Echoes of History: Steering the Future in Charting the Course: Navigating the Future of American Naval Power – Reflecting on WWII’s Legacy in Current Naval Strategy
Welcome to our Insightful Series!
Welcome Members and Friends to ‘Charting the Course: Navigating the Future of American Naval Power,’ an essential series presented by Americans for a Stronger Navy. I’m Bill Cullifer, the voice behind this series and the founder of Americans for a Stronger Navy. With a thumbs-up, I warmly welcome you to the first episode in an eight-week journey that delves into the intricacies of naval power and the pivotal issues shaping our future security and stability.
Personal Insights & Historical Significance:
As a former Destroyer Navy Sailor and an advocate for naval advancement, I bring not only my naval experience to the table but also a passion for innovation and strategic thinking. Our series embarks on its voyage today, December 7, 2023 a date steeped in history that reminds us of the sacrifices made for peace and the vigilance required to maintain stability. Understanding WWII is crucial to comprehending the ‘why’ behind our series, ‘Navigating the Future of American Naval Power.’
Though we may not be meeting in person, each episode of this series is an open invitation to engage in meaningful discussions. Together, we’ll explore the current state and future prospects of American naval power. I’ll be here alongside Dale A. Jenkins, Senior Advisor and author “Diplomats and Admirals” to dissect and discuss each topic with you, our dedicated audience.
Podcast Series Schedule:
We’ve lined up eight thought-provoking sessions, with a new podcast released weekly, allowing us time to dive deep and discuss the nuances of each topic.
Today – December 7, 2023 – Orientation and Bonus Track WWII: We kick off the series by introducing its themes and discussing the enduring legacy of Pearl Harbor Day in the context of today’s naval challenges.
December 14, 2023 – Inaugural Discussion: Join Dale A. Jenkins, Senior Advisor at Americans for a Stronger Navy and author of “Diplomats and Admirals” and me as we set the stage for the critical conversations that will unfold throughout the series.
Weekly Episodes:
Speakersand Sessions
Episode 1: Dr. Steven Wills, Navalist for the Center for Maritime Strategy at the Navy League of the United States. – The Anatomy of Naval Strate – December 28, 2023
Dive deep into the world of naval strategy with Dr Steven Wills, who brings a keen eye to the intricacies of strategy development, its challenges, and the integration of diverse naval capabilities. This session promises a thorough exploration of what constitutes U.S. Navy strategy, its objectives, and how it shapes the nation’s maritime future.
Episode 2:Dr. Bruce Jones, Senior Fellow – Foreign Policy, Center for East Asia Policy Studies, Strobe Talbott Center for Security, Strategy, and Technology, Brookings Institution. – Maritime Power Through History and Future – January 4, 2024
Join Dr. Bruce Jones for a historical and global perspective on maritime power. This session connects past and present maritime dynamics, exploring the influence of trade, climate change, and geopolitical shifts. Gain insights into how historical narratives of maritime prowess inform the current dynamics of power and influence in the global maritime domain.
Episode 3: Dr. Sam Tangredi, Leidos Chair of Future Warfare Studies and professor of national, naval, and maritime strategy at the U.S. Naval War College.January 11, 2024.
Embark on a technological journey with Dr. Sam Tangredi, an authority on the integration of AI in naval warfare. This session addresses how AI, big data, and human-machine interfaces are revolutionizing naval operations. Learn about the ethical, legal, and strategic dimensions of AI in the Navy and its profound impact on future naval force structure and capabilities.
Episode 4: Dr. Scott Savitz, Senior Engineer at the RAND Corporation – Innovation at Sea: Non-Lethal Weapons and Uncrewed Platforms – .January 18, 2024.
Explore the cutting-edge of naval innovation with Dr. Scott Savitz, focusing on non-lethal weapons and uncrewed platforms. Understand how these technologies are reshaping naval strategy and operations, their potential risks, and their role in maintaining strategic advantage over global rivals. This session promises insights into the future of naval warfare and national security.
Episode 5: Bryan Clark, senior fellow and director of the Center for Defense Concepts and Technology at Hudson Institute – The Technological Horizon of Naval Warfare – February 1st, 2024.
Delve into the future with as we examine the broad implications of emerging technologies like AI, big data, machine learning, and more in naval warfare. This session covers the integration challenges these technologies pose, their strategic impact, and their role in enhancing interoperability and effectiveness with global allies.⁰
Episode 6: Seth Cropsey, President Yorktown Institute. – Navigating Today’s Naval Challenges – February 8, 2024.
Join us as we explore the complexities of modern naval power with Seth Cropsey, a seasoned expert with extensive experience in the U.S. Naval and Department of Defense realms. This session offers an in-depth look at the current challenges and opportunities facing the Navy, particularly in the context of global rivalries. Discover the strategic insights that set the stage for a comprehensive understanding of contemporary naval dynamics.
Episode 7: Jon Rennie, co-founder, president, and CEO of Peak Demand Inc., – Leadership and Culture in Modern Naval Power –February 15th, 2024.
Conclude our series with Jon Rennie, focusing on the crucial elements of leadership, culture, and the balance between tradition and modernization within the Navy. This session highlights the importance of leadership in navigating the multifaceted challenges and opportunities in naval power, offering a holistic view of the organizational dynamics at play.
Engagement and Exploration:
Each episode is designed to be a treasure trove of insights and expertise, and I’ll be here with Dale to unpack each session in our post-show debriefs. Mark your calendars, and prepare for a series that charts not just the course of a podcast, but the journey of American naval power into the future.
Additional Information:
Schedule of Events: Stay informed of upcoming episodes and special events. Visit our schedule page for the latest updates and detailed information about each episode in the ‘Charting the Course’ series.
Contact Information: Your feedback and questions are invaluable to us. Please feel free to reach out via our contact page or email us directly at the contact us page at StrongerNavy.org
We’re here to engage with you and answer any queries you may have.
Featured Resource – ‘Echoes of History: Steering the Future in ‘Charting the Course”: For a deeper dive into the themes of our series, don’t miss our comprehensive analysis in “Echoes of History.” This resource provides rich insights into how historical naval strategies inform our current and future naval power. Available here.
BONUS TRACK: WWII’s Influence on Modern Naval Strategy: Complete Course Content
Introduction: Welcome, everyone. Today, we’re going to explore how World War II fundamentally reshaped naval warfare and its enduring impact on today’s naval strategy. This understanding is crucial for grasping the discussions in our ‘Charting the Course’ series.
Section 1: The Shift in Naval Warfare: Let’s start with a significant shift during WWII: the transition from battleship dominance to the era of the aircraft carrier. Before WWII, battleships were seen as the epitome of naval power. However, the Battle of Midway in 1942 marked a turning point. In this battle, U.S. carrier-based aircraft sank four Japanese fleet carriers, demonstrating the potency of air power in naval engagements. This victory marked the decline of the battleship and the rise of the aircraft carrier as the new capital ship of naval forces.
Section 2: Submarine Warfare and the Battle of the Atlantic: Next, let’s turn to submarine warfare. German U-boats posed a significant threat to Allied shipping during the Battle of the Atlantic. Their strategy was to disrupt Allied supply lines and it was devastatingly effective. German U-boats sank around 2,779 ships, underscoring the critical role of submarines in modern naval strategy. This aspect of naval warfare emphasized the need for anti-submarine tactics and technology, which continue to be a pivotal element in contemporary naval defense.
Section 3: Technological Advancements: Technological advancements during WWII were extraordinary. Radar and sonar, for instance, revolutionized naval engagements. These technologies allowed navies to detect and track enemy ships and aircraft over greater distances and with greater accuracy than ever before. Another significant breakthrough was in codebreaking. The Allied efforts to decrypt the Enigma machine, led by teams like those at Bletchley Park, were vital. The intelligence gathered from these efforts, especially during the Battle of Midway, provided the Allies with a critical advantage, shaping many naval engagements.
Section 4: Amphibious Operations and Joint Forces: Amphibious operations were another crucial aspect of WWII. The D-Day landings at Normandy are a prime example. This operation involved over 5,000 ships and landing craft and marked one of the largest amphibious military assaults in history. The success of such operations depended on seamless coordination between naval, air, and land forces, exemplifying the evolution of joint-force operations. This integrated approach to military operations has since become a staple of modern military strategy.
Section 5: Strategic and Geopolitical Outcomes: In the aftermath of WWII, the global geopolitical landscape underwent dramatic changes. The U.S. emerged as a dominant naval power. This shift influenced the formation of NATO, a collective defense pact that played a significant role in naval strategy during the Cold War and continues to impact geopolitical dynamics. The post-WWII era saw the U.S. Navy becoming a central tool in American foreign policy, with its ability to project power globally.
Conclusion: To conclude, the lessons and transformations from WWII continue to influence modern naval strategy. Understanding these historical contexts is key to navigating the complexities of contemporary naval challenges. As we proceed with our ‘Charting the Course’ series, keep these insights in mind as they provide a valuable perspective on current and future naval strategies.
I’ve had the privilege of engaging with multiple experts at the forefront of naval innovation and strategy.
These conversations have illuminated the significant technological strides and forward thinking in the U.S. Navy, particularly in the realm of autonomous vessels.
During a brief pause in these discussions, my thoughts drifted to the storied Army-Navy football game set for December 9, 2023. This annual event, steeped in tradition and camaraderie, sparked a curious reflection on the future intersection of technology and tradition.
In a creative moment, I envisioned autonomous Army and Navy football players – a fusion of technology and sport. This vision, while fascinating in a technological sense, also stirred a poignant realization.
The rapid evolution of autonomous technologies, while enhancing our naval capabilities, might also mean that future generations could miss out on traditional experiences. The prospect of serving at sea or competing on the football field might become memories of a bygone era.
This duality is at the heart of our upcoming series. While we explore the technological advancements and their implications for national security, we must also acknowledge the sentimental aspects. The camaraderie of sailors at sea, the saltiness in the air, the taste of ballpark hot dogs, and the roar of the crowd at a football game – these are experiences that shape character, foster bonds, and define human experiences.
