Tag: U.S. Navy

Posted on

Fleet Forward: Charting Tomorrow’s Navy –  Episode 3: Technological Advancements and Design Considerations in Modern Shipbuilding

Introduction

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 the previous episodes, we introduced the series and explained why we decided to create it and why it matters. 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. In the second episode, we explored the budgetary challenge of naval shipbuilding, and how it affects the Navy’s shipbuilding plan and force structure goal.

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. 

Posted on

Charting a Course for a Stronger and Competitive U.S. Navy

Image: US Navy

Introduction

Bill Cullifer, Founder

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.

Mackenzie Eaglen, in her American Enterprise Institute Op-Ed, has astutely pinpointed the growing challenges confronting the U.S. Navy, advocating for fleet modernization, technological investment, and reinforced alliances to sustain our maritime dominance.

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.

Posted on

Fleet Forward: Charting Tomorrow’s Navy: Episode 2: The Budgetary Challenge of Naval Shipbuilding

Bill Cullifer, Founder

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. 

With this series, inspired by our shared values and patriotic spirit, we aim to complement our upcoming December podcast series ‘Charting the Course: Navigating the Future of American Naval Power’

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.

sources 

https://www.cbo.gov/publication/59708

Posted on

US Sends Powerful Message of Deterrence to Iran and Its Allies with Nuclear Submarine in Middle East

A picture shared by US Central Command appears to show a guided missile submarine in the Suez Canal passing under the Al Salam Bridge northeast of Cairo.

Introduction

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 East says 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.

Posted on

Honoring the Brave: Remembering YN3 Shingo Alexander Douglass

Yeoman 3rd Class Shingo Douglass, a nHonoring the Brave: Remembering YN3 Shingo Alexander Douglassative from Oceanside, Calif., during a memorial service at the U.S. Navy Memorial hosted by Honor Flight Maine, Oct. 28, 2023.

Introduction

The sea has always been an unforgiving frontier, demanding respect and vigilance from those who traverse its expanse. The men and women of the United States Navy stand as guardians over these waters, often paying the ultimate price in service to their nation. This truth was solemnly underscored as we gathered to honor the memory of Yeoman 3rd Class Shingo Alexander Douglass at the U.S. Navy Memorial.

Moment of Silence

Before delving into the heart of our narrative, let us observe a moment of silence. A moment to reflect on the sacrifice of YN3 Douglass and his six fellow sailors who perished on June 17, 2017, in the collision between the USS Fitzgerald (DDG 62) and the MV ACX Crystal.

Why This Matters

It is imperative to recognize these acts of valor and the profound losses that accompany them. In doing so, we not only honor the fallen but also reinforce the backbone of the values upon which our Navy and nation are built: courage, honor, and commitment.

Story

The memorial service held on October 28, 2023, was not just an act of remembrance but also a testament to the enduring bonds of military service. It connected generations, from the World War II veterans to the family of YN3 Douglass—his father and grandfather, who have both known the weight of service and sacrifice.

Stephen Douglass, YN3’s father, eloquently captured the mix of pride and grief felt by those left behind, reminding us of the personal stories etched into the collective memory of our military heritage. His presence, along with that of Carl Douglass, a Purple Heart recipient, reminded us that service is often a shared family journey.

The Honor Flight Network plays a pivotal role in this narrative, enabling veterans to witness how their legacy is honored and remembered in the nation’s capital. The inscription of YN3 Douglass’s name on a seat at the Navy Memorial auditorium serves as a permanent reminder of his sacrifice.

Conclusion

As Americans for a Stronger Navy, we believe that every sailor’s story writes a part of our national identity. The memorial for YN3 Shingo Alexander Douglass serves as a bridge between past, present, and future sailors. It is a call to honor, to remember, and to ensure that the sacrifices made in service to our nation are never forgotten.

An official website of the United States government and programs like the Honor Flight are crucial in this mission.

Our sailors are the steel spine of our nation’s defense. In the memory of YN3 Douglass and all those who have served, let us strive to fortify that spine, ensuring a Navy—and a nation—that remains ever strong, vigilant, and worthy of their sacrifice.

