Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Navy: The Cruisers Must Go, That Others May Stay (BS: Without Aegis, Carriers Sunk By Silkworms)
DoD Buzz ^

Posted on 04/02/2012 4:12:57 PM PDT by MindBender26

The Navy’s proposal to decommission seven Aegis cruisers was “an extremely difficult choice for us to make,” but it must be done to protect what the Navy calls the “wholeness” of the rest of its fleet, top commanders told Congress Thursday.

Navy logistics and readiness boss Vice Adm. Bill Burke told a House Armed Services Committee panel that the surface force is banking on the money and sailors it would save from the ships going away — along with its now-fully funded request for ship maintenance — to help continue to dig the fleet out of its longstanding readiness problems.

“The cruiser retirements were an extremely difficult choice for us to make, but our goal was to balance readiness, procurment and the personnel priorities within our budget controls to still meet global force management and avoid a hollow force,” Burke said.

The Navy can free up about $4 billion by not keeping the ships, he said, even though they have 10 or even 15 years of life left — and the Navy’s recent top goal has been squeezing the most good from everything in today’s fleet. The ships need comprehensive upgrades and they’re suffering from the infamous cracks in their aluminum superstructures, so Burke said the brass had to swallow hard and let them go.

He’s not kidding: Although Secretary Panetta and other DoD-level officials have pooh-poohed the “older, less-capable” cruisers, these ships have long commanded a special status in the surface force. When certain kinds of Navy officers at desks in the Pentagon close their eyes for a moment of pause, they picture themselves on the bridge of a cruiser as the ship turns at high speed on a sunny afternoon off Southern California.

Virginia Republican Rep. Randy Forbes, who chaired Thursday’s hearing, wants that daydream to remain a reality for six of the seven ships slated to go away. (We’ll get to the seventh in a moment.) He said his committee staff has calculated that it would cost about $592 million in FY 13 and $859 million in FY 14 to upgrade the six ships and keep them around for the rest of their service lives. Compare that against more than $2 billion for a single new destroyer and it seems like a no-brainer, he argued.

Maybe, Burke said, but he said Forbes’ estimates didn’t cover the cost of operating the ships, or fielding helicopters with them, and said the bottom line was this: With seven fewer cruisers and fully funded maintenance budgets, the surface Navy could finally slay the readiness and maintenance demons that have been plaguing it for the past decade. He and Naval Sea Systems Command boss Vice Adm. Kevin McCoy said the fleet is turning the corner on its readiness problem, and deviating from the latest plans could throw a monkey wrench into that effort.

“It was a terribly difficult choice,” Burke said. “We didn’t want to make it. But in order to maintain readiness of all the forces we chose to decrement our Navy by a couple [of cruisers] … If we didn’t do this, if we kept too many, we’d be under-maintaining all of them and we’d end up down the road having a bigger problem than we have today.”

As for the seventh ship, Thursday’s hearing made clear that the poor cruiser USS Port Royal is a goner no matter what. Forbes’ estimates deliberately excluded the cost to upgrade it, and none of the Navy witnesses seemed to even consider keeping it around past its scheduled mothball date next year. The Port Royal ran hard aground off Honolulu in 2009 and its repairs cost the Navy tens of millions of dollars, but by all accounts, the ship has never been the same. As it sat stuck on the coral reef, the tide rocked and shook the cruiser and all of its onboard equipment, damaging it more than might have initially been apparent. The Port Royal eventually returned to service, but the Navy’s mothball decision and Thursday’s hearing apparently confirmed the brass wants to just cut its losses.

The sad twist for the surface Navy — taking Burke and McCoy at their word that it’s turning the corner — is that even a smaller, better-maintained fleet still falls far short of the oft-discussed “demand signal” from the combatant commanders. Under questioning from Forbes, Burke said that it would take a fleet of 500 ships to meet the “demand” from the various military areas of operation around the world. If everything goes the Navy’s way, it hopes to build a fleet of 300 ships by 2019.

