Europe under extreme duress

[Random8145]

Real navy is always rooted in merchant marine. They know what the insurance is. Insurance as such is a means of merchant marine fleet, historically. From it the navy knows since it cannot use financial insurance as such it should build enough moderate naval units instead of a couple of super-units which are extremely hard to substitute, hence applying the insurance as doctrine. Your Reagan 600-units Navy and current 350 are just proof of what needs no proof for those who know naval history. Japanese and German navies in XX century were unable to understand this simple logic since they weren't rooted in common merchant marine practice, as well as Russian navy just now learning this simple lesson. Just now, as they are rooted in army inheritance as no other navy in history of civilization as the whole.

According to the article that Flash posted, the Royal Navy reduced their personnel numbers while increasing their training, whereas the U.S. SWO community reduced their training to maintain personnel. So wouldn't the Royal Navy be following the "super-unit" model then and the U.S. the "moderate naval unit" model?

Also when you say that a real navy is always rooted in the merchant marine, do you mean that a real navy first concentrates on mastering core skills of seamanship and ship handling, then focuses on warfare, whereas navies that do not come from such a background tend to focus more on warfare skills while ignoring seamanship skills (such as DCFP) to their detriment?

 

[Max the Mad Russian]

So wouldn't the Royal Navy be following the "super-unit" model then and the U.S. the "moderate naval unit" model?

The balance matters. The role of USN is main cast while RN is returning to its constabulary role, the ancient and first role of any navy.

 

[Random8145]

The balance matters. The role of USN is main cast while RN is returning to its constabulary role, the ancient and first role of any navy.

You mean Royal Navy is becoming more strictly about defense of Britain/UK?

 

[Max the Mad Russian]

Also when you say that a real navy is always rooted in the merchant marine, do you mean that a real navy first concentrates on mastering core skills of seamanship and ship handling, then focuses on warfare, whereas navies that do not come from such a background tend to focus more on warfare skills while ignoring seamanship skills (such as DCFP) to their detriment?

The point is when the navy reverts to "decisive battle" it is the navy followed army and general military model. Russian navy is an example. When Navy is more clever and using several different models, it is the Navy as such

 

[Max the Mad Russian]

You mean Royal Navy is becoming more strictly about defense of Britain/UK?

The main role of RN is to prevent invasion on the island of the Crown. All the other roles are diverting it from main one. At least the naval historian Andrew Lambert, King's College, states so. USN role differs, as Mr. Samuel Huntington wrote. I stick with his thoughts.

 

[Random8145]

The point is when the navy reverts to "decisive battle" it is the navy followed army and general military model. Russian navy is an example. When Navy is more clever and using several different models, it is the Navy as such

Why is this bad though? Sorry for my lack of understanding, I just don't get how that hurts the functioning of such a navy.

 

[Griz882]

There’s a great section in the book “Halley’s Typhoon” where experienced sailors note the excellent seamanship of some experienced (merchant) officers over and above of less experienced “fighting” officers (90 day wonders).

 

[Max the Mad Russian]

I just don't get how that hurts the functioning of such a navy.

Well, in Lambert's opinion, USN is rooted in continental paradigm too. This does mean that USN is just a means of overall military paradigm the ultimate form of which is "projection power". And USN differs from say Russian or German navies only in the scale and wisdom real democracy brings: it bans the Navy from disbanding when the military goals achieved. He states that this was almost the case in 1947 when USAF took the role of ultimate means and only Admirals Revolt saved the USN as such. Note that such revolt couldn't be the case even in Great Britain, only USA political structure made it possible hence saved the Navy as lead force. For short: American democracy and A-bomb both saved the USN and it is still the major player proved as such.
In my own opinion, USN being bold enough to play its own role in national defence structure, was and still is the only forse to rule the oceans in post-empire times since it and it only possess the means to force any other part to restrict its own interests to A2/AD areas and this is the real and important role of the global cop, indispensable by nature

 

[Max the Mad Russian]

There’s a great section in the book “Halley’s Typhoon” where experienced sailors note the excellent seamanship of some experienced (merchant) officers over and above of less experienced “fighting” officers (90 day wonders).

You may laugh but one of my beloved movies, Harley Davidson and the Marlboro Man, is setting cultural frame for citizen soldier/sailor far better than any social science writting: 90 days wonder will eventually win over any corporate culture
Royal Canadian Navy in WWII is kinda proof
But culturally professional merchant mariners will prevail. Know why? They don't claim families follow after their own movement

 

[Mos]

Why is this bad though? Sorry for my lack of understanding, I just don't get how that hurts the functioning of such a navy.

I think because it hurts a navy that can't afford it and it hurts a navy that is undervalued by a more land-focused power. Both conditions seem to be particularly true of the Russian Navy.

 

[Max the Mad Russian]

and it hurts a navy that is undervalued by a more land-focused power

Land-focused empires' days are counted inevitably. Rome, France, Germany, Austria, Turkey, Russia are examples. Naval-bound countries, if powerful enough, may last for good. It's for short

 

[Griz882]

Within the cycles of American history the navy has always been a struggle. Merchant mariners and ships make money, naval officers warships cost money. Had it not been for Mayhan connecting the dots between commerce, power, and defense through power projection we would have been even less prepared for an event like WWII - and even then that war wasn’t won by professional naval types but by citizen sailors. Today I think our navy suffers from a bit of tunnel vision (carriers, carriers, and only carriers) and may come to regret it a little bit, but more importantly we will (or probably already do) regret the loss of any real merchant fleet that is American made and manned.

 

[Griz882]

And….my apologies to @sevenhelmet, he said, better, just about the same thing I wrote above over in the energy discussion.

 

[Flash]

Interesting! But I am curious, why would the SWO community not have standardized training if the aviators and submariners do?

Because they wanted to save money, at least that is why they cut out SWOS ~20 years ago which at least was a starting point for new SWO's. To be frank I think it is a case of 'that is always the way we've done it and everything is fine, so why change it?'.

A couple of us from various services and designators/specialties/jobs discussed a while ago that US Navy SWO's were the only designator or equivalent that we could think of in any branch that did not have an initial trade/professional school to start their careers, ATT SWO's were just handed a stack of CD's and sent to the fleet to learn their trade OJT. What kind of product do you think results from that 'training'? I think we found out the hard way a few years ago, twice.

 

[Max the Mad Russian]

but more importantly we will (or probably already do) regret the loss of any real merchant fleet that is American made and manned.

Kinda solace: US professional fishering fleet as well as cruise lines both are still alive and while latter was temporary paralized by Covid, the former was at sea even then in quite good shape. Both are carrying much less economical burden than merchant traffic but they are, along with USCG, still precerving a pool of professional mariners who are not Navy, which is the source for unvaluable another seagoing point of view, another shiphandling opinion, another maritime experience.
Aside, a friend of mine who is the cargo airline pilot says that in his opinion the traditional roles of merchant fleet include the one of maintaining the freedom of trade by establishing widespread common practices, and this role nowadays is the one the cargo air services are gladly sharing with old good merchant fleets even where the latters are shrinking