Pointed there by Byron in comments - from CFFC's blog, a bit about the C2 changes that brought joy to my ears.
Amidst plenty of C2 confusion, this change essentially preserves the goodness of integration of Ech 1-Ech II, Provider-TYCOMs, and CPF-USFF via AIR/SURF/SUB FORs and re-affirms the tried and true C2 (responsibility, authority and accountability) of the Type Commanders--SURFPAC, SURFLANT, AIRPAC, AIRLANT, SUBPAC, SUBLANT.Like I said in comments over there, the sun looked brighter when I saw the term "Enterprise" go. Only one thing in the Navy should have "ENTERPRISE" in its name - and that would be a warship.
Great idea getting rid of the "Enterprise" term that unintentionally evolved in degrading C2. In our line of work, accountability for performance must reside with an individual and not a board room.
With "Big E" on her last deployment - I hope someone already had their eye on the next ship with that name. Seriously, that should be in a Top 5 list somewhere.
While I'd like to make some worthwhile comment about the PFOR, I'll admit to probably needing to give it a second read, instead of a quick scan.
ReplyDeleteAlas, to your second point - "Enterprise", we appear to have gone a different direcction. CVN-78, Gerald R. Ford followed by what, the Clinton, the Bush, and the Barack H. Obama?
Will we ever see an America, or an Enterprise again?
I am seriously going to barf if they name a Submarine "ENTERPRISE". I mean, they already named a sub MISSOURI......that was a HUGE crank-stomp.
ReplyDeleteLHA-6......USS AMERICA. Already happened, dude. We're building her now.
ReplyDeleteI agree Gator, the Missouri should have been named the Cochise, or maybe the Crazy Horse, and the Jimmy Carter the Wahoo. So this time, let the Amphibs take the hit for the team, make the last LCS (LCS 4) the Barack Obama.
ReplyDelete"<span>last LCS (LCS 4) the Barack Obama."</span>
ReplyDeleteSlick first appearance, but largely empty, ill-suited for the task, impotent, and an example of all that is wrong with the process that foisted it upon our Navy?
Oh, and fails to live up to the hype.
ReplyDelete"Change you'll get sick of paying for."
How the frack can the Navy call it a gator when it doesn't have a well deck?
ReplyDeleteAye matey's it's a fine Navy day and decision indeed.
ReplyDeletesensitive subject there, Butch.
ReplyDeleteLHA-6 and follow-on carriers are headed for another NAVSEA PR disaster.
Intended as Jump Jet carriers (and helo's of course), the LHA-6 will be damaged by the downward exhausts of the F-35B even at idle on deck !
LHA-6 needs to have extremely thick, and top-heavy steel welded all over her Flight Deck to accommodate the new Jump Jet's take off, landing, and just moving around the deck.
LHA-6 and the Jump Jet are not going to be very good "neighbors" !
ANOTHER FINE JOB BY NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS COMMAND, with terrible input from NAVAIR's little jumpy jets.
OOOooo OOOOh! I know this one! (channeling Horshack)
ReplyDeleteThe same way we can call it a Littoral Combat Ship when it could never stand up to combat in the littorals!
I tried to click "like" 5 times!
ReplyDeleteFUTURE BLOG: Year = 2014, TOPIC: how COULD the Navy be so stupid !!!
ReplyDeleteIn other words, HOW could the Navy build LHA-6 and LHA-7 without any well deck ???
What WAS the NAVSEA leadership "Thinking" way back in 2009-2010 ??
NOTE: LHA-7 is already "in the queue". Too late to change it now. Just a clone of LHA-6. Fast forward to 2018, USS AMERICA LHA-6 is on patrol inside the crowded Persian Gulf. The USMC pilots are attempting to launch some of their new F-35B jump jets. Unfortunately, wind is very low this morning and it's 123 degrees air temp. The USMC pilot will attempt to launch with BOTH fuel AND weapons. And LHA-6 has a maximum speed of only 24 knots due to all that thick steel welded onto the flight deck to protect the ship from F-35B melting damage. Heading directly into the wind, USS AMERICA now manages to get 28.5 knots wind speed across the deck. This situation does not bode well for the Marine pilot, or his upcoming close air support mission.
