
Meaning, the risk from counter-battery fires (and at this point, FPV drones are a more effective form of counter-battery fire) is such that they cannot deploy with any substantive range beyond the line of contact. If they get close enough to range the enemy rear, they get killed themselves.
Now, RAP rounds make some difference in that, but most deep fires are being done with rocket/missile artillery, not tubes.
Tubes are churning dirt on the front lines. Still killing people, to be sure, and not arguing they don't have a purpose, but neither side is currently using them for what they should be using them for.
"Get your pens out. Put a mark where you thought your navy was in September 2023, and where you now think it is in February 2024." I'm going to use a pencil. Not going to chance it, that the professor won't have us "show our work" just before we have to turn in the assignment or that things won't change in March. This is a difficult exam. I planned to take an all or nothing approach, that each level would only get an up-check if it was totally 100% in OK shape. Before placing any marks I was thinking that a pyramid needs a firm foundation. I'm done.
Bonus question… where would adversaries mark themselves on the pyramid? So far this is localized, but betcha others are taking notes. What if this goes for 2y, 5y,,, What if UAV harassment attacks begin in other Straits. Someone help me with the SM2/6 depletion/DOD budget math, or DDG surge/7 month deployment tipping point. This adversary war game is no doubt catching the attention of opponents
I don't think it matters who is at the helm of the USA on any given day. The navy is tasked with coming up with a five-year plan every year and seems they have not to have able present and sell a competent plan since 1990. In addition, all too often they seek technological leaps, rather than going with gradual improvements. I believe this is the time for them to show that they can do the job they say they can. Given that the USCG is talking about laying up too NSC due to manning shortages, why should the USN not take those, show us how fast they upgrade their armaments and put them into action.
You raise a really good point on the subject of manning. It's not just the military dealing with this headache. A lot of the equipment OEMs are tweaking their designs to minimize the technical quals necessary to assemble and install because they can't get people who want to do that work or are competent enough to use a welding rig. Add in electro-hydraulics, etc., to perform tasks that require a lot of HP and/or force application and things get really interesting... On the maintenance side of things??? Not good to downright frightening. The degree of change in the caliber of techs from 20+ years ago vs. today is startling and not to the good. The USGC and the Navy won't be spared regrettably.
Figuring out the personnel issues/manning issues is the huge problem. If we have 600 ships today we would not have enough sailors to man them. I think we need to figure how how to solve the reserve fleet problem that has reservists that only are called upon for deployment in case of declared war. No more a year on and a year off but real part time . Might be able to find part time sailors if they stay near home.
The age of the missile certainly seems to have a "equalizer" wrench into the works these days. Should profileration of ballistic missile tech continue apace (as well as ISR evolution), holding the top 2 tiers for any navy is going to be real bear. Gives pause to think where ASBM tech might be in a decade... Pyramid gives one much to chew on.
Unfortunately our Navy is a result of our national policy. The Democrats place little value on a strong navy. Why? Look at the melting pot from which they come. It is in part a cultural issue where there is a tremendous difference in values, norms and priorities; i.e., social welfare programs, religious differences, muslim, vs. christian, etc.. Another "weak link" in the policy stems from their ideology which favors socialism. Our beloved navy is in the same shape as our national borders - broken.
The "Scoop" Jackson wing of the Democratic Party took flight some half century ago and hasn't been heard from since. On the other hand, Jackson hatched Republican neoconservatives like Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle who have served the nation for good or ill ever since. Pick your poison—it's the American way.
When you have one world government you don't need a Navy.
The Houthis are at fault for not being a part of the New World Order.
Pete, give the Houthis their due. Along with other Iranian proxies in the region, they play an important role in Jake Sullivan's strategy of maintaining Shia Iran as a regional counter-balance to the largely Sunni nations of the Middle East.
The exceptional peace and political stability which has been the norm in the Middle East since 12:01 PM of January 20th, 2021, is a testament to the effectiveness of Jake Sullivan's vision for how American foreign policy in that region should be conducted. It's such a welcome change from when Orange Man Bad was in control of America's military, foreign, and domestic agenda!
