or maybe “that’s the way we’ve always done it.”
One constant that requires some level of doing it the same way is physics. Sound hasn't evolved with our technology, so you still need to have the basics of "Search, Localization, Tracking, Attack." (Capitalization just for
@IKE).
Why have surface ships at all?
As mentioned, TLAMs, NGFS, AAW, and their tail, which can be very helpful.
we can launch a missile from underwater that can deliver hundreds of suicide drones that could hunt their own prey based on some tactical ordering.
Can we? We still need to know where to launch that missile, which still requires OTH-T.
The entire purpose of CSG ships is to protect (or service) the carrier.
A narrow view that I'd argue is extremely simplified. That "service" involves more than just SM-3/5s (or whatever number we're up to now). There's a lot of other mission sets/support that happens that involves pushing a sensor far away from the CVN.
best and brightest aren’t settling with buying a helicopter that was fielded in 1979
And that may be where the disconnect is. The H-60 is an amazing airframe, but if that's not what wins, so be it. But if it does win, or something similar, it's not like an old Blackhawk A-model. There's a lot of extra, pretty amazing gear in there, and even more everyone wants, that makes it even more capable than the Navy's 1991 version.
Space-based assets and long-loiter unmanned ISR.
To keep it on the UNCLASS level, I'll respond with, "No." Sometimes even a side-lobe isn't detected with enough resolution from space to locate what you're looking for.