(yet) another fine job by NAVSEA HQ, WASHINGTON D.C. "acquisition professionals".
Is it too late to fire everyone inside NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS COMMAND (except the submarine team) ?
Why is the US Navy so full of themselves that they can't use the ski jump that the Brits use for their Harriers? It lets you carry a lot more gas and weapons instead of next to nothing and tank as soon as you get to altitude.
ReplyDeleteTanking ? You mean as in USAF Land Based, long range, heavy, excellent, True Tankers ? Forget it. Our children will all be retired before the US AIR FORCE can properly award the next gen TANKER contract and then beg Congress to have them built in sufficient quantities to actually be deployable.
ReplyDeleteAnd the US Marine Corps tankers ? At the rate that Congress is funding those couple of new KC-130J USMC air borne tankers, our grandkids will all be graduating from college, with post-graduate degrees. Besides, since America seems to have more enemies than friends on this Planet, from Where would all these air borne tankers fly out of ?
REALITY: When a USMC jump jet takes off from USS AMERICA and whatever LHA-7 will be named (BTW it's likely no other warships besides LHA-6/7 will ever be able to eventually handle the F-35B), then these jump jets are "on their own". Expect no rendez-vous with either USAF or USMC air borne tankers. So, whatever fuel and weps, that the Marine pilot launches with, that's all he gets. Let's hope that ship's force can repair the damage done by each F-35B take off before they return to land back onboard again after their missions.
ReplyDeleteThis means that the exceptionally hot, dangerous, and damaging F-35B will be a fairly "short-legged" weapon. A ski-jump bow might help a little bit. NAVSEA will need to issue _______ (pick a number) contracts to study this for the next 8 years. Then bid it to the few remaining American shipyards. Rebid it again after the protests are resolved in long court cases. Then attempt to convert LHA-6, followed by 18 more months of deck qualifications. Then back into a post-industrial availability to correct all the design flaws on this first ramp, with the next underway periods only lasting 16 months off and on, to requal this modified ski jump. Then work-up's with USMC squadrons off the coast of VA or CALIF, then LHA-6 will be fully ready to use the new ski jump ramp. As soon as LHA-6 stops into another shipyard for her normal, regularly scheduled Phased Industrial Availabilily (or whatever new acronym NAVSEA dreams up). This should only last 8 months and then after sea trials and work ups, LHA-6 with her (hopefully) helpful new ski ramp will actually deploy, " Into Harm's Way ".
Heaven help the inertia in our NAVSEA ship life cycle "management". Japanese or South Korean or Spanish or Italian Navy's could add this ski ramp bow and deploy their new LHA type warships probably in less than 2 years, including design and underway quals.
The "new" NAVSEA. It's not your Father's Navy..... unfortunately .....
Of course your Gator navy will soon be built to civil ABS standards and manned by CivMars (see last week's Navy Times)....
ReplyDeleteThe modern USN:
We Are Too Good To Fight!
Because if they called it a CVL Congress would demand it be nuke powered.
ReplyDeleteOf course, it's not really a CVL considering it's kinda similar in length and displacement to the French Charles de Gaulle but the R91 can carry real airplanes like Rafales and Hawkeyes. I dunno why it exists. If you're gonna make a gator, make a gator. If you're going to build a baby carrier, then build a baby carrier.
Well there is tradition there, anyone remember the Iwo Jima class LPH's? They didn't have a well deck and were strictly designed for the heliborne amphibious assault. Lessons learned lead to the Tarawa and Wasp classes to have a well deck, along with downsizing of the fleet as AKA's and APA's were purged from the fleet.
ReplyDeleteInstall fw pumps to pump water up the the flight deck run radiator tubing back and forth in like a layer of water tubes in the the boiler (live stim) and down to a condenser and dft (stim dead) then through a manifold to hot water heaters and such and thence to a manifold to a cold well (holy saturated steam, Batman) and a strainer and back to the pump. Sandwich the tube between the old (lower) deck and the new (upper) deck AND PRESTO an automatically deicing temperature controlled flight deck. Only one gazillion megabucks. Got that Po Han? Now call your cousin Mary Sue and give her the Garbage contract in perpetuity if she has Uncle Wo Fat do the install gratis. Comrade Commissar Dragon Lady? Mary Sue has her number, has for years.