Just think of what might be accomplished between now and January 2029 if only Jake Sullivan can be given another four years to finish out the work he started in January 2021!
The rules-based international order, and the many benefits it has for America, cannot survive without him! And so when November 2024 comes around, be sure to mark the ten ballots you receive in your mailbox for Joe Biden! You'll be very glad you did!
^ As I was reading your piece, I was visualizing it being delivered dispassionately with a straight face. Here: https://as2.ftcdn.net/v2/jpg/04/34/24/77/1000_F_434247799_7DnAKAhim4J5HqAxdchLHfG3Wlaarb8p.jpg
Jake certainly Made Iran Great Again.
Sullivan is a junior amateur. Out of his league.
Oh, it’s worse than that unfortunately. I could tolerate the man if he was simply Junior League and incompetent.
Sullivan is the architect of the JCPO - the “Iran deal”.
He is a committed believer to the premise that the only way you reduce conflict in the Middle East is by creating an alternate power structure to equal out Israel’s overwhelming capability.
He’s living in a world of abject, cognitive dissonance that refuses to consider as valid the idea that the Iranians might actually use nuclear weapons against Israel, because in his worldview, all world leaders are rational, and none of them actually believe any of that religion silliness, because he doesn’t. He is a textbook case of how US diplomatic elites failed to understand, irrational, extremist, ideologies.
He’s not second rate. He’s dangerous. And he’s also a coward.
The last Democrat President to care about the Navy was FDR.
Using your own marker there I would say Kennedy.
JFK.
Reagan
This isn't a D v. R issue and trying to paint it as such simply ensures we will never see the targeted spending necessary to rebuild our maritime base. We are where we are because of greed, short-sighted national strategies, and an inattention to the sea.
The citizens of the United States, outside of some select areas in the Northeast, are not a maritime people. Even Mahan understood this. We rely on the sea for defense and trade but do not think about it when times are good. Our history is a testament to this. Lack of national attention and care allows a small group of interests to profit at the nation's expense.
A national fleet, both naval and merchant (because these things are inherently linked), requires government spending. This is not "socialism", it is a primary function of any government regardless of type. The United States is a wealth nation, we can "have it all." We can afford basic social welfare programs and also pay for a navy and merchant marine. I personally think the defense budget should be adjusted to get away from the focus on equal spending on Army, Navy, and Air Force. The Army had 20 years of focus in the GWOT. The next major conflict will be maritime, not land based. Its time the Army received a smaller piece of the pie, shrunk the standing size of their force, and we then shift that money to support a larger fleet and maritime industrial base.
Not sure how to read the top "bucket" of "war": War capability?
Ability to conduct...
The United States Gayvy? They can't even prevent piracy. It's pretty bad when the pirates see a Naval Destroyer and attempt to attack it. Our navy would rather promote mentally ill people than fight a war. Bottom scale, for sure.
The civil wat was won with a mentally ill president with 2 mentally ill generals. The problem is not promoting those who have the instinct to fight.
I saw on the news a few days ago some female reporter saying that the Houthi will regret the response from the U.S. if they ever hit one of our Destroyers with a rocket or missile. WHAT? Does she mean it'll take an actual lucky hit from the low tech junk they're launching to evoke a response from our leadership? That sailors must die first? That a gaping hole at the waterline is part of the checklist on the ROE? How about...they shoot at us, we destroy them utterly? If I was a sailor out there in harm's way being trailed as bait, I would shun the Career Counselor's pleadings. "Va fangool, Bucko, Imma flip me some burgers."
Once again, were I in a position to make it happen, it'd be "Arc Light" time, and I'd be buying Mk 82's to keep it up until nothing stirred along that entire coast.