Posted on

The Lone Star Flight Museum: A Must-See Destination for Navy Lovers and WW2 History Buffs, A Testimonial by Dale A. Jenkins

Dale A. Jenkins, Senior Advisor – Americans for a Stronger Navy and son Dave Jenkins at Lone Star Flight Museum. Houston, Texas. They stand in front of a Douglas SBD Dauntless, a World War II American naval scout plane and dive bomber that was manufactured by Douglas Aircraft from 1940 through 1944.
Bill Cullifer, Founder

If you are a fan of aviation and history, you will love the Lone Star Flight Museum in Houston, says American for a Stronger Navy senior advisor, Dale A. Jenkins, a former Naval officer and author of Diplomats and Admirals, a book that explores the diplomatic and military aspects of World War II.

The museum displays more than 24 historically significant aircraft, and many artifacts related to the history of flight. Among its collection, there are several U.S. Navy planes that have served in various wars and missions, and tell the stories of courage and sacrifice of their pilots and crews.

Douglas SBD Dauntless is a World War II American naval scout plane and dive bomber that was manufactured by Douglas Aircraft from 1940 through 1944 sturdy enough for pilots to dive at a near-vertical 80 degrees. The US Navy’s primary dive-bomber at the war’s start, the bomber earned its reputation—and helped earn victory—at the 1942 Battle of Midway, sinking four Japanese carriers.

One of these planes is the Douglas SBD Dauntless, a dive bomber that played a crucial role in the Battle of Midway in 1942. The Dauntless was of particular interest to Dale, who has done extensive research on the Battle of Midway and the role of the Dauntless in turning the tide of the war in favor of the U.S. Dale said that it was touching to be there with his son, who shares his passion for aviation and history. “It was a wonderful experience to share with my son. He was fascinated by the planes and their stories,” said Dale.

Another plane is the Grumman F6F Hellcat, a fighter that dominated the skies over Iwo Jima and Okinawa. The plane on display at the museum was flown by David McCampbell, the Navy’s top ace of World War II, who shot down 34 enemy planes and received the Medal of Honor.

The Grumman F6F Hellcat is an American carrier-based fighter aircraft of World War II. Designed to replace the earlier F4F Wildcat and to counter the Japanese Mitsubishi A6M Zero, it was the United States Navy’s dominant fighter in the second half of the Pacific War.
The Grumman TBF Avenger (designated TBM[1] for aircraft manufactured by General Motors) is an American World War II-era torpedo bomber developed initially for the United States Navy and Marine Corps, and eventually used by several air and naval aviation services around the world.

A third plane is the Grumman TBM Avenger, a torpedo bomber that was flown by future president George H.W. Bush. The plane on display at the museum was flown by Paul Newman, a pilot who participated in the Battle of Leyte Gulf and was shot down by a kamikaze.

A fourth plane is the Douglas A-1 Skyraider, an attack aircraft that served in Korea and Vietnam. The plane on display at the museum was flown by Ed Olander, a pilot who flew over 200 combat missions and rescued a downed airman in enemy territory.

These are just some examples of the U.S. Navy planes that you can see and learn more about at the Lone Star Flight Museum. The museum also offers flight experiences for those who want to feel what it is like to fly in a vintage aircraft.

“The Lone Star Flight Museum is an amazing place to see and appreciate the history and heritage of U.S.Naval aviation. The planes are not only museum pieces, but also flying legends that inspire us to be stronger and better,” said Dale. “I highly recommend it to our members and friends of the Americans for a Stronger Navy and anyone who loves our Navy and our country.”

In early 2024, together with Dale, we will be shining a spotlight on the courageous pilots at Midway with our Wings of Victory series, which will feature interviews, stories, photos, videos, and more about these heroic aviators.

We owe the pilots at Midway and elsewhere a debt of gratitude for their service and sacrifice for our freedom and security.

If you are interested in visiting the Lone Star Flight Museum or learning more about our Wings of Victory series, you can find more information on on their website by clicking here.

Thank you for your support for a stronger Navy.