ReplyDeleteAll you need is an old wespac sailor (ChMach W4). I know just the guy if he's still alive ;)
Somebody call me when they reestablish the Cruiser-Destroyer Flotillas.
ReplyDeleteWOAH WOAH WOAH, SIR. LCS is NOT an AMPHIB. LCS is resourced by OPNAV N86, "Surface Warfare." It is classified as a surface combatant...REAL L ships, LHAs, LHDs, LHDs, those are resourced by OPNAV N85, Expeditionary Warfare.
ReplyDeleteI'm going to jump in here with a Fact Minute...LHA 6 will NOt be damaged by F-35. We have a program called "External Environments / CORNERSTONE which, after analysis (which hopefully was thorough by NAVAIR) has determined what the requirements were to harden the deck and to shift around antennae / weapons in order to minimize effects by the F-35.
ReplyDeleteAlso, LHA 6 was requested by USMC not to have a well deck. F-35 has a huge footprint, and as such, you can't embark what you would need in the ACE if you had a well deck. A study is ongoing right now to determine if the follow on LHA 8+ will have a well deck, and if so, will it just be LHD 8's design or will we have to design in (at added cost) a well deck to LHA 6. I would personally reccomend LHD 8 design, but we are having growing pains with her engineering plant.
Harrier Carrier.
ReplyDeleteThis the 21 st Century ! Get with the times !
ReplyDelete20 th Century = CRUDESFLOT EIGHT
21 st Century = CRUDESGRU EIGHT
Now come on. Admit it. Flotilla is such an out of date word.
CRUISER DESTROY FLOTILLA EIGHT does not sound the same as
CRUISER DESTROY GROUP EIGHT !
"Group" is much more "Nautical" sounding for the US Navy ! I wish I had joined the Australian Navy 30 years ago.
You can blame CNO for that goat rope. Amphibs are being offered up for sacrifice. See this month's PROCEEDINGS whereby some jackass was saying that we should embark Marines on LCS and regular surface combatants. Apparently, the surface warfare community in this country believes we don't need amphibious warfare....nevermind that it is the only community that can do amphib assault to HA/DR. How effective was that cruiser the first day down in Haiti? Not much...she didn't do shit except take photos.
ReplyDeleteIn addition, the mission set for the F-35 is extremely EXTREMELY broader than what it was for the AV-8.
ReplyDeleteStand corrected. Substitute "Surface Force" as applicable.
ReplyDeleteYou sure your middle name isn't "nitpicking"? ;-0
Put him to work on it, Po Han was a snipe on the San Pueblo, after all.
ReplyDeleteI agree. MISSOURI should be the name of a large powerful surface warship, to preserve role exemplified by the IOWAs. Same with the next IOWA, NEW JERSEY, and BIG BADGER BOAT. ENTERPRISE should only belong to a carrier. Carriers should be named after battles, and famous warships, and subs after fish.
ReplyDeleteNext thing you'll be telling me is that the title "Commodore" is out of date. ;)
ReplyDeleteHey C-Dore so what was it like to sail with Lt. Decatur into Triopli Harbor to burn the USS Philadelphia.
ReplyDeleteEVERYbody's a comedian....
ReplyDeleteWow, color me oblivious; missed it completely (and this from an airdale who cruised LPH-10, though, admittedly, no Salty Gator. Not even a slightly briny gator. Does letting the det crew paint a fighting Gator on the side of 66 & 67 count?) Kiddin. Thx for lesson; homework completed.
ReplyDeleteByron:
ReplyDeleteThere was a Navy Times article a couple of years ago that identified an excersize with the Brits. The Brits brought a carrier over with only helo's, and 10-14 USMC Harriers embarked. From what I read, they loved the ski jump for the reasons you state. Much easier to get off the deck. The allegation in the article was simply that no one in our Navy wanted a ski jump looking ship. I think by extension they simply thought the length of our big deck Amphibs would mitigate the need for the ski-jump.