As members and friends of Americans for a Stronger Navy, you understand the delicate balance between embracing innovation and preserving tradition. Our naval history is rich with tales of bravery and unity, and our future promises unprecedented technological prowess.
Let’s embrace this journey together, exploring how these advancements will shape the U.S. Navy while remembering the human element that has always been its backbone. The future of American naval power is not just about ships and technology; it’s about the people who serve and the traditions that bind us.
Dear Members and Friends of Americans for a Stronger Navy,
Our Deepest Gratitude This Thanksgiving
As we gather with our loved ones to celebrate Thanksgiving, it’s a poignant time to reflect and express our deepest gratitude to the men and women serving in the United States Navy. These sailors, stationed across the globe from the decks of mighty aircraft carriers, destroyers, and support ships to the silent realms of the deep sea, showcase unwavering commitment and dedication every day.
A Unified Force: Celebrating Every Division and Unit
The Navy is a complex and diverse organization, with each division and unit playing a crucial role in the fulfillment of its overarching mission. This Thanksgiving, we honor the unique and essential contributions of each facet of our Navy:
Surface Fleet: Our surface warriors manage a vast array of sophisticated warships, ensuring a strong and visible naval presence.
Submarine Force: The silent service, operating beneath the waves, plays a critical role in deterrence and intelligence gathering.
Naval Aviation: The eyes in the sky, these pilots and their support teams provide essential air power and support to naval operations.
SEAL Teams and Special Warfare: Embodiments of resilience and bravery, undertaking the most challenging missions to protect our nation.
Naval Construction Forces (Seabees): The builders and protectors, essential to the construction and maintenance of naval facilities.
Logistics and Supply Units: The lifeline of the Navy, ensuring that our forces are always ready and well-equipped.
Medical and Chaplain Corps: The heart and soul, providing vital care and spiritual support to our sailors.
To the Families Behind Our Sailors
We extend our heartfelt thanks to the families of our Navy personnel. Your sacrifices and support form the foundation of our sailors’ strength. This Thanksgiving, we recognize and celebrate your resilience and unwavering spirit.
A Thanksgiving Message of Thanks
To each sailor serving across every division and unit, and to their families – our Thanksgiving is more meaningful because of your commitment and sacrifices. Your dedication safeguards our freedoms and upholds our nation’s values. We are eternally grateful and inspired by your service.
Join Our Mission
This Thanksgiving, let us renew our commitment to supporting our Navy. We invite you to join Americans for a Stronger Navy in advocating for the resources and recognition our sailors and their families deserve. Your involvement can make a significant difference.
As Thanksgiving 2023 approaches, a time for reflection and gratitude, I find myself moved by the stories of dedication, sacrifice, and courage that we’ve had the honor of sharing through our platform. As the founder of the Americans for a Stronger Navy, it has been my privilege to bring to light individuals like Dan Maloney, whose life and service to our nation exemplify the best of the American spirit.
This Thanksgiving, I want to extend my heartfelt thanks to each of you – for your support, and your belief in our mission. Your participation not only enriches our community but also fuels our commitment to preserving and celebrating these important narratives.
The stories we share are more than just accounts of military service; they are personal journeys that reveal the depth of human resilience, the strength of character, and the profound impact one individual can have. Dan’s story, among many others, is a testament to this. His experiences, challenges, and triumphs offer us a window into a life dedicated to something greater than oneself, inspiring us all to reflect on our own paths and contributions.
As we gather with our loved ones this holiday season, let us remember and honor the sacrifices of those who have served our nation. Their stories are not just a part of our history; they are a beacon that guides our future.
I encourage each of you to take a moment to share your stories or the stories of those you know. Every voice matters, every story adds a unique thread to the rich tapestry of our collective history. Let’s continue to build this legacy together, fostering a community where every sacrifice is remembered, and every story is cherished.
Wishing you and your families a warm, joyful, and reflective Thanksgiving.
We introduced Dan Maloney, whose face remarkably inspired the statue, and delved into the creation process, the artist’s vision, and the intricate approval journey the statue underwent.
This episode promised a deeper dive into Maloney’s life, exploring his shared memories, challenges, and how his journey intertwines with the story of the Lone Sailor, including a unique segment featuring written questions and answers directly from Dan.
As teased in our previous episode, today we set sail into the captivating life story of Dan Maloney, the man whose visage inspired the Lone Sailor statue.
The Origin of The Lone Sailor
Dan shared the history and significance of The Lone Sailor statue, dating back to its inception in the 1980s as an initiative by the U.S. Navy Memorial Foundation. The statue stands as a tribute to sailors’ dedication, sacrifice, and contributions to the country.
The Early Years: Foundations of a Sailor
In this episode, you’ll journey through Maloney’s early aspirations, his unexpected entry into the Navy, and the diverse experiences that shaped him into the figure immortalized in bronze. We’ll explore his motivations, the intricacies of his recruitment, and the unique circumstances that led him to embrace the Navy as a lifelong commitment.
Dan’s story is a compelling narrative of naval service, embodying adaptability, determination, and the art of navigating life’s unexpected courses.
The Lure of the Navy
Dan described the allure of the Navy as a blend of patriotism, a sense of adventure, and the promise of personal development. The Navy provided an opportunity to be part of something bigger than oneself, offering both challenges and rewards that resonate on a personal and national level.
What inspired your initial decision to join the Navy instead of pursuing your initial dream of becoming a veterinarian, and how did the advice and stories from a Cryptologic Technician influence your choice, especially regarding the nuclear power program?
Answering the Call: Joining the Navy
After high school, I was accepted to the University of Maryland with dreams of becoming a veterinarian. My older sister was in her junior year at Maryland and was struggling with her mounting student loan debt. I had a good job as the manager of a busy liquor store on Route 1 in Laurel, MD but was still living with my mom. It quickly became evident that I needed to get out from under her roof and rules. One of my cashiers was the wife of a second class petty officer. He was a Cryptologic Technician (Interpretive) brushing up on his Russian language skills at Fort Meade.
One evening over beers, in response to me talking about my future plans, he recommended I join the navy. He also specified that I join the nuclear power program (more money) and join the drill company in boot camp to avoid washing dishes during service week. He told me stories of guys who got everything they needed from the navy and saved all of their paychecks in a shoebox. I never met anyone like that.
Can you share your thought process behind choosing the Navy over other military branches, particularly focusing on the unique opportunities presented by the nuclear power training?
Nuclear power training was not available anywhere else and I looked at the casualty numbers from past wars and determined I was more likely to survive in the navy if we went to war again. I only intended to do the six years required to go into nuclear power and then get out and work in the lucrative civilian nuclear industry. While I was in boot camp, the accident at Three Mile Island occurred and that was when I began thinking about staying in the navy.
Trials of Recruitment
The recruitment process, as narrated by Dan, tested the mettle of prospective sailors. It was an initiation into the Navy’s ethos, demanding both physical endurance and mental resilience. From rigorous screenings to the anticipation of a new life chapter, recruitment epitomized the start of the naval odyssey.
When and where did you enlist?
I enlisted in January 1979 after visiting the local recruiter.
Tell me about the recruitment process? Did it go smoothly?
The Rigors of Recruitment
The process was very fast. I told the recruiter I wanted to be a “nuke” and, spying my shoulder length hair and scruffy army jacket, he told me to slow down because I needed to take the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery test first and, if I did OK on that, he would then administer the Nuclear Field Qualification Test. I did very well on both tests and the recruiter’s demeanor changed immediately because he was excited by the extra credit he would receive for inducting a nuke. He showed me a video about the nuclear power program that was narrated by William Shatner and featured the aircraft carrier Enterprise. My physical went well and I was informed that I would be sent to Great Lakes for boot camp.
I pushed back and said I wanted to go to San Diego because it was too cold in Illinois in February and I had been to Orlando on vacation already. They didn’t want to risk losing a nuke so my request was granted. I took my first plane ride three weeks later.
Boot Camp
Boot Camp was a transformative phase for Dan. It distilled the essence of discipline, teamwork, and the naval ethos into intense training sessions. Through sweat, toil, and camaraderie, recruits evolved from novices to adept sailors, ready for the vast seas.
My first twenty-four hours in the navy were remarkable. On the plane trip to San Diego, I met some sailors returning from leave. They were kind enough to offer me a ride to the base so I didn’t stick around at the airport for the Recruit Training Command (RTC) bus as directed. My new friends dropped me off at the Naval Training Center gate and bid me good luck. The gate guard was flummoxed because he didn’t know what to do with me. He contacted the RTC and they sent somebody to come gather me up. That was when I received my first ass chewing in the navy. I was instructed, very forcefully, that my days of showing any initiative were over. I was brought to the barracks where most of the new recruits were fast asleep because it was past midnight. I was shocked to see clothing draped everywhere. It seemed very untidy for the military. I also noticed a person walking around the barracks in a very deliberate manner. I didn’t trust him so I placed my wallet under my pillow. I was clueless about the role of the roving watch. Less than an hour later, he woke me up and said I had the next watch. I had no idea what he was talking about so I exclaimed, “I haven’t even gotten my hair cut yet!” and demanded to see the “Captain.” A senior petty officer soon resolved the situation and told me to go back to sleep.
What were your initial impressions and experiences during boot camp? Can you share any particular challenges or memorable moments that stood out?
I experienced the usual culture shock that all recruits go through in the first couple of weeks. I quickly realized that I had more life experience and street smarts than many of my fellow recruits. I thought the food was decent and enjoyed the occasional smoke break. I thought it was odd we were prohibited from using the urinals but soon learned it was the savvy move of an experienced Company Commander (CC) to keep the urinals pristine for barracks inspections.
There were two memorable events that almost derailed my navy career before it even began. The first event involved the difference between boxers and briefs. I was issued boxers while it seemed everyone else had been given briefs. The boxers were very blousy and difficult to stow neatly in the locker no matter how many times I ironed them with my Blue Jacket Manual. The boxers were preventing me from passing locker inspections and I quickly tired of being severely reprimanded by my CC. After a week of that, I decided I was done. I told the CC I didn’t care if I had to go to Leavenworth, I wanted out of the navy. It was a weekend so the CC arranged for me to talk to the chaplain via the telephone. There was another recruit who wanted out too so he joined us at the duty office. He talked to the chaplain first and started bawling about being homesick. I thought he sounded a little pathetic. When my CC said it was my turn I said, “That’s OK, I’m good. I’ll see you on graduation day.” That night, I snuck into the head and got my boxers nice and damp before folding them. The folds held perfectly even after drying. I wore the same pair of boxers for the remainder of boot camp and passed all subsequent locker inspections.