So it’s the old standoff: Will Congress ultimately force service officials to keep ships they don’t want, having absorbed — in this case — the Navy’s years of arguments that “quantity is a capability all its own?” As we saw this week, lawmakers have asked the Pentagon not to implement any of its planned changes until the Hill gives its go-ahead, so there may be still more talk of keeping these once-prized warships the Navy says must go


TOPICS: Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-60 next last
Typical Obama anti-military BS!

Results: More money for welfare, sunk carriers, dead sailors!

1 posted on 04/02/2012 4:13:03 PM PDT by MindBender26
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: MindBender26
The Navy can free up about $4 billion

One day's deficit costs us 7 Aegis CG's? WTH?

2 posted on 04/02/2012 4:18:26 PM PDT by central_va ( I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26

We could be at war within months. We will wish we had them.

The Aegis is the kind of thing, when you need it, you can’t wait months for them to re-commission it. You need it now.


3 posted on 04/02/2012 4:18:35 PM PDT by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26
Unbelievable, simply unbelievable.....
4 posted on 04/02/2012 4:20:22 PM PDT by wally_bert (It's sheer elegance in its simplicity! - The Middleman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26

The Aegis program is very, very expensive. By decommissioning those vessels, scarce funding resources are made available for vital vote-buying activities that are urgently needed to protect the jobs of incumbent politicians.


5 posted on 04/02/2012 4:22:02 PM PDT by Steely Tom (If the Constitution can be a living document, I guess a corporation can be a person.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26

The Aegis program is very, very expensive. By decommissioning those vessels, scarce funding resources are made available for vital vote-buying activities that are urgently needed to protect the jobs of incumbent politicians.


6 posted on 04/02/2012 4:22:14 PM PDT by Steely Tom (If the Constitution can be a living document, I guess a corporation can be a person.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26
Somebody tell Obama that he is following the British lead. Maybe he will change his mind.
7 posted on 04/02/2012 4:27:31 PM PDT by Truth29
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26
What good does it do to have a strong defense if we as a free nation cannot even afford 0bamacare death panels to defend?
8 posted on 04/02/2012 4:27:41 PM PDT by EGPWS (Trust in God, question everyone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26
Russia just tested an upgraded AS-6 Kitchen from their backfire regiment, and another test from their bears at Engles Air Base.

The target?

An island in the Artic the exact same shape and size of a Nimitz Carrier.

Islands nearby, <5km away, are set up with chaff, ECM, etc. to simulate a carrier battle group and it's defenses.

Getting rid of the TICO CGs are a DUMB idea....if we do retire them, give 3 to Israel, 2 to South Korea, and 2 to Japan.

9 posted on 04/02/2012 4:28:33 PM PDT by DCBryan1 (Tagline removed at the request of someone who doesn't "get" Monty Python or Shakespeare.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26

This is mind numbing. So much for a balanced task force that is able to deal with all incoming vampires. So little hope and so much change.


10 posted on 04/02/2012 4:28:37 PM PDT by Keflavik76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26
Russia just tested an upgraded AS-6 Kitchen from their backfire regiment, and another test from their bears at Engles Air Base.

The target?

An island in the Artic the exact same shape and size of a Nimitz Carrier.

Islands nearby, <5km away, are set up with chaff, ECM, etc. to simulate a carrier battle group and it's defenses.

Getting rid of the TICO CGs are a DUMB idea....if we do retire them, give 3 to Israel, 2 to South Korea, and 2 to Japan.

11 posted on 04/02/2012 4:28:37 PM PDT by DCBryan1 (Tagline removed at the request of someone who doesn't "get" Monty Python or Shakespeare.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26

America drowned in insurmountable debt purposefully imposed in part through Stimulus “investments” in gimmicks designed in significant degree to reward Democrats election campaign supporters (can you say UAW, Solyndra, etc.?), dependent on loans from foreign sources to fund even its military forces, is a nation rendered laughably ineffective, of little to no influence or credibility in the global geo-political arena, and thus exactly what the Kenyan malcontent Barak Obama intended to make it as one key element of his intended fundamental transformation.
Our President’s intentions for America accord much more harmoniously with those of Vlad Putin than with the philosophy and wishes of George Washington.


