Obola's dream for the US Navy.
Posted on 04/27/2015 6:45:55 AM PDT by C19fan
A battle of the hawks is raging on Capitol Hill. Defense hawks say the nation’s security will be endangered if the caps imposed under the 2011 Budget Control Act aren’t lifted, allowing for more defense spending. Fiscal hawks assert with equal vehemence that the nation’s long-term economic health — the foundation for all government activities, including defense — will be permanently harmed if burgeoning deficits and debts are not addressed. Defense hawks argue for a massive investment to maintain the United States’ position as the world’s strongest power. Fiscal hawks argue for innovative improvements in efficiency to sustain U.S. leadership.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
"For this reason, the modern carrier violates a core principle of war: Never introduce an element that you cannot afford to lose."
I think we cannot afford to lose one American life defending these shiite holes that hate us and end up being worse when we leave without finishing the job.
In other words, don't cut military spending to the point where you cannot replace mission-critical assets.
It's a shame we can't (chose not to) replace the carriers.
/johnny
BINGO!
That argument works with other ships (and Aircraft too) (which I am pleased we do have 100+ Arliegh Burkes Now)
What Happens if we loose a B-2 or F-22?
The Army Air Corps over Europe had one of the Highest American Causality Rates of the War.
At the rate they were shot down, we'd loose our entire B-52 Fleet in a handful of Missions today.
When a platoon is pinned down under enemy fire they're not going to get support from a submarine launched Tomahawk. Aside from the fact he's discussing explosives, this is as apples and oranges as he could get...
We have 62 Arliegh Burke class destroyers in the fleet.
What Happens if we loose a B-2 or F-22?
The Army Air Corps over Europe had one of the Highest American Causality Rates of the War.
At the rate they were shot down, we'd loose our entire B-52 Fleet in a handful of Missions today.
It's not a coincidence we go to war with little countries that can't really hit back...
Obola's dream for the US Navy.
We don’t need 12 aircraft carriers.
Bean counting consultants. Do we really want our wars planned by the folks who decided New Coke was a good idea?
As an active duty Sailor who has spent many days underway of various carriers, I can't even comprehend what the loss of one of our Nimitz-class carriers would do to the Navy.
As the article discusses, these are massive national assets, costing billions of dollars and taking years to build. Rotation cycles of maintenance and deployments are scheduled years in advance.
This isn't 1944 where we can crank these things out of shipyards every few weeks. The loss of just one would be such an incredible blow that the Navy could never risk losing another.
This was a very good piece. Thanks for posting.
I agree. We need at least 15 aircraft carriers.
:P I was taking the Hull Numbers at Face value >.<
U.S.S. Michael Murphy is Hull Number 112: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Michael_Murphy
It's not a coincidence we go to war with little countries that can't really hit back...
I Remember watching a Documentary about the Air Force and a Colonel saying he was told in the..... 60's(?) (I think this was during or just before Vietnam) That "We will Never Fight a Conventional War again" and he said "What do you think we have been doing since the end of World War II?"
That is how we got fighters like the F-111 and why after Vietnam was stopped with this "Jack of All Trades Masters of None" B.S.
The F-15 is a Air Superiority Fighter, Nothing Else.
The A-10 is a ground attack Aircraft, Nothing Else.
And Guess what?
They. Kick. Ass.
Not sort of good at both.
We’d loose ALL of our B-52s in a single mission against any second tier power. The B-52 is not suitable for operation where air superiority is contested. It is slow, and not very agile and relies solely on ECM for defense.
What we need are loiter capable drones, possibly armed with large numbers of guided bomblets capable of engaging various targets. These bomblets need to be a LOT cheaper than Hellfires. I got pretty PO’d watching our gunships using $30K Hellfires to take out single Talibunnies.
Analogous to the German Navy during WW I and II. After the Jutland the Kaiser ordered the High Seas Fleet to stay in port and Hitler after the sinking of the Bismarck did the same thing with the Tirpitz.
Then the fighter mafia got in charge of running programs.
I think procurement is completely wrong on the AF side.
And some of who has the AC is wrong.
Before the fighter mafia tries to make their points... the A-10 should be Army.
Or the AF should be the Army Air Force again.
/johnny
Given that a third of them are going through maintenance cycles at any one time, we probably do. Remember, only half to 2/3s of those carriers are available at any one time.
"Amateurs study tactics, professionals study logistics."
You mean killing individual Talibunnies with Hellfires isn’t an issue of logistics?
Carriers in their current form have been obsolete for the last 20 years
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.