Skip to comments.
Navy Expected to Recommend a Force of About 300 Ships
National Defense Magazine ^
| 3/16/2012
| Sandra Erwin
Posted on 03/23/2012 9:08:26 PM PDT by U-238
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-31 next last
1
posted on
03/23/2012 9:08:30 PM PDT
by
U-238
To: U-238
If they put 2 or 3 carriers and their air wings into the equation it might be reasonable...
To: U-238
do the launches, gigs, water taxis and whatnot count against the 300?
To: U-238
Never happen with SecNav Mabus, SecDef Panetta, or POTUS Obamination in charge.
To: RitchieAprile
To: MasterGunner01
I can’t remember
What did Reagan want?
600?
6
posted on
03/23/2012 9:55:59 PM PDT
by
Steve Newton
(And the Wolves will learn what we have shown before-We love our sheep we dogs of war. Vaughn)
To: Steve Newton
In regard to the 600 Ship Navy, understand that the mission has changed, the enemies have changed, and the technologies have changed.
While you still need a certain amount of iron-on-target, 100% control of the world’s sea lanes against a huge, worldwide naval adversary is no longer required.
7
posted on
03/23/2012 10:05:35 PM PDT
by
tcrlaf
(Election 2012: THE RAPTURE OF THE DEMOCRATS)
To: MasterGunner01
If 0bama gould get away with it, he’s sell the US Navy to the Chinese or Russians.
8
posted on
03/23/2012 10:22:59 PM PDT
by
unkus
(Silence Is Consent)
To: Steve Newton
9
posted on
03/23/2012 10:23:45 PM PDT
by
unkus
(Silence Is Consent)
To: U-238
A 300-ship Navy... You just can't have Too Much Navy.
10
posted on
03/23/2012 10:34:09 PM PDT
by
Rudder
To: Steve Newton
Reagan took us up to a 594 active duty fleet in 1987 up from Cater's 533 in 1979.. Poppy had us down to 471 by 9/30/92. Slick Willy had us cut even lower at 318 in 2000. Not to be out done by Slick Willie or Poppy the Smirking Chimp's Navy was at 278 in 2007.
U.S. Navy Active Ship Force Levels, 1886-present We are at 285 as of 9/30/11.
11
posted on
03/23/2012 10:44:51 PM PDT
by
cva66snipe
(Two Choices left for U.S. One Nation Under GOD or One Nation Under Judgment? Which one say ye?)
To: U-238
From the current fleet of 285 ships, 100 are deployed, said Greenert. Which in the long run will bring serious issues. The ratio for standard deployments should be about 1:4 meaning three ships to one deployed either in overhaul, brief shipyard period {three months post deployment}, doing pre-deployment work ups {which is not same as a deployment} or deployed. There just isn't much way too keep the fleets maintained right otherwise. 400 active duty should be minimal.
12
posted on
03/23/2012 10:52:02 PM PDT
by
cva66snipe
(Two Choices left for U.S. One Nation Under GOD or One Nation Under Judgment? Which one say ye?)
To: cva66snipe
I want the go back to the days where we had a 600 ship navy.
13
posted on
03/23/2012 10:57:37 PM PDT
by
U-238
To: cva66snipe
In 1990, we had the largest fleet in the world.With 15 carrier battle groups, four battleship surface action groups, and over 100 attack submarines.
14
posted on
03/23/2012 11:02:31 PM PDT
by
U-238
To: U-238
A lot of the maintenance issues started about that time as well as the cuts. The JFK's Ship Lift Extension Program was botched, America was denied S.L.E.P. and was literally ran to death early, JFK after S.L.E.P. was unofficially a reserve ship meaning lacking funds for maintenance. All of which came to a head immediately after 9/11. We also went from four too one carrier builder.
The nuke powered subs had a service life of about 20-25 years and could not be extended. When their time was up many were decommissioned with no replacement.
Congress, POTUS, Sec of Defense, and Service Secretaries of the post-Reagan years basically let things start declining and none of them had the ambition nor will to stop the gutting of our military in either party.
15
posted on
03/24/2012 12:21:55 AM PDT
by
cva66snipe
(Two Choices left for U.S. One Nation Under GOD or One Nation Under Judgment? Which one say ye?)
To: unkus
The way that ship construction costs are going through the roof, the Navy won’t be able to AFFORD a 300 ship fleet, unless you count lifeboats and rafts.
To: cva66snipe
17
posted on
03/24/2012 12:58:39 AM PDT
by
U-238
To: tcrlaf
100% control of the worlds sea lanes against a huge, worldwide naval adversary is no longer required....
At this time.
Ok, I’ll settle for 400.
18
posted on
03/24/2012 1:14:59 AM PDT
by
tet68
( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
To: Steve Newton
I believe that was then SecNav Webb, that requested a 600 ship navy. Subsequently, he resigned because he refused to reduce the size of the navy.
19
posted on
03/24/2012 2:56:33 AM PDT
by
stuartcr
("In this election year of 12, how deep into their closets will we delve?")
To: U-238
U.S. Code of law explicitly limits the total number of four-star admirals that may be on active duty at any given time. The total number of active duty flag officers is capped at 216 for the Navy
Let's mandate that the ratio of flag officers/Navy ships be capped at 1/4. It seems to me that four ships per admiral is reasonable. /S
20
posted on
03/24/2012 5:30:52 AM PDT
by
Makana
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-31 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson