Not to worry. Before this administration is done, the newly renamed Department of Peace and Tranquility will be stationed on the Potomac to assure the world of good intentions towards one and all.
Come play with us.
Posted on 01/25/2014 7:09:17 PM PST by ClaytonP
The U.S. Navy is about to cut in half the number of aircraft carriers it keeps ready for combat. Starting in 2015, just two American flattops will be on station at any given time, down from three or four today.
The change is spelled out in a presentation by Adm. Bill Gortney, head of Fleet Forces Command. The U.S. Naval Institute published the presentation on its Website on Jan. 24.
The new “Optimized Fleet Response Plan” represents an effort to standardize training, maintenance and overseas cruise schedules for the Navy’s 283 front-line warships, in particular the 10 nuclear-powered carriers.
The OFRP is also meant to save money and keep the Navy functioning under budget cuts mandated by the sequestration law. But to be clear, even after the change the Navy will still deploy more, bigger and better ships than any other maritime force in the world.
Warships will adopt a 36-month calendar. In each three-year cycle, a ship will sail on patrol once for eight months. “All required maintenance, training, evaluations and a single eight-month deployment will be efficiently scheduled,” Gortney claimed.
That means less than a quarter of the combat fleet—possibly fewer than 70 ships—will be deployed at any given time, down from 81 today. The Navy keeps around two-thirds of its combat power in the Pacific, equal to around 45 deployed ships under the OFRP.
Fewer frontline ships will be on patrol under the new plan, but those ships—and their crews—should be in better condition, having spent more time at home for training and refit, Gortney claimed. “The Optimized Fleet Response Plan has been developed to enhance the stability and predictability for our sailors.”
Sailing less often also helps the Navy shift funding into ship maintenance, a traditionally under-funded but vital activity that ensures vessels can serve for their entire 30-to-50-year planned lifespan.
But the undeniable fact is that there will be fewer Navy ships near potential hot spots starting next year. Based on historical patterns, it’s likely the Navy will keep one aircraft carrier in the Western Pacific near China and another in the Indian Ocean and Persian Gulf to watch over Iran.
U.S. flattops will be routinely absent from the rest of the world’s oceans, although the Navy will also be able to deploy two assault ships carrying helicopters and Harrier or Joint Strike Fighter jump jets—mini-carriers, in a sense.
Moreover, the OFRP standardizes and enlarges carrier strike groups, concentrating the smaller deployed fleet into fewer but bigger formations. “These CSGs will be composed of seven to eight, vice current three to four, surface combatants,” Gortney explained.
The concentration will be achieved in part by shifting ballistic-missile-defense ships—cruisers and destroyers fitted with missiles and radars for shooting down enemy rockets—away from independent patrols. Instead, many of the BMD ships will sail alongside the carriers.
The addition of missile-defense ships to the carrier groups could help the flattops defend themselves against Chinese-made DF-21D “carrier-killer” rockets in the event of a major war.
But Gortney stressed that some missile-defense patrols will need to be independent—most likely, those conducted by the Navy’s new four-ship destroyer squad in Rota, Spain. Those four ships are meant to patrol the Mediterranean, where American aircraft carriers will rarely venture.
The handful of destroyers carrying Scan Eagle drones and Fire Scout robot helicopters could also be exempted from carrier-group duty, Gortney added. These vessels frequently sail alone along the East African coast in order to gather intelligence for Special Operations Forces secretly working ashore.
The new plan will mean fewer but more powerful Navy deployments, but does not mean an end to routine, small-scale humanitarian and goodwill cruises. Rather, those “softer” naval missions are increasingly the purview of the quasi-civilian Military Sealift Command, which operates more than 100 lightly-armed specialist ships alongside the frontline Navy.
The Navy recently bought MSC 10 small, speedy catamaran transports and four Mobile Landing Platform “sea base” ships specifically so that those cheaper vessels could handle soft missions. Sealift Command ships might become a more common sight across the globe at the same time that aircraft carriers become rarer.
David Axe’s new book Shadow Wars is out. Sign up for a daily War is Boring email update here. Subscribe to WIB’s RSS feed here and follow the main page here.
