Posted on 04/06/2010 10:35:32 PM PDT by ErnstStavroBlofeld
The Navy faces an operational “tipping point” where the demand for overseas presence will far exceed the number of ships, according to the influential Center for Naval Analyses.
CNA’s new report, “The Navy at a Tipping Point: Maritime Dominance at Stake?”, which was provided to DOD Buzz, is being used by the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations to evaluate future force plans. It says that despite a 20 percent decrease in the size of the total battle fleet over the past 10 years, the number of ships deployed, around 100 at any given time, has remained constant.
The Navy has been able to pull this off with a smaller fleet by lengthening deployments and more frequent cruises. What has suffered is training, as the number of available training ships has declined. Now, however, the Navy faces a dilemma, that of maintaining forward presence and meeting maritime security requirements in the face of a shrinking battle fleet and declining resources, CNA says.
The military’s future unfolds in a world of constrained federal budgets and Navy budgets will not experience growth rates above inflation; “getting well” in future budgets is a myth, CNA says. Rising shipbuilding costs, ever increasing personnel and health care costs, and the need to fund ongoing operations will all exert serious downward pressure on ship numbers. If the Navy continues on the current shipbuilding course of about six or seven ships per year, the battle fleet will face a steady decline over the next two decades that will see it go from 286 ships today to around 230–240 ships from 2025 and out.
(Excerpt) Read more at dodbuzz.com ...
This does not include any planned cuts by Congress or Obama. Massive cuts are coming.
By 2012, we will be lucky to have a fleet over 200 vessels.
Not good. The Navy is the most strategic force to US interests. The Navy will need a serious build up soon.
Whatever happened to the 600 ship Navy?
After the fall of the Soviet Union that plan was pretty much scrapped.
Isn’t Russia building a brand new navy training center? Seems to me other countries are building up their navies to improve their regional power while the US Navy is getting stretched thinner and thinner.
Yet they continue to waste money on social engineering efforts such as modifying ships, and now submarines, to make them co-ed.
How much do shipboard pregnancies cost the Navy each year?
And what is the cost in efficiency, readyness and fighting ability for this experiment in political correctness?
by itself the USMC has the 4th largest Navy on the planet.
WWII was over a long time ago....
Well, they don’t look so “fallen” now.
Once upon a time the Navy was Wooden Ships and Iron Men. Under OBOZO it will be Iron Ships and Wooden Men!!!
Well it all started under Poppy and a DEM congress. Poppy, Cheney, and congress began cutting the fleet and cutting maintenance to the rest of the ships still operational. Yes even while Gulf War one was underway. It cost us a carrier doing so. Next came Clinton and for two years DEMs in both houses still more cuts came. Then in 1994 the GOP wins both houses. The cuts still continued and continued on through W's term as well.
Jimmy Carter in all his gross incompetence was not as harmful to our Navy as the past 20 years under both parties has been.
Other than a few vocal members of congress not a POTUS nor member of congress since Reagan have actually done diddly squat for our military. Bush Whizzed away an opportunity of a life time after 9/11 and instead chose to become LBJ2 spending it on his nation building and domestic social projects. The Navy Reagan's people built was destroyed by Liberals in both parties. It began when Poppy raised his hand for POTUS oath of office and continues today. The great legacy of Bush/Clinton/Bush/Obama.
Put on your asbestos underwear. The Bush worshipers don’t like to read the truth about the Bushs and will be all over you for pointing this out.
The sooner we can elect an “American” President that fully understands and gets the fact that a strong armed force actually promotes peace and stability (good fences make good neighbors) the better off our country will be. Some of the things I’m watching this WH do, scare the living day lights out of me.
But until then, we are stuck with the mentality that “defense is bad, welfare is good” - The US will continue to think “cost savings” and “cost reductions” in the armed forces are a good thing. We saw how well that worked in the 90’s.
The numbers don’t lie - under the Clinton administration they took the whole “peace dividend” and ran with it, cutting and gutting defense programs, projects, personnel, intelligence gathering, and weaponry right to the bone - In my opinion, they were responsible for covering our eyes and plugging our ears to the point that 9/11 was even possible.
I always felt that the Bush administration had the defense our nation as priority A1A - Looking at the facts today, I don’t get that feeling from this administration. Defense for them falls somewhere below making sure acorn is fully funded and supported to get the democrats elected in 2010 and him re-elected in 2012. Just my opinion.
Is it still technically the law that we could keel haul traitors?