\Flashback\ I recollect standing watch in CIC in the GoT. We'd get a NOTAM shout-out on 243.0 from a flight of B-52's. We'd plot the coordinates, get a bearing and then time it so we could go topside to watch the Arclight in action some 50 miles away. The light of the explosions would illuminate the clouds and if you stayed long enough you could hear the steady low bass rumble. I was 21-23 years old and pretty much a uni-dimensional beer & mission focused individual then and I thought it awesome. Today, I'd think it the Götterdämmerung. *snif* ...you kind of had to be there, right, Boat Guy?
From "This Day in Aviation";
"20 February 1966: Brigadier General James M. Stewart, United States Air Force Reserve, flew the last combat mission of his military career, a 12 hour, 50 minute “Arc Light” bombing mission over Vietnam, aboard Boeing B-52 Stratofortress of the 736th Bombardment Squadron, 454th Bombardment Wing. His bomber was a B-52F-65-BW, serial number 57-149,¹ call sign GREEN TWO. It was the number two aircraft in a 30-airplane bomber stream. "
Too many in “leadership” think since we have a nuclear capability to wage war, we don’t really need all the conventional weapons anyways. After all, there is no way China will use force! We have nukes don’t ya know!
What? No stage for diversity? Isn't that an achievement in and of itself?
C'mon, Pete. The CDR said the chart was 3 years old. No man could have been that prescient. Not even with a Ouija Board. Sometimes realities must be denied to keep a grip on sanity. Last thing we want is for some guy to climb a tower with a scoped .30-06. It was bad when Whitman did it. It'd be worse if it was a Navy Officer.
Two thoughts; 1) Whitman was partially brought down by Texans grabbing rifles out of their trunks and returning fire - NOT very likely in today's Austin;
2) How many Naval Officers are proficient in Battle Rifle-caliber marksmanship?
Who can say? Not me. Most of my retired friends are Enlisted. My friends have been collecting milsurp battle rifles for decades. One of them, an IM2 at the time, won the Navy/Marine 1000yd contest with an M-14 back in the 70s. He won a G.I. issue M-14 out of it and the trophy was handed to him by a Marine Colonel who genuinely congratulated him. I'm sure the Marine team was ruck marching barefoot that night with 80 lbs of kit. I have a nice old pre-64 Winchester Model 70 in .308 w/ iron sights, several SKS's, a WASR-10 and 6 Mosin Nagant's. The rest of the milsurps, I sold off. I can't do prone or sitting anymore and am only good for a few standing shots until I get fatigued. Have a good supply of ammo, stripper clips and mags...I'd be OK in supplying suppressing fire for younger shooters.
I shot the PacFlt Matches as a LT; do we even have such anymore?
ALL of my rifles were sadly lost at sea some time ago.
They do. https://usnmt.org/events/
Last time I shot in the Navy, in fact the only time in 26 years, was when I was a LT. 1989.
Was trying to qualify for the pistol ribbon. A friendly GMG2 at the NAS Pensacola range handed me a rattly old Ruger Service-Six in .38 Special. Making some minor allowance for the condition of the gun I got my ribbon. So did the dozen or so instructors who were off-block and tagged along too. Fun day.
I shot a LOT on Active duty. Did a lot of instructing as NucWeps Security Officer.
as to point 2: I think approximately 8 to 9 NMCBs and 1 ACB would like to have a word on that subject... :>)
Given that my son was an CPO and LDO in at least one of those MCB's I'm not too worried. Given that there are no " Battle Rifle-caliber" rifles in any MCB TO&E (do we really have an ACB anymore, if so YAY!), I'll stand by the statement.
Down to 1 ACB... ACB2 decommissioned late last year. What do you define as "battle rifle caliber" because the TOA of an NMCB at full deployment strength was a crap load of M-16s back in the day along with 88 mm mortars, M2's (oh sweet merciful heavens), M-60s and a few crates of LAWS rockets which are a real hoot.