The second event involved an argument and on-going conflict with another recruit. He was in the army before so everyone called him Sarge. He was an imposing man and a few years older than most of us. He fancied himself a bully. He joined under the buddy program and his buddy was a chubby and lippy kid who derived his swagger from his association with Sarge. Sunday mornings provided the only free time we got in boot camp. That time was set aside for writing letters to loved ones and we were allowed to listen to the radio. The Recruit Company Commander (RCC) was the only recruit allowed to touch the radio. Sarge violated that rule and changed the radio station to his liking. That made many of us unhappy and loud arguments ensued. Sarge tried to bully us but I wasn’t about to take any of his nonsense. He was bigger than me but I also stood at 6’2” and 190 pounds. I did not back down. We were separated by the CC and directed to explain what happened. Sarge lost his spot in our drill company and was reassigned to a regular company that would be working in the galley the following week. Sarge was relaying threats to me via his buddy. During his week in the galley, Sarge would stand behind the silverware holding a knife in front of his face and glare at me while I moved down the line. Like most bullies, he was all talk. After graduation, I approached him and his buddy in the enlisted club and asked about his threats. He quickly said he didn’t want any beef and that was that. Welcome to the navy!
How did your mom feel about your decision to join the Navy?
She was a little shocked about how soon I would be leaving but was overall proud. She had always wished I would go to the Naval Academy so she was definitely pro-Navy. My involvement as the model for the Lone Sailor and commissioning as an officer has made her immensely proud. My late father was very proud of my accomplishments too. He had served in the army and the National Security Agency so he understood selfless service better than most.
What duties did you perform?
Life at Sea: The Submarine Experience
As a nuclear-trained Machinist Mate, I was responsible for operating and maintaining the nuclear reactor and steam plant that drives the main propulsion turbines and the electrical generating turbines. I also operated the evaporator that boiled seawater to create fresh water. I could make 12,000 gallons per day. I operated and maintained four 200-ton air conditioning plants that cooled the entire submarine and all electrical equipment.
Sea Tales and Specialties
Dan regaled with tales from the deep blue, from harrowing storms to moments of camaraderie under the vast sky. Each sailor had a specialty, be it navigation, engineering, or communications, ensuring the smooth sailing of the ship and fostering bonds of brotherhood.
Can you describe the various roles or positions you held during your time in the Navy? Where were you stationed, and what were some of your primary responsibilities in these roles?
1979: Machinist Mate “A” School, Great Lakes, IL (Advanced to MM3)
1979: USS LEXINGTON CVT-16, Pensacola, FL
1980: Naval Nuclear Power School. Orlando, FL (Advanced to MM2)
1980: Nuclear Power Training Unit (NPTU), Trident (S8G) Prototype, West Milton, NY
1980-1983: Instructor Duty NPTU, West Milton, NY (Advanced to MM1)
1983-1984: Pre-Commissioning Unit ALABAMA, Electric Boat Shipyard, Groton, CT
1984-1989: USS ALABAMA SSBN-731 (Gold), Bangor, WA (Selected as Sailor of the Year 1988 for ALABAMA and Submarine Group Nine)
1989-1992: Trident Training Facility, Bangor, WA (Advanced to MMC and ENS and certified as a Master Training Specialist) (Selected as Engineering Instructor of the Year 1991)
1992-1997: Naval Reactors Representatives Office, Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard (Advanced to LTJG and LT)
1997-2000: Fleet Maintenance Officer, Commander, Submarine Force, US Pacific Fleet, Pearl Harbor Submarine Base
2000-2003: Maintenance Officer, Naval Submarine Support Command, Pearl Harbor Submarine Base (Advanced to LCDR)
2003-2004: Operational Type Desk Officer, Commander, Submarine Force, US Pacific Fleet, Pearl Harbor Submarine Base (Retired from Active Duty)
2005-Present: Modernization Program Manager (GS-13), Commander, Submarine Force, US Pacific Fleet, Pearl Harbor Submarine Base
Could you share about any specialized or extra training you received during your time in the Navy, and how it impacted your naval career?
Climbing the Ranks: From Sailor to Leader
In addition to Nuclear Training, I received specialized instruction to better understand the theory, operation, and maintenance of the various equipment I was responsible for on the submarine. I also received instruction in quality assurance, curriculum development, and lathe operation. Continuing training on reactor plant theory, operation, and casualty response is a daily occurrence when assigned to an operational reactor whether ashore or at sea.
Can you describe the process of how assignments were chosen in the Navy? Did you have any say in selecting your initial placement or specialization, and how did that decision come about?
I graduated #1 in my class at the Trident S8G prototype at NPTU and was picked up as an instructor for a three year tour. Wanting to stay on Trident submarines, I volunteered to join the initial manning of the submarine PCU ALABAMA undergoing new construction at EB. After new construction, I opted to do back-to-back sea tours on USS ALABAMA. I chose my shore duty at the Trident Training Facility. Upon receiving my commission and acceptance as a member of the Naval Reactors staff, I was assigned to the field office at Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard. This was the first time I did not get my first choice. I wanted to stay in Washington State but was given my third choice (Hawaii). Once I decided Hawaii would be my forever home, I successfully negotiated Hawaii for my last three active duty assignments. I was thrilled when I landed a federal job at my last duty assignment.
Life Enlisted
Life enlisted was characterized by a structured regimen, responsibilities, and an unyielding commitment to duty. Beyond the tasks, it was a life enriched by bonds forged in adversity, the pride of service, and the continuous pursuit of personal and professional growth.
Reflecting on your naval career, with its unique challenges and rewards, could you delve into what made your time in the nuclear power field particularly fulfilling? How did the experience shape your journey, especially with significant milestones like becoming a Chief Petty Officer and receiving a Limited Duty Officer commission?
It was very rewarding. Nuclear Power training is a demanding pipeline and many do not make it through. The nuclear field is stressful duty that taxes both the body and mind. I truly enjoyed working with such high caliber and intelligent sailors and officers. Advancing to Chief Petty Officer and receiving a Limited Duty Officer commission were my fondest achievements. Achieving those milestones was acknowledgement for some incredibly hard and dedicated work over the years. I was treated very differently after I put on khakis. It was well worth the effort.
Navigating the Cold War Waters
Dan’s tenure saw the Cold War’s intrigues. The Navy played a pivotal role, maintaining a delicate balance between power projection and diplomacy. It was a period of heightened vigilance, strategy, and the omnipresent responsibility of safeguarding national interests.
Reflecting on the day you were chosen as the model for the Lone Sailor statue, what were your thoughts and emotions, and how do you believe they were captured in the statue’s expression?
I was thrilled to be selected as the model. I was admittedly brash and confident as a young man in my mid-twenties and I think that shows in the statue’s face. I am proud to be an American and I strongly felt that my job in the navy was very important to help maintain our nation’s security. I approach all aspects of my job with a seriousness and sense of purpose. I think all of that comes through.
Side note: I was always very meticulous about my uniform. You will note a difference between the cut of the pants in Bleifeld’s first two attempts with other models and the Lone Sailor. The pants on the first two are loose hanging and the hem travels in a straight line from the hip to the cuff. The Lone Sailor’s pants hug the thighs and then bellow out into the bell bottom starting at the knee. Crackerjacks issued at boot camp have pants that look like the first two. I had my crackerjacks professionally tailored while at “A” school in Great Lakes and I really think that is what visually set the Lone Sailor apart from the earlier versions.
How much time did you spend at sea?
In my twenty-six years in the navy I spent less time at sea than most. Except for a four month tour on the carrier LEXINGTON, I was in the navy for over 6 years before getting underway on the USS ALABAMA. spent the next five years making patrols. Once I became an officer, I was assigned to various operational staff jobs so I spent time underway on almost every submarine operating in the Pacific area of operations.
Can you describe your experience of being at sea, particularly the aspects you found most enjoyable and challenging, and how the Navy’s approach to aspects like sleep and equipment maintenance impacted your time underway?
I enjoyed being at sea more than the work necessary to get underway. I thoroughly loved to operate the nuclear power plant and main engines. While absolutely necessary, I wasn’t a big fan of the constant casualty drills and training lectures. The absolute worst underway was Alpha Sea Trials on ALABAMA. We had to conduct over 24 hours of testing on the surface before we could execute our first ever dive. That wouldn’t have been so bad but a serious Nor’easter was tossing us around and many sailors and shipyard workers were very seasick. It wasn’t pretty. Getting enough good sleep was always a problem. I’m glad the navy has changed their policies about the need for better sleep. While underway, I derived the most pleasure from fixing a piece of broken equipment.
Rise to an Officer
Dan’s ascent to officer rank was a journey of perseverance, learning, and leadership. It epitomized his dedication, the trust bestowed upon him by peers and superiors, and his commitment to lead with integrity and vision.
What influenced your decision to pursue officer training, and how did this choice align with your career aspirations in the Navy?
I had many supervisors during my career that followed the same path. It just seemed like the right thing to do and I knew I had a strong record of sustained superior performance. There was also a period of time when I was trying to make chief where the numbers were against me. It took me five attempts to make chief and it wasn’t due to lack of effort or qualifications. In a two year period there was only one advancement spot for a submarine nuclear machinist mate. I was stuck in a deep advancement valley that I feared would still be the case for future advancement to senior and master chief.
Of course, the increase in pay and benefits was a motivating factor.
