Back to news

May 12, 2020 | International, Naval

Build a fleet, not a constituency

By: and Timothy A. Walton

The U.S. Navy's long-awaited award of a contract to design and build a new class of frigates has brought with it calls to dramatically expand the planned class of 20 ships to a fleet of 70 or more hulls. Like recent congressional efforts to build more of today's amphibious ships or destroyers, these recommendations risk putting the Navy on an unsustainable path and could fail to influence Chinese or Russian adversaries the U.S. fleet is intended to help deter.

The Navy clearly needs guided-missile frigates. By bringing comparable capability with less capacity, frigates will provide a less expensive alternative to Arleigh Burke destroyers that are the mainstay of today's U.S. surface fleet. Freed of the requirement to conduct almost every surface combatant operation, destroyers would have more time to catch up on maintenance and training or be available to conduct missions demanding their greater missile capacity like Tomahawk missile strikes or ballistic missile defense.

However, the frigate's size — less than a destroyer, more than a littoral combat ship or corvette — also limits its ability to support U.S. Navy wartime operations. Frigates like the Franco-Italian FREMM can conduct the full range of European navy operations such as local air defense, maritime security and anti-submarine warfare, or ASW.

But the American FREMM variant will not have enough missile capacity for large or sustained attacks like those conducted by the U.S. Navy during the last several years in the Middle East, or like those that would be likely in a conflict with China. And although they could defend a nearby ship from air attack, the planned U.S. frigates could not carry enough longer-range surface-to-air interceptors to protect U.S. carrier and amphibious groups, or bases and population centers ashore.

Proponents argue frigates' capacity limitations could be mitigated by buying more of them, better enabling distributed maritime operations and growing naval presence in underserved areas like the Caribbean and Arctic. In a post-COVID-19 employment environment, accelerating frigate construction could also create jobs by starting production at additional shipyards.

Although they cost about $1 billion each to buy, the money to buy more frigates — at least initially — could be carried in the wave of post-pandemic economic recovery spending. But after a few years, that spigot will likely run dry, leaving the Navy to decide whether to continue spending about half the cost of a destroyer for a ship that has only a third as many missiles and cannot conduct several surface warfare missions.

The more significant fiscal challenge with buying more frigates is owning them. Based on equivalent ships, each frigate is likely to cost about $60 million annually to operate, crew and maintain. That is only about 25 percent less than a destroyer. For the U.S. Navy, which is already suffering manning shortages and deferring maintenance, fielding a fleet of 70 frigates in addition to more than 90 cruisers and destroyers will likely be unsustainable.

Instead of simply building more frigates to create jobs and grow the Navy, Department of Defense leaders should determine the overall number and mix of ships it needs and can afford within realistic budget constraints. The secretary of defense recently directed such an effort, which continues despite the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. This commentary's authors are participating in the study.

As recommended in a recent study, instead of buying more frigates to expand the fleet's capacity, the Navy would be better served by adding missile-equipped corvettes like those in European or Asian navies. These ships could carry as many missiles as the Navy's planned frigate but would not incorporate capabilities for area air defense or ASW. The smaller size and reduced capability of corvettes would reduce their sticker price to about one-third that of a frigate, and their sustainment cost to about a quarter that of destroyers.

The lower price for corvettes would allow more of them to be built and deployed, where they could team with other surface forces to provide additional missile magazines that could be reloaded by rotating corvettes to rear areas. In peacetime, corvettes would enable the Navy to expand presence and maritime security to underserved regions and provide more appropriate platforms for training and cooperation.

Frigates will still be needed, even with a new corvette joining the U.S. fleet. Frigates would replace destroyers in escort operations to protect civilian and noncombatant ships, like supply vessels. They would also conduct maritime security operations in places such as the Persian Gulf or South China Sea, where piracy, trafficking and paramilitary attacks occur. Most importantly, frigates would lead ASW operations, where their towed sonar systems could be more capable than the systems used by current destroyers.

Although ASW is an important naval mission, buying more frigates than planned to expand the Navy's ASW capacity is unnecessary and counterproductive. The Navy could gain more ASW capacity at lower cost and with less risk to manned ships by complementing its planned 20 frigates with unmanned systems including fixed sonars like SOSUS, deployable sonar systems that sit on the ocean floor, unmanned surface vessels that tow sonars and trail submarines, and unmanned aircraft that can deploy and monitor sonobuoys or attack submarines to suppress their operations or sink them.