Posted on

How the Navy’s Unmanned Boat Made History in the Middle East Region

An unmanned U.S. Navy vessel fired “lethal munitions” in international waters near the Middle East on Oct. 23, 2023.
U.S. NAVAL FORCES CENTRAL COMMAND / U.S. 5TH FLEET

Dear Members and Friends,

Some news that demonstrates the U.S. Navy’s unmatched capabilities and leadership in the maritime domain.

On October 23, 2023, an unmanned U.S. Navy vessel successfully fired lethal munitions in international waters in the Middle East, marking the first time such an exercise has been carried out in the region. This unprecedented drill, dubbed Digital Talon, was conducted by the Navy’s Task Force 59, a team focusing on unmanned and artificial intelligence technologies.

Why Unmanned Systems Matter

Unmanned systems are a key component of the Navy’s strategy to respond to the growing threats from China, Russia, Iran, and other adversaries in the maritime domain. Unmanned systems offer the Navy numerous advantages, such as:
• Reduced personnel and manpower requirements
• Reduced risk to personnel
• Lower operating costs
• Greater persistence and range
• Enhanced speed and accuracy of data processing
• Greater access to denied areas
• Faster decision cycle

By integrating unmanned systems with manned platforms and networks, the Navy can create true human-machine teaming that is ubiquitous across the fleet. These systems can enhance the Navy’s lethality, survivability, and agility in both peacetime and wartime operations.

How Digital Talon Worked

During Digital Talon, the Navy used a method called manned-unmanned teaming, which involves the coordination and collaboration between manned and unmanned assets to achieve a common objective. In this case, the objective was to identify and target simulated hostile forces using an unmanned surface vehicle (USV) equipped with a Lethal Miniature Aerial Missile System (LMAMS).

The USV, a MARTAC T-38 Devil Ray, was remotely controlled by a human operator ashore, who made the engagement decisions. The USV used its sensors and artificial intelligence to detect, track, and classify potential targets.

The USV then launched a missile from its LMAMS, which is a small, lightweight, and low-cost weapon system that can be mounted on various platforms. The missile successfully scored direct hits each time, destroying the target boat.

The entire process was overseen by Vice Adm. Brad Cooper, the commander of U.S. Naval Forces Central Command, U.S. 5th Fleet, and Combined Maritime Forces. He praised the achievement as a significant step forward and a demonstration of the Navy’s next-level capabilities.

What This Means for th Future

Digital Talon is the second time in as many months that the Navy has successfully demonstrated its unmanned and artificial intelligence capabilities in the Middle East.

In September, the Navy used 12 different unmanned platforms to track Iranian Navy and Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy ships and small boats over the course of several days. These exercises show that the Navy is not only developing and testing new technologies, but also applying them to real-world scenarios and challenges.

The Navy is committed to investing in advanced autonomy, robust networks, and unmanned systems to build a more lethal and distributed naval force for the future. The Navy is also working closely with its allies and partners to share best practices and lessons learned from these experiments. By doing so, the Navy is strengthening regional maritime security and enhancing deterrence against malign activity.

We at the Americans for a Stronger Navy are proud to support the Navy’s efforts to innovate and adapt to the changing security environment. We believe that unmanned systems are a vital part of the Navy’s arsenal and a force multiplier for our Sailors and Marines.

We urge you to join us in advocating for the continued funding and development of these systems, which will ensure the Navy’s dominance and readiness in the 21st century.
Thank you for your attention and support.

Posted on

Legacy Reborn: The New USS Arizona and Its Historic Significance

USS Arizona is Navy Cmdr. Tom Digan,

Hello, everyone. Today, I have some exciting news to share with you: the U.S. Navy has named a captain for a new submarine named USS Arizona, the first ship to bear the name since the loss of the battleship at Pearl Harbor in 1941.

Why this matters

The USS Arizona battleship was one of the most iconic and tragic symbols of World War II. On December 7, 1941, it was attacked and sunk by Japanese aircraft, killing 1,177 sailors and Marines on board. The ship remains at the bottom of Pearl Harbor as a national memorial and a resting place for the fallen heroes.