12 posted on 04/02/2012 4:36:12 PM PDT by Elsiejay (in)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1
Getting rid of the TICO CGs are a DUMB idea....if we do retire them, give 3 to Israel, 2 to South Korea, and 2 to Japan.

Israel has no interest in something that big, and the Aegis destroyers that Japan and South Korea now have are much newer and more capabable than these CGs.

13 posted on 04/02/2012 4:42:53 PM PDT by Strategerist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26
the boy and his minions have GOT to go!!!
14 posted on 04/02/2012 4:52:21 PM PDT by Chode (American Hedonist - *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wally_bert

Why is it unbelievable when we have someone in the WH who hates America?

Wait till we have a Muslim CO and crew on one of our nuclear subs.


15 posted on 04/02/2012 4:55:37 PM PDT by 353FMG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Vroomfondel; SC Swamp Fox; Fred Hayek; NY Attitude; P3_Acoustic; investigateworld; lowbuck; ...
SONOBUOY PING!

Photobucket

Click on pic for past Navair pings. Post or FReepmail me if you wish to be enlisted in or discharged from the Navair Pinglist. The only requirement for inclusion in the Navair Pinglist is an interest in Naval Aviation. This is a medium to low volume pinglist.

16 posted on 04/02/2012 4:59:14 PM PDT by magslinger (If I wanted to vote for a Commie I would vote for Obammie. He has a chance of winning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 353FMG

I think all they need is a Mohammedan CO, XO and missile officer.


17 posted on 04/02/2012 5:02:37 PM PDT by magslinger (If I wanted to vote for a Commie I would vote for Obammie. He has a chance of winning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26

So get rid of a ship that can shoot missiles in space.


18 posted on 04/02/2012 5:06:54 PM PDT by bmwcyle (I am ready to serve Jesus on Earth because the GOP failed again)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26
Wow. These traitors are not wasting anytime dismantling key elements of our military that will allow it to function in a high threat environment (ie. someone like China for instance).

If I am not mistaken this system was a key part of our forces. Its one thing to replace them with something better and if possible smaller, but where is that replacement? The Chinese are building their own version of the ship though smaller, and capabilities are unknown with maybe the acception that they have succeeded in stealing a lot of its tech so they can put it to use.

19 posted on 04/02/2012 5:07:04 PM PDT by DarkWaters ("Deception is a state of mind --- and the mind of the state" --- James Jesus Angleton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26; Jeff Head; Travis McGee

Precedent Erkel Mugabe is a gundecking shitbird fer sure !


20 posted on 04/02/2012 5:07:15 PM PDT by Squantos (Be polite. Be professional. But have a plan to kill everyone you meet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marron

Yes

This is just another thing to add to the list of stupid things that are happening with this administration


21 posted on 04/02/2012 5:14:39 PM PDT by Steve Newton (And the Wolves will learn what we have shown before-We love our sheep we dogs of war. Vaughn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: magslinger

Pls add me. ty.


22 posted on 04/02/2012 5:15:05 PM PDT by TFMcGuire (Liberalism Is Hatred)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26

The US needs at least 6 carrier battle groups for Command of the Sea. 12 would be better. Ageis cruisers provide missle defense.


23 posted on 04/02/2012 5:20:45 PM PDT by Citizen Tom Paine (An old sailor sends)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26

Yes, exactly. More money for welfare, “You must love sodomy because sodomy is perfectly normal” training and reconfiguring ships & boats to accomodate females...


24 posted on 04/02/2012 5:22:09 PM PDT by MSF BU (n)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26

The nation will pay the price in blood for poor leadership. Generally, it tis the blood of our children.


25 posted on 04/02/2012 5:22:41 PM PDT by Citizen Tom Paine (An old sailor sends)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Citizen Tom Paine

What’s left in terms of naval gunfire? Anything that compares to the Wisconsin or New Jersey?


26 posted on 04/02/2012 5:25:44 PM PDT by MSF BU (n)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Steve Newton

Replace stupid with treasonous and you’re dead right.


27 posted on 04/02/2012 5:27:47 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: 353FMG

Probably a draft plan in the works or almost ready to go after the next election if (heaven forbid) the wun wins or most likely tries to steal it somehow.