The U.S. Navy is at the beginning of a period of dramatic change. New technologies for autonomy, sensing, weapons and networking are enabling new concepts for naval missions at the same time fiscal constraints and pressure from great power competitors are making traditional approaches to naval operations obsolete or unsustainable. The Navy's frigate award is a great start toward the future fleet, but the Navy needs to take advantage of this opportunity and assess the best mix of ships to field the capabilities it needs within the resources it is likely to have.

Bryan Clark is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, where Timothy A. Walton works as a fellow.

https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/05/11/build-a-fleet-not-a-constituency/

On the same subject

  • Pentagon wins brief waiver from government’s Huawei ban

    August 17, 2020 | International, C4ISR

    Pentagon wins brief waiver from government’s Huawei ban

    WASHINGTON ― The Trump administration is granting the Pentagon a temporary waiver of government-wide ban on contractors using Huawei and other Chinese-made telecommunications equipment, according to a memo obtained by Defense News. The move offers a weeks-long reprieve, until Sept. 30, for firms doing business with the Department of Defense. The firms are among those still reeling from the economic effects of the coronavirus pandemic and who lobbied for more time to comply with new far-reaching regulations. The original provision was to take effect Aug. 13. The administration had been finalizing regulations that would prohibit government contracting with companies whose supply chains contain products from five Chinese companies including Huawei, as mandated under of Section 889 of the 2019 National Defense Authorization Act. The administration, confronting China on trade and a host of issues, has deemed Huawei an espionage threat. Citing U.S. national security interests, Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe granted the Pentagon a temporary waiver to further assess a broader waiver request from DoD. The action came in a memo to Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment Ellen Lord.

  • Oshkosh to modernize U.S. Army heavy vehicles in $146.8M contract

    May 4, 2021 | International, Land

    Oshkosh to modernize U.S. Army heavy vehicles in $146.8M contract

    Contractor Oshkosh Defense announced a three-year extension of its contract with the U.S. Army on Monday to build heavy vehicles, valued at$146.8 million.

  • Saab Held Today its Annual Gripen Seminar

    May 16, 2018 | International, Aerospace

    Saab Held Today its Annual Gripen Seminar

    Seminar can be viewed at: http://saab-seminar.creo.se/180516/annual_gripen_seminar_2018 Article on Skies Magazine: Saab positions Gripen E as Canada's next-generation fighter Saab Group is confident that its single-engine Gripen E remains a viable contender for Canada's next generation fighter aircraft fleet, even though there are currently no immediate plans for Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) pilots to actually fly the aircraft. This was according to Richard Smith, head of Gripen marketing and sales during a May 16 briefing on Gripen market opportunities worldwide. He confirmed the planned visits included “site surveys and also some more senior visits as well, but at the moment, no plans for a flight evaluation.” He offered no details on who specifically would be visiting, but welcomed a suggestion that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau could be on the list. Canada is one of a number of countries Saab is targeting as a customer for the Mach 2 delta wing/canard fighter, the first variation of which entered service with the Swedish Air Force in 1997. Development of the Gripen E, featuring a General Electric F414G engine and an upgraded electronic warfare system (EWS), began about 2014 and it was first flown in June 2017. It is now said to be on track for delivery to the Swedish and Brazilian air forces. Smith said he expected that “continued dialogue so far this year” with Canadian government representatives was setting the stage for an early draft proposal, possibly in the third quarter of 2018, followed by the government's request for proposal for 80 aircraft early next year. He said the Gripen is suitable for all RCAF operations, including the high north, the Arctic and forward operating bases, which he said are “very similar to what we have in Sweden.” He later added that Saab would “tailor” its offering to Canada, as it would to other prospective customers with different operating environments. “Value for money, the industrial packages, that's what makes the Gripen rather unique and rather attractive.” On the seminal Canadian question about the reliability of a single-engine aircraft in Arctic and maritime missions, Gripen test pilot Mikhal Olsson said it had never been an issue. “I've been flying fighter aircraft since 1996 and I've been stationed . . . up in the Arctic,” he said. “I've been flying over the Atlantic, I've been flying across the sea eastbound to India (Saab is proposing the Gripen for the India Air Force), and every time I've been in a single-engine jet. I've never, ever, been worried about the engine [due to built-in redundancies]. “We have a really reliable system.” Olsson also said that as a “smart fighter” with net-centric technologies, a new sensor suite and long-range weapons, the E model is tailored to an “much more hostile and . . . much more unpredictable” operational environment where “new conflicts arise and disappear much quicker that