US Naval Fleet Aims To Join Fight Against Terrorism & Rogue States Nov 25, 2005 – By Philip Edwards
One of the oldest maxims in warfare is that the military, when planning for
the next war, tends to prepare to fight the last one.
When looking at the bulk of the US Navy, nothing could be truer. But for the
navy, the problem is even worse than for other services. Not because the navy
has bad planners, but because of the high unit cost and long lead-time to
build new forces.
Consider this: just to get an aircraft carrier afloat might take twenty years
from order to shakedown cruise. These floating airports cost billions of
dollars, and once started can't be stopped. In the water they have a service
life of more than 20 years, huge crew and extensive overhauls to maintain
them up to date with the latest technology. They burn money like their jets
burn aviation gas - by the tanker full.
The current navy has 12 aircraft carriers (CV, CVN), 18 nuclear armed
ballistic missile subs (SSBN), 50 attack subs (SSN) and a host of cruisers,
destroyers, frigates, landing and command ships - about 350 ships in all.
It's hard to see the need for this enormously expensive blue water fleet. It
was designed to duel a Soviet fleet that no longer exists. Who are we going
to fight?
Worse, terrorists and 3rd world countries have routinely done serious damage
to these billion dollar high tech missile magnets. In 2000, a couple of guys
in a speedboat full of explosives nearly sank the destroyer USS Cole at dock
killing 17 sailors in the process. In 1987, an Iraqi Mirage F1 put two Exocet
AM39 sea-skimming ship killers in to the frigate USS Stark with complete
impunity. Our then ally Saddam had the pilot decapitated for his error - he
thought it was an Iranian tanker.
The USS Vincennes, an Aegis-class cruiser, shot down Iran Air Flight 655 in
1988 which resulted in the deaths of over 290 innocent passengers. This just
proves how much of a bull in the china shop one of these ships can be when it
has no real enemy.
Admirals at the navy are not stupid - already plans are on the drawing board
for new types of ships better equipped to deal with a changing threat
environment.
One of the most important new roles is one of surveillance. Once relegated to
launching Harpoon anti-ship missiles and hunting down enemy subs, ships like
the new Arleigh Burke destroyers bristle with communications interception
gear. Mines - still the most effective naval weapon - have received high
priority as well both for laying and countermeasures.
Arleigh Burke class destroyer - packs more firepower than a WWII
battleship. Currently the best destroyer in the world.
In order to maintain a large fleet and lower costs, the navy has embarked on
a program to automate large portions of the previously labor-intensive job of
maintaining a warship. Everything is computerized and controlled from a
Combat Information Center deep within the ship. Crew sizes have been reduced
25% since the 70s.
Less emphasis is placed on sheer speed and attack value, more on reliability,
easy of maintenance and economy.
Stealth to protect against radars has also been improved in the wake of a new
generation of water skimming supersonic anti ship missiles. But the basic
cheap missile, expensive, vulnerable ship logic remains.
Witness the Russian Navy's SS-N-22 Sunburn. It has been called "the most
lethal missile in the world today." Speed: Mach 2.5 - faster than a bullet,
warhead: 750lbs. conventional or 200 kiloton nuclear. These puppies make
Exocets look like pop bottle rockets in comparison - they actually jump
around on terminal phase to avoid missile countermeasures. They cost less
than a fighter and just one armed with a nuclear warhead could sink an
aircraft carrier. It is used on "Sovremennyy" destroyers (eight missiles on
each) and on "Tarantul [Tarantula] III patrol ships (four missiles on each).
China recently bought 2 Sunburn armed destroyers from the Russians.
These new missiles are the primary reason carriers and capital ships try to
stay at least 100 miles from the shore and other ships - there is no known
defense against them.
The navy's worst nightmare would be to have to deal with several Sunburn
armed subs which could easily get within strike range before being detected.
Quad Sunburn launcher on the deck of a Russian destroyer - just one can
sink any US surface unit
One of the most historically deadly naval weapons has been the torpedo. The
Russians have developed a torpedo that travels at jet speed underwater with a
new rocket-based propulsion system. Rumors place the blame for the Kursk
sinking on a test firing of this dangerous new weapon. Since this technology
could effectively change the balance of naval power, the US navy is
developing similar technology.
Trent Lott gleefully announced his state will be building some of the first
of 8 next generation destroyers. At over a billion dollars apiece, this new
hull will be forced into three different roles: littoral (shallow waters and
rivers), guided missile cruiser to protect carriers and destroyer to hunt
subs and do picket duty.
DD(X) program - let's see, it has a gun, missiles, a motor, sonar and
radar - same as the ships it replaces. Looks like they tossed in some PCs,
too. For a billion dollars hope they are at least Pentium 4s.
In any case, it should be interesting to see what the Admirals come up with
to protect the blue water navy they worked so hard to get. As long as jobs,
contractor profits, pork barrel politics and creative propaganda having
anything to say, they should have no problems keeping their expensive toys
out of the scrap yard.
US Naval Fleet Aims To Join Fight Against Terrorism & Rogue States