28 posted on 04/02/2012 5:28:08 PM PDT by wally_bert (It's sheer elegance in its simplicity! - The Middleman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Squantos

He’s no gundecker. Too many good sailors kept their Division Officers bright and shiny with a bit of creative gundecking.

That....individual is the [BLEEP]ing All-time King Sandcrab.

....and that’s coming from a brownshoe with less sea duty time than some have got falling overboard.


29 posted on 04/02/2012 5:33:33 PM PDT by Unrepentant VN Vet ((291 and a wakeup) Truth, I know, always resides wherever brave men still have ammunition.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26

If anyone is furious over this news, just wait until Obama is re-elected because your fellow Freepers refuse to vote for Romney. Imagine what the commie Muslim traitor will do his 2nd term? But no worry, as long as your fellow Freepers have the satisfaction of not having to pull the lever for Idiot Romney, all is well right?

I can’t stand people who cut off their nose to spite their face.


30 posted on 04/02/2012 6:00:23 PM PDT by Freedom_Is_Not_Free (REPEAL OBAMACARE. Nothing else matters.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Freedom_Is_Not_Free
We are infiltrated by a large group of dems and gays trying to act like Conservatives, stirring up the anti-Mormon nonsense.

Like many FReepers, Romney is far from my ideal candidate, but when it comes down to obama or Romney, there is no questions we must all vote to get rid of Obama.

31 posted on 04/02/2012 6:19:55 PM PDT by MindBender26 (New Army SF and Ranger Slogan: Vengeance is Mine, sayeth the Lord.... but He subcontracts!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26
The Arleigh Burke class destroyers have about the same AEGIS defense capacity as the Ticos, but they lack the large missile capacity of the Ticonderoga (about 60% of the CG's complement), and have much shorter logisitcal legs than the Ticonderogas.

On the other hand, the Burkes are the ones that are being reworked to serve as floating missile defense platforms (BMD, not just fleet defense) and they have gotten some pretty amazing new sensors and software as part of that upgrade.

For me though, I would prefer having both. And more of each at that.

32 posted on 04/02/2012 6:45:16 PM PDT by AzSteven ("War is less costly than servitude, the choice is always between Verdun and Dachau." Jean Dutourd)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26
The Arleigh Burke class destroyers have about the same AEGIS defense capacity as the Ticos, but they lack the large missile capacity of the Ticonderoga (about 60% of the CG's complement), and have much shorter logisitcal legs than the Ticonderogas.

On the other hand, the Burkes are the ones that are being reworked to serve as floating missile defense platforms (BMD, not just fleet defense) and they have gotten some pretty amazing new sensors and software as part of that upgrade.

For me though, I would prefer having both. And more of each at that.

33 posted on 04/02/2012 6:45:30 PM PDT by AzSteven ("War is less costly than servitude, the choice is always between Verdun and Dachau." Jean Dutourd)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AzSteven

And for some reason I like the Burkes so much it posted twice!


34 posted on 04/02/2012 6:46:38 PM PDT by AzSteven ("War is less costly than servitude, the choice is always between Verdun and Dachau." Jean Dutourd)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: magslinger

Is this what Obama was hinting to Medvedev about when he was caught on a ‘hot mic’?


35 posted on 04/02/2012 6:51:56 PM PDT by BIGLOOK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26

Hold on bow, aren’t the Aegis Cruisers the only missile defense system we can now deploy? What functionality will the Navy be losing?


36 posted on 04/02/2012 6:55:37 PM PDT by NonValueAdded (Steyn: "If Greece has been knocking back the ouzo, we're face down in the vat.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCBryan1
"if we do retire them, give 3 to Israel, 2 to South Korea, and 2 to Japan."

We'd still be paying for 5 of them, with the inflated pass-thru costs.

37 posted on 04/02/2012 7:12:42 PM PDT by StAnDeliver (=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26; All
"sunk carriers, dead sailors"!

Well no, not really.

The Burke-class "Destroyers" are 90+% of the size of these Cruisers, newer, more capable and easier to maintain.