I wanted to work for Naval Reactors but that was a blessing and a curse. It was a five year commitment and also meant I had to work in a shipyard. I had some shipyard experience at Electric Boat but wasn’t prepared for what my new oversight role at Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard would entail. Every day was 14-16 hours plus calls at home throughout the night. I had to write a weekly letter to the four-star admiral in charge of Naval Reactors explaining what I had done the previous week to improve his program. It was intellectually challenging work. I was relieved when I fulfilled my commitment to NR and was able to don the uniform again. I was required to wear civilian attire (shirt and tie) while at NR because I was dual assigned to the Department of Navy and the Department of Energy. Also, since I was representing the four-star, he didn’t want anyone knowing what ranks we held because we were often junior to the submarine commanding officers we monitored. The tie let everyone in the shipyard know that we were one of the admiral’s men. I was elated to put my khakis back on and go back to sea on submarines. I was even happier when I retired from the navy so I could wear an aloha shirt to the office.
Essence of Naval Service
Dan emphasizes the essence of naval service as a deep-rooted commitment to the nation, its principles, and fellow servicemen. Beyond mere defense, it’s a dedication to values like discipline, integrity, and camaraderie. The legacy and honor of the naval service act as guiding pillars throughout service.
Can you recall a specific moment in the Navy that significantly influenced your career or personal growth?
Turbulent Seas and Internal Struggles
Beyond external challenges, Dan spoke of the internal battles sailors often grappled with – from homesickness to navigating interpersonal dynamics onboard. The sea’s vastness could evoke introspection, with sailors drawing strength from their training and each other.
There were many moments but my assignment in 1979 to the Machinery Division on the WWII-era aircraft carrier USS LEXINGTON (CVT-16) provided all the motivation I would need to make it through nuclear power training. I was fresh out of Machinist Mate “A” school so this was my initial fleet experience. The engine rooms and boiler rooms were incredibly hot and the only relief was standing directly beneath the ventilation ducting. At the end of each watch, your last four hours of logs had to be transcribed onto a clean set of logs because sweat caused the original log sheets to become blurry.
This was also my first experience with navy hazing rituals. I was gang tackled in berthing by my division and covered from head to toe in grease and Prussian bluing. I got in a few good punches but certainly got the worse end of the initiation. That was my first initiation but not the last. My Shellback and Chief initiations were of the ‘old school’ variety. They were ribald, disgusting, and fun but the navy has changed a lot since then. Probably for the better.
I learned a lot about the navy in those first months in the fleet and vowed to do whatever it took to succeed in the nuclear power program. I knew I would do anything to avoid returning to the engine rooms of the oil-fired navy.
Overcoming Challenges within the Navy
Dan’s nautical odyssey was punctuated by myriad challenges, from deciphering ship nuances to addressing operational dilemmas. However, a solid support framework, mentorship, and comradeship transformed these impediments into growth catalysts.
Were there challenging experiences that molded you as a sailor? How did you navigate them?
Getting through the first six months of the nuclear power training pipeline was, by far, the most challenging academic pursuit I have experienced. There were extremely fast-paced classes in math, physics, reactor principles, heat transfer/fluid flow, electrical theory, and chemistry. The classes were five days a week, eight hours per day. It usually took four or more hours to finish the daily homework and 8-12 hours of homework on the weekends. All of the material was classified so it had to be done in the schoolhouse. Students with poor grades were assigned mandatory study hours (usually 30-40 hours/week). I had decent grades (3.7 on a 4.0 scale) and avoided mandatory study but even above average students struggled with the sheer volume of the material. Many did not make the cut. Those that did make it (2.5 to survive) were reassigned to the prototype phase to continue training on a land-based operational reactor. I was assigned to the Trident submarine prototype in upstate New York where I finished at the top of my class. My assignment to the fleet was delayed for three years because I was retained as an instructor. My confidence was sky high after succeeding in such a demanding environment. The father of the nuclear navy, Admiral Rickover, had a quote that was inspirational and helped mold me for the rest of my career. He said, “Responsibility is a unique concept… You may share it with others, but your portion is not diminished. You may delegate it, but it is still with you… If responsibility is rightfully yours, no evasion, or ignorance or passing the blame can shift the burden to someone else. Unless you can point your finger at the man who is responsible when something goes wrong, then you have never had anyone really responsible”.
Did you have mentors in the Navy? How did they guide or inspire you?
I always looked up to the Chief Petty Officers that I served with in my first decade in the navy. Their ability to handle the technical demands of the job and train their reliefs simultaneously was impressive. The CPOs instilled the absolute necessity for integrity in all matters and the pride in doing your job to the absolute best of your ability. I’m reminded of another Rickover quote that applies. He said, “A good manager must have unshakeable determination and tenacity. Deciding what needs to be done is easy, getting it done is more difficult. Good ideas are not adopted automatically. They must be driven into practice with courageous impatience. Once implemented they can be easily overturned or subverted through apathy or lack of follow-up, so a continuous effort is required. Too often, important problems are recognized but no one is willing to sustain the effort needed to solve them”. I only met Admiral Rickover once but he was omnipresent in my career and a mentor for every nuke that has ever served.
How would you describe the essence of naval service to someone unfamiliar with it? What does it mean to you?
Serving in the navy requires surrendering to a cause that is larger than your own desires. Especially important in the submarine service, you must acknowledge that every member of the crew, from the Commanding Officer to the non-rated sailor, has an integral role in the warfighting capability of your ship. For me, the navy meant unlimited opportunity for a better life for me and my family. I was confident that if I performed each task to the utmost of my ability that I would not have to worry about my next assignment or promotion. I also felt strongly that the ballistic missile submarine’s primary mission of deterring nuclear war was necessary and admirable.
Emotions and Memories: The Lone Sailor Statue
The Lone Sailor statue stirs a plethora of emotions in Dan, encompassing pride, nostalgia, gratitude, and belongingness. It epitomizes every sailor, especially those who’ve given their all. The detailed features reflect the life trajectory of a sailor, encapsulating common experiences and the undying navy spirit.
When you see the Lone Sailor statue, what emotions or memories surface? How do you hope others connect with it?
The prevailing emotion whenever I think about the Lone Sailor is pride. I’m proud that I was considered worthy of the honor to serve as the model but also proud of my forty-four years and counting of service to the submarine force. When I visit any of the statues I always experience a visceral reaction upon laying my hand on the peacoat. I feel a momentary Ponce de Leon Fountain of Youth rush of memories that transport me back to my twenties. That emotion is fleeting but it happens every time.
The thing that brings me the most joy is the universal acceptance of the Lone Sailor by all sailors, past and present. My mother recalled how many of the WWII sailors present at the dedication of the original statue in 1987 shed a tear upon seeing the statue for the first time. That’s the beauty of the design. Sailors see themselves in the face of that statue. Many people say that the sailor looks just like the sailor in their life when they were young. It is my sincere hope that sailors experience the same rush of memories I feel every time they see or touch the Lone Sailor statue.
Wisdom and Lessons
Dan’s naval tenure was a repository of wisdom and lessons, both explicit and tacit. From the importance of teamwork to the value of perseverance, the Navy imparted lessons that transcended the confines of the ship and resonated in all walks of life.
Guidance for Aspiring Navy Personnel
Aspiring Navy personnel receive sage advice from Dan to nurture adaptability. With inevitable challenges ahead, possessing the right attitude fosters growth. Dan accentuates seeking mentorship, embracing adversities, and unwavering allegiance to navy core values.
What advice would you offer to young individuals considering the Navy?
My first advice would be work hard in high school in order to expand your options. Take advanced placement courses whenever possible. Become involved in extracurricular activities including community service. The goal should always be college and a commission as an officer. If college isn’t in the cards, think very hard about what enlisted rating interests you the most and go for it. Have several alternates in mind because the ratings are not always open to everyone. Practice being early for everything. Remember the Vince Lombardi adage that if you are five minutes early you are already ten minutes late. I told my sailors that being on station early in a squared away uniform was half the battle. That approach is analogous to the tone set by UCLA basketball coach John Wooden on the first day of practice. The very first thing he taught his players was how to properly tie their shoes. Insisting, every day, on perfection performing this simple task set the foundation for everything else moving forward. One last Rickover quote fits well here. He said, “The Devil is in the details, but so is salvation.”
The Impact of the Lone Sailor Story
Stories possess the innate power to inspire, connect, and etch legacies, a sentiment echoed by Dan. The Lone Sailor narrative mirrors his voyage and resonates with countless navy personnel. Such tales enable the wider populace to fathom the gravitas of service and the ensuing sacrifices.
Reflecting on your service and connection to the Lone Sailor, how do you hope your story impacts others?
I hope my story affirms that discipline, dedication, and desire can take you anywhere you want to go. I suppose it also highlights the serendipitous nature of my selection as the model. My story highlights the philosophy that luck is when preparation meets opportunity.
Challenges and Growth
Challenges, both at sea and ashore, were omnipresent. Yet, for Dan, they were also catalysts for growth, shaping character, fostering adaptability, and honing skills. Overcoming them was a testament to the sailor’s spirit and training.
Challenges in Service
Can you share about any challenges you faced within the Navy, especially ones influenced by internal politics or dynamics?
One of the biggest challenges related to politics and dynamics occurred during my first year as a commissioned officer. I was selected as a Limited Duty Officer with a nuclear designator in 1992. I was interviewed at Naval Reactors (NR) by five different senior managers including Admiral Bowman. I was elated to be chosen to serve in the Naval Reactors Representatives Office (NRRO) at Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard. I was assigned a desk directly outside the office of the civilian who had been in charge of the office for over a dozen years, Mike Hardin. Mr. Hardin was an intense man that screamed (A LOT!!) and chain smoked in the office despite it being against federal regulations. He was a presidential appointee for life in the Senior Executive Service (admiral equivalent) so, basically, untouchable. His management style can only be described as fear driven, intimidation reinforced by volume, and demanding and uncompromising when it came to technical matters. I spent several weeks getting indoctrinated and meeting the rest of the staff (all mustang officers too). I soon learned that I must be in the office hours before the boss (usually 0430) and the work day didn’t end until after he left for the evening. Getting across the breakers with Mr. Hardin was to be avoided at all costs. When I was finally summoned to his office, the conversation was terse and one-way. “Maloney, you don’t know anything about nuclear power and you know even less about how the shipyard works. Get out of my office and don’t return until your qualification program is completed”, he bellowed. I wondered what I had gotten myself into and would this be my life for the next five years. I learned many things from Mr. Hardin but the lessons were usually unpleasant. I will forever completely research the root requirement underlying any issue no matter how obscure or complex. Fortunately for me, I only had to spend one year under Mr. Hardin. Another member of the staff got so fed up with his treatment he resigned his commission and returned to enlisted status as a master chief. NR headquarters subsequently directed Mr. Hardin’s return to Washington DC. My new boss was also technically demanding but much better tempered.
