This week we will will have another full-scope Midrats.Please join me with with our panel of Galrahn of InformationDissemination and EagleOne ofEagleSpeak as we take on the latest Navy-Marine Corps team issues this Sunday, 1700R/2200Z/5pm EST.
No guests this week - just all Navy milblog radio. You can join us live via the showpage- where you can also roll in with the usual suspects during the live-show chatroom that gives you the opportunity to share your thoughts on the ongoing conversation and feed the panel your question and/or observations.
If you can't join us live though - remember that you can get to the archives at the blogtalkradio showpage, or subscribe and download the podcast on iTunes
I strongly suggest that one topic of discussion be the good Capt. Rubel, Ret. assertion that our plan should be to put many small assets forward and the CVNs far back. I believe this a premise not based in platform fact, to wit:
ReplyDelete1) A small platform (nominally a ship) is defined by it's own sphere of influence, which is limited to it's offensive weapons arc, it's defensive weapons arc, and it's sustainability. You can call it a footprint.
2) a platform with a small footprint will shine brightly in a small place for a very short time. Swarming tactics are defeated by swarming stand-off tactics. You can kill a lot of hornets with several cans of bug spray at the ready.
3) The most effective way to contain the PLAN is with SSNs. The PLAN sub force is (comparatively speaking) low tech and not much in numbers, either. Once the SSNs and SSBNs are defeated, the surface force is meat on the table.
4) Small platforms can either carry lot's of AAM missiles or lots of ASMs but not both. Their size forces them to carry a small amount of weapons.
5) Worst of all, we don't have squat for an anti-ship missile. Harpoon is vastly inefficient and it's old tech. It's stupid of us to not build a better, faster, smarter ASM. Please don't say, "Penguin", because that's like carrying a derringer into a street gunfight. You'll get a shot off but you won't live to enjoy it.
Rushing small(ish) surface warships into range of land based aviation... can you say Falklands redux? And PRC has much more ASuW assets than Argentina. I am not sure of their ASW status but probably it isn't even anywhere near old Soviet one...
ReplyDeleteByron, I don't know, not having sat around in ready rooms, but I suspect the primary anti-ship missile is going to be the AGM-88. Surface forces that can't radiate without getting shot in the face are going to have a hard time controlling anything in their footprint.
ReplyDeleteHARM does an excellent job shooting their ship-board eyes out...it does not sink the ship. HARM is a blast-fragmentation warhead.
ReplyDeleteWe need something with a 100+mile range, supersonic, with IR/radar and freakin' agile. Sub-sonic straight and level won't get it.
Why not just license build Sunburn? Would be great ego-propper for Russia and good thing for building up mutual cooperation. BTW supersonic is hard to couple with agile - the faster you go, the harder is to turn. Still, the faster the missile, the harder it is to shoot down.
ReplyDeleteNo Need to worry about LCS-1 class being sunk:
ReplyDeletesee this link and you will realize why no USS FREEDOM CLASS warship will ever be sunk by overseas enemies:
http://www.defensedaily.com/sectors/business/Freedom-Returns-To-Service-After-Repairs-Made-To-Downed-Diesel-Generators_9551.html
Since Nov 2008 commissioning, LCS-1 has essentially been rebuilt, overhauled, updated, and tested and retested to death. Yet last week, she refueled (no surprize) down in the Carribean. Since LCS-1 really needed to run 3 SSDG's if her massive COMM, COMBAT SYSTEM, COMMAND AND CONTROL was all up and running, NAVSEA is installing much larger capacity diesel generators onboard LCS-3. Guess what is gradually happening to this class of warship ?
slightly heavier generators, which use more fuel, only add to this already overweight corvette. Recent photo's show LCS-1 riding pretty low in the water. So much for the semi-planing hull form. The Navy's new RFP includes optional additional radar ( adding much more weight both below decks and topside): SPQ-9B is optional in the future. It cannot replace the EADS TRS-3D which is for longer range searching above the horizon searching done by SPQ-9B. Besides PMS-501 is considering replacing TRS-3D with a British THALES radar topside. There are so many topside blockages that LOCKHEED MARTIN must do a full topside redesign. No doubt, much increased costs, weight, etc.
Final result ? LCS-3 and beyond will soon approach the weight and max speed of a FRIGATE ! Already exceeding the costs of a frigate, but missing any sonar, decent weapons, and staying power once on station overseas. Add in the two crews, and you really wonder if any personnel costs are going to be realized ever. Add BLUE and GOLD crews 80 or 90 times 2 = 160 to 180 crew size. Gee, even the new COAST GUARD WMSL's are crewed at just over 100 total (4,100 tons) although they have nice staterooms for up to 148 crew total. HULL #5 of the WMSL's is in the President's budget for next year at $535 million total fixed price.
LCS-1 class will break down before they ever transit 8,000 miles overseas. Perhaps PMS-501 should just devote all the efforts to their other project: DDG-1000.
Ewok, the USN actually bought some KH31s to use as targets to mimic KH31s. But they quit buying them as they weren't realisitic enough!
ReplyDeleteByron, after a ship's sensors are shut down by HARMs, they'll be pretty easy pickin's for a Harp.
ReplyDeleteHaving said that, in littoral warfare, the Navy is going to be VERY reluctant to use any weapon that they can't command guide all the way to impact. The risk of hitting a neutral merchie with a Harp or other ASM is fairly high, and the downside is huge.
AWESOME MIDRATS!!! Dr. Norman Friedman was on today and it was terrific. Best ever, we could have talked for hours. Thanks to Phib and Mary Ripley for getting a very gracious Naval expert on board. Sid, you bum, you should have been there, Dr. Friedman was asked what his opinion of LCS and the very FIRST thing he said, "why does it have to go so fast?". It was a total validation of everything we've had to say about LCS.
ReplyDeleteThat was outstanding!
ReplyDeleteByron...for full disclosure...they met at our conference...Friedman's participation was surely the result of Raymond and Phib's conversations there.
Please get Friedman back on...he had so many great insights. I hope there will be a transcript in addition to the download!
One wonders if there's a way to make the show longer....yeah, yeah, I know, I know :) Mary, I'm sure you got Dr. Friedman in an arm lock and dragged him over to Phib and Raymond. ;)
ReplyDeleteI am working...Can't get into the application here ;-(
ReplyDelete