Dominant Logistics
The Future Surface Warfare Fleet
While debates rage over what sorts of ships the Navy should be building, I think many tend to lose perspective on the overall role that the Navy must play in our collective military. Instead of viewing the whole of a naval formation, we tend to lock in on specific ships as being an end-all, be-all. This has led to where all we currently build today are billion dollar superships while we have no capabilities left in the fleet for basic roles that must be filled. While Navy Admirals continue planning for the next great carrier, our Navy lacks any effective means for engaging in shallow water (littoral) operations or naval surface fire support. The Navy is so busy building Aegis superships that it is largely ignoring growing shortcomings in mine warfare and anti-submarine warfare missions.
Naval Combat Groups
To begin the process of correcting these problems, I feel we need to develop a standard formation to serve as a Naval Combat Group. This would be to the Navy what a division is to the Army or Marines. It is not an all-purpose entity; these groups would be combined in some situations while in others they could operate on their own but no single group will have every ability needed for every occasion. The idea here is to allow for some flexibility and options within the force structure to account for different missions and roles.
The only real current option our Navy has to respond to a crisis is to send a Carrier Battle Group. While these are well suited to a variety of roles, they are also extremely expensive and many missions require capabilities that the supercarriers lack. But addressing this issue also needs to go well beyond the crys from many to bring back the Iowa-Class Battleships. While these do need to make a return to the force, they are only two ships and in and of themselves would make little impact on the whole of the Navy.
We need to start by defining a Naval Combat Group (NCG) as a group of seven ships consisting of a primary ship, two support ships, and four multi-role ships. The primary ship defines the mission of the NCG, whether the ship is a carrier, battleship, mine warfare ship, what have you. The two support ships perform various roles either in support of or defense of the primary ship. The multi-role ships assist the formation in whatever way assistance is needed - it may assist the support vessels in defense or it may assist the primary in an offensive role or it may serve an entirely different purpose altogether.
In total, the Navy should have 60 NCGs divided between two fleets, Pacific and Atlantic. This will consist of a total of 356 surface combat ships which is quite high but realize that this will largely be made up of smaller ships than is the current norm (176 frigates and 58 Streetfighters). We also need to realize that ships operate in cycles where they must occasionally be removed from service for overhaul.
Carrier Battle Groups - Seven CBGs
The Carrier Battle Group should consist of one of the current Nimitz-class supercarriers for the primary ship, two Burke-class Destroyers as the support ships, and four Sa'ar5 Frigates. This group will retain our current dominance in blue water operations while also being able to support large quantities of naval aviation assets. Assuming one group in overhaul at any given time, this keeps three groups operational in each fleet.
This also makes a number of Nimitz carriers available as test beds for bringing new technologies into the mix. Existing ships can be used to develop and create new technologies for these vessels and then the new technologies can be added to the rest of the fleet during overhauls. Additional ships can be kept in a mothballed state for if they needed in the future.
Surface Battle Groups - Seven SBGs
Surface Battle Groups should be created around Battleships and are the primary formation for going into harm's way. Where the CBGs are relatively vulnerable and need to remain at a distance from major threats, the SBGs are intended to get up close and personal with dangerous threats. The primary ships in these groups should be heavily armored for this role. As with the CBG, the escorts should continue to be four frigates but the support ships should be of a new Streetfighter Missile Carrier design that will still be somewhat armored but features two missile turrets for firing various models of the Standard missile.
Two Iowa-Class Battleships should be modernized and brought back into service for this role but we will need additional vessels as well. Ideally, we should use some of the available Ticonderoga-Class cruisers and perform some major redesign work to achieve sufficient survivability. This should include a thick layer of Kevlar-belting around the existing hull while adding another hull and keel to the exterior that will form a trimaran outer hull for the full length of the vessel. The re-engineering should also include gutting the interior of the forward hull to add sufficient bracing and mechanicals to fit a single barrel 16" gun in the front. The VLS launchers should be moved to the rear and replace the existing helicopter facilities with a small pad being retained so helicopters can land but won't be kept onboard.
Naval Warfare Groups - Eighteen NWGs
Where the Battle Groups are designed to close with and destroy an enemy, the Warfare groups are more of a team approach with systems intended to serve within a Joint context. While it can still serve in any of a wide variety of roles, that lack of specialization makes it better suited to working as part of a larger team instead of as an independent combat force. That having been said, this group is much better suited than the other groups for OOTW needs including support for humanitarian operations and disaster relief as well as peacekeeping.