Have a cousin who is a retired BUCS, a S-i-L who was an EO1; worked at the County Engineering Office with a retired BUCS and BUC, a LCDR SeaBee, 2 retired LDO Seabees (LCDR & CDR) and my boss was a retired CWO4 SeaBee. None of them duds. Both of the retired LDO's had great Vietnam stories. One of the problems they had was when their guys heard gunfire in the distance, they grab their rifle and run to the sound. It really hurt deadlines, and they said there were plenty of Marines to handle minor flair ups. But they just couldn't keep the SeaBee's bloodlust down. The LCDR said they liberated a 106mm Ontos vehicle and patrolled in their spare time. Yeah, SeaBees. Whenever I got assigned as Chief of Shore Patrol, a 2 or 3 time a year curse, I'd grab a SeaBee to partner with. Protect the quarterback.
Whitman was a Marine unfortunately. Your average SWO would be far less effective.
It’s amazing how Mass murderers are rarely proficient.
Non shooters see the numbers and think ‘oh, these guys are so deadly’
Operators look and say ‘thank God they are losers and we are good guys- if we did that the fatality count would be order of magnitude higher’
The DOT is taking the lead in transforming America in terms of diversity. Ships, not so much.
You can read all about it in the "Equity Action Plan" which I came across while surfing the net.
https://www.transportation.gov/priorities/equity/equity-action-plan
Missy Mullen's thousand ship navy is today's ABDA.
Admiral Mullen joined the board of GM following his retirement but it didn’t work out too well after he tried to put rudders on cars.
ABDA. New acronym to me. How did that work out?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/32/ABDA_Japanese_attacks.jpg
CDR Sal, at the risk of sounding like a pandering sycophant here goes. There's a lot of thought went into this. A couple of careers ago, when I used to write scenarios for big events, we used a DIME / PMESII framework to organize our framing documents; this would fit right in. IMO this model passes the ultimate test...it is USEFUL. Any tool that the average person can use in today's world to help make sense of the tsunami of information they get bombarded with is USEFUL. Speaking for myself, of course; YMMV.
Regarding our allies and partners (with the caveat that is always an "interest of the moment" discussion, and I include NATO in that conversation), few if any can project power with any quantity and / or lengthy of time. Our own capability is diminished from years past, but as you point out is still the overwhelming preponderance of the naval power in the ME. Just as the Spanish Civil War was a precursor, battle lab and TTP developer for WW II, arguably UKR and the ME are doing the same for whatever is to come (pay attention to the Pacific, or course). Drones and swarms and exchange rates of attackers vs defensive munitions are creating threats to the naval status quo that are very troubling. Tanks vs ATGMs and aircraft vs SAMs of all types are lessons learned and TTP gold mines as well.
The electronic / space / IO side is also being closely watched by everyone, especially the Pacific. Speaking of the Pacific, looking at China, Japan, and Korea is fascinating. You have industrial capacity in all three (more than the U.S. arguably, especially in shipbuilding), intense competition economically and geographically, incredibly bad history among all three going back centuries (not just WW II !!!)...and us, perhaps being seen as a less than reliable partner than in decades past.
Japan in particular has publicly upped their game in the naval regime, not familiar with S. Korea as much anymore. While everyone appears to band together as an act of self preservation against China, I still find myself thinking about the end scene in "the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly" when the three main characters faced off in a triangle against each other. SPOILER ALERT for those who haven't seen the movie: The one who cheated the most won, perhaps there is a lesson buried in a great movie somewhere...
Awwww, shucks. Thanks!
I'm not sure our Navy is capable of fighting a 12-month war. Certainly not against a peer. Not sure we can fight a 12 day war, to tell the truth - and dying valiantly is not a rational strategic goal.
The Air Force is in slightly better shape - but we have insufficient tanker assets, insufficient ISR assets, insufficient stocks of bombs (smart and dumb), stand off attack munitions, Come on, sing along!
And until the Navy and US Air Force prep the battlefield, the Army and Marines aren't going anywhere. Not that the Army is in terrific shape itself.
The AF and Navy will do as well as the Army does in protecting our borders from invaders.
that's unfair. The Army goes and attempts to do what Politicals order it to do. This Admin has the border theatre it wants and the Army hasn't been cast in the show
Army doesn’t have any lines until act 2 scene 5
Ph-t-t. It's a 2 act play. Curtain call comes after act 2 scene 4.
