Posted on Sep 26, 2017
Building a 355-Ship Navy: It’s Not Just the Number, It’s the Mix
1.38K
14
14
3
3
0
Posted 7 y ago
Responses: 6
Good article that lays out the foundation of the problem, we do not have enough ships, here is where I would start closing the deficit today:
USS America class (LHA-6) modern expeditionary warfare will likely not require the LHA to have a well deck, if needed just and another LPD or LSD to the group. Going back to the idea of escort carriers we do not need a Ford class to meet all of our needs. An America LHA with 20 F-35s and specially outfitted V-22 for refueling would be able to deploy a lethal amount of airpower. Add to that a good group of escort ships like DDGs and FFGs (discussed next) with a lot of Tomohawks you have a lethal strike force that can overpower all but our near peer countries.
Accelerate the development then deployement of the Frigate variant of LCS. Declare a winner in the “sail off” and move forward with one of the hulls outfitted with VLS, new OTH Surface to Surface, RAM, etc…
Accelerate the building of the Flight III DDGs, these are capable replacements for the Tyco CGs and represent the most capable ships in the world
All three of these initiatives have little front end and development risk as they are all tried and tested platforms already deployed and walking the walk.
Manning, if you need 100 sailors to man a ship you should recruit and train 300, the extra 200 serve on shore duty supporting the fleet with training and maintenance. SIMAs could increase that amount of shipboard maintenance they cover now to include the routine maintenance that falls on the crew. Crew could spend more time training and would only need to keep the Ship clean. We have to stop pushing all of these political requirements down on the sailors that get paid next to nothing when you look at it from an hourly wage working 100 hours a week. LT Brad McInnis
USS America class (LHA-6) modern expeditionary warfare will likely not require the LHA to have a well deck, if needed just and another LPD or LSD to the group. Going back to the idea of escort carriers we do not need a Ford class to meet all of our needs. An America LHA with 20 F-35s and specially outfitted V-22 for refueling would be able to deploy a lethal amount of airpower. Add to that a good group of escort ships like DDGs and FFGs (discussed next) with a lot of Tomohawks you have a lethal strike force that can overpower all but our near peer countries.
Accelerate the development then deployement of the Frigate variant of LCS. Declare a winner in the “sail off” and move forward with one of the hulls outfitted with VLS, new OTH Surface to Surface, RAM, etc…
Accelerate the building of the Flight III DDGs, these are capable replacements for the Tyco CGs and represent the most capable ships in the world
All three of these initiatives have little front end and development risk as they are all tried and tested platforms already deployed and walking the walk.
Manning, if you need 100 sailors to man a ship you should recruit and train 300, the extra 200 serve on shore duty supporting the fleet with training and maintenance. SIMAs could increase that amount of shipboard maintenance they cover now to include the routine maintenance that falls on the crew. Crew could spend more time training and would only need to keep the Ship clean. We have to stop pushing all of these political requirements down on the sailors that get paid next to nothing when you look at it from an hourly wage working 100 hours a week. LT Brad McInnis
(3)
(0)
CMDCM Gene Treants
Agree with all except Scrap the CS and replace it with the FFG from scratch. If you keep the LCS use it for its intended mission to support the MARG during littoral combat ONLY.
If the ship needs 100 people, make sure that includes the people needed to do firefighting and damage control. Yes, a hit by a nuc killed all but that is usually not the case so lets man for saving the ship and put the bodies where they belong, on the ship and not ashore.
If the ship needs 100 people, make sure that includes the people needed to do firefighting and damage control. Yes, a hit by a nuc killed all but that is usually not the case so lets man for saving the ship and put the bodies where they belong, on the ship and not ashore.
(0)
(0)
LCDR (Join to see)
CMDCM Gene Treants - 100 was just to use round numbers. All I am saying is that we need to have more shore duty billets for sailors to get a break from this high op-tempo deployment cycle we have found ourselves in.
(1)
(0)
CMDCM Gene Treants
LCDR (Join to see) - Totally agree with you sir, I just don't want to find us in the Gold/Blue concept that I believe leads to more problems with maintenance than fixing the crew solves. I think ownership of the ship is very important and just being on board part-time does not lend to that. Yes, a break away from the ship, like we are seeing when the ship is in port and the crew is in berthing ashore might solve some of the problems, I agree.
(0)
(0)
355 is nice, but unless they man them where they need to be and train the crews we will have the same problems we are having now.
(3)
(0)
I really loved building my Cruiser and serving on her. One heck of a ship and at 10,000 tons as heavy as some light Battleships from WWII. Yes, we need the Aegis Cruisers and whatever can replace them in today's Navy. No, we do not need Battleships as much as it pains the really old salts to understand that. What we really need is a replacement for the KNOX Class Frigates. Something Sleek, fast and highly maneuverable, but LIGHT. Our current Destroyers are basically the same weight as a cruiser. The Zumwalt, need I say more? We seem to have enough Carriers if you look at both the CVN and the Gators. BUT let's look at Subs as well - we do need more of the Fast Attacks. Replace the Aging boomers if you want to keep the deterent ability.
Once we get the proper mix, let's also look at manning our fleet. Part of the problem as I see it is our desire to depend on Automation. Look that is fine on Merchant Ships. Maybe you are confident that 10 to 20 people can take a 200,000-ton cargo ship from China, to the Panama Canal, and into port Bayonne, but I am darn sure a 10,000-ton Destroyer needs more than 100 people in a war.
Once we get the proper mix, let's also look at manning our fleet. Part of the problem as I see it is our desire to depend on Automation. Look that is fine on Merchant Ships. Maybe you are confident that 10 to 20 people can take a 200,000-ton cargo ship from China, to the Panama Canal, and into port Bayonne, but I am darn sure a 10,000-ton Destroyer needs more than 100 people in a war.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next