USN Warship Numbers: What is ideal? (re-titled)

[DougC]

I think it has been asked before but can't find it again.

How did the Navy come up with the 355 ship figure?

Back in the Reagan year, the Navy was to have 600 ships.

[Timmy C]

355 comes from the 2016 Force Structure Assessment. Here's a PDF of its executive summary: https://news.usni.org/wp-content/upload ... ummary.pdf

[maxim]

This sentence regarding the plans to reach a 355 ship fleet is the most interesting:

While Navy officials have advocated for a 355-ship fleet since releasing the 2016 FSA, the objective has not led to an increase in the service�s topline budget.

https://news.usni.org/2020/08/04/cape-n ... defe82c004

A larger fleet without additional money... More ships does not cost anything for building, crewing, maintenance etc. etc. *LOL*

[Haijun watcher]

Defense News

America�s 355-ship Navy does not have to be the current fantasy
By: Everett Pyatt ? 8 hours ago
Current law and presidential policy established 355 ships, including 12 carriers and 66 submarines, as the U.S. Navy force goal. Since few mission categories have support of law, budgets should reflect this priority. They have not.
In fact, the fiscal 2020 defense budget proposed reducing carriers by not refueling the aircraft carrier Harry S. Truman. Opposition was so strong that the president reversed the plan. The FY21 budget removed a submarine and frigate.
No progress has been made toward this goal in this administration. Ships have an average life of about 35 years. Replacement is eight to nine ships a year. Expansion of the force over a 10-year period requires about 70 ships above replacement quantity or seven ships a year. Total annual ship acquisition for the next 10 years should be about 15 ships. Average procurement recently has been about eight ships. At this rate, force expansion is impossible.
(....SNIPPED)

[Haijun watcher]

Coming closer back to Reagan-era "600-ship Navy" force levels???

Defense News

The Pentagon is eyeing a 500-ship Navy, documents reveal
By: David B. Larter and Aaron Mehta ? 18 hours ago
WASHINGTON � The Pentagon�s upcoming recommendation for a future Navy is expected to call for a significant increase in the number of ships, with officials discussing a fleet as large as 530 hulls, according to documents obtained by Defense News.
Supporting documents to the forthcoming Future Navy Force Study reviewed by Defense News show the Navy moving towards a lighter force with many more ships but fewer aircraft carriers and large surface combatants. Instead, the fleet would include more small surface combatants, unmanned ships and submarines and an expanded logistics force.

(..SNIPPED)

[CC Clarke]

Everybody wants to go to heaven, but nobody wants to die. This pretty much sums up the reality of a larger Navy. "Cheap and Easy" is incompatible with today's Navy.

The USN cannot adequately maintain the fleet it has now. The USS Boise has not been operational for four years due a lack of an availability. That sounds like the boat from hell to me, tied to the pier awaiting work. https://news.usni.org/2020/05/26/navsea ... -year-wait

Increased infrastructure needs to be addressed before more ships can be added. The country needs to build at least two dedicated naval shipyards - one to replace Mare Island and another to address increased maintenance for a proposed larger Navy. Private yards can only do so much - in the case of submarine work, there's a huge learning curve that takes a lot of specially-trained craftsman. EB can't hire fast enough to keep up with their contracts. Pearl Harbor is limited and cannot be expanded due to available land. Building anything in CA costs too much - the red tape alone could hold a dozen battleships together.

"But we'll use lots of drones and call them ships!" Swell. Drones will need maintenance too, no matter the size.

Today's ships are more expensive and take longer to build than ever before. The Navy's approach to ship-building for the last 20 years has been a floating punchline. The LCS program has been a disaster. The Zumwalt class was neutered before it left the starting gate and as a result, the Navy cannot afford rounds to put in the Advanced Gun system. All three ships are being formed into a "evaluation squadron" since they aren't good for much else.