Shhhh someone has to watch the play…
I hate it when someone gives a spoiler. Sorry.
Sounds like the US Army can screw up by the numbers as well:
https://youtu.be/Zfn1dd8P3IA?t=130
...yeah, but those soldiers are marching in retreat.
Like General Milley?
He needs to check with his Chinese 'friends'.
The Army would do a hell of a job defending the border - just task them, and provide rational ROE's.
That they are not is 100% the fault of POTATUS
And how did he become POTATUS ?
Supposedly, 81 million votes.
I believe he got 81 million "votes"; I DON'T believe 81 million legitimately registered, live people voted for him.
Something, something Burke about a chain from the dead to future generations.
You really need to get to know your opposition.
I believe 81 million ballots and/or ballot images were counted for him. I think there is an exactly zero chance he won the election if all 50 states counted only legally cast ballots, 1 each.
It's the fault of both teams in the UniParty
US Navy: Green to borderline Yellow, trending down.
PLAN: Light Red to borderline Yellow, trending up.
Trending towards equal in quality of ships and training. We'll have the experience and an edge in multidomain warfare and Joint operations, but they will have the numbers, home field advantage and the benefit of operating under their A2AD system.
We have lots of 'allies', but since they don't seem to actually want to show up, is that better than the PLAN not needing the allies they don't have?
After reading Cdr. Vandenengel’s book, ‘Questioning the Carrier’, I’m more convinced than ever that the appropriate platform for ASW defense of the battle group is the submarine.
No surface vessel can detect submarines as well as another submarine.
We cannot afford enough SSN’s to both protect the fleet from enemy submarines, as well as free them to hunt the enemy fleet.
We need to be building much lower cost, conventionally, powered submarines, like the Japanese Soryu class. Those vessels, with their comparatively shorter legs, would perform the fleet, ASW, mission, freeing our SSN’s to hunt the enemy fleet.
That will then free up an enormous amount of space and capability and training on the surface vessels, which can be prioritized to strike and anti-missile defense capabilities
I don't think that will do it. Our SSNs have the largest ears and the best capability to keep up with the fleet. It might be best to have them quarterback and inundate the battlespace with ASW ISR on the cheap, which we have not attempted. Get those MQ-9Bs out there in numbers. Give MQ-25 a back up ASW mission. Make our ships boats useful for something aside from VBSS. Stick the MH-60R dipping sonar on them with an unmanned system suite. Get those sonobuoy sized UAVs out there with mad sensors. Get a loiitering ASW Tomahawk out there. All these can fit in the price of a SSN.
MQ-25 as an ASw asset is a non starter. The operations won’t allow (tethered to the carrier via modloc) and their operators don’t have the experience in ASW. They also don’t have the sensor capabilities nor the mission planning and post mission analysis spaces required for a foot print onboard the CVN. Lastly, CAG isn’t giving up his Texaco to Zulu for tasking. No how, no way.
We need to develop a UAV swarm capacity for the Surface navy and the Sub guys. Loitering Air to surface missiles have an asymmetrical effect on the enemy battle rhythm and OODA loop.
I'm not a huge fan of the MQ-25 at this point. Its price point seems outrageous for what its doing.
"Get a loitering ASW Tomahawk out there."
we (modern airships) can do that for ya!
You’ll be shot down by a Chinese sea plane carrying the entire reload.
Then use the Virginia’s to protect the fleet and push the Soryu’s out to hunt. We could build 6 to 8 Soryu’s for every Virginia.
They’ve a range in excess of 6000 nautical miles. If we’re basing them out of Okinawa and Japan, that’s more than enough for combat patrols into the areas of concern.
And they are top-of-the-line AIP. They might actually be more quiet than the Virginia’s.
