And those who think government is nothing but a problem might see it does a lot more good than they ever thought possible.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Road to 350: What Does the US Navy Do Anyway?
- Thread starter Randy Daytona
- Start date
And those who think government is nothing but a problem might see it does a lot more good than they ever thought possible.
We actually do that already through a myriad of programs of service in addition to the military, from the Peace Corps to rural health care grants to pay med school loans. Could they be put under a single national service program and expanded? Sure, there is some validity to the idea but I think it would run into some political headwinds from the right (way too much) and the left (way too little). The student loan forgiveness program is a great idea and an 'easy win' to rewarding service but it should be implemented a lot better (I am somewhat familiar with the wickets).
D
Deleted member 67144 scul
Guest
More on topic, it looks like there's a consideration to decommission 6 CGs in 2021 and 2022. https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2...o-scrap-its-largest-combatants-to-save-money/
Bonus: There's commentary from Jerry Hendrix.
Bonus: There's commentary from Jerry Hendrix.
I think you would find reaction to such a proposal would run the full spectrum from folks on the right. Those with a more libertarian streak would oppose it. Many would support it. The left would more universally oppose because they just hate America ?.
ABMD
Bullets don't fly without Supply
not to thread jack, but I was talking with a coworker about this subject today. With schools, both private and public, hoarding money in their endowments (Harvard has close to $40 BILLION!!) why aren't they basically giving free tuition to all students that can get into the schools? Public universities and colleges receive state funds (tax payers money) meanwhile also receiving funds from private donors. Then the schools sit on stockpiles of cash and keep raising tuition. This list of the top 100 richest schools all have over $1 BILLION in their endowments, but yet tuition keeps rising? Instead of these debt strapped Bernie lemmings asking the government for a bailout, why don't they channel that frustration at the
Also, I agree with what was mentioned earlier, we need more people learning the trades. Not everyone needs a degree. I have several people in my family that have started their own business in the trades (some with degrees some without) and are doing more than OK. Sure it is stressful running a business, but after a few years they are able to basically sit back and manage the workers and bid new business without getting their hands dirty.
"How'd you pay for college dad?"
"Shit I just put it on the credit card."
"How the fuck did you manage that?"
"Well it was only $500 a semester at State."
"Shit I just put it on the credit card."
"How the fuck did you manage that?"
"Well it was only $500 a semester at State."
I was planning on switching. Make it a Tier 1.
D
Deleted member 67144 scul
Guest
I certainly agree with you, and I attended two universities with over $1 billion in endowment. But there were certainly many students who had and continue to take note of this and channel their frustration at the universities. However, one just doesn't hear about it as much as the politicians and their supporters harping about free college from the government because that's what's always on the news. Especially since it's one of those "Ask what your country can do for you" kind of things that is trendy these days.
Couldn't agree more about learning a trade, and I think there should be more done in that respect to guide teenagers on how to get into a trade rather than just college or taking whatever is available in the workforce as the often touted default options. But all in all, I'm rather delighted that my university education enabled me to become a well-endowed corporate vassal.
That might be the total cash value of the endowments but many of the individual monetary or other gifts that make up endowments to the schools more often than not come with strings attached from the donors. Billionaire A might be interested in archeology so his $25 million gift can only be used for archeology-related projects and professors, while Multimillionaire B's $4 million gift can only be used for basketball scholarships and so on. I was bored one day and went through all the scholarships at my school, they were listed in our guidebook, and the vast majority had some restriction like state of origin, major or family association (e.g. son of a Marine Veteran).
Most state schools have seen their state funding slashed in the last few years, especially after the state budgets were squeezed by the Great Recession, and the funding has yet to recover. The last I saw at my state school funding had dropped from ~40% of school funding overall when I was there to ~16% a few years ago.
If you dig a bit, there are a number of top tier private colleges (Bowdoin comes to mind) that use their endowment in large part for that exact purpose - financial aid is based on need, and in the form of grants rather than loans, so that when an individual is accepted, there's a sliding scale based on what their household can pay, and that's what they pay. The rest is covered by the endowment.
That is a difficult question, but one the Navy must find the answer to if it is going to expand - and considering the challenge in the Pacific, one the Navy must address.
From an aviation perspective, one of the easiest would be using contractors in the training command. Nobody wants to go that route, but considering the shortage of pilots it would certainly be worth the consideration. Other areas would be taking the Navy dets off of vertrep and giving all of those to contractors. I would be interested in hearing what the SWO's here suggest considering manning the ships.