If the Navy can't find a serious purpose for these two programs, why should the American taxpayer be obliged to fund drilling deeper holes in the ocean to flush funding into? NAVSEA has dropped the ball when it comes to (surface) shipbuilding. The submarine force is in better shape, with EB getting cheaper and faster with each new build, but again, how will the US maintain more boats with less infrastructure? We can't have it both ways.

CCC

[Haijun watcher]

And speaking of the surface fleet, and maintaining the numbers you already have...

Defense News

US Navy�s aging surface fleet struggles to keep ships up to spec, report shows
By: David B. Larter ? 1 day ago
WASHINGTON � The U.S. Navy�s aging surface fleet is getting harder to maintain, and overall is showing declining health in several key areas, such as its main propulsion systems, electrical systems and Aegis combat systems, according to an annual report of the Navy�s Board of Inspection and Survey submitted to Congress earlier this year.
The so-called INSURV inspections found that over five years, the surface fleet found big dips in the main propulsion systems � the plants that produce the power to push the ship through the water � as well as in the electrical systems and aviation systems. The Aegis systems, a collection of sensors and software that protects the ship primarily from air threats, has also shown some signs of slipping over the last half-decade.
The declining trend comes after years of intense focus on readiness inside the Defense Department, but the Navy says that recent changes to how the Navy conducts the notoriously intrusive INSURV inspections are making the fleet more ready. Still, the slipping scores do raise questions about whether the Navy�s much-in-demand surface combatants are getting adequate time in maintenance.

(...SNIPPED)

[Haijun watcher]

"Battle Force 2045"?

Military.com

7 Things to Know About the Pentagon's New Plan for a 500-Ship Navy Fleet
7 Oct 2020
Military.com | By Gina Harkins
The secretary of defense this week detailed an aggressive new plan to significantly boost the Navy fleet to more than 500 vessels, with an emphasis on attack submarines, unmanned ships and "light carriers."
Defense Secretary Mark Esper on Tuesday unveiled the long-awaited results of a Navy review to determine the size of the future fleet. Coined Battle Force 2045, Esper said the future fleet will eventually include more than 500 manned and unmanned ships, making it a "more lethal, survivable, adaptable, sustainable, modern and larger force than we have seen in many years."
"If we can assemble the collective will and determination to see it through, I'm confident Battle Force 2045 will maintain our maritime superiority far into the future and ensure the United States Navy remains the greatest in the world for generations to come," he said.

(...SNIPPED)

[Tim Jacobs]

"manned and unmanned"

Wonder what the ratio will be.

[Haijun watcher]

Kind of surprising that a Democrat would say this; not the usual fear-mongering where one party accuses the other of one thing or another.

Military.com

A Biden Administration Would Rewrite NDS, Toss 500-Ship Navy Overboard, Lawmaker Says
29 Oct 2020
Military.com | By Richard Sisk
A Joe Biden administration is likely to rewrite the National Defense Strategy, scuttle the plan for a 500-ship Navy and spend less on the military, the top House Democrat on defense issues said Thursday.
A push to rename military bases honoring Confederate generals and leaders would also get a boost if former Biden, the former vice president under Barack Obama, defeats President Donald Trump next Tuesday, said Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., chairman of the House Armed Services Committee.
The progressive wing of the Democratic party is expected to argue for major cuts in defense budgets to pay for expanded domestic programs, but Smith said he's opposed to drastic reductions.
"They want to reshift priorities" away from defense spending, Smith said of the progressives.
(...EDITED)

[Haijun watcher]