SSNs would be a real good answer. I suspect we'll be able to see everything, and hit anything we can see, but the number of targets and being able to separate the high value vs chaff / decoys (manned and unmanned) would be challenging in a full out exchange. Flood the zone with everything you've got would make sense, and hope to force a reassessment of the wisdom of continuing by the other guy is a gamble, but likely the best course of action. However, the reality of numbers of platforms, weapons per platform, targets requiring servicing, loss rates, and ability to get in and out of the AOR seem daunting.
ASW is dependent on the water column. Even SSN’s will have serious difficulty in a knife fight. Air ASW allows relative near instant movement to prosecute and detect depending on the skills of the crew. Don’t discount Air ASW.
(ahem) we're here....
during WWII, 89,000 ships in convoy were escorted by blimps, with only one ship lost to submarine. even with absolutely archaic blimps.
Modern airships can do ALL the ASW you could ever want; and, a fair number of other missions as well..
That worked with U-boats in World War II because they spent most of their time on the surface. It won’t work with modern ASW. Modern submarines are far too quiet. The Chinese aren’t as good as ours, but they have some that are a generation behind. As good as some of the better Russian ones from the Cold War.
If you hammer away with dipped sonar on active, you tell every Chinese sub within 500 miles where you are and where the fleet is, you’re trying to protect.
The submarine has a far greater advantage at ASW because it can sit below the layer and listen with far more powerful sensors and computers
Granted, all.
I'm puzzled though...."If you hammer away with dipped sonar on active, you tell every Chinese sub within 500 miles where you are and where the fleet is"
then....a P-8 has no utility?
rather than think of a something like a blimp, flying very slowly and using "dipped" sonar; the vision is something more akin to a P-8 deploying sonobuoys,.....modern, fully rigid, amphibious, airships that can hover like a helicopter, deploy from Denver to South China Sea in 3 days, fly at 100kts from sea level to 20,000', with virtually unlimited unrefueled range and linger capability; crew of a dozen, carrying 27 tons payload of offensive/defensive weapons. do-able, now, and at relatively low costs.
Hopefully, some influential Navy personnel read this blog and will take notice, eventually. preferably soon!
A P-8 using active prosecution is far away from the enemy submarines PIM. A blimp is literally over head. Artifacts are famous on acoustic analysis. Comparing an P8 with a blimp is disingenuous for several reasons.
Number of sensors.
Number of onboard sensor operators.
Latency.
Reactive time on target (crazy Ivan)
More. Lots more...
Please, Sir......no more bloody "blimps" !
I hate blimps. hate em, Hate em, HATE em!
which is why I write "modern airships". I got a kick out of your "seaplane" reference; although, a modern airship having 27 tons of payload should mean a fair amount of sensors; operators, etc..
That much payload should cover a reasonable defensive suite of weapons, as well.
My leaky teaky Taiwan trawler displaced 12 tons. Made 7 kts. Would be more effective than an
“Airship”…
P8’s spend more time prosecuting passive submarine contact than active. You don’t arbitrarily use active prosecution until it’s time to attack. An airship will be woefully behind the prosecution to conduct any attack: deliberate, urgent or otherwise. Well maybe blind.....
But again, read ‘Questioning the Carrier’
Vandenengel is a Nuclear submarine officer.
He does a really good job of describing in lay terms without disclosing classified capabilities the difference and dangers with modern submarines and the challenges for ASW.
I’ve always been fascinated with submarines, and so I’ve read every last thing I could get my hands on about them, but even with that, I felt like my appreciation for the challenges, facing surface warfare and aviation in the ASW fight, was greatly improved by reading his book.
Personally, I think a lot of folks in the Navy are going to be horrifyingly disappointed at how ineffective surface and aviation ASW are at prosecuting the best Chinese submarines
Yes, they have a lot of older crap that we’ll hear coming. There’s a very good chance that while we’re hunting those easy targets, some of their better boats will slip through. And they are improving at an amazing rate.
Ahhh that’s why they will bring old guys back like me. For ASW… and good coffee.
Norfolk - '87 or so, they brought back "old timers" to deal with reactivation of the BB's and to train the crews... What a nightmare effort to get those sailors up to speed and to get ready for deployments to the Gulf. I don't recall if they even had the schools ready with the requisite curriculum to do the training required...