And that's the problem...we have an entire FLEET of what are essentially Cruisers. At 8,500 - 10,000 tons many of these ships are bigger than the Cruisers being retired and certainly as big as any Cruiser-class ship we've ever put to sea.

We have 60 in the water today and another 15 on the way.

What we NEED is 50-100 of what would have been called a Destroyer in any other era...but would now be called a Frigate. 4,000 tons with a crew of 120, VLS and all the new Aegis voodoo.

The National Security Frigate now being proposed by Ingalls would be an EXCELLENT choice, but alas the brass is wedded to the LCS concept.

38 posted on 04/02/2012 7:56:21 PM PDT by Mariner (War Criminal #18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Squantos; All

...and the CGX, the replacement for the crusiers has not even left the draing board yet.

This president is doing more to wreck our Navy than the combined might of all the agressor nations of the world have been able to do in the last 50 years.

While the Chinese continue to build a large, modern fleet at breakneck speed...in the last 10 years they have grown with ne modern combatants something like 142% while we have decreased by around 20%...and that’s before the earlier cuts and these.

AEGIS Vessels of the World
http://www.jeffhead.com/aegisvesselsoftheworld/

The Rising Sea Dragon in Asia
http://www.jeffhead.com/redseadragon/


39 posted on 04/02/2012 9:04:34 PM PDT by Jeff Head (Freedom is not free, never has been, never will be (www.dragonsfuryseries.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man

Yes

And what can or will we do about this?


40 posted on 04/02/2012 9:06:56 PM PDT by Steve Newton (And the Wolves will learn what we have shown before-We love our sheep we dogs of war. Vaughn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
And that's the problem...we have an entire FLEET of what are essentially Cruisers. At 8,500 - 10,000 tons many of these ships are bigger than the Cruisers being retired and certainly as big as any Cruiser-class ship we've ever put to sea.

You noticed that, huh?

And it's the manpower demands that are the US Navy's problem.

Back in the 17th Century when Samuel Pepys reorganised the Royal Navy he introduced the idea of rating ships into classes by crew size - even when that was changed to number of guns it amounted to much the same thing.

Now today Tico cruisers, Burke "destroyers" (and Burke derived ships of the Korean, Japanese navies) run 300-400 crew. Which isn't a pronlem for ROKN and JMSDF as they use these ships as cruisers.

There are actually destroyers these days - the large AAW "frigates" Spanish F-100, Dutch LFC, German F-124, Framco/Italian Horizon, and similarly sized British, Korean, Japanese ships actually called destroyers running crews of 200-250

Then these navies have actual frigates similar size but 150-200 crew, similar to the Perry's

Below them: "light frigates", 100-150 crew; corvettes with less combat capability and 50-100 crew

Below these surface combatants is the LCS 35-50 crew.

The future US Fleet: Cruisers and the LCS, Is everyone at BuShips completely stoned?

41 posted on 04/02/2012 9:45:13 PM PDT by Oztrich Boy (This world is a comedy to those that think, a tragedy to those that feel - Horace Walpole)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Ping.


42 posted on 04/02/2012 10:24:46 PM PDT by Army Air Corps (Four Fried Chickens and a Coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jet Jaguar; NorwegianViking; ExTexasRedhead; HollyB; FromLori; EricTheRed_VocalMinority; ...

Thanks Army Air Corps

The list, Ping

Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list

http://www.nachumlist.com/


43 posted on 04/02/2012 10:35:02 PM PDT by Nachum (The complete Obama list at www.nachumlist.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26

I HAVE HAD A MINOR REVELATION...

How did President Reagan win the cold war against Russia?

To a certain extent, by out-spending them into oblivion. Their meager economy couldn’t keep up with let alone meet the challenge of the mighty US economy, when it came to spending on the US military and growing our military might.

Yes, we spent a ton of money - but it was cheaper than going to war with the Soviet Union. And the Soviet Union faded into the dustbins of history. (Let’s not discuss Russian resurgence for the moment...)

Obama is doing the inverse. He is spending the US into oblivion, and consequently hollowing out the mighty US military.

He is singly-handedly ending our unintentional US hegemony.

