by CC Clarke » Sat Mar 27, 2021 9:36 am
This ship embodies all that is wrong with modern naval procurement. Programs should be judged not by intentions but results. This ship class is a complete disaster, as was the LCS program that preceded it. The Ford class isn't faring much better. For the first time, Congress is debating the future of "super carriers" --the most holy of holies of the USN. That alone speaks volumes about the future of the Navy.
A good redesign of this ship would feature a set of pontoons supporting a huge funnel with a crane to drop sacks of cash into. All three ships of this class are now in a DEVRON, and STILL looking for an actual mission. DEVRONS generate one thing: Reports. The USN could have done this a lot more cost-effectively than blowing the money on these floating advertisements for foolishness.
As far as future procurement goes, a proposed larger fleet needs a solid industrial support structure for planned and emergent maintenance. Teh USN is unable to get timely work performed now.
We could start by building several Naval Shipyards. Losing MINSY was political - not logical. The liberals in northern CA threw out all of the Bay area naval bases with a resulting huge economic loss of well-paying jobs and all the problems that follow massive unemployment. MINSY, Alameda NAS, Treasure Island, the huge Oakland Naval Supply Center, all gone. Tens of thousands of jobs wiped out in a short span of time. Vallejo, which was totally dependent on MINSY became a bankrupt ghetto.
If the surface fleet doesn't get it together soon, the bucks will flow faster to the submarine force, which is in many ways, a better investment. They may not embody the presence of a carrier, but they can be more deadly and immune from retribution in most cases. Just the threat of a modern nuclear submarine in an area is enough to sent surface ships scurrying back to port - the Argentinians can back that up.
All surface ships are vulnerable to the effects of EMP which the Chinese include in their battle doctrine. One nuke detonated far enough away to avoid casualties on a carrier (which would lead to a war) will turn it and it's air groups off like flipping a switch. Luckily, submarines are shielded from EMP, but that's little consolation to the carrier battle group that is out of action, waiting for a tow. Against near-peer adversaries, surface action forces are headed toward obsolescence - but Big Navy doesn't like to discuss that.
The DDX program had great intentions, too bad it couldn't fulfil very many of them. It's still a streamlined funnel to shovel money into. The last Big Idea was to replace the useless guns with directed energy weapons. "Sure, they're expensive, but cheap to shoot!" Good luck getting close enough to an adversary to use them.
This ship embodies all that is wrong with modern naval procurement. Programs should be judged not by intentions but results. This ship class is a complete disaster, as was the LCS program that preceded it. The Ford class isn't faring much better. For the first time, Congress is debating the future of "super carriers" --the most holy of holies of the USN. That alone speaks volumes about the future of the Navy.
A good redesign of this ship would feature a set of pontoons supporting a huge funnel with a crane to drop sacks of cash into. All three ships of this class are now in a DEVRON, and STILL looking for an actual mission. DEVRONS generate one thing: Reports. The USN could have done this a lot more cost-effectively than blowing the money on these floating advertisements for foolishness.
As far as future procurement goes, a proposed larger fleet needs a solid industrial support structure for planned and emergent maintenance. Teh USN is unable to get timely work performed now.
We could start by building several Naval Shipyards. Losing MINSY was political - not logical. The liberals in northern CA threw out all of the Bay area naval bases with a resulting huge economic loss of well-paying jobs and all the problems that follow massive unemployment. MINSY, Alameda NAS, Treasure Island, the huge Oakland Naval Supply Center, all gone. Tens of thousands of jobs wiped out in a short span of time. Vallejo, which was totally dependent on MINSY became a bankrupt ghetto.
If the surface fleet doesn't get it together soon, the bucks will flow faster to the submarine force, which is in many ways, a better investment. They may not embody the presence of a carrier, but they can be more deadly and immune from retribution in most cases. Just the threat of a modern nuclear submarine in an area is enough to sent surface ships scurrying back to port - the Argentinians can back that up.
All surface ships are vulnerable to the effects of EMP which the Chinese include in their battle doctrine. One nuke detonated far enough away to avoid casualties on a carrier (which would lead to a war) will turn it and it's air groups off like flipping a switch. Luckily, submarines are shielded from EMP, but that's little consolation to the carrier battle group that is out of action, waiting for a tow. Against near-peer adversaries, surface action forces are headed toward obsolescence - but Big Navy doesn't like to discuss that.
The DDX program had great intentions, too bad it couldn't fulfil very many of them. It's still a streamlined funnel to shovel money into. The last Big Idea was to replace the useless guns with directed energy weapons. "Sure, they're expensive, but cheap to shoot!" Good luck getting close enough to an adversary to use them.