Few people understand the nuance with hammer vs passive prosecution and why each had its own place in Detection, tracking, localizing and if required attacking.
I may be a Marine, kind sir, but I can read ;)
Not you. I can see you get it.
All good. My attempt at self deprecating humor was less obvious than I hoped. 🤪
WW1 and 2 are as removed from modern warfare as the Tomahawk vs the 155mm self propelled arty.
Well, 100 people a day get killed in Ukraine by 155mm SPGs....
true, but the limitation is that both sides are restricted to using their standard tube SPG's for 'front line' engagement only.
Meaning, the risk from counter-battery fires (and at this point, FPV drones are a more effective form of counter-battery fire) is such that they cannot deploy with any substantive range beyond the line of contact. If they get close enough to range the enemy rear, they get killed themselves.
Now, RAP rounds make some difference in that, but most deep fires are being done with rocket/missile artillery, not tubes.
Tubes are churning dirt on the front lines. Still killing people, to be sure, and not arguing they don't have a purpose, but neither side is currently using them for what they should be using them for.
Yeah that book is definitely a wake up call...
"Get your pens out. Put a mark where you thought your navy was in September 2023, and where you now think it is in February 2024." I'm going to use a pencil. Not going to chance it, that the professor won't have us "show our work" just before we have to turn in the assignment or that things won't change in March. This is a difficult exam. I planned to take an all or nothing approach, that each level would only get an up-check if it was totally 100% in OK shape. Before placing any marks I was thinking that a pyramid needs a firm foundation. I'm done.
Bonus question… where would adversaries mark themselves on the pyramid? So far this is localized, but betcha others are taking notes. What if this goes for 2y, 5y,,, What if UAV harassment attacks begin in other Straits. Someone help me with the SM2/6 depletion/DOD budget math, or DDG surge/7 month deployment tipping point. This adversary war game is no doubt catching the attention of opponents
Everyone has a propensity to mark and grade themselves higher than reality. Look at any O4-O8 FITREP.
I don't think it matters who is at the helm of the USA on any given day. The navy is tasked with coming up with a five-year plan every year and seems they have not to have able present and sell a competent plan since 1990. In addition, all too often they seek technological leaps, rather than going with gradual improvements. I believe this is the time for them to show that they can do the job they say they can. Given that the USCG is talking about laying up too NSC due to manning shortages, why should the USN not take those, show us how fast they upgrade their armaments and put them into action.
You raise a really good point on the subject of manning. It's not just the military dealing with this headache. A lot of the equipment OEMs are tweaking their designs to minimize the technical quals necessary to assemble and install because they can't get people who want to do that work or are competent enough to use a welding rig. Add in electro-hydraulics, etc., to perform tasks that require a lot of HP and/or force application and things get really interesting... On the maintenance side of things??? Not good to downright frightening. The degree of change in the caliber of techs from 20+ years ago vs. today is startling and not to the good. The USGC and the Navy won't be spared regrettably.
Figuring out the personnel issues/manning issues is the huge problem. If we have 600 ships today we would not have enough sailors to man them. I think we need to figure how how to solve the reserve fleet problem that has reservists that only are called upon for deployment in case of declared war. No more a year on and a year off but real part time . Might be able to find part time sailors if they stay near home.
The age of the missile certainly seems to have a "equalizer" wrench into the works these days. Should profileration of ballistic missile tech continue apace (as well as ISR evolution), holding the top 2 tiers for any navy is going to be real bear. Gives pause to think where ASBM tech might be in a decade... Pyramid gives one much to chew on.
Mostly on point: The Royal Navy had an oopsie. Again.
https://www.twz.com/sea/royal-navy-trident-ballistic-missile-fails-test-launch-for-second-time-in-a-row
I believe the main problem is a very restricted ROE, lack of political will and fear in an election year.
It would help is Those houthi Launch sites were hit unannounced and actually terminate a few crews.