Were there moments when you felt your contributions or experiences were overlooked or underappreciated? How did you navigate these feelings?
All in all, the NRRO job was meaningful and I felt I was making a difference. The biggest frustration was with headquarters personnel in DC. I was required to write a short letter to Admiral Bowman every week reporting what actions I had taken to improve nuclear work at the shipyard. Rarely NR headquarters action was needed but, when it was, “NAVAL REACTORS ACTION REQUESTED” was typed boldly at the top of your letter. In five years, I only requested NR action twice. The first instance involved my collateral assignment as the security manager. I questioned why there were pier-side security fences protecting the surface ships but none for the nuclear submarines. Due to space constraints, the submarine base had been granted a waiver decades ago but the provisions of the waiver were no longer being followed. Because of the shoddy physical condition of the secondary fencing cited in the waiver, I recommended the submarines be protected by new pier-side fences built according to the navy’s security regulations. NR headquarters denied my request stating I didn’t appreciate the obstacles to submarine maintenance that would be created by the fences. The other time I sought NR action was a request for changes to clarify a procedure that was always misunderstood by the submarine crews during dry-runs in preparation of the actual evolution. It was a high-risk evolution that had no margin for error. NR denied my request and simply stated the procedure worked as written. I questioned why I was their eyes in the field if my assessments were going to be ignored. I left the NRRO after fulfilling my five year commitment due to those cases and my early experiences with Mr. Hardin. I was subsequently successful in getting the procedure changed as a Lieutenant assigned to the COMSUBPAC staff. Fences were installed on the submarine piers in 2000, shortly after the bombing of the USS COLE in Yemen. Submarine maintenance continues unabated. I enjoyed the challenge of the NRRO job but it gave me a good insight into the NAVSEA bureaucratic hurdles I would eventually encounter during my civilian service in the federal government.
In hindsight, what lessons or insights have you drawn from these experiences, and how have they shaped your perspective on service and commitment?
My experiences over the decades serving the navy, both good and bad, reinforced the basic tenets of service I learned as a young petty officer. Live your life with integrity, it is your most important asset. Work hard, take accountability, and give every task your utmost effort. Always be on time and in a squared away uniform of the day. Most importantly, take care of your people.
Hello and welcome to Fleet Forward, the podcast series that explores the future of the U.S. Navy and its role in the world.
In this episode, we are going to talk about the technological advancements and design considerations in modern shipbuilding, and how they affect the Navy’s ability to maintain a credible and capable fleet in the face of growing threats and challenges.
In this episode, we will delve into the technological aspects of naval shipbuilding, and how they influence the design and performance of the Navy’s ships. We will focus on one of the most critical and expensive shipbuilding programs in the Navy’s history, the DDG(X), the Navy’s next-generation guided-missile destroyer that is expected to provide the backbone of the surface fleet and deliver new capabilities such as hypersonic missiles, lasers, and electromagnetic railguns.
The DDG(X) is one of the most critical and expensive shipbuilding programs in the Navy’s history, and it has significant implications for the Navy’s strategy, tactics, and budget. The main question we want to explore today is: What is the operational concept and mission of the DDG(X), and how will it shape the future of the U.S. Navy?
The trade-offs and opportunities involved in designing and building the Navy’s ships are the choices and consequences that the Navy has to face and accept when it decides how to allocate its resources, prioritize its requirements, and balance its needs and wants for its ships.
The trade-offs and opportunities can affect the cost, schedule, performance, and risk of the shipbuilding programs, and ultimately, the capability and readiness of the fleet.
Some examples of the trade-offs and opportunities involved in designing and building the Navy’s ships are:
Quantity vs. Quality: The Navy has to decide how many ships it needs and can afford, and how capable and advanced those ships should be. The Navy faces a trade-off between quantity and quality, as it has to balance the need for more ships with the need for more advanced and survivable ships that can operate in contested environments. The Navy also faces an opportunity to leverage new technologies and designs that can increase the quantity and quality of its ships, such as modular and scalable architectures, unmanned and autonomous systems, and additive manufacturing.
Risk vs. Reward: The Navy has to decide how much risk it is willing and able to take and manage, and how much reward it expects and seeks to achieve, when it develops and implements new technologies and capabilities for its ships. The Navy faces a trade-off between risk and reward, as it has to balance the need for innovation and experimentation with the need for reliability and certainty. The Navy also faces an opportunity to mitigate and overcome the risks and challenges associated with new technologies and capabilities, such as technical complexity, integration issues, and operational testing and evaluation.
Current vs. Future: The Navy has to decide how to address its current and future operational requirements and expectations, and how to adapt to the changing global security environment and the evolving threats and challenges from potential adversaries. The Navy faces a trade-off between current and future, as it has to balance the need for maintaining and modernizing its existing ships with the need for developing and acquiring new ships. The Navy also faces an opportunity to anticipate and prepare for the future, and to shape and influence the future, by incorporating new technologies and capabilities that can enhance its strategic and tactical advantages and options.
These are some of the trade-offs and opportunities involved in designing and building the Navy’s ships, and they are not mutually exclusive or exhaustive. The Navy has to consider and weigh them carefully and holistically, and make informed and rational decisions that can best serve its interests and values. The DDG(X) program is a case in point, as it reflects and illustrates some of the trade-offs and opportunities that the Navy faces and embraces in designing and building its next-generation guided-missile destroyer.
The DDG(X) program is the Navy’s effort to design and build a new class of large surface combatants (LSCs) that will replace the aging CG-47 Ticonderoga-class cruisers and a significant portion of the DDG-51 Arleigh Burke-class destroyers. The LSCs are the Navy’s most capable and versatile surface ships, as they can perform a wide range of missions, such as air and missile defense, anti-surface warfare, anti-submarine warfare, strike warfare, and ballistic missile defense.
The Navy’s previous force structure assessment, which was released in 2016, called for a fleet of 355 ships, including 104 LSCs, by 2030. However, the Navy’s previous shipbuilding plan, which was released in 2020, fell short of this goal, as it projected a fleet of 355 ships, including 88 LSCs, by 2034. Moreover, the shipbuilding plan was underfunded and unrealistic, as it did not account for the rising costs and delays of shipbuilding programs, the impact of inflation and maintenance, and the trade-offs between quantity and quality. On October 6, 2020, Secretary of Defense Mark Esper presented some details regarding a new Navy force-level goal, called Battle Force 2045, for achieving a fleet of more than 500 manned and unmanned ships by 2045, including 355 manned ships prior to 2035. This new force-level goal is based on an internal Office of the Secretary of Defense assessment that calls for the Navy to cut two aircraft carriers from its fleet, freeze the large surface combatant fleet of destroyers and cruisers around current levels and add dozens of unmanned or lightly manned ships to the inventory. The new force-level goal also reflects and illustrates some of the trade-offs and opportunities that the Navy faces and embraces in designing and building its next-generation ships, such as the DDG(X) destroyer.
The DDG(X) program is one of the most critical and expensive shipbuilding programs in the Navy’s history, as it is expected to provide the backbone of the surface fleet and deliver new capabilities that will enhance the Navy’s ability to operate in contested environments. The DDG(X) will be larger, more powerful, and more survivable than the DDG-51, and will be able to carry and launch hypersonic missiles, lasers, and electromagnetic railguns. The DDG(X) will also have improved seakeeping, Arctic operations, survivability, and lethality, and will be able to accommodate future technologies and missions.
The DDG(X) program is still in the early stages of development and subject to change, but the Navy estimates that each DDG(X) could cost up to $2.6 billion, while the Congressional Budget Office projects a higher cost of $3.4 billion. The Navy plans to start construction of the first DDG(X) in 2028 and deliver it in 2034, but this timeline could be affected by budget constraints, industrial capacity, and competing priorities.
Technological Advancements in the DDG(X)
The DDG(X) stands as a testament to naval modernization, according to its proponents. They point to its cutting-edge features like hypersonic missiles, advanced laser systems, and electromagnetic railguns, emphasizing how these technologies significantly enhance the Navy’s operational capabilities. However, it’s crucial to note that some analysts express concerns over the feasibility and reliability of these advanced systems, citing technological and integration challenges and cost
DDG(X)’s operational concept and mission
The DDG(X)’s operational concept and mission are based on the Navy’s vision of distributed maritime operations (DMO), which is a new way of fighting in the maritime domain that exploits the advantages of dispersed, networked, and resilient forces. DMO aims to counter the threats posed by China and Russia, which have developed anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) capabilities that can challenge the U.S. Navy’s access and freedom of maneuver in key regions, such as the Indo-Pacific and the Baltic Sea.
The DDG(X) will be a key enabler of DMO, as it will provide the surface fleet with the ability to operate in contested environments and deliver lethal and non-lethal effects across multiple domains. The DDG(X) will have four main missions, according to the Naval Sea
Systems Command
• Air and Missile Defense: The DDG(X) will be able to defend itself and other naval assets from air and missile threats, such as aircraft, cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, and hypersonic weapons. The DDG(X) will also be able to conduct offensive strikes against enemy air and missile systems, using its own hypersonic missiles, lasers, and electromagnetic railguns.
• Surface Warfare: The DDG(X) will be able to engage and destroy enemy surface ships and coastal targets, using its hypersonic missiles, lasers, electromagnetic railguns, and torpedoes. The DDG(X) will also be able to conduct maritime security operations, such as counter-piracy, counter-terrorism, and counter-proliferation.
• Undersea Warfare: The DDG(X) will be able to detect and track enemy submarines and mines, using its advanced sonar and towed array systems. The DDG(X) will also be able to attack enemy submarines and mines, using its torpedoes, lasers, and electromagnetic railguns.