Defense News

As its term winds down, Trump�s White House plots a major naval expansion
By: David B. Larter
October 30 at 5:20 PM
Photo credit: MC2 Jonathan Trejo/U.S. Navy
BATH, Maine � Sitting inside a restaurant just yards from Bath Iron Works shipyard on a blustery October day, President Donald Trump�s top national security aide has two things on his mind: pizza, and the growing menace of Chinese naval expansion in the Western Pacific.
One solves a short-term problem. The other is a long-term menace.
National security adviser Robert O�Brien, the California-based attorney who was brought in to replace John Bolton, was in Maine to visit Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in Kittery, which maintains submarines, and Bath Iron Works, the lead shipbuilder for the U.S. Navy�s mighty Arleigh Burke-class destroyer and three Zumwalt-class stealth destroyers.
The week following his trip to Maine, O�Brien visited Fincantieri�s Marinette Marine shipyard, where the new generation of guided-missile frigates, the Constellation class, is set to be built over the next decade.
Government ethics watchdogs are raising questions about whether the national security adviser should be on the stump in key states just weeks before an election. In Maine, for example, Republican Sen. Susan Collins is in a tight race that could decide the balance of power in the legislative body.
But officials who spoke to Defense News said O�Brien�s trips were more than just electioneering: They�re part of a high-level push inside the Trump administration to prepare for a major expansion of the U.S. fleet, beginning in earnest with the rollout of the 2022 budget and into a potential second Trump term. A major buildup could deepen the naval arms race in the Western Pacific and potentially reorder the Defense Department�s budget for years to come.
In the past month, O�Brien, as well as Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought and senior economic adviser Peter Navarro, have publicly and quietly made trips to shipbuilding and ship repair facilities, including Huntington Ingalls' yards in Pascagoula and Newport News; General Dynamics' yards in San Diego as well as Bath Iron Works in Maine and Electric Boat in Connecticut.
The emphasis comes amid Trump�s increasing focus on withdrawing troops from Afghanistan and other so-called forever wars. At the same time, the rhetoric from his national security and economic teams has increasingly focused on shipbuilding and growing the Navy.
In interviews, more than half a dozen senior White House officials and aides described to Defense News an emerging maritime strategy that combines pulling back from long conflicts on land with growing the fleet. The new direction is viewed as a way to directly counter Chinese expansion while adding more industrial jobs to the economy. But analysts, who see little potential for defense spending increases in the wake of a staggering coronavirus-relief spending binge, say such a plan would cost tens of billions of dollars and could necessitate big cuts to other armed services.
To the president�s national security adviser, however, continuing to spend money on long-running counterterrorism conflicts in the face of a rising Chinese maritime threat is foolhardy.
�We�re outside of a shipyard right now,� O�Brien said in between bites of cheese pizza. "We�re not building enough ships to deal with the Chinese threat. At the same time, we�re spending $3 billion a month in Afghanistan or somewhere near that. It�s $3 billion a month when we could be building three frigates a month � that�s 36 frigates in the year.
�You know who loves the fact that we�re Afghanistan? China. China loves the fact that we�re in Afghanistan. You know who loves the fact that we�re in Afghanistan? Russia. Iran loves the fact that we�re in Afghanistan. We�re putting resources into Afghanistan that would otherwise be devoted to great power competition and protecting American people.�
Politico also participated in the interview with O�Brien.
�A strong Navy above all else�
To O�Brien, the situation is simple: The United States has oceans on either side and has interests all over the world. The way to stay relevant on the international stage as the U.S. draws down on its long-running Middle East conflicts is through the Navy.
�We want a strong Navy above all else to protect the country but also to protect the power,� O�Brien said. "We are a trading people. We invest all over the world, we trade all over the world, we travel the world as Americans, we have financial interests all over the world where Americans need to be protected.
�When you have an aircraft carrier, you�ve got a lot of sovereign territory and you don�t have to ask basing rights. If you�ve got a surface fleet, you can [fight] piracy, project American power, protect freedom of navigation. You protect the sea lanes of communication. If you�ve got a strong submarine fleet, as we do, you can prevent countries from engaging amphibious attacks on their neighbors. So there�s a lot the Navy can do. It�s a very important instrument of national power.�
For O�Brien, the decline of the Navy�s capacity since the Cold War � which saw the fleet shrink from fewer than 600 ships to today�s fleet of just about 300 capable ships � combined with budget cuts during the mid-2010s have hurt the readiness of the Navy and the United States.
But furthermore, the rise of China as an economic and maritime giant also necessitates drastic measures to expand the fleet, he argues.
�With sequestration and the lack of attention to the maritime power, in America�s Navy over the years, we became a weaker country as a result, and the president wants to fix that,� O�Brien said. �But look, we�re also confronted by a(...EDITED)