The new USS Arizona is a Virginia-class nuclear submarine, which is the most advanced attack submarine in the world, with stealth, firepower, and maneuverability. The new USS Arizona is the first U.S. naval vessel to bear the name since the loss of the battleship at Pearl Harbor, and the second Block V boat, which will feature the Virginia Payload Module, enabling it to deliver a wider variety of capabilities.

The new USS Arizona was authorized for construction on December 2, 2019, and its keel was laid on December 7, 2022, at the Quonset Point Facility of General Dynamics Electric Boat in North Kingston, RI.

The sponsor for the new USS Arizona is Nikki Stratton, the granddaughter of Donald Stratton, a Seaman First Class aboard the battleship USS Arizona who survived the attack and reenlisted to serve in World War II. He died in February 2020 at the age of 97.

The first commanding officer of the new USS Arizona is Navy Cmdr. Tom Digan, who was named on October 30, 2023, marking the first time in over eight decades that the U.S. Navy has named a skipper for a ship of the same namesake.

What others are saying:

• Rear Adm. Jonathan Rucker, Program Executive Office, Attack Submarines: “The boats in this class are the most advanced attack submarines ever designed. Their stealth, firepower, and maneuverability are superior to every other attack submarine force in the world. Additionally, Arizona will be the first of the Virginia-class equipped with the Virginia Payload Module, enabling the submarine to deliver an even wider variety of capabilities.”

• Nikki Stratton, sponsor for the new USS Arizona: “The future is unknown. But one thing we do know is that the crew of SSN 803 will stand watch, patrolling the ocean’s depths … She will strike fear into the hearts of our enemies and become a beacon of hope.”

• Cmdr. Tom Digan, first commanding officer of the new USS Arizona: “It is an honor and privilege to be selected as commanding officer of Pre-Commissioning Unit Arizona. I am humbled by this opportunity to lead such an amazing crew as we bring this incredible warship to life.”

This news is a testament to the strength and resilience of our Navy and our nation. The new USS Arizona will carry on the legacy of its predecessor and honor its memory by defending our freedom and security.

I am proud and grateful for the new USS Arizona and its crew. I hope you are too.

Posted on

Rediscovering the Battle of Midway: Unveiling History Beneath the Waves

The USS Yorktown was one of seven large vessels that sank during the Battle of Midway. Ocean Exploration Trust / NOAA

Introduction: Welcome to our latest post. Today, we dive into the depths of World War II history, exploring the pivotal Battle of Midway through the lens of recent underwater archaeological discoveries. This intriguing story, originally reported by Sarah Kuta for Smithsonian Magazine, offers fresh insights into one of the most significant naval battles of the 20th century.

The Battle of Midway: A Turning Point in WWII In June 1942, the Pacific Ocean was the stage for a critical showdown between American and Japanese forces. The Battle of Midway, lasting four intense days, turned the tide of the war in the Pacific. While it resulted in the tragic loss of lives and significant material damage on both sides, it marked a crucial victory for the United States and hindered Japanese expansion.

A Deep-Sea Voyage into History Recently, the non-profit Ocean Exploration Trust embarked on an ambitious project to explore the watery graves of three aircraft carriers from the battle: the USS Yorktown of the United States and the IJN Akagi and IJN Kaga of Japan. These explorations, taking place more than 16,000 feet below the surface within the Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument, are revealing new details about these historic vessels and the battle itself.

Exploring the Iconic Battle of Midway

Uncovering the Past: The Ocean Exploration Trust’s Findings Using advanced remotely operated underwater vehicles, researchers captured stunning images and videos of the wreckage. They were able to closely examine features like the anti-aircraft guns, still ominously pointing skyward, offering a glimpse into the battle’s final moments. Remarkably, this marked the first time the Akagi was seen since it sank, though it was located in 2019, and the first live observation of the Yorktown since its discovery in 1998.

Historical Context: The Strategic Importance of Midway The Battle of Midway, fought near Midway Atoll—a key U.S. naval base some 1,000 nautical miles northwest of Honolulu—was pivotal. U.S. codebreakers had deciphered Japanese messages, giving American forces a crucial advantage. This intelligence enabled them to thwart Japan’s plans to occupy Midway and use it as a base for further assaults, most notably against Pearl Harbor.

