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.
Yep, I agree.
OY!! Buckwheat!
Fedgov has a valid, legitimate function to defend the country (i.e. maintain a military).
It has no legitimate function to provide the entitlements it does. Before cutting a VALID function, then ALL non-valid functions should cease FIRST. And the size of the entitlement spending, if fully cut, would allow todays current military budget and sizable tax cuts, at the same time.
Not surprising and pretty predictable given it takes three carriers to keep one deployed, there is always one carrier being refueled and a good chunk of the time another carrier prepping for refuel or working back up after coming out.
Right now Lincoln is being refueled ( just started) and Roosevelt just finished up. The Enterprise retired before her replacemenr (Ford) is finished and in the cycle. So the US is down to eight carriers, one less than the 9 required to keep three deployed. It’s just mathmatics.
I’d expect that the USN will compensate by putting more Harriers onto the LHDs, particularly those going to the Med. During the Libyan overthrow the USS Kearsarge was the “Med Carrier” and it’s Harriers did fly combat missions.
That’s some amazing projection and demagoguery there. Just because I don’t think the primary focus of our military should be nation building in the Middle East doesn’t make me a leftist. Are you a big believer in our role as world police, fighting at the whim of the UN like in Libya and Somalia? That’s the reality of our world.
Just because I don’t think we need to spend as much on our military as the rest of the world combined doesn’t mean I think that money should be wasted on welfare. That’s a low rent slander and shows just how shallow your arguments are.
Correction NOB Norfolk is the only east coast carrier home port.
Exactly right. This has been on my mind for some time, and now the situation is more acute.
I believe that if you were to draft a book on what things not to do military, that would expose your nation to extreme danger, we would be breaking nine out of ten of the top things, and more than likely 18 out of the top 20.
Even before the shorter month or six week deployment there was at minimal a month of ops off GITMO. Your ship went through Operational Readiness Evaluation, Propulsion Examination Board, Carrier quals for the air-wing, and that was in addition to the training to pass these test. Cutting down to one deployment every three years basically means this. A new crew will deploy each time. That is not wise either.
I’m not qualified to make the observations you have. What you’re saying makes a lot of sense. This is being passed off as being of little value change overall. That’s bogus, and it gripes me considerably to see folks here act as if this is just a minimal tweak.
We’re not going to have crews trained to the best of their abilities. We’re asking for trouble.
Obama is absolutely dumb to do this.
The America needs constant attention. Commissioned in 1965, it is showing its age. A month before leaving Norfolk, a senior enlisted crew member complained to his congressman: The ship was operating on only two of its six electric generators, without radar and unable to pump fuel. This would be its third six-month cruise in three years, and without the standard 18 months at home for repairs, salt water and full steaming had taken their toll.
That doesn't mean the ship was in port for 18 months it meant it missed needed yard times. She did three six month deployments in three years an abuse of the other extreme. What the article doesn't mention was the boiler room explosion that happened a few days after returning to Norfolk.
These cuts started immediately after Gulf War One. America's Ship Life Extension Program {SLEP} was not done and the ship decommissioned at 50% of it's service life. I do have enough knowledge of that ship to say the conditions were likely. Why no radar? Because there was only two functioning generators. The electronics were heat sensitive. Two of six generators would only allow for lights, fire pumps, pumps for boilers, and little else. The ship had six - 200 ton, three 150 ton, and one 300 ton A/C unit. The 200 ton units took about 1200 amps start up and 220 amps at 460 volts to run. A/C was the largest single electrical load. No A/C? No Radar or other electronics. I worked on that ships A/C units.
Fast forward to immediately after the 9/11 attack. The JFK had at that time been used as a reserve carrier missing maintenance. The Kitty Hawk also lacked funding. Cutting the military was popular by every POTUS since Reagan's last day in office - present as well as congress approved all these cuts while expanding non Constitutional programs.
The America's lessons were ignored. The lessons of 9/11 have been ignored. This nation is well below a relative to needs of the era level of military readiness ever allowed in our nations history. Who did it? Both parties for over 20 years now.
The Japanese were hoping that the American Carriers were docked in Pearl Harbor.
If Obama were President back then, GAG, they would have been. The Battle of Midway would have ended up being the Battle of Catalina.
Everyone West of the Mississippi would be speaking Japanese and everyone East of the Mississippi would be speaking German if Obama was in charge back then.
I agree with your conclusions. It’s part of the reason why I cannot support Republican party leadership. They agree to everything, then blame the Democrats.
They’re signing off on all of it.
It’s quite evident that our military is being ravaged at this time. All the while the whiners in our society are being coddled constantly.
“call it the ‘white flag fleet’...”
half-white fag fleet....just sayin’
Yes, you are exactly right. However, Congress and the Executive branch have slowly encumbered us with “entitlements” and social spending. When fiscal reality asserts itself, we will have to cut all spending and the military will not be an exception. The only issue is to what extent it is cut relative to other budget items.
The Navy is quietly working on an alternative option, one better suited for many of the more mundane tasks today’s Navy faces than the supercarriers presently in service. You don’t need a Ferrari to go for groceries, or pick up your kids.
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/dfad249c4dfc
this is part of state dept pub7277 freedom from war. scaling down our military capability outside of our own country. while militarizing our internal security forces.
The Navy knows full well that 15 Carrier Battle Groups are required for it to perform is mission.
In each three-year cycle, a ship will sail on patrol once for eight months...but those ships—and their crews—should be in better condition, having spent more time at home for training and refit...
Nonsense! Eight month deployments are brutal on ships and crews. The Navy again knows full well that warships' equipment status and crew efficiency drop dramatically after five months of peacetime deployment. With less ships deploying into more wartime type operations this will worsen. So basically the Navy is saying: "We'll make them do more for longer with less support but they'll be just fine!"
U.S. flattops will be routinely absent from the rest of the world’s oceans...
And there it is. Our Navy will no longer rule the waves. Pax Americana is over.
This is a bad plan. It is probably the best that could be done given the fact that Congress continues to ignore its Constitutional requirement to provide and maintain a navy if favor of funding uncounted unconstitutional programs. But the Navy should not whitewash it simply because it has been shoved down its throat.
Another typical disaster brought to you by the fools on the hill.
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.