The primary ship of the NWG is the LHD-class carrier. These can function as conventional carriers using VTOL aircraft but they can also serve in a wide variety of other roles including as helicopter carriers and amphibious assault ships. They also have a greater capacity for medical and command and control facilities. As with the previous groups, the escorts should be two Burke-Class destroyers and four Frigates.
Air Defense Groups - Six ADGs
The ADGs use vessels tailored to long range air defense and more specifically to missile defense in particular. These can be used as a naval portion of a National Missile Defense or they could also serve in a theater role abroad. While the ships in this group will use existing designs for their hulls, they will be highly modified for serving in these groups.
The primary ship in the ADGs should be a modified High Speed Vessel featuring a VLS system on a significantly larger scale. Existing VLS is too small for missiles of sufficient size to serve in this role but we can use larger missiles in the HSV. The HSV should also be modified to allow for longer range than the current models.
Supporting the HSV should be two Burke-Class Destroyers with their radar upgraded for the missile defense role. These should also replace their helicopter facilities with multiple unmanned Lighter Than Air vehicles that can loiter at considerable altitude with a sensor suite for identifying cruise missiles at longer range and for getting an early view of ballistic missiles as well. The 5-inch guns should be replaced with a large-caliber CIWS system for greater range and lethality. Ideally, this would consist of a large gatling gun in a caliber of 75mm or so to use the same rounds as the proposed Bradley Medium Tank. These rounds will also feature digital fusing modes to improve their lethality in a missile defense role. Existing VLS capabilities should remain to have Standard missiles available for secondary fires.
As with the previous formations, this group should include four Frigates that can support the mission being addressed. These should replace their guns with box launchers in the front for defensive missiles while their helicopter facilities are replaced with the same large-caliber CIWS of the Destroyers. All ships in the groups should be linked with high-bandwidth communications to share sensor data across the group.
Subsurface Warfare Groups - Six SWGs
These groups are tailored to dealing with threats below the waterline, whether the threats come from submarines or from mines or from other means. The primary ship in this group is an HSV outfitted for mine warfare while including facilities for unmanned LTAs for a loitering aerial view. Supporting the HSV will be Destroyers modified to place a greater emphasis on subsurface threats including the use of underwater remotely piloted vehicles to map out locations of underwater mines. These ships will retain their helicopter facilities for ASW aircraft. Their guns should also be replace with additional torpedo and depth charge capabilities.
The escorting Frigates should be similarly modified but their helicopter capabilities should be replaced with additional LTA systems. Because this formation will only be used in support of other naval groups, there will be additional ASW helicopters available from those groups so the space on these vessels is better served by enhancing sensor capabillities.
Maritime Strike Groups - Sixteen MSGs
The Maritime Strike Groups are designed primarily for serving in littoral regions, either in a naval combat role or in support of amphibious operations. Where the Surface Battle Group is intended to go into harms way regardless of the threat, the MSG is designed to support the SBG if assistance is needed. It can also assist in a fire support role for amphibious assault landings.
The primary ship of the MSG is the LPD-17 amphibious assault ship. This vessel provides the necessary support for this mission including medical facilities and helicopter support. It can also carry amphibious forces or special vessels within its well deck. Supporting the LPD-17 should be two of the new Streetfighter Gunship vessels featuring 8inch gun turrets and armor. These can operate in littoral regions in a variety of roles including naval surface fire support while also providing long range gunfire support for other groups or vessels.
Escorting these vessels should be a new type of vessel called hovertanks. Hovertanks are relatively small hovercraft built with the armor and guns of a main battle tank. These can operate over a variety of of terrains at high speeds and are nearly impervious to mines and torpedoes. They can also be used as gun boats for blockade and boarding operations. They should operate in pairs with a pair of hovertanks (a squadron) replacing the standard escort ship. This provides the MSG with a total of 8 hovertanks that can ride in the well deck of the LPD-17 for long range transit or be carried on towed support platforms if the well deck is needed for other missions.
