Replies

Then why is Romney calling for a 350 ship navy if the Navy puts their needs at 313? Why is Romney saying they need an 11th air wing when the navy hasn't had a one-for-one relationship between air wings and carriers since before the Cold War and has done very nicely all that time? Why is Romney calling for a whole new class of frigates when the need for frigates died with the Soviet Union? Is is a defense budget or a pork barrel? Or is it a campaign idea in search of a strategy?

Because of the number of actual deployable ships. With the current 285 about 95 are deployable meaning ship is ready and crew is ready. Another 95 will be going through qualifications and work up pre-deployment training. BTW not all of the 285 ships are even combat ships. That number is significantly less. Take another 95 off the top of that number and you'll have the approximate number of ships in port for training, replenishment, or shipyard maintenance stand down which from what we didn't learn in the 1990's early 2000's is very critical.

Maintenance can't be skimped on and disaster be the end result if it is missed. We saw Kitty Hawk and KENNEDY unable to get underway following 9/11 due to maintenance issues. Those were issues that should have been taken care of in the yards. My best guesstimate is they were not funded and then 9/11 happened and it bit them.

Immediately following Gulf War One we lost a carrier to the same reason. It had a Boiler Room explosion at the piers in Norfolk. This web site gives the ship force levels since 1917-present In 1987 we had 594 ships. We need our submarine count back above 80 and Amphibious ships whch can begin taking up slack on the carrier portion including Vertical Take Off and Drone operations.

We also need to ramp up our antisubmarine warfare capabilities world wide. Nations like China won't need state of the art submarines to do us great harm just plenty of them saturating an area.

We need to relocate assets into other areas. One of the east coast carriers actually two should be relocated back to Mayport, Florida. Five carriers at NOB Norfolk is insane and YES it has happened as I have seen a picture of it.

Last but not least we need to be able to go back to strength in numbers. That includes refueling at sea. We need to stop using ships for good will tours to stink holes like Yemen. Yemen didn't have anything the Cole needed. I'd like to see next POTUS also turn over all foreign Intel OPS & Embassy Security operational decisions to The Pentagon.

With the current 285 about 95 are deployable meaning ship is ready and crew is ready. Another 95 will be going through qualifications and work up pre-deployment training.

According to the Navy's own website we currently have 114 ships deployed. Another 56 are underway on local ops or at-sea training. Link

BTW not all of the 285 ships are even combat ships.

About 83% are. Of the 285 ships in the navy, 47 are considered auxiliaries.

Maintenance can't be skimped on and disaster be the end result if it is missed.

No argument there. But that is separate from the justification for a 350 ship navy.

We need our submarine count back above 80 and Amphibious ships whch can begin taking up slack on the carrier portion including Vertical Take Off and Drone operations.

Why? We have 53 nuclear powered attack subs and 8 more building, more than all the other navies in the world combined. We have 14 ballistic missile subs and 4 more capable of carrying 150 cruise missiles each. We have 31 amphibious ships easily capable of carrying an entire marine division plus a good part of its air wing. How much more do we need?

But not often, since one or two are deployed at any given time. And Romney as said he'll go back to permanently having a carrier on station in the eastern Med so that'll cut back the parking problems even more.

Last but not least we need to be able to go back to strength in numbers.

Or do we need to rethink nationbuilding in sinkholes like Yemen and concentrate on spending our defense budget on defending ourselves?