Oh please URR. I would ask you what it was like standing at 8th and I while the Brits burned Washington, but I do repect some of my elders.
ReplyDeleteTo be honest I would have joined the USMC, but the recuriter found out that both of my parents were married, but he told me then that I could get a waver for that. From there he asked if they were brother and sister, when I said no. He told me thanks but no thanks, I just wasn't leatherneck material. :-P
BC:
ReplyDeleteI was at the naming ceremony in June 2008 of Pre-commissioning Unit America LHA 6. Additionally, I was at the Keel Authentication ceremony of PCU America in July 2009.
Much has been said about naming LHA after CV 66, and other ships named America. Many feel that this ship should have been named after a former Essex class, as much if not all of the Wasp class were named, or after a famous Marine battle. I've followed this debate with interest because - and this is going to appear extremely self serving - I'm the guy who told (suggested) to the USS America Carrier Veterans group that this ship was available and hadn't been named. At the time I didn't think about the traditions of naming this ship after a famous marine battle. One of their board members even attributed this to me in a July 14, 2008 Navy Times article 3/4's of the way down. They were ultimately responsible for getting this done, submitting the proposal to the SECNAV. Let me be clear - all credit belongs to them for accomplishing their goal.
I'm a firm believer that CVN 78, as their association believed (and still does) should have been named America. That said, a big deck Amphib is a GREAT 2nd choice, 1st in class ship.
At the Keel Authentication ceremony, at the reception, I spoke with the designer of LHA 6. At one point, this ship was supposed to be 921' long (per the Navy's web site or Global Security's web site), close in length to the Midway. While I can't remember the exact details, the designer spoke to me saying that all the equations, cost, capability, etc. that goes into this, they couldn't justify making this a longer ship. This ship - other than lacking in a well deck - will be a close sister to Makin Island LHD 8, powerplant, canted stacks. Also - the elevators will not have the ability to fold verticle into the ship. They're giving up on going through the Panama Canal. Interesting guy, this ship designer. We did not talk about the flight deck and any issues with the jet blast affecting the flight deck.
Also interesting to meet the nicest people ever, Former Chair of the Joint Chiefs General and Mrs. (Lynne) Peter Pace. Mrs. Pace is the ships sponsor, and they are TOP people. They shook everyone's hand and made all feel welcome, both times I met them.
The President of the America association has made a recent visit to PCU America, and detailed this on ussamerica.org, stating that the workers are taking GREAT pride in building this ship.
Enough said - thanks.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
ReplyDeleteI don't go back to the burning of Washington. Besides, which were the only ones who stayed during the "Bladensburg Races"?
No, my "old Corps" goes back to steel pots, c-rations (which I still prefer), F-4 Phantoms, and the AR-15 with a three pronged flash suppressor.
Of course, to many, my "old Corps" isn't so old. And anyway, I have been told the "old Corps" ended the day before I joined....
True - I agree, but with the capabilities of the Virginia class, I'm impressed, so I don't feel soooo bad Missouri is named in this class.
ReplyDelete8-) :) =-X :-P 8-)
ReplyDeleteShip naming conventions have gone out of the window at various times through out the recent history. For example the first aircraft carrier was named after an aviation scientist. Then the next two carriers were conversions of battlecruisers and they started the name of carriers after famous battles, that was until the Ranger came along. She was named after a previous ships with that name. Which carried over to Yorktown class, which varied tween the famous battle/ship names. Then the Wasp came along named after the previous ships. Then the Essex class which except for the Shangri-la, all varied tween famous battles or famous ships. Then as the cruisers started to leave the fleet, the 688 hulls started to take them on as a way to appease the politicos in Congress, except for a couple of special politicos who had thier names added to one of the ships. Then as the battleships started to leave and the founding father ballistics started to leave the fleet, those names were assigned to new SSBN's and Carriers. While the new DDG47 hulls started to eat up the older famous ship names. Meanwhile the gator frighters who varied tween just being numbered to being named after various counties in the states. At which when the large deck L-class ships started to take on famous Marine Battles, except for the Wasp hulls which started to eat up some of the Essex class names. The only ships that seem to have been able to stay true to thier convention is the destroyers. Even the supply train ships have gooned up thier naming conventions. Typically they were named after famous stars or constellations, except we have a few named after cities or even a whole region.