• Information Warfare: The DDG(X) will be able to collect and disseminate intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) data, using its sensors, drones, and communication systems. The DDG(X) will also be able to conduct electronic warfare (EW) and cyber warfare (CW) operations, using its jammers, decoys, and hackers.
The DDG(X) will be able to perform these missions in a distributed and networked manner, meaning that it will be able to operate independently or in coordination with other naval platforms and systems, such as aircraft carriers, submarines, amphibious ships, littoral combat ships, unmanned vehicles, and satellites. The DDG(X) will also be able to adapt to different scenarios and threats, using its flexible and scalable design that can accommodate future technologies and missions.
Additional Insights on the DDG(X) Program
Recent discussions in the defense technology sphere, as highlighted in a Popular Science article, bring to light several intriguing aspects of the DDG(X) program. The article emphasizes the Navy’s vision for the DDG(X) to be equipped with powerful lasers, a significant leap from traditional destroyer armaments. This aligns with the Navy’s ongoing pursuit of cutting-edge technologies to maintain maritime superiority.
Lasers as a Game-Changer: The DDG(X) is envisioned to carry a forward-mounted 150-kilowatt laser and two rear-mounted 600-kilowatt lasers. These high-powered lasers could revolutionize naval warfare, offering rapid and efficient defense against various threats, including incoming missiles, drones, and even small manned vessels. The implementation of such advanced laser systems is a testament to the Navy’s forward-thinking approach in adapting to modern warfare scenarios.
Balancing Innovation with Practicality: While embracing innovation, the DDG(X) program also appears to be learning from past experiences, such as the challenges faced by the Zumwalt-class destroyers. Unlike the Zumwalt’s ambitious but problematic features, the DDG(X) aims for more modest, yet impactful advancements. This includes improved sensors, longer-range weapons, increased missile capacity, and an all-electric Integrated Power System, crucial for powering the new laser systems.
Efficiency and Sustainability: Another key aspect underlined in the article is the focus on efficiency and sustainability. The DDG(X) aims to achieve a 50 percent greater range and a 25 percent reduction in fuel usage compared to existing destroyers. This goal highlights the Navy’s commitment to operational efficiency and reduced logistical footprints, aligning with broader environmental and resource sustainability goals.
A Future-Proof Design: The DDG(X)’s design philosophy seems to be rooted in adaptability and future-proofing. While the hull form and specific components are yet to be finalized, there is a clear intent to create a platform that can evolve with emerging technologies and changing strategic needs. This approach ensures the DDG(X) remains relevant and formidable in the ever-evolving landscape of naval warfare.
Comparative Analysis – DDG(X) vs. Arleigh Burke-Class: Supporters of the DDG(X) highlight its advancements over the Arleigh Burke-class, focusing on enhanced stealth, advanced sensor arrays, and greater firepower with new weapon systems. They argue that the DDG(X) is a necessary evolution to maintain naval dominance. On the other hand, skeptics question whether these advancements justify the significant investment, especially considering the proven effectiveness of the existing fleet.
Land-Based Testing: A Pivotal Step in the DDG(X) Development:A recent milestone in the DDG(X) program was the inauguration of the DDG(X) Land Based Test Site (LBTS), as reported in March 2023. This facility, established by the Program Executive Office (PEO) Ships and the Naval Surface Warfare Center, Philadelphia Division (NSWCPD), represents a crucial step in advancing the design and capabilities of the DDG(X).
The Role of LBTS in Risk Reduction and Technical Oversight: The LBTS is not just a testing ground; it’s a cornerstone in ensuring the reliability and capability of the DDG(X)’s critical systems. Capt. Joseph Darcy of NSWCPD emphasized its importance, noting that the site will be instrumental in building the future of the U.S. Navy’s most advanced destroyers. The LBTS approach reflects a deliberate strategy to mitigate risks ahead of construction, aligning with the Navy’s goal of writing requirements from a place of knowledge rather than uncertainty.
Historical Context and Congressional Alignment: Rear Adm. Fred Pyle, Director, Surface Warfare Division (N96), highlighted the historical success of land-based testing for other ship classes like the Spruance and Arleigh Burke. This historical perspective underscores the value of the LBTS in comprehending new technologies and reducing risks. The alignment with Congress on the necessity of this test site reinforces its significance in the broader naval acquisition process.
Increased Capability and Operational Flexibility: The DDG(X), through developments at the LBTS, promises to offer substantial increases in range, efficiency, and time-on-station. This advancement will provide fleet commanders with greater operational flexibility and reduce the demand on fleet logistics. The emphasis on an evolutionary rather than revolutionary approach, integrating lessons learned from past shipbuilding programs, highlights the program’s pragmatic and informed development path.
Legacy of Land-Based Testing at NSWCPD: NSWCPD’s rich history in land-based testing, dating back to 1943, and its experience with the DDG 51 Class Land Based Engineering Site (LBES) positions it uniquely for the DDG(X) program. The site’s ability to test full-scale propulsion systems and other critical components plays a pivotal role in refining and perfecting the DDG(X)’s technologies.
Current Phase of the DDG(X) Program:
As the DDG(X) currently resides in the concept refinement stage, prior to entering the preliminary design phase, the LBTS stands as a testament to the program’s methodical and data-driven approach. This phase is crucial in shaping the future design and capabilities of what is set to be the country’s next enduring guided missile destroyer.
Operational Concept and Mission: Proponents of the DDG(X) underscore its strategic role within the Distributed Maritime Operations framework, envisaging it as a game-changer in various conflict scenarios. However, there are voices that caution about over-reliance on any single platform, emphasizing the need for a diverse and balanced fleet.
Trade-offs and Opportunities: The development of the DDG(X) reflects a series of strategic decisions balancing technological advancement with cost. While supporters argue that these trade-offs are essential for future readiness, critics point to budgetary constraints and the risks of focusing too heavily on high-end capabilities at the expense of other naval needs.
Audience Engagement: We recognize that this topic generates diverse opinions, and we value your perspective. Your questions and comments about the DDG(X) help deepen our discussion, offering a platform for varied viewpoints.
Challenges and Future Outlook: Despite its potential, the DDG(X) faces challenges, including budgetary pressures and technological risks. Looking forward, we explore how the program might evolve to meet the Navy’s future needs while considering the broader debates surrounding its development.
Summary and Conclusion
The DDG(X) represents a significant stride in naval innovation, yet it stands at the center of an ongoing debate. It embodies the Navy’s push towards advanced technological capabilities, but this comes with its own set of challenges and differing opinions.
Teaser for Next Episode:
In our next episode, we’ll expand our exploration to the global stage, examining how emerging technologies like the DDG(X) influence international naval dynamics. How does the evolving U.S. Navy strategy shape and respond to global maritime challenges? Stay tuned for more.
“Any man who may be asked in this century what he did to make his life worthwhile, I think can respond with a good deal of pride and satisfaction: ‘I served in the United States Navy.'” JFK
Hello, members and friends of the Americans For a Stronger Navy. Today, we take a break from our podcast series to honor those who have served our nation with extraordinary bravery and sacrifice.
As part of our Medal of Honor Monday series, we will feature a different Navy hero every week, and share their stories of valor and service with you. We hope that by doing so, we can inspire you to appreciate and support the Navy and its mission, and to learn from the examples of courage and patriotism that these heroes have set in times of war and peace.
This week, we are proud to present Navy Rear Adm. Daniel Judson Callaghan, who commanded ships fighting against a massive enemy force during one of the deadliest battles of World War II. Callaghan did not survive the ordeal, but his leadership, foresight and courage helped lead his sailors to victory. That earned him a posthumous Medal of Honor.
Callaghan was born on 26 July 1890 in Oakland, California. He graduated from the Naval Academy in 1911, and served as an engineering officer, an executive officer, and a naval aid to President Franklin D. Roosevelt. By April 1942, he was promoted to rear admiral while commanding the cruiser USS San Francisco.
By November, he was in the middle of the Naval Battle of Guadalcanal, where the Allies had retaken the island from the Japanese, who were desperately trying to take it back. On the night of 12 November, Callaghan learned that a large Japanese naval force was heading toward his position, which was in Iron Bottom Sound between Guadalcanal and Savo Island.
The Japanese ships were superior in numbers and in power, but Callaghan decided to engage them with his task force, which consisted of three light cruisers, eight destroyers and two heavy cruisers, including the San Francisco, the task force’s flagship. Hedevised a plan of attack, and led his forces into battle against tremendous odds.
The battle was chaotic and fierce, and the San Francisco was the first to face enemy ships by taking on the Hiei, a Japanese battleship, in a head-on duel. Callaghan and the San Francisco’s commanding officer, Capt. Cassin Young, were both on the ship’s bridge wing directing close-range operations. They were both killed by a shell from the Hiei, but not before they inflicted heavy damage on the enemy ship.
The blast also knocked the ship’s communications officer, Lt. Cmdr. Bruce McCandless, unconscious. When he woke up, he realized Callaghan and Young were gone, so he took command of the ship and the task force, and ordered them to continue their bombardment. He also managed to sink a destroyer and damage two other Japanese vessels.
Eventually, the Japanese admiral, who was commanding the enemy ships, lost his nerve and ordered his crews to withdraw and regroup. The battle was over, and the Allies had won a decisive victory. They had prevented the Japanese from bombarding Henderson Field, the airfield on Guadalcanal, and from delivering troops to the island’s shores. The battle was the last in a series that forced the Japanese to surrender Guadalcanal for good, handing the Allies a strategic victory.
The win came at a heavy price for the Allies, too. Nine U.S. ships were sunk while about a dozen more were damaged. More than 1,700 Americans lost their lives, including Callaghan. He was buried at sea, and his name is listed on the Wall of the Missing at the Manila Cemetery in the Philippines.
On 9 December 1942, his son, Navy Lt. j.g. Daniel J. Callaghan Jr., received the Medal of Honor on his father’s behalf from President Franklin D. Roosevelt. His citation read:
“For extraordinary heroism and conspicuous intrepidity above and beyond the call of duty during action against enemy Japanese forces off Savo Island on the night of 12-13 November 1942. Although out-balanced in strength and numbers by a desperate and determined enemy, Rear Adm. Callaghan, with ingenious tactical skill and superb coordination of the units under his command, led his forces into battle against tremendous odds, thereby contributing decisively to the rout of a powerful invasion fleet, and to the consequent frustration of a formidable Japanese offensive. While faithfully directing close-range operations in the face of furious bombardment by superior enemy fire power, he was killed on the bridge of his flagship.”
