US Navy Doubles Down On Carrier Capability

Naval News ^ | 1/14/24 | Lee Willet

[hardspunned]

The US Navy is ramping up delivery of its new Ford-class nuclear-powered aircraft carriers just as there is demonstrable increased strategic and operational need for the capability an aircraft carrier provides, the Executive Director for the USN’s Program Executive Office (PEO) Carriers told the Surface Navy Association annual symposium in Arlington, Virginia.

[hardspunned]

In today’s world of swarm missile and drone attacks, is this good money after bad? If the 5th Fleet can’t protect the mouth of the Red Sea from a bunch of well armed pirates, what’s the point?

[OKSooner]

$$$

[RedMonqey]

With inductions down, who’s gonna man, er, work these ships?
Good luck with the trannies, crossdressers, homos and swabbing women who can’t attend their duties cuz one “dissed” another!

[PIF]

They are not allowed by ROEs to do more than what they are doing. Its a leadership problem, not a naval one.

[MinorityRepublican]

Each missile costs a couple of million dollars to defend our fleet while a random terrorist can launch a drone to attack us that costs a couple of thousand dollars each.

We lose in that game.

[Vermont Lt]

I am thinking of how the Navy rushed the battleships back into the war after Pearl Harbor.

They provided anti aircraft support. They were used from very safe positions to support invasions. But their original use case was pretty much long gone by 1944.

Projecting air superiority is critical. I doubt much of anything short if a nuke is going to sink a carrier. But a “thousand drone” attack is not too far away in our future.

Smaller, nimble, and powerful is going to I win the next sea war.

[MinorityRepublican]

They are not allowed by ROEs to do more than what they are doing.

We should withdraw all of our troops and go home. Let the Brits and the French handle the Middle East if they're annoyed enough that the pirates are having an impact on their economies.

[MinorityRepublican]

But a “thousand drone” attack is not too far away in our future.

Iran. But they may give all the drones to the Houthis.

Plausible deniability.

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

Plausible deniability.

More like implausible undeniability.

[JonPreston]

Whoever can make computer systems go dark will win future wars.

[CodeToad]

“There are two types of warships. Submarines and targets.”

Funny thing, in Space Force (previously Space Command), we call submarines targets.

[Jimmy Valentine]

My thought is that the Navy needs more Arleigh Burke destroyers. May up the tonnage a bit to De Moines Cruiser class, but better flexibility.

[Stingray51]

The USA provides Ukraine with resources for the purpose of striking Russian targets. It could hardly be surprising to see a proxy chain going in the other direction via Iran and/or the Houthis.

[DesertRhino]

Yeah, but the Ford class has a maternity room and has eliminated all urinals in all heads. And in the unusual event they need to launch and aircraft, it has a crappy EMALS catapult!

[hanamizu]

As I understand it, American-flagged merchant vessels have been targets of Houthi attacks which makes U.S.Navy action justified, at least by long-standing tradition.

And while swarms of drones, both air and water borne may well tax our defenses (assuming that I know what our defenses against those threats are) I have to wonder about an early 20th century weapon that can easily be deployed to disrupt trade; the sea mine. (Why does that make me think of the Bob Newhart sketch or the scene from Hot Fuzz?)

[PIF]

We should withdraw all of our troops and go home.
—
Yeah, Freedom of the Seas is like Freedom on Land: we only believe in it, if it suits the isolationist policy de jour.

[flamberge]

These are expensive targets under the current rules of engagement. They are still useful against third world enemies - as long as their allies have not supplied those enemies with modern antiship and anti-aircraft missiles.

But they cannot hang around on patrols and wait for attacks. They most certainly cannot be anywhere near built up defenses unless they are actively pounding them into rubble.

Carrier strike groups as we currently know them are reaching the end of their useful lives. It is impossible to conceal their movements or locations from peer opponents. If you can see an enemy, you can kill an enemy. What matters most is who gets the first effective shot. But with "smart weapons" it is possible for both sides to lose a battle.

New drone weapons are changing "the rules". It is not yet clear what the new strike measures and countermeasures will be.

[McGruff]

The Russians learned the hard way, drones are the future of naval combat.

[MinorityRepublican]

We don’t really believe in the Freedom of the Seas anymore. Now it depends on who’s the POTUS. The pirates are just going to take advantage when we have a Democrat in the White House.