Another plan for a larger future US Navy
by noreply@blogger.com (brian wang) from NextBigFuture.com on (#2CQ6B)
There are a few competing studies with recommendations for a larger US Navy. There is one from MITRE and another by the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA).
The Navy needs a vastly larger fleet - 414 warships - to win a great-power war, well above today's 274 ships or even the Navy's unfunded plan for 355, the think-tank MITRE calculates in a congressionally-chartered study. That ideal fleet would include:
14 aircraft carriers instead of today's 11;
160 cruisers and destroyers instead of 84;
72 attack submarines instead of today's 52;
New classes ranging from a missile-packed "magazine ship," to diesel-powered submarines, to a heavy frigate to replace the Littoral Combat Ship, which would be cancelled.
The CSBA and an internal US Navy study recommend 12 aircraft carriers, but the CSBA also wants ten smaller aircraft carriers The CSBA wants 340 manned ships and 80 unmanned, MITRE says 414 manned ships, and the the Alternative Future Fleet wants 321 manned ships and 138 unmanned.
The MITRE plan is even more radical than the competing plan submitted to Congress by the Center for Strategic & Budgetary Assessments. Although both studies would grow the fleet, upgrade the America-class amphibious assault ship into a conventionally powered light carrier, cancel LCS, and build a new frigate, MITRE calls for a larger force overall and more new types of ship.
Building a 414-ship fleet "is unrealistic," MITRE acknowledges, even assuming the Budget Control Act is repealed. So the study lays out what MITRE considers a good-enough plan to build and upgrade as many ships as possible for an additional $4.5 billion a year ($1.7 billion in shipbuilding funds and $2.8 billion for new weapons, mostly missiles).
This good-enough plan includes many compromises. Most notably, it slows down the production of aircraft carriers in the near term - even though MITRE believes we ultimately need more - because the Navy doesn't have enough fighter jets to equip them all, and an aircraft carrier without aircraft is pretty pointless. To close the airpower gap, MITRE advocates buying more F/A-18E/F Super Hornets, since it believes "accelerating F-35C (Joint Strike Fighter) production does not appear to be a viable option."
MITRE argues against today's reliance on a small number of exquisitely expensive long-range missiles for anti-aircraft and missile defense. Instead MITRE advocates large barrages of precision-guided shells fired from conventional naval cannon - known as the Hyper-Velocity Projectile - and ultimately from electromagnetic railguns. Fielding HVP "must be a top priority" because it would turn the 5"^3 guns on every Navy cruiser and destroyer into missile defense systems.
Suggested style of ship to replace the LCS
Read more
The Navy needs a vastly larger fleet - 414 warships - to win a great-power war, well above today's 274 ships or even the Navy's unfunded plan for 355, the think-tank MITRE calculates in a congressionally-chartered study. That ideal fleet would include:
14 aircraft carriers instead of today's 11;
160 cruisers and destroyers instead of 84;
72 attack submarines instead of today's 52;
New classes ranging from a missile-packed "magazine ship," to diesel-powered submarines, to a heavy frigate to replace the Littoral Combat Ship, which would be cancelled.
The CSBA and an internal US Navy study recommend 12 aircraft carriers, but the CSBA also wants ten smaller aircraft carriers The CSBA wants 340 manned ships and 80 unmanned, MITRE says 414 manned ships, and the the Alternative Future Fleet wants 321 manned ships and 138 unmanned.
The MITRE plan is even more radical than the competing plan submitted to Congress by the Center for Strategic & Budgetary Assessments. Although both studies would grow the fleet, upgrade the America-class amphibious assault ship into a conventionally powered light carrier, cancel LCS, and build a new frigate, MITRE calls for a larger force overall and more new types of ship.
Building a 414-ship fleet "is unrealistic," MITRE acknowledges, even assuming the Budget Control Act is repealed. So the study lays out what MITRE considers a good-enough plan to build and upgrade as many ships as possible for an additional $4.5 billion a year ($1.7 billion in shipbuilding funds and $2.8 billion for new weapons, mostly missiles).
This good-enough plan includes many compromises. Most notably, it slows down the production of aircraft carriers in the near term - even though MITRE believes we ultimately need more - because the Navy doesn't have enough fighter jets to equip them all, and an aircraft carrier without aircraft is pretty pointless. To close the airpower gap, MITRE advocates buying more F/A-18E/F Super Hornets, since it believes "accelerating F-35C (Joint Strike Fighter) production does not appear to be a viable option."
MITRE argues against today's reliance on a small number of exquisitely expensive long-range missiles for anti-aircraft and missile defense. Instead MITRE advocates large barrages of precision-guided shells fired from conventional naval cannon - known as the Hyper-Velocity Projectile - and ultimately from electromagnetic railguns. Fielding HVP "must be a top priority" because it would turn the 5"^3 guns on every Navy cruiser and destroyer into missile defense systems.
Suggested style of ship to replace the LCS
Read more