Callaghan is a true Navy hero, who exemplified the values of courage, honor, and commitment. He showed us what it means to defend our country and our freedom, even in the face of overwhelming odds and danger. He also showed us what it means to lead and inspire our fellow sailors and our Navy family, even in the midst of chaos and pain. He is a role model and an inspiration for all of us, and we are grateful for his service and his legacy.
We hope that you enjoyed this week’s Medal of Honor Monday, and that you learned something new and valuable from Callaghan’s story. Please join us next week, as we feature another Navy hero who earned the Medal of Honor. Thank you for your attention and your support. Stay safe and stay strong. This is Bill, signing off.
Hello, and welcome to the Americans for a Stronger Navy blog, where we share the latest news and insights on the U.S. Navy’s mission and operations, and how they affect our national security and interests. My name is Bill Cullifer, and I am a proud founder and supporter of this organization, which advocates for a stronger and more capable U.S. Navy that can deter and defeat any adversary, if needed and can also secure and sustain peace for ourselves and our posterity.
Today, I want to talk to you about a new and exciting technology that the U.S. Navy is exploring, and how it can enhance its logistics and operations in the global maritime domain. I am talking about the Transwing airborne drone, which is a type of unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) that can take off and land vertically, and fly horizontally with high speed and efficiency. The Transwing drone is designed and produced by PteroDynamics, a company based in Los Angeles, California.
The U.S. Navy is always looking for new and innovative ways to enhance its capabilities and to overcome its challenges. One of the latest solutions that the U.S. Navy is exploring is the Transwing drone, a unique and versatile unmanned aerial vehicle that can transform from a fixed-wing aircraft to a rotary-wing aircraft in mid-air. The Transwing drone can also be used for humanitarian, commercial, and recreational purposes, such as delivering supplies, monitoring the environment, and capturing aerial footage.
The Transwing drone has recently demonstrated its potential and performance by completing a series of sea trials with the U.S. Navy. The Transwing drone successfully launched and recovered from the deck of the USNS Burlington, a Spearhead-class expeditionary fast transport ship, sailing near Key West, Florida. The Transwing drone also successfully landed on a moving target, which is a critical skill for naval operations.
The Transwing drone is a potential game-changer for the U.S. Navy, as it offers a number of advantages over conventional drones. Some of the advantages are:
• The Transwing drone can take off and land vertically, like a helicopter, which means it does not need a runway or a catapult. This makes it more flexible and adaptable to different environments and situations.
• The Transwing drone can also fly horizontally, like a plane, which means it can fly faster and farther than a helicopter. This makes it more efficient and effective for long-distance missions and operations.
• The Transwing drone can carry up to 500 pounds of cargo, which is more than most drones of its size. This makes it more useful and practical for delivering essential supplies and equipment to remote or inaccessible locations.
• The Transwing drone can operate autonomously or remotely, which means it can reduce the workload and the risk for human operators and pilots. This makes it more reliable and safe for complex and dangerous tasks and scenarios.
According to Tim Whitehand, the vice president of engineering at PteroDynamics, the company that developed the Transwing drone, “Participating in The Hybrid Fleet Campaign Event brought us closer to our goal of providing the U.S. Navy with a flexible and scalable shore-to-ship, ship-to-ship, and ship-to-shore automated cargo delivery capability.”
However, the Transwing drone is not without its challenges and drawbacks. Some of the challenges are:
• The Transwing drone is still in its early stages of development and testing, which means it may face some technical issues and glitches that could affect its performance and functionality. For example, the Transwing drone may have difficulties in maintaining stability and control during the transition between the fixed-wing and the rotary-wing modes.
• The Transwing drone is also subject to some operational risks and uncertainties, such as weather conditions, air traffic, and enemy threats. For instance, the Transwing drone may encounter strong winds, turbulence, or interference that could hamper its flight and navigation. The Transwing drone may also be detected, tracked, or attacked by hostile forces that could compromise its mission and security.
• The Transwing drone may also raise some ethical concerns and legal implications, such as the accountability, the responsibility, and the authority of the human operators and the decision-makers. For example, the Transwing drone may pose some dilemmas and conflicts in terms of the use of force, the protection of civilians, and the respect of sovereignty. The Transwing drone may also require some regulations and standards to ensure its compliance and compatibility with the existing laws and norms.
The Transwing drone is a new and powerful solution for naval logistics and operations, as it combines the best features of both fixed-wing and rotary-wing aircraft. The Transwing drone has shown its capabilities and its potential by completing a series of sea trials with the U.S. Navy, and by demonstrating its ability to launch and recover from a ship, and to land on a moving target.
The Transwing drone also offers a number of advantages over conventional drones, such as flexibility, efficiency, utility, and reliability.
The Transwing drone is still in its development and testing phase, and it will require more research and evaluation to overcome its challenges and to optimize its performance. The Transwing drone is also a source of inspiration and motivation for the next generation of naval leaders, as it shows them the importance and relevance of the U.S. Navy’s mission and strategy, and how they can contribute and make a difference.
With a heritage rooted in my service as a US Navy Destroyer sailor and as the founder of Americans for a Stronger Navy, I carry a profound appreciation for the indispensable role of the U.S. Navy in safeguarding our nation’s security and prosperity. Having stood stem to stern with sailors of diverse backgrounds, I’ve been a witness to their commitment and the sacrifices they make for our country’s well-being. My dedication to this esteemed American institution is unwavering, and I am resolute in my commitment to maintain our Navy as the most formidable maritime force globally.
It is encouraging to note that GOP candidates Ron DeSantis and Nikki Haley in last night’s debates have both recognized the need for a “stronger Navy.” Their collective acknowledgment underscores the urgency of reinforcing our naval capabilities in the face of escalating threats from strategic adversaries like China, Russia and Iran.
Echoing Eaglen’s sentiments, I contend that an agile adaptation to the shifting maritime theater is essential. Investing in the right mix of technology, forging stronger alliances, and galvanizing public support for naval endeavors are critical steps towards this goal.
As we acknowledge the challenges outlined by Eaglen and others, we at Americans for a Stronger Navy understand the gravity of these concerns and the imperative of a strategic response.
The Path Forward
To address the multi-faceted nature of these challenges, a comprehensive strategy encompassing innovation, force structure assessment, shipyard modernization, and strengthened alliances is necessary:
Strategic Innovation: The Navy should lead in deploying advanced technologies like unmanned systems and artificial intelligence, amplifying the capabilities of our current fleet and personnel.
Force Structure Assessment: Regular evaluations of our force composition will ensure that we have the optimal blend of high-end assets and versatile platforms for varied operational demands.
Shipyard Modernization: Upgrading our shipbuilding facilities and fostering workforce proficiency is crucial for augmenting our shipbuilding capacity and minimizing maintenance delays.
Budget Certainty: It’s imperative that Congress affords the Navy a predictable and substantial budget, mitigating the inefficiencies of financial uncertainty.
Alliances and Partnerships: Fortifying our bonds with allies and encouraging their naval modernization endeavors will be pivotal for a robust collective defense.
Holistic Defense Strategy: The Navy must be integrated within a broader defense architecture that encompasses air, space, cyber, and land forces.
Education and Outreach: Fostering strong connections with educational entities will nurture the future craftsmen and leaders essential for naval supremacy.
Investing in Its People: The backbone of the U.S. Navy is its sailors. To maintain a competitive edge, we must invest in their professional growth and personal well-being. This entails comprehensive training programs, educational opportunities, career development paths, and supportive services that ensure our sailors are not only prepared to meet the demands of modern warfare but also feel valued and invested in. By doing so, we cultivate a workforce that is resilient, skilled, and deeply committed to the Navy’s mission. Our sailors deserve the best support a nation can offer, from cutting-edge training systems to robust family and health services, ensuring they are mission-ready and their families are well cared for.
Public Engagement
To cultivate enduring support for a formidable Navy, we must enhance public engagement through:
Awareness campaigns that illuminate the Navy’s role and capabilities.
Educational programs to broaden knowledge of the Navy’s contribution to national security.
Opportunities for public involvement to support the Navy’s mission.
Concluding Thoughts
In essence, we urge a united front of policymakers, industry leaders, and citizens to embrace a strategic vision that preserves the U.S. Navy’s preeminence on the global stage. With discerning evaluations and consistent investment, we can nurture a balanced, mighty naval force ready to counter any threat and uphold our national interests for future generations.
Welcome back to Fleet Forward: Charting Tomorrow’s Navy, a podcast series that explores the challenges and opportunities facing the US Navy in the 21st century.
In the previous episode, we introduced the series and explained why we decided to create it. We also discussed the format and the content of the series, and how we hope to provide you with insightful and informative analysis and commentary on the issues and trends that shape the Navy’s present and future.
The Budgetary Challenge of Naval Shipbuilding
In this episode, we will focus on one of the most important and contentious issues facing the Navy: the budgetary challenge of naval shipbuilding. How much does it cost to build a Navy? How do we balance the need for a larger and more capable fleet with the reality of fiscal constraints and competing priorities? How do we ensure that our naval force is ready and relevant for the 21st century?
These are some of the questions that we will explore in this episode, as we examine the Navy’s shipbuilding plan for fiscal year 2024, which presents three alternatives for the future fleet, each with different costs and capabilities. We will also explore how the Congressional Budget Office and Brent Sadler have critiqued the Navy’s plan and offered alternative perspectives on how to optimize the Navy’s budget and capabilities. We will also delve into the stories and people behind the Navy’s shipbuilding strategies, and reflect on their implications for our national security, economic vitality, and our role on the global stage.
The Stakeholders and Perspectives of Naval Strategy
Today we ’ll not only delve into the Navy’s shipbuilding strategies but also the stories and people behind them, reflecting on our national security, economic vitality, and our role on the global stage.