The Legacy of Midway: Remembering and Learning The underwater survey and the subsequent findings are more than just a technological achievement. They symbolize the enduring significance of the Battle of Midway in U.S.-Japanese relations, turning a once bitter conflict into a collaborative effort for understanding and remembrance. It’s a powerful reminder of how history shapes our present and future, encouraging us to honor the sacrifices made during those turbulent times.

Conclusion: As we reflect on these revelations from beneath the Pacific, it’s important to acknowledge the role such discoveries play in keeping history alive. The Battle of Midway remains a testament to the bravery, strategy, and sacrifice of those involved. In exploring these wrecks, we not only pay homage to the past but also learn invaluable lessons for the future.

Thank you for reading and for your continued support of the Americans for a Stronger Navy. We invite you to join us in exploring more of our naval history and its ongoing influence on current defense strategies.

Check out, “Wings of Victory: How Naval Aviators Transformed WWII from Battleships to the Skies and won the Pacific War” is a collaborative exploration into WWII with Dale A. Jenkins and the Americans for a Stronger Navy. A Blog Series. February 7. 2024. The cost is free. Click here for additional event detail and registration.

Posted on

The Sinking Submarine Industrial Base: Voices That Matter

Bill Cullifer, Founder

This article draws heavily upon the insightful and meticulously researched paper by Emma Salisbury, who shed light on the intricate challenges and opportunities facing the U.S. submarine industrial base with remarkable clarity.

Submarines are indeed an integral part of the U.S. Navy’s future. Many agree that the United States needs more submarines if it is to deter China in the Indo-Pacific and maintain its maritime superiority. 

Submarines are stealthy, survivable, and lethal platforms that can operate in contested waters and deliver precision strikes, intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, and special operations.

However, the U.S. submarine industrial base is facing serious challenges that threaten its ability to deliver the submarines that the Navy needs on time and on budget. 

The submarine industrial base consists of two main shipbuilders — General Dynamics Electric Boat and Huntington Ingalls Industries’ Newport News Shipbuilding — and hundreds of suppliers across the country that provide parts, materials, and services for submarine construction and maintenance.

The submarine industrial base is struggling to keep up with the growing demand for submarines, which has increased from one Virginia-class attack submarine per year in 2012 to two per year in 2021, plus the addition of the Columbia-class ballistic missile submarine program, which is the Navy’s top acquisition priority.

The Navy has recognized the importance of stabilizing and strengthening the submarine industrial base and has taken some actions to address its challenges. However, these actions are not enough.

The submarine industrial base needs more support and investment from Congress, the Department of Defense (DoD), and from our view, especially from the American public if we’re going to get anywhere. Decisions surrounding our national defense and industrial capabilities shouldn’t just be left to policymakers in isolation.

In our history, we’ve seen time and again the profound impact public opinion and support can have on shaping policy decisions. For our submarine industrial base and broader naval defense, public support isn’t just a nice-to-have; it’s the lynchpin.

While experts can identify problems and policymakers can draft solutions, it’s the collective will of the American people that determines our nation’s priorities. 

By becoming informed, involved, and vocal about the importance of a strong and capable Navy, the American public can be the driving force that ensures our naval defense remains robust and prepared for the challenges of the 21st century.

We echo the sentiments of urging Congress and DoD, and we further advocate for the American public to support and invest in the submarine industrial base.

Specifically, we need to:

  • Raise awareness of the imminent risks facing our naval defense. The U.S. Navy’s capability to deter potential threats, maintain maritime superiority, and ensure national security is at stake. Delays and shortcomings in our submarine and surface fleet programs could leave us vulnerable in a rapidly evolving global security environment. 
  • It’s essential to mobilize public support now for increased funding for both submarine and surface fleet programs alike, including infrastructure, support services, and the often overlooked but equally important logistics.
  • Invest in education and training in career techical education for shipyard building and management in areas such as welding pipefitting and for naval STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) fields. Beyond immediate funding and infrastructural upgrades, there’s an underlying need to address the skills gap.

If you are interested in learning more about the industrial base, the need for education and training, or supporting our cause, you can find more information at StrongerNavy.org.