When you consider all that happy talk as Admiral Roughead was going out the door about making sure ships can make it 30, 35, 50, 75 years - this data point should provide the real Roughead legacy, in a fashion.
Via a forwarded email, Names removed to protect pretty much everyone involved. In part;
Based upon the ALT POM changes- the Department plans to inactivate the ships below:+/- a year or two, this is where we are:
CG (FY 13): 60, 68, 69, 71
CG (FY 14): 59, 63, 64, 65, 66
LSD (FY 14): 41, 43, 46
While there may be some further discussion with the CGs with respect to which ones in which year- these are the hull numbers (and OPNAV concurred).
Per 10 USC 2244A, any modernization (except safety modifications or modifications costing less than $100K) is not allowed within 5 years of retirement/disposal. NAVSEA (any SYSCOM) should not provide FY 12 (or remaining FY 11) procurement funds to any of the above platforms (except safety modifications). If funds are already spent on these platforms, that is okay given that these are recent changes. The key is to ensure no new money is being spent.
- USS CAPE ST. GEORGE (CG-71) was commissioned in 1993. In FY13 she will be, yes Liberal Arts math here - 20 years old.
- USS PRINCETON (CG-59), commissioned in 1989 in FY14 will be 25 years old.
- USS WHIDBEY ISLAND (LSD-41) commissioned in 1985 will in FY14 be 29 years old;
- USS TORTUGA (LSD-46) will be 24 years old.
Please, let's build more 20-yr expected life LCS to tote around their 57mm gun and making waves instead of getting another decade out of an Amphib or Aegis Cruiser. There's your opportunity cost for the pig-headed desire to keep building a ship that is PPT deep and based on nothing but promises.
Please, let's build more 20-yr expected life LCS to tote around their 57mm gun and making waves instead of getting another decade out of an Amphib or Aegis Cruiser. There's your opportunity cost for the pig-headed desire to keep building a ship that is PPT deep and based on nothing but promises.
I've yet to run the numbers on where this curve leaves us if you need to do another run of early retirements (which you will unless things change drastically) - if you know someone who has drop me a line - but who was it that warned everyone the need to prepare for the low 200s while those who should have know better mindlessly bleated 313? We should have been working this problem four years ago - but we weren't. Good people have been working hard on these numbers this year - it looks like a solid plan to do what needs to be done.
When you build small run, highly expensive ships - and the coming budget trainwreck that some have seen coming for decades (one of my ECON Profs explained it to me in the mid-80s) is knocking at the door.... Well - there you go.
There will be more. The questions is - how do we match a Maritime Strategy to our future capabilities?
Yes I said that - as we do not have the money or political will to have the capabilities to match our Maritime Strategy.
When you build small run, highly expensive ships - and the coming budget trainwreck that some have seen coming for decades (one of my ECON Profs explained it to me in the mid-80s) is knocking at the door.... Well - there you go.
There will be more. The questions is - how do we match a Maritime Strategy to our future capabilities?
Yes I said that - as we do not have the money or political will to have the capabilities to match our Maritime Strategy.