ReplyDeleteUnlike the DoD instruction on how aircraft, avionics, and weapon systems are supposed to be numbered; there isn't anything similar from either the SecNav or OpNav. The only thing is NHHC clears a name for usage to verify that it isn't being used before and create the history behind a name.
Starts with an L. Its an amphib.
ReplyDeleteOh, but she started as a Frigate didn't she?
ReplyDeleteRisky "enterprize" ? I guess that word is dead now....
ReplyDeleteNavsea is taking a huge risk that whenever LHA-6 class is completed and at sea, that the F-35B jump jets will be working, procured, supported, etc.
Risk Mitigation was a course all of us in Acquisition Billets had to take from the Defense Acquisition University.
Risk exists that LHA-6 flight deck can handle the new jump jets, and risk exists that the F-35B will not be cancelled.
LHA-6 and now LHA-7 follow-on will cost around $9 billion total. That's a lot of risk. Constructing both without a well deck and hoping F-35B does not get cancelled.
Is Navsea avoiding risk, or betting $9 billion dollars that both LHA-6 and LHA-7 will be of some value to the future Fleet commanders.
Really? Which amphib do you know that can't carry any marines, embark any helo other than a HH-60, or have a well?
ReplyDeleteNavsea isn't doing anything....OPNAV is the one who is taking the risk, and that is a function of the Marines and the Joint Program Office refusing to accept reality about the status of the F-35 program. It has already gone through a Nunn-McCurdy breech...it will likely do it again.
ReplyDeleteThe scary thing is: if the schedule slips, does the money to harden the deck and make the mods for JSF-interoperability evaporate? Probably.
The Independence is an LCS. How much do you want to bet that the next Big-E will be a little crappy ship?
ReplyDeleteRetired now.
ReplyDeleteI smell sarcasm, if so, I approve. A flotilla is a group of water craft, regardless of size, whose operators are associated in some manner which is related to the gathering into a group of said water craft.
The english language, it's how you say exactly what you mean!
yeah but when MISSOURI (BB 63) pulled back into port she didn't leave 1/3 of her hull coating behind at sea.
ReplyDeleteBADA-BING!
Commodore did always sound better than Rear Admiral Lower Half.
ReplyDeleteSAP, Just a bit before my time although I did make my 3/C Midshipman training cruise aboard a Fletcher-class DD.
ReplyDeleteSalty, Maybe that's the "transformational" nature of the LCS that they've been looking for. ;)
ReplyDeleteThe original LPH(s) were Essex class that didn't get an angled deck. Iwo Jima, Okinawa, etc were McNamara monsters with one drive train and screw, too slow, and nothing like the survivabiltity of the Essex's. The first round of interfering, arrogant know it all's screwing up shipbuilding and design.
ReplyDeletecynic
ReplyDeleteThe guys on the sweeps couldn't pass a tomato seed. Dark and scary. Stevey was wound as tight as an 8 day clock. Went through the Arab Anchor Watch like the cook's best knife through a stew carrot. Lit the old girl and pulled for home, mother and the babies. Everybody shook for 3 days afterward, except Stevey, who just grinned like a school boy who stole a pie both going to and coming home from school, at the same house.
ReplyDeleteHell of a bonfire. Sad end for a good ship.
This mission would make for a great movie.
ReplyDeleteGrandpa - would the sailors like to re-enact the mission 8-) ??
C-Dore,
ReplyDeleteNo worries. I was feeling snarky and just in the mood to jerk yours and URR's chain as you guys were talking about the olden days. Don't feel so bad about cruising on a Fletcher. My first deployment was on the Big E. We celebrated her 40 yr old B-day while on my deployment. She was old and tired then in 2001, but a good ship and a fun ship to sail on. While we were in the yards, while tearing through a space we found a box of parts for F-4B's AWG-10, vaccum tubes for some of the older ALQ systems, and some older repair manuals for some APQ system crica 1960's. I don't remember off hand what happened to it all.
Yeah.
