Proceedings - Buy Ford, not Ferrari

[mmx1]

CDR Hendrix proposes forming sixteen "influence squadrons" built around an LPD, DDG, LCS, JHSV, and M80 Stiletto as the forward line of US naval presence, with the ESG's and Carriers (the "ferrari" in this analogy") in reserve as a surge force.

http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/story.asp?STORY_ID=1838

Commentary:
http://informationdissemination.blogspot.com/2009/04/influence-squadrons-next-evolution.html

CDR Hendrix just wrote a book on TR's Naval Diplomacy, so it could be a case of wielding a hammer looking for nails, but it's an interesting idea. He is incidentally a FO (not an aviator as the blog claims).

 

[Uncle Fester]

Well, "Buy Ford, not Ferrari" seems to sum up SECDEF's announced budget philosophy. So if this fits in with the DoD's Correct Answers, it could be so.

The problem with that is, right now we need Fords for hauling firewood and knocking shit down, but what happens in a few years when we need to race a grand prix and all we have are broke-ass pickups? I understand SECDEF's point is we can't afford both, and if we can only have one or the other, the priority needs to be on what we need now, not what we might need later. But given the enormous lead time required for weapons systems, we can't really wait until we "need" something to start working on it.

 

[xj220]

The problem with that is, right now we need Fords for hauling firewood and knocking shit down, but what happens in a few years when we need to race a grand prix and all we have are broke-ass pickups? I understand SECDEF's point is we can't afford both, and if we can only have one or the other, the priority needs to be on what we need now, not what we might need later. But given the enormous lead time required for weapons systems, we can't really wait until we "need" something to start working on it.

Isn't that were fixing the procurement process comes to play. Yeah, we can't have it all, however if we can reform the way we do things it should streamline the process and allow us to pick and choose what we want. The Fords for the dirty work and what we need now, but a chance to get a Ferrari every now and then.

 

[mmx1]

Well, "Buy Ford, not Ferrari" seems to sum up SECDEF's announced budget philosophy. So if this fits in with the DoD's Correct Answers, it could be so.

The problem with that is, right now we need Fords for hauling firewood and knocking shit down, but what happens in a few years when we need to race a grand prix and all we have are broke-ass pickups? I understand SECDEF's point is we can't afford both, and if we can only have one or the other, the priority needs to be on what we need now, not what we might need later. But given the enormous lead time required for weapons systems, we can't really wait until we "need" something to start working on it.

But what substantively got cut, other than the FCS? The F-22 was frozen at its current numbers, in favor of an accelerated F-35 buy; we're committed to 11 carriers until 2040 (minus the Enterprise gap, I'm assuming).

Next generation cruiser and bomber have been delayed until we get a better handle on requirements, and the aerial laser is still in R&D.

 

[HueyCobra8151]

The problem with that is, right now we need Fords for hauling firewood and knocking shit down, but what happens in a few years when we need to race a grand prix and all we have are broke-ass pickups? I understand SECDEF's point is we can't afford both, and if we can only have one or the other, the priority needs to be on what we need now, not what we might need later. But given the enormous lead time required for weapons systems, we can't really wait until we "need" something to start working on it.

I'm not disagreeing with you, but one thing to consider is that the United States has a pretty incredible industrial capacity. If a major conventional war were to kick off I think we would be able to crank out ships at a pretty fast rate.

 

[eddie]

So he thinks we should cut the number of carriers to six, and use the mini-ESG's for regular patroling / deterrence??? (I skimmed in places.)

Can the mini-ESG's hack it (No organic AEW?)? Can we really expect to see another Falklands style (lucky...?) conflict again and come out on top? They also seem awfully small, non-redundant, and therefore vulnerable???

I dunno, I just hate the LCS.











Question.
True differences between the LHA/LHD, LSD, and LDP?
I have some guesses, but never been quite clear on that.

 

[nittany03]

I'm not disagreeing with you, but one thing to consider is that the United States has a pretty incredible industrial capacity. If a major conventional war were to kick off I think we would be able to crank out ships at a pretty fast rate.