[Haijun watcher]

Military.com

Navy Forges Ahead with 500-Ship Plan in Wake of Esper's Firing
15 Nov 2020
Military.com | By Gina Harkins
Plans to build a 500-ship Navy are still intact as the Trump administration ushered in a host of new leaders at the Pentagon this week -- though the top admiral overseeing shipbuilding says challenges remain.
Battle Force 2045, Defense Secretary Mark Esper's ambitious plan to nearly double the size of the Navy fleet, is still underway. Esper was fired by President Donald Trump's this week, and several new civilian leaders were installed to replace him and other top policy staffers.

(...EDITED)

[maxim]

In the last weeks of that administration, the plans, which had been not executed in the last four years, do still exist?

[Haijun watcher]

If true, this should be more than a little late for him to do this...especially with all his legal actions in various courts to try to overturn the election results all falling flat...

Military.com

Trump Administration Plans to Raid War Chest to Pay for Big Navy Shipbuilding Plan
11 Dec 2020
Military.com | By Gina Harkins
The Trump administration has, in its final weeks in office, unveiled a plan to meet the 355-ship Navy it promised early on -- but the costs associated with it could intensify a battle for Defense Department dollars as the Navy prepares to pour tens of billions of dollars into shipbuilding.
The 30-year shipbuilding plan, according to the White House, "represents a historic investment that would protect U.S. national security for decades to come."

(...SNIPPED)

[Haijun watcher]

Defense News

Trump�s massive Navy buildup bets on savings that wont materialize, experts say
By: David B. Larter and Aaron Mehta ? 19 hours ago
WASHINGTON � If the Trump administration had its way, it would cut legacy systems, Army end strength and troops stationed abroad to pay for a major increase in shipbuilding, according to documents released by the Defense Department and White House this week.
Major questions remain about the plan to grow the Navy�s strength, however, not the least of which is whether the incoming administration of president-elect Joe Biden will follow through or scrap the strategy.
The fiscal year 2022 fiscal planning framework, released late Thursday alongside the 30-year shipbuilding plan, proposes a $759 billion topline for national defense, including $721.9 billion for the Pentagon, a 2.3 percent increase from the FY21 budget request. Pentagon leaders have repeatedly stated they need three percent to five percent budget increases to have �real� budget increases beyond inflation.
(...SNIPPED)

[Haijun watcher]

I had to post this in its entirety this time because of its importance: As for the ships in reserve, I assume they'll only have US Naval Reserve crews on board these ships while they mostly stay in port with only periodic maintenance runs?

Seapower

Navy Plans to Retire 48 Ships During 2022-2026
Posted on December 11, 2020 by Richard R. Burgess, Senior Editor


ARLINGTON, Va. � The Navy�s 30-year shipbuilding plan, released Dec. 10, announced the names of 48 ships scheduled to be decommissioned or, in the case of Military Sealift Command Ships, placed out of service, during the fiscal years 2022 through 2026.

Of note, the planned retirements include the first Nimitz-class aircraft carrier, the first two Ohio-class guided-missile submarines, and the first Victorious-class ocean surveillance ship. The list also includes 11 Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruisers and 11 Los Angeles-class attack submarines.

The retirements are listed by fiscal year below:

In 2022:

Six Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruisers will be placed in reserve: San Jacinto (CG 56), Hue City (CG 66), Anzio (CG 68) Vella Gulf (CG 72) and Port Royal (CG 73).
One Whidbey Island-class dock landing ship will be placed in reserve: Whidbey Island (LSD 41).
Two Los Angeles-class attack submarines will be recycled: Providence (SSN 719) and Oklahoma City (SSN 723).
One Powhatan-class fleet ocean tug will be disposed: Apache (T-ATF 172).

