Posted on 12/16/2016 7:23:57 AM PST by rktman
The Navy released a new fleet plan that calls for 355 ships, outlining a massive increase in the size of its high-end large surface combatant and attack submarine fleets but a modest increase in its planned amphibious ship fleet, according to a Dec. 14 summary of the assessment.
The findings of the latest Force Structure Assessment adds 47 ships to the Navys battle force over the 308-ship figure from a 2014 FSA.
According to the summary, the service determined the 355 total was the minimum force structure to comply with [Pentagon] strategic guidance and was not the desired force size the Navy would pursue if resources were not a constraint, read the summary.
Rather, this is the level that balances an acceptable level of warfighting risk to our equipment and personnel against available resources and achieves a force size that can reasonably achieve success, according to the summary, which notes it would take a 653-ship force to meet all global requirements with minimal risk.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.usni.org ...
“The new DE subs are quiet, fast, can stay submerged for extended periods.”
While there is a role for DE subs, it’s not in blue water where the USN dominates. DE is too slow, not enough endurance for transit and surface fleet protection.
However, in the Med, South China Sea and Persian Gulf they could be quite effective.
If we had a frigate near the Bowditch the Chinese would not have been so bold to steal that drone.
I would think a guided missile heavy cruiser with some 8-10 inch guns would fit the bill nicely.
At one point prior to the Okinawa invasion there were over 700 ships anchored there.
Murderer's Row:
Coast Guard? Why is that germane?
Good Question! I would add, what is the total tonnage? and how has that change? We may have fewer combat ships but equal tonnage, or not.
Wow! thanks
That’s a SHAME!
President Reagan never quite got his 600 ship navy, but we were close. It has been downhill ever since.
We need a new class of warship—small battleships armed with rail guns. With rockets and Anti-sub gear! A heavy cruiser for the 21st Century. Name em after Native American Tribes like Monitors in the Civil War.
Because their National Security Patrol Frigate is a superior platform to the LCS in nearly every respect.
Especially this version:
Patrol Frigate 4921 is a more radical redesign with a crew of 141,[22] adding weapons and sensors at the expense of reducing range from 12,000 nautical miles (22,000 km) to 8,000 nautical miles (15,000 km).[23] It adds a 12-cell Mk56 VLS launcher for ESSM air-defense missiles, just behind the main gun which is upgraded from 57mm to a 76 mm Super Rapid.[22] Two quad launchers for Harpoon (missile) anti-ship missiles and a triple launcher for torpedoes are added to the stern.[23] It retains the SeaRAM/Phalanx CIWS and 6 machine guns of other NSC variants.[22] The stern is closed in and houses a towed-array sonar;[23] there is a hull sonar for mine countermeasures and an ESM suite.[23]
Well that maybe however, building them does not seem to be on the Navy’s list - they like fancy-smacy stuff like the LSC and the F-35. Practical and or cheaper stuff is just not that lucrative for their next careers as consultants.
So they will go with a pile of ships that don’t work, float, or fight, and a plane whose range is limited like its payload capacity - but hey, looks neat!
The other 7 ships are just place holders until they come up with something even neater, fancier, and more expensive than the LCS or F-35.
Until the enemy starts sinking them.
Unit costs of the F-35a are equivalent to the F-16 block 60, or any of the later variants. About $85mil/ea.
The National Security Frigate costs about $200mil/ea more than the LCS.
More Zumwalts with railguns are what’s needed.
What have you against the USCG?
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.