ReplyDeleteThe USN will peg "enterprise" as a "midsized" town ...
Uh-huh.
Meets all the same criteria as this "midsisized city"
Right?
<span>Hey C-Dore so what was it like to sail with Lt. Decatur into Triopli Harbor to burn the USS Philadelphia.</span>
ReplyDelete<span></span>
<span>SAP...In these post Cole days (my early liberty training was during this era), you young'ns would last till the water got hot with those ole salty dawgs....</span>
<span></span>
<span>
Falling in with a wild crowd in New York City which included Washington Irving, his off hours were occupied with drinking bouts and fights. Irving nicknamed him "Sindbad." On leave in Baltimore, he stabbed and killed a drunk threatening him and escaped a lynching.
</span>
Just sayin'... 8-)
I remember when the name change went down... from Commodore to the "lower half" business. A Navy CDR I knew thought it even more ridiculous than the "Commodore Admiral" nonsense.
ReplyDeleteBut one enterprising Middie mentioned that the "lower half might be smelly, but it had all the fun".
Pirate, I was Weps on one of "Big E's" escorts for her '76-77 Westpac Deployment. It was one of those 9 month stints that were so popular in the mid/late 70s. That was back when ENTERPRISE still had the SPS 32 and SPS 33 "billboard" radars. Interestingly enough, once we got to Westpac we never saw her again until it was time to come home.
ReplyDeleteSid,
ReplyDeleteOh yea. I have a book that talked about Porter and his son David Farraguat, along with a number of other famous makers of US Naval Tradition. Both of them were wild, full of piss and vinger, and full of adventure. If you look at nearly all of our early heroes in our naval service, were short of tact or at times common sense for the era. Everything from fist fights in bars, to dueling with members of the RN (or just about anyone), Storming ashore threatening national leaders with arms, all sorts of things that would now a days cause politicos to flip out.
I haven't seen the "Last Detail" in years, I might have to put that in my netflix rotation.
C-Dore I thought I had seen some of the old ships, but the closest I ever got to a FLETCHER was the model I built in 1975 or so...right before your deployment. You make me feel young again!
ReplyDeleteCVN-79 USS TED KENNEDY...bank on it given the relationship between the said former senator and the current commander in chief. If the USN is willing to name a ship USS JOHN MURTHA, naming a ship after Senator Kennedy is actually huge progress in the right direction.
ReplyDeleteSir I honestly deep down in my heart believe that it is just that....and actually the surface warfare community in the pentagon at the 2-3 star level is assessing whether or not to change the story on LCS to make it an "L" ship, that just happens to be resourced by N86...
ReplyDeleterealist.
ReplyDeleteIt has a module don't you know which can house dudes extraneous to the the ship. Therefore, an L
ReplyDeleteI think they sussed out the simple fact that in the face of 21st century threats amphibious warfare is right up there in the art of war with a pike charge, a cavalry charge, longbows, stuff like that.
ReplyDeleteso you the gator are making an argument for a carrier? what's with that? just how amphibious is a carrier? how many boots on the ground from that bay bee? Used to like home on jam because that was nice and simple as the truth. Then I liked RBL because that could find targets in the dark out to xx miles and then I was kind of friendly to BOL because one could count on the simple minded little warhead to find giant targets beyond visual range and kill them dead.
ReplyDeleteHave you reached the point where your amphib lingers more than a hundred miles offshore? Kind of like what we do with the AF? Not really very realistic is it? Let's review our CONOPS shall we. interlude, Baba O'Reilly. Out here in the fields.
Gigantic hulls and it will take about one slickie to announce he can stealth them. Wonders never cease. and seriously dude, if it doesn't do the boots on ground thing with the serious stuff, it aint an amphib. tanks, jeeps, LAVs, trucks, etc.
Think so, Guest? Grab a globe and start looking for undefended ports and suitable intact airfields near where trouble brews that would affect US interests. Then look at road networks.
ReplyDeleteNarrows down our choices to almost zero. Think it is risky to land on a beach? Try taking down a major port that hasn't been cleared. Combines the worst aspects of amphibious assault with MOUT. And that is BEFORE you have to repair all of the infrastructure to handle an offload.