In 2023:

Two Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruisers will be placed in reserve: Bunker Hill (CG 52) and Mobile Bay (CG 53).
Four Whidbey Island-class dock landing ships will be placed in reserve: Germantown (LSD 42), Gunston Hall (LSD 44), and Ashland (LSD 48).
One Harpers Ferry-class dock landing ship will be placed in reserve: Carter Hall (LSD 50).
Two Henry J. Kaiser-class fleet replenishment oilers will be disposed: John Lenthall (T-AO 189).
One Powhatan-class fleet ocean tug will be disposed: Catawba (T-ATF 168).
One Safeguard-class rescue and salvage ship will be disposed: Grasp (T-ARS 51)

In 2024:

Two Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruisers will be placed in reserve: Antietam (CG 54) and Shiloh (CG 67).
One Whidbey Island-class dock landing ship will be placed in reserve: Rushmore (LSD 47).
Two Harpers Ferry-class dock landing ships will be placed in reserve: Harpers Ferry (LSD 49) and Pearl Harbor (LSD 52).
Four Los Angeles-class attack submarines will be recycled: Chicago (SSN 721), Key West (SSN 722) San Juan (SSN 751) and Topeka (SSN 754).
Four Avenger-class mine countermeasures ships will be disposed: Sentry (MCM 3), Devastator (MCM 6), Gladiator (MCM 11) and Dextrous (MCM 13).
One Safeguard-class rescue and salvage ship will be disposed: Salvor (T-ARS 52).

In 2025:

One Nimitz-class aircraft carrier will be recycled: Nimitz (CVN 68).
One Harpers Ferry-class dock landing ship will be placed in reserve: Oak Hill (LSD 51).
Two Los Angeles-class attack submarines will be recycled: Helena (SSN 725) and Pasadena (SSN 752).
One Henry J. Kaiser-class fleet replenishment oiler will be disposed: Joshua Humphreys (T-AO 188)

In 2026:

One Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruiser will be placed in reserve: Chancellorsville (CG 62).
One Whidbey Island-class dock landing ship will be placed in reserve: Comstock (LSD 45).
Two Ohio-class guided-missile submarines will be recycled: Ohio (SSGN 726) and Florida (SSGN 728).
Three Los Angeles-class attack submarines will be recycled: Newport News (SSN 750), Scranton (SSN 756) and Alexandria (SSN 757).
One Henry J. Kaiser-class fleet replenishment oiler will be disposed: Pecos (T-AO 197).
One Victorious-class ocean surveillance ship: Victorious (T-AGOS 19).

[maxim]

A, a long list of Ticonderoga class cruisers!

It for sure make sense to retire these old ships. But there is no new cruiser design yet, only the Flight III Arleigh Burke as replacement?

[Thomas E. Johnson]

Retiring the Nimitz is a mistake. We need more carriers, not less.....

[maxim]

Nimitz will be 50 years old when she is scheduled to be decommissioned. She is planned to be replaced by John F. Kennedy (CVN-79) in 2025.

[Haijun watcher]

Defense news

Congress guts funding for cruiser replacements
By: David B. Larter ? 1 hour ago
WASHINGTON � The U.S. Navy�s new shipbuilding plan shows that over the next five years it plans to decommission 11 cruisers with more than 1,340 vertical launch tubes, but Congress doesn�t think the Navy has a serious plan to replace them with a new generation of large surface combatants, according to the text of a recent funding bill.
Citing a lack of clear direction for its large surface combatant building program and a recent reduction in plans for the next iteration of the Arleigh Burke-class destroyer, Congress is set to strip the project of more than 70 percent of the requested $45.5 million in funding for planning and early development costs.
�Despite repeated delays to the [large surface combatant program], the Navy has reduced the acquisition profile for DDG-51 Flight III destroyers in recent budget submissions, and has not delineated a clear acquisition path for large surface combatants following the conclusion of the current DDG-51 Flight III destroyer multi-year procurement contract in fiscal year 2022,� the text of the bill reads, citing the Navy�s 2018 multi-year procurement of four of the new Burkes.

(...SNIPPED)