Ship Totals
So, with these groups, we end up with a Navy surface combat fleet consisting of:
Primary Combat Ships
7 Nimitz-Class Supercarriers
2 Iowa-Class Battleships
5 Modified Tico-Class Battlecruisers
18 LHD Carriers
6 Air Defense High Speed Vessels
6 Subsurface Warfare High Speed Vessels
16 LPD-17 Assault Ships
Support Combat Ships50 DDG-51 Burke-Class Destroyers in current configuration
12 Burke-Class Destroyers modified for Air Defense
12 Burke-Class Destroyers modified for Subsurface Defense
32 Streetfighter Gunships
14 Streetfighter Missile CarriersEscort Ships
128 Multi-Role Escort Frigates
24 Air Defense Frigates
24 Subsurface Warfare Frigates
128 Abrams Hovertanks
This surface combat fleet is then supported by a fleet of
200 High Speed Vessel Cargo Ships
58 Misc. Support Vessels (T-AKR Cargo Vessels, oilers, etc)
In addition, we'll have a submarine fleet consisting of
8 Ohio-class SSBN w/ 16 Trident II missiles demirved to 5 warheads each
4 Seawolf-class SSN (we will need to build one more)
8 Virginia-class SSN (built as currently designed)
12 Los Angeles-class Subs (modified to include a modular systems bay)
48 New Tactical Attack Subs (an AIP diesel design w/ modular systems bay)
6 Ohio-class modified to serve as tankers for NTAS and naval groups
For a total Navy Ship count of 700 surface and subsurface vessels in addition to 128 hovertanks. By any measure, this is a very large navy but realize that 434 of these ships are frigates or HSVs which are very cheap compared to most of the ships we currently purchase and operate. Also, many of these vessels will be in reserves in case of major conflict. We should also understand that with this force structure, the Navy will be able to augment the Coast Guard in Homeland Defense missions.
Infrastructure Maintenance
A major concern of late in Naval circles has been maintaining shipbuilding infrastructure. Simply put, the Navy doesn't purchase enough ships to maintain the industrial base necessary to produce some of the ships we use. This plan will go a long way in resolving that problem by a variety of means. Obviously, there is an advantage of the simple expansion of the number of ships in the fleet. A larger fleet means more work but the advantages of this plan go well beyond that.
As brought up a number of times, the bulk of this fleet is smaller, more basic vessels like the HSVs and frigates. These types of ships can be built at pretty much any shipyard in the United States. This isn't the case with other types of vessels like the supercarriers and attack submarines. With this plan, each of the major shipyards will have their particular area of specialization, such as all nuclear work being consolidated at Newport News while all conventional subs are built in Groton, CT but all yards can construct the smaller vessels to bridge gaps in production of their specialized ships. For example, we won't need additional Nimitz-class carriers under this plan so until a future carrier design comes around and the time is right to replace the existing carriers, Newport News can have their personnel building the frigates and HSVs, allowing the other yards to focus on newer vessels like the NTAS and the LPD-17. As those fleets reach completion, we can shift the HSV/frigate production work around to maintain the bulk of the industrial base.
This also provides our naval contractors with work than can also be exported. Most navies of the world rely on smaller vessels like frigates while the HSV has both military and civilian applications. Today, much of our naval construction could accurately be called a jobs program to maintain the industrial base but with this plan, American shipyards can be expected to be called upon for a total foreign and domestic fleet of around 1000 ships. For all practical purposes, this plan would nearly double the size and workload of the shipbuilding industry in the United States.
Controlling Costs
Ironically, even though this naval fleet is enormous by today's standards, it shouldn't cost much more, if ANY more, than current Navy plans for purchasing ships. The current Nimitz supercarriers are so expensive to operate that retiring the excess from this portion of the fleet is enough to pay for much of what is in this plan. It takes approximately 3 years to build an LHD carrier, and rather ironically, if we retire one of the unneeded Nimitz-class today, it will save enough money over 3 years to pay for the LHD carrier. We're already planning on expanding the LHD fleet to 12 ships so this can fill the funding gap until the retirement date for the LHA carriers being replaced. Ultimately, 3 Nimitz class carriers should be retired with the funding from each used to finance the LHD fleet expansion.
The Battleship portion of the plan is to be financed by the retirement of two more Nimitz carriers. According to studies, the costs to modernize and bring back the two Iowa Battleships can be covered in one year of operating costs for a Nimitz. The second carrier retirement and additional savings from the first can finance the conversion of the 5 Ticonderoga cruisers into Battlecruisers.
The remaining Ticonderogas can be used for the air defense and subsurface defense ships in the plan meaning that construction of Aegis superships could end immediately with all additional funding moved to frigate construction. At current funding rates and plans, this would be sufficient to pay for about half of the frigate fleet. This leaves us still needing about $50 billion to pay for the remainder of the frigate fleet and for the fleet of HSVs and Streetfighters.
The plan for submarines should save us about $20 billion in purchasing costs compared to current plans to purchase 40 Virginia-class attack submarines. This leaves roughly $30 billion unfunded, but with the reductions in carrier aviation requirements and the reduced operating costs of using more conventional vessels instead of nuclear vessels, we should see a savings of about $1 to $1.5 billion per year that is not currently earmarked for financing other purchases. Over the timeframe it will take to construct this fleet, the savings in operating costs shoud be sufficient to pay for the remainder of the plan.