I'm used to it. I've been posting this information for years. Look in my Bookmarks. I can fight them with End Troop Strength Numbers which BTW are 1996 levels and I have the ships in service numbers for every years since during WW1 :>}
We did loose a carrier. Our second newest conventional. Because of budgets cuts it was not given what is called S.L.E.P. or Ship Life Extension Program which is done at the carriers half way life expectancy. The carrier did three six month deployments in three years and upon return from the third had a major boiler room explosion at the pier.
The ship was in such poor condition the summer of 1993 before the third deployment the Command Master Chief wrote a letter to his congressman. That was verified to me by a Freeper shipmate. I was on that same ship during all of Carters term but the last three months. It never got like that even under him.
Believe it or not the Navy actually improved under Carter a little bit. I saw the changes and no I do not like Carter. But the honest truth is Carter or rather I would say more likely his second SECNAV restored morale, discipline, and tradition. That issue was caused in part by Rummy's first tenure as Sec of Defense under Ford which W made a huge mistake with both picking him again and then Gates.
Rummy and the DEM congress under Ford started us on The Hollow Carter Military. That is a fact Republicans don't like to hear but the truth. Carter was handed a huge mess. I know because I go to my ship very early 1977.
Rummy tried to put some of his bad Ford era policies back such as letting members of the military walk away from their obligations. That was going on when I got to the ship and was stopped under Carter.
Recall that in this world of “interdependence” the US imports most of its raw materials. Command of the Sea is an essential part of US security. One wonders if the clowns (idiots???) in the White House are aware of the concept?
As I recall a good principle is if you want peace, prepare for war. We pay for our “leader’s” mistakes in blood. The people ultimately suffer when we have bad leaders.
I know the carrier you are talking about was USS America. I see you were a snipe-BT or MM? We also lost JFK- I was a BT on her- because of an uncompleted SLEP-she was supposed to be in sevice til the new CVN design cam on line and I blame Clinton for that. The Nay also gets some blame as it had budgeted $300 million in 2005-06 to ccomplete the SLEP on JFK but decided to pi** it away on design for the CG and DDG-1000’s that are cancelled or will be built in small numbers. I know, I worked with NAVSEA on using JFK as a test bed for piping.It is a shame that America was used for destructive tests as we had others which could have been used.
Since we are so broke, we need to re-shape our thinking about the military from a globalist force to a US only protecting force. Let the EU and other allies foot the bill for their own defense a change. Uncle Sucker is out of money!
The America needs constant attention. Commissioned in 1965, it is showing its age. A month before leaving Norfolk, a senior enlisted crew member complained to his congressman: The ship was operating on only two of its six electric generators, without radar and unable to pump fuel. This would be its third six-month cruise in three years, and without the standard 18 months at home for repairs, salt water and full steaming had taken their toll.
I was a Machinist Mate onboard 77-80. My job was AC&R which gives me some insight on this others may not realize. Before going to AC&R shop I did a stint as a non rate in Fuel Test Lab. No radar was caused by no Air Conditioning. No Air Conditioning was caused by only two of six generators operational. The Chillers took 1200-1500 amps to lite off and 150-300 to run and you can multiply that times ten because there were ten units to run. NO A/C simply meant NO ELECTRONICS could operate except maybe the gyro {which had a smaller independent A/C} were operational.
The generator issue could have been due to several things including the fuel pumping issue not allowing a boiler to Lite Off. You know more about that part than me. A Freeper who was onboard during the time in question told me the Command Master Chief wrote the letter. It takes a lot to get a Lifer to make such a move. The explosion happened at N.O.B. NORVA in March 94 I think. So severe it required a Cold Iron tow to Portsmouth.
America was ran hard and put up wet by Poppy and Cheney during Gulf War One. At that point I think it was also decided No SLEP. It should have entered the yards upon return from deployment two for overhaul. Clinton made a very huge mistake deploying her in 1993 without that overhaul.
I've heard all kinds of stories about both America and JFK some of which were impossible. For example some say America was originally picked to be a nuke and McNamara ordered the change to conventional. Impossible. The contract was awarded and keel was laid before JFK even took office and at that point such a hull change is impossible. It would have been easier & quicker to scrap construction and build a new one. I think that rumor origionated from some blue prints down in Central of the Piping System which due to Typo Error had CVN-66 with a line through it and CVA-66. I've seen them myself.
Another rumor was they had thin hulls and were shorted on steel. Why? Doesn't make sense at all. Steel was plenty to be had and cheap. The only major difference between AMERICA and the other KH class carriers was she had a sonar dome. The only carrier before or since to have such. I used to hear it trying to go to sleep as our berth was third deck {at water line} under the aft galley. Kennedy also got into problems because they closed Philly Yards during her SLEP wasn't it? Kennedy in theory could have possibly been the one to be CVN as it was a class all it's own. But I doubt even that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.