They need to go back to a heavy cruiser concept Cheaper and just as long range
When in good condition, the ships are very effective - might handle the whole Finger Lakes system.
I grew up in Rochester/Henrietta. The foothills to the south of the city are about the only places I miss - beautiful in each of the seasons, but especially Fall and Spring (unless there's a new coating of snow which can make a very nice landscape all its own).
They aren't dormant, they're just in U.S. waters instead of the Indian Ocean. And if this plan loosens up more money for maintenance then they'll be in better condition.
We could call it the ‘white flag fleet’...
Those flat tops will be gone with the first strike from either NORKS or Iran.
However, from a strategic point, could we not maintain a fleet based on min max. Rotate the manpower around each battle group keeping the manpower at a optimal low and the rotated hardware at an optimal high with reserves being trained in the process.
In a wargaming sense your idea might work. But in real-life? Probably not, the service’s are having a hard enough time with retention of trained personnel.
Too many tours away from home will destroy the families of the people serving.
As a side note, I am willing to bet pretty good money that most of our volunteers for the Armed Forces come from families that had people serving in the military too, fathers, uncles and now mothers and aunts.
>>I am willing to bet pretty good money that most of our volunteers for the Armed Forces come from families that had people serving in the military too, fathers, uncles and now mothers and aunts.<<
Christians are not joining the Armed Forces these days, perverts are. This move is Obama’s way of saying we don’t have enough young men or women joining to man a full sized force anymore but I’ll never admit that to my enemies.
Which allies? What allies? Japan? Taiwan? NATO? Turkey? Israel? Who are we protecting them from? How much are they compensating us for the billions we spend defending them? Would they go to war for us?
/bingo
This looked like some sort of sick joke when I first saw it.
Sad thing is, it is a sick joke, from a totally broken federal government.
Two carrier fleets active at a time.
Where to begin...
Thank John Kerry. At least we know where your grasp of things ends.
The handful of destroyers carrying Scan Eagle drones and Fire Scout robot helicopters could also be exempted from carrier-group duty, Gortney added. These vessels frequently sail alone along the East African coast in order to gather intelligence for Special Operations Forces secretly working ashore.
Well, it’s obvious that’s not a secret any more.
Secrets? Who needs secrets? It’s just one big friendly world out there where we provide money streams to our best friends who have sworn to bury us. And then here on what is supposed to be a Conservative forum, we have folks buttress the Leftist’s view that an ever shrinking military is actually the best thing.
Next year when they announce we’ll only have one active carrier group on the high seas, folks will come in to swear they never thought we’d come to our senses, but we finally have.
With friends like these, who needs enemies?
In this article is also touches on the fact that our 600 plus have in Reagan’s day is now a 78 ship Navy on the high seas.
We might just as well print business cards that say, “Attack at will...”
So much for the sea empire and dollar hegemony. Was nice while it lasted.
“... 600 plus Navy...”
Seriously! Do you think this is going to loosen up more money for upkeep? And do you honestly think our ships will be out to sea in U. S. waters?
To keep this battle groups in top form, you have to have them on station. These ships will NOT be on station. They will be in port and on short cruises up and down our coasts.
When war comes, and it will, our teams will not be at peak training levels.
This money shill be shifted to social programs, in and out of the military. It is not going to make us more battle ready.
I think it’s going beyond that. It’s an open invitation for our next military engagements to be played at the home team venue, ours.
The Norks and Iran together couldn’t hit 20% of our battle fleet. It’s debatable if they could hit one of our battle groups. Iran doesn’t even have the bomb yet. North Korea has never tested one on a ballistic missile.
There’s more going on here than meets the eye, and I think it’s Islam’s leading advocate neutering Islam’s potential largest enemy to open the door for more chaos.
Not to worry. Before this administration is done, the newly renamed Department of Peace and Tranquility will be stationed on the Potomac to assure the world of good intentions towards one and all.
Come play with us.
Try climbing the ladder a little bit. After 70 years of wasting our blood and treasure so other countries could build little socialist paradises under our protection maybe it's time the US went Galt.
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.