He is losing for us and our posterity, the uniqueness and gift to the world, from the founders, of the US and it’s ideals.

“What a maroon! What an ingoranimus!”

... to quote the great philopher and thinker, Bugs Bunny!

http://www.hark.com/clips/nsvdjzkfdz-what-a-maroon

IMHO


44 posted on 04/03/2012 1:47:11 AM PDT by muffaletaman (In My Not So Humble Opinion. I MIGHT be wrong - but I doubt it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muffaletaman

BTW...

A philopher is a non-human philosopher.

I thought EVERYONE knew that!

:-)


45 posted on 04/03/2012 1:50:28 AM PDT by muffaletaman (In My Not So Humble Opinion. I MIGHT be wrong - but I doubt it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26
(Art.) Under questioning from Forbes, Burke said that it would take a fleet of 500 ships to meet the “demand” from the various military areas of operation around the world. If everything goes the Navy’s way, it hopes to build a fleet of 300 ships by 2019.

Need: Ronald Reagan's and Sec. Lehman's 600-ship Navy.

Reality: Obama's 300-ship cripple job as he sets us up to lose a major war.

46 posted on 04/03/2012 4:12:32 AM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oztrich Boy
The future US Fleet: Cruisers and the LCS, Is everyone at BuShips completely stoned?

I think BuShips/NavShips and CNO are trying to get to some combination of ship types that will get the job done, even while assorted budget-cutters hand them their heads year after year.

The Bushy RiNO crowd, led by Poppy and Dick Cheney, want to cut and slash every year, so silver-haired ladies who are the core of the GOP can have more and more tax cuts.

The DemonRats want to cut the budget because they lust for a wet-dream total-war victory for international Communism over the hated USA, and they don't care if Russia or China does the honors, as long as we lose.

47 posted on 04/03/2012 4:20:12 AM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: 353FMG
Wait till we have a Muslim CO and crew on one of our nuclear subs.

Easy to track too. 5 times a day they steady up on 090 true.

48 posted on 04/03/2012 4:26:52 AM PDT by central_va ( I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26; Jeff Head

What should we expect when we elect a Communist traitor mole to be POTUS?


49 posted on 04/03/2012 5:05:01 AM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
The Burke-class "Destroyers" are 90+% of the size of these Cruisers, newer, more capable and easier to maintain.

Remember that the Ticonderogas are really Spruance-class destroyer hulls with Aegis and larger CinC facilities. In fact, the first four were originally assigned DDG prefixes, which is why DDG-47 through DDG-50 were "skipped" and the Burkes started with DDG-51.

The last ships that could have been really considered "cruisers" and then only by a stretch of the traditional sense of the word were the Belknaps and Leahys. Even those started life as "Destroyer Leaders" (DLGs), commonly referred to as Frigates (until "Frigate" was applied to Destroyer Escorts). The last true cruiser was the USS Long Beach (CGN-9).

The big reason why the Ticos wear the "Cruiser" monicker is to keep the "Cruiser" name in Naval Service and permit at-sea surface combatant billets for O-6 SWOs.

The Ticos have a somewhat larger missile capacity (of negligible use in today's environment - if we want to rain massive amounts of Tomahawks down on an enemy the Ohio-class SSGNs are a much better option) and somewhat larger CinC facilities than the Burkes. But they also tend to be overweight and are at greater risk to combat damage (significant amount of aluminum in their structures, a pretty high center of gravity).

Going further, there are 22 Ticos left in the fleet (the first five, which didn't have VLS, were retired years ago) to support 10 (and about to be 9) active carrier strike groups. That's a hair over two ships per CSG. USS Port Royal is really messed up, as mentioned. USS Princeton was never quite right either after eating that mine in Desert Storm - I assume that she'll be one of the seven as well.

Given that additional Burkes are now being built, it seems to me that the Navy can absorb the "hit" from retiring these ships early. The overall capability is still there, just in a somewhat reduced state ... unlike say what the Royal Navy did to itself with ditching the Invincibles and Harriers/Sea Harriers.
50 posted on 04/03/2012 6:08:57 AM PDT by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-60 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson