www.defensenews.com
‘Show me the money’: Congress calls for Navy to spend more on shipyards
Even though the Navy has the most developed plan in DoD to modernize its repair facilities, a lawmaker warned the service to stop playing funding games and prioritize shipyards in next year's budget request.
Wrong topic.
news.usni.org
Most but that can be use as an advantage.
reemphasisThe focus now for the Pentagon is maneuverer warfare, “where we plan on using our forces to create dilemmas for adversaries that prevent them from being successful more than us being able to project power and take over locations of our own choosing. So, this decision-centric move in warfare is going to require us to have a fleet design that reflects some new characteristics different than the characteristics of our previous fleet,”
Navy Lacks ‘Clear Theory of Victory’ Needed to Build New Fleet, Experts Tell House Panel - USNI News
The Navy and the Department of Defense haven’t finished their homework needed to inform how the Navy builds its future fleet, a panel of naval experts told a House panel on Thursday. The debate in Congress and in the Pentagon on naval power has been pegged on the last assessment of the number of...
if you are going to force real dilemmas you will need not just missile magazine LUSVs, but large surface combatants (LSC) which can launch sizeable numbers of semi attritable lg rg UCRAVs (the likes of X-47{~$10m a copy} and the Kratos tube & wing Low Cost Attritable were obsolete 10yrs ago). LSC needs a next gen VGAS which does not make sense for a LUSV. Dilemmas and DMPIs served will put an adversary on their backfoot.
Clark claims to Congress small dispersed ships are going to cause too many dilemmas. Corvettes and smaller are not causing dilemmas. Dispersed standoff LSC able to stay out of range and attack you w/ lng rg guns, UCRAVS, hypersonics will.
Clark says lightly manned Corvettes rather than LUSV, well as long as the junior officer and crew can una.. that thing when in close surface combat. ie a minimally manned SeaTrain concept which deploys modules/LUSVs progressively farther and farther away from close combat until the personnel are close enough to a ESG/ECG group and have left a trail of missile magazines back to the close surface Combat zone or a fast escape ocean going vessel. Exposing even a minimally manned small craft to close surface combat is unnecessary and not well thought out.
T-AKE class ships w/ VLS for launch or combatant reload is a great idea.
In large strokes, that means moving the Navy away from the massed formations centered aircraft carriers and amphibious warships and into smaller groups that will make it harder for adversaries like China and Iran to target.
If Clark is correct that a FA-XX is most likely a derivative of an existing aircraft-Super Hornet or F-22 or even F-35, the carrier is not going to be worth sustaining at the numbers.. ie still need a $9T NDAA for FY2022 or carriers are increasingly not worth the $.
Again if carriers are going to be worth it at all they will need aircraft w/a F-14 like stealth fighter/bomber able dominate the skies when outnumbered, and a A-12 like stealth tactical bomber able to threaten deep strategic tgts..
PS: Can the USN hierarchy be trusted to mature unmanned sea tech when it threatens their careers and post service careers? DARPA (generally not impressed w/ their transition record) may be the only trusted development agent and OSD directly forcing transition to program of record as USN will inhibit.
There is a slight problem with having more VLS Cells that EVERYONE seems to be forgetting...
THing is that out side of the LCS, we all know how that went, the USN dont do corvettes or smaller ships...
cdrsalamander.blogspot.com
cdrsalamander.blogspot.com
If one doesn't have enough missiles to survive PLAN numbers just give up now or go back to guns..
The Missiles numbers are the easiest to fix, buy more, we have the factory capacity. Just not the will to pay for more missiles at a time.
wavellroom.com
The universal electromagnetic launcher would also launch ballistic and cruise missiles for land attack and anti-ship operations at ranges of up to 1,000 km; ‘electromagnetic rockets’25 for operations between 200 and 600 km; and the electromagnetic railgun would prosecute land and sea targets within a range of 200 km.26Chinese Power Projection; A Role for Arsenal Ships?
A paper exploring the concept of Arsenal Ships and where they may sit within future Chinese maritime power projection ambition.
How well do they deal with damage control from missile hits?
THe Problem with having small crews is that well...
Once again, a reasonable narrative left the station some time ago. Its not a question of who should be fired but who shouldn't be fired. Missile fetishism will render this ship barnacle bait. The USN is turning into a laughing stock. Asia is a widespace much like the incompetence of the USN.
The Guns havent worked in the last 3 years and Congress will not give Navy the funds to rebuild them to shot army shells.
And don't forget a pair of guns on top of the hangar as originally planned and maybe a RAM launcher or two. The flight deck and hangar would be useful for all kinds of things.
Those at the moment are 30mm bushmasters. Basically in the same set up as the LCS Surface Warfare modules.
Why would you want to take a step back? Anything you can do with a Mk41 you can do with a Mk57. The reverse cannot be said.
The Navy does have designs for being able to Doublepack most MK41 missiles into the larger Mk57. Mainly the Arsocs, SM2s and SM6B1s.
The MK57 needs to have new canister certified anyways, for basically any missile not Tomahawk or SM2, so adding another to the list will not be much work. I have seen official Navy images and wordage for a dual pack MK57 canister before with a list of missiles and the ARSOC and SM6 was on it years. Will post that when I find it.
As is the BMD ships only carry eight SM3, with one of the CG(X) designs having only 12 KEI back when those two programs were a thing. Plus it depends on how big the Modern KIE will be. OG KIE was longer then any of the correct surface launch Hypersonic missiles.
It is about time! Keep the ammo flowing! The US cannot build enough ships with the facilities it has. There should be a hard look at upgrading and rebuilding US ship building capacity. The current US Navy plan requires it. Having enough skilled workers will be a huge problem. I think we can figure it out. Time is not on our side. Spend 20 minutes going up or down the Chinese coast line on Google Earth, so many dry docks. I have not looked inland along their main rivers.‘Show me the money’: Congress calls for Navy to spend more on shipyards
Even though the Navy has the most developed plan in DoD to modernize its repair facilities, a lawmaker warned the service to stop playing funding games and prioritize shipyards in next year's budget request.
Was on vacation this past week and spotted a Burke just off the side of the road in a seemingly random place and found out there are only two spots on the entire west coast they can actually load weapons on ships:
"For the first time, the planned pier and causeway will be able to accommodate 844-foot-long amphibious assault ships or simultaneously service two guided-missile destroyers.
“That’s very important if you need to move a lot of ships overseas,” Navy spokesperson Gregg Smith said.
Considering the next closest Naval Weapons Station is in Washington, over 1,000 miles from the U.S. Pacific Fleet’s hub in San Diego, the new ammunition pier will raise Seal Beach’s strategic importance for the Navy."
Bit of a shocker to pop out of a town and boom there it is. I expected to see ships when I got to San Diego but was not expecting this some 100 miles north:
View attachment 666987
View attachment 666986
(Obviously I didn't take this but given there was a Burke parked there it's close enough.)