Not once we're done outsourcing it to India.

 

[eddie]

Not once we're done outsourcing it to India.

God forbid we ever find ourselves over Southern China:

"Dude, you just blew up the MegaloMart Barbie Factor..."

Although seriously. Our "enemies" are ship-breakers more than ship-builders at this point, are they not?

 

[Junkball]

I'm not disagreeing with you, but one thing to consider is that the United States has a pretty incredible industrial capacity. If a major conventional war were to kick off I think we would be able to crank out ships at a pretty fast rate.

Isn't it a common thought that any sort of major conventional war would be over in <1 year, if not 6 months or less? Not exactly a shipbuilding-length of time.

 

[m26]

Isn't it a common thought that any sort of major conventional war would be over in <1 year, if not 6 months or less? Not exactly a shipbuilding-length of time.

That was the common thought before WWI. And military leaders thought jets wouldn't need guns. Sometimes people get things wrong. It's good to have a back up plan.

 

[Spekkio]

The problem with that is, right now we need Fords for hauling firewood and knocking shit down, but what happens in a few years when we need to race a grand prix and all we have are broke-ass pickups? I understand SECDEF's point is we can't afford both, and if we can only have one or the other, the priority needs to be on what we need now, not what we might need later. But given the enormous lead time required for weapons systems, we can't really wait until we "need" something to start working on it.

The Germans had developed a lot of cutting edge technology during WWII, but ultimately lost because they couldn't produce enough of it.

There's a certain quality in quantity.

 

[A4sForever]

The Germans had developed a lot of cutting edge technology during WWII, but ultimately lost because they couldn't produce enough of it.

There's a certain quality in quantity.

You got that right, but not only 'cause of "quantity" ... as the Kraut's (that's what my Dad called our family ancestors and their Nazi-oriented descendants that he fought ... ) had some GREAT ideas and products ... but their ideas frequently predated the available technology of the day by a few decades ... thus ... many, many reliability problems.

He (DAD) always maintained if the Jerry's had not invaded and been tied up in Russia ... we would never have breached the so-called "Atlantic Wall" ... he said Normandy would not have happened -- or it would have failed, if attempted w/out an Eastern Front ... he fought there -- Normandy and across Europe --- so he's entitled to a first-hand opinion, I guess.

Lots of stuff goes into the overall equation ...

 

[BigRed389]

So he thinks we should cut the number of carriers to six, and use the mini-ESG's for regular patroling / deterrence??? (I skimmed in places.)

Can the mini-ESG's hack it (No organic AEW?)? Can we really expect to see another Falklands style (lucky...?) conflict again and come out on top? They also seem awfully small, non-redundant, and therefore vulnerable???

I dunno, I just hate the LCS.











Question.
True differences between the LHA/LHD, LSD, and LDP?
I have some guesses, but never been quite clear on that.

LHA/LHD is a "big deck" amphib. They're mini-carriers.

LSD and LPDs are similar sized, mainly one is specialized to carry equipment, the other personnel. That said, either one can carry both, it's just that they're geared towards one or the other. Much less aviation capability than the big deck.

Seems like LCS is here to stay. 55 total planned. Sure is a lot riding on those mission modules.

 

[Spekkio]

I agree, A4s, but RE: the whole Russia thing, Germany had an insane K: D ratio on the Eastern front; they simply ran out of supplies on the way to Moscow.

I'm not advocating we run our military the way Russia did in the late 1930s, but it just goes to show that the army with better toys isn't the one that always comes out ahead.

 

[phrogpilot73]

True differences between the LHA/LHD, LSD, and LDP?
I have some guesses, but never been quite clear on that.

There isn't really a huge difference between the LHA/LHD. Think of it as comparing the F/A-18 C/D to the F/A-18 E/F. Improvement on the basic design. An LHD is larger, can carry more people, has better medical facilities, more landing spots for aircraft, etc.

The differences between the LSD and LPD are a little tougher to break out. However, the LPD was designed primarily to carry cargo - and the LSD was designed to be an integral participant in an amphibious assault.