Introduction
In this episode, we will examine the fiscal landscape of naval procurement, focusing on the budgetary challenges and trade-offs that the Navy faces in pursuing its shipbuilding plans. We will also explore how the CBO and Sandler have critiqued the Navy’s strategies and offered alternative perspectives on how to optimize the Navy’s budget and capabilities.
The Navy’s Shipbuilding Budget
The Navy’s shipbuilding budget is the primary source of funding for acquiring new ships and maintaining the existing fleet. The budget is determined by the Navy’s long-term shipbuilding plan, which outlines the desired size, composition, and capabilities of the future fleet, as well as the projected costs and schedules for each ship class. The plan is updated annually and submitted to Congress as part of the President’s budget request.
The current shipbuilding plan, released in December 2022, covers the period from 2023 to 2052 and aims to achieve a fleet of 355 ships by 2035 and 400 ships by 2052. The plan also introduces the DDG(X) program, which is intended to replace the aging Arleigh Burke-class destroyers with a more advanced and capable design. The plan estimates that the Navy will need an average of $33 billion per year (in 2022 dollars) for shipbuilding over the next 30 years, which is 50 percent more than the historical average of $22 billion per year over the past 30 years.
The CBO’s Analysis of the Navy’s Shipbuilding Plan
The CBO, an independent and nonpartisan agency that provides budgetary and economic analysis to Congress, has conducted a detailed assessment of the Navy’s shipbuilding plan and its implications for the federal budget and the Navy’s capabilities. The CBO’s report, released in October 2023, raises several issues and challenges with the plan, such as:
• The plan’s cost estimates are optimistic and likely to increase over time, due to factors such as inflation, technical risks, and schedule delays. The CBO projects that the plan will actually cost an average of $40 billion per year (in 2022 dollars) for shipbuilding over the next 30 years, which is 21 percent more than the Navy’s estimate and 82 percent more than the historical average.
• The plan’s funding requirements are unsustainable and unrealistic, given the competing demands and constraints on the federal budget. The CBO estimates that the plan will consume an average of 13 percent of the total defense budget over the next 30 years, which is significantly higher than the historical average of 9 percent. The plan will also require increasing the Navy’s share of the defense budget from 28 percent in 2022 to 34 percent in 2052, which will likely entail reducing the funding for other military services or increasing the overall defense budget.
• The plan’s fleet size and composition goals are ambitious and questionable, given the operational and strategic environment. The CBO questions the rationale and feasibility of achieving a 400-ship fleet by 2052, which would be the largest fleet since the end of World War II. The CBO also suggests that the plan may not adequately account for the changing nature of naval warfare and the emergence of new threats and technologies, such as cyberattacks, hypersonic weapons, and unmanned systems.
The CBO’s report concludes that the Navy’s shipbuilding plan is not a viable or effective strategy for meeting the nation’s naval needs and recommends that the Navy and Congress reconsider the plan’s assumptions, objectives, and priorities. The CBO also offers some alternative shipbuilding scenarios that would achieve different fleet sizes and compositions at lower costs than the Navy’s plan.
Sandler’s Critique of the Navy’s Shipbuilding Plan
Sandler, a former U.S. Naval Captain and author of U.S. Power in the 21st Century, has also published a blog post in November 2023, criticizing the Navy’s shipbuilding plan and proposing a different approach to naval strategy and shipbuilding. Sandler’s main arguments are:
• The Navy’s shipbuilding plan is based on a flawed and outdated paradigm of naval power, which emphasizes quantity over quality, platforms over payloads, and conventional over asymmetric warfare. Sandler argues that the Navy is stuck in a Cold War mentality and fails to adapt to the changing realities and challenges of the 21st century, such as the rise of China, the proliferation of anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) capabilities, and the diffusion of power and influence.
• The Navy’s shipbuilding plan is wasteful and inefficient, as it invests in expensive and vulnerable ships that are not suited for the current and future threat environment. Sandler singles out the DDG(X) program as an example of a misguided and unnecessary project, which he calls a “gold-plated boondoggle” that will cost billions of dollars and provide marginal benefits. Sandler contends that the DDG(X) is a redundant and obsolete design that will be outmatched by cheaper and more effective weapons and systems, such as missiles, drones, and submarines.
• The Navy’s shipbuilding plan is counterproductive and dangerous, as it provokes and escalates tensions with potential adversaries, especially China, and undermines the stability and security of the international order. Sandler warns that the Navy’s pursuit of a 400-ship fleet and the DDG(X) program will trigger a naval arms race and increase the risk of conflict and miscalculation in the Indo-Pacific region. Sandler also cautions that the Navy’s plan will alienate and weaken the U.S.’s allies and partners, who may not share the same vision or interests as the U.S. and may not be willing or able to contribute to the Navy’s ambitious and costly goals.
Sandler’s blog post concludes that the Navy’s shipbuilding plan is a strategic blunder and a fiscal disaster that will undermine the U.S.’s naval power and global leadership. Sandler advocates for a radical shift in the Navy’s mindset and approach, which he calls “smart power”. Sandler’s smart power concept is based on four principles:
• Quality over quantity: The Navy should focus on developing and acquiring fewer but more capable and versatile ships that can deliver multiple effects and missions across the spectrum of conflict.
• Payloads over platforms: The Navy should prioritize investing in and deploying advanced and adaptable weapons and systems, such as missiles, drones, and cyber capabilities, that can enhance the lethality and survivability of the existing and future fleet.
• Asymmetric over conventional warfare: The Navy should embrace and exploit the opportunities and advantages of asymmetric warfare, such as stealth, speed, deception, and innovation, that can offset and counter the A2/AD capabilities of potential adversaries.
• Cooperation over competition: The Navy should seek and strengthen cooperation and coordination with the U.S.’s allies and partners, as well as engage and deter potential adversaries, through diplomacy, deterrence, and dialogue, rather than confrontation, coercion, and conflict.
Conclusion
In this episode, we have explored the fiscal landscape of naval procurement and the budgetary challenges and trade-offs that the Navy faces in pursuing its shipbuilding plans. We have also examined how the CBO and Sandler have critiqued the Navy’s strategies and offered alternative perspectives on how to optimize the Navy’s budget and capabilities. In the next episode, we will delve into the technological advancements and design considerations in modern shipbuilding, with a spotlight on the DDG(X) program. Stay tuned for more insights and analyses on the Navy’s path forward.
As Americans for a Stronger Navy, we stand with our brave sailors and Marines who are serving in the Middle East amid the ongoing turmoil and violence. We salute their courage and dedication to protect our nation and our allies from the threats posed by those that would harm us and we pray for their safety.
In a rare and bold move, the US military announced on Sunday that an Ohio-class guided missile submarine had arrived in the Middle East, a clear message of deterrence to our regional adversaries according to press reports.
The Ohio-class submarines are among the most formidable weapons in the US arsenal, capable of carrying up to 154 Tomahawk cruise missiles, each with a 1,000-pound high-explosive warhead. These submarines can deliver a lot of firepower very rapidly and accurately, and no opponent of the US can ignore their presence.
The announcement of the submarine’s arrival in the Middle East is unusual and significant, as the US military rarely discloses the movements or operations of its fleet of ballistic and guided missile subs. The deployment comes as the Biden administration is trying to avoid a broader conflict amid the Israel-Hamas war, and to prevent Iran and its allies from opening new fronts against Israel or attacking US bases and interests in the region.
The submarine’s location and range suggest that it is focused on the threats in and around the Mediterranean, where Hezbollah, the Lebanese militant group backed by Iran, has fired rockets and drones at northern Israel, and exchanged fire with Israeli forces on the border.
The submarine could also target the Houthi rebels in Yemen, another Iran-supported group that has launched missiles and drones at Israel from across the Red Sea.
Additionally, the submarine could deter or respond to any aggression from Iran itself, or from its proxies in Syria and Iraq, where they have been firing rockets and drones at US military bases.
The presence of the submarine in the Middle East has important implications for the regional security and stability, as it demonstrates the US commitment and resolve to defend its allies and interests, and to deter or retaliate against any attack.
The submarine also adds to the existing US naval assets in the area, including two carrier strike groups and an amphibious ready group, creating a formidable force that can project power and influence across the region. The submarine’s deployment could also affect the ongoing negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program, as it shows the US willingness and ability to use military force if diplomacy fails.
The submarine’s deployment demonstrates the US commitment and resolve to defend its allies and interests, and to deter or retaliate against any attack. The submarine also adds to the existing US naval assets in the area, creating a formidable force that can project power and influence across the region.
The Ohio-class submarines and the US Navy are vital for the national security and the global peace, as they protect our freedom, preserve our economic prosperity, and keep the seas open and free.
U.S. Has 4 Objectives in Middle Eastsays DOD
The Defense Department currently has four lines of effort in the Middle East, said Pentagon Press Secretary Air Force Brig. Gen. Pat Ryder, who briefed the media today.
Protection of U.S. forces and citizens in the region.
Flow of critical security assistance to Israel as it defends against further Hamas terrorist attacks. Coordination with the Israelis to help secure the release of hostages held by Hamas, to include American citizens.
Strengthening of force posture across the region to deter any state or nonstate actors from escalating the crisis beyond Gaza.
Strengthened force posture includes the deployment of the USS Gerald R. Ford and USS Dwight D. Eisenhower Carrier Strike Groups, which are currently in the U.S. Central Command area, along with an Ohio-class submarine.
Over the past few weeks there have been attacks by Iranian proxy groups at al-Asad air base, Iraq, and al-Tanf, Syria, on U.S. forces there, Ryder said.
The attacks, by drones and missiles, resulted in several dozen injuries, including a mix of minor injuries and traumatic brain injuries, he said.
Some of those injured didn’t immediately report their condition, he said.
“The reporting data is highly dependent on self-reporting when individual injuries are not visually evident to medical personnel providing care directly following an incident,” he said.
As Americans for a Stronger Navy, we support and advocate for a strong and modern naval force that can meet the challenges and opportunities of the 21st century.
We urge you to join us in our mission and to help us spread the word about the importance and value of the US Navy. Together, we can make a difference for our nation and our world through peace by strength.