Maybe we shouldn't be expanding. Blasphemy, I know.
US ships are absurdly overmanned compared to some of our overseas counterparts.
That doesn’t mean they’re right and we’re wrong, but our newer ships (eg DDG1000) are also crewed for a hell of a lot less. I suspect the right answer lies in a mix of re examining how we do maintenance and upkeep and systems automation.
But if we go that route we’ll almost certainly wind up top heavier than we are now, because more ships means almost directly proportional increase in Os but not the case for enlisted manning.
Found some accounts and data concerning mines and missiles (nothing on torpedoes). Despite hitting a mine, it was still considered safer for the big tanker to take the lead and the warships to follow in its wake. Perhaps the double hulls, the multiple tanks with plumbing designed to move large amounts of liquids and by design a necessary and effective fire suppression system makes the tankers more difficult to sink than some here have surmised. Certainly the captains of the USS Kidd and the USS Fox which decided to follow in trail seemed to think so.
From the Washington Post concerning the Bridgeton Incident. https://www.washingtonpost.com/arch...abdf554/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.ff1becd596ef
It was soon clear to officers on the bridge of the supertanker, however, that the damage was minor. "The hit is port {left side} amidships, 100 to 200 feet aft of the bow," said one radio report. "There is no danger to the ship, {there is} plenty of reserve buoyancy here." After the initial damage inspection, the convoy closed ranks to single file, with the Bridgeton in the lead, and the flotilla picked up speed to 10 knots. Murphy, the destroyer captain, told reporters that the mine that hit the Bridgeton was extremely powerful. "If we had hit that, it would have done enormous damage to the Kidd," the captain said. The huge supertanker is more able to absorb such blows.
In a tactic that appeared to put the safety of the Kuwaiti supertanker second to the safety of U.S. warships, the convoy proceeded to Kuwait after the mine went off using the Bridgeton as a plow through the gulf waters in hopes that its massive hull would detonate any additional mines.
Aboard the USS Fox, Capt. William Mathis told reporters that the Kuwaiti supertanker "can take hits easier than we can."
A study from The Strauss Center at the University of Texas had some interesting data on the Tanker War of the late 1980's, comparing tankers to bulk carriers and freighters.
https://www.strausscenter.org/hormuz/tanker-war.html
Lessons Learned
The Tanker War provides a useful historical background on a hypothetical future conflict in the Strait of Hormuz. Below are some key takeaways from the eight-year conflict:
Oil tankers are not very vulnerable to damage. 61 percent of the ships attacked during the Tanker War were oil tankers. In total, only 55 of the 239 petroleum tankers (23 percent) were completely sunk or declared CTL, compared to 39 percent of bulk carriers and 34 percent of freighters.
As for adaptability, the Expeditionary Transfer Dock which are in service and are being built are based on the Alaska class VLCC tanker. The original purpose built design was $1.5 billion per copy, by adapting the existing tanker design, the price was reduced 66% down to $500 million.
ESB variant USS Lewis B. Puller
It was mentioned earlier that WW2 was won with the Essex class carrier, etc. However one could argue that adapting civilian designs was more cost effective for some missions that did not require an Essex. Only 24 Essex class were built, however 122 escort carriers were built - the Avenger class, the Sangamon class, and the Bogue class escort carriers were all built on merchant hulls. With shipbuilding cost very high and some of the designs over budget, behind schedule or quite disappointing as well as not being built in the numbers planned, perhaps it might be worth a study to see if adapting some civilian hulls for specialized missions might be worthwhile.
Finally, it does seem to be a time of innovation as the Surface Navy discusses distributed lethality
https://usnwc.edu/News-and-Events/News/Distributed-Lethality-concept-gains-focus-at-NWC
and the Marines testing HIMARS from the decks of LPD's.
http://cimsec.org/want-broadside-marines-need-naval-fire-support/31347
Will be interesting to see where it leads...
Looks like 2 more, and possibly 3, ESB's.
General Dynamics NASSCO has been awarded a contract by the U.S. Navy worth up to $1.6 billion for the construction of the sixth and seventh ships of the Expeditionary Sea Base (ESB) program, as well as an option for ESB 8.
https://www.maritime-executive.com/article/contract-awarded-for-additional-expeditionary-sea-bases
https://news.usni.org/2019/08/13/na...ough-new-weapons-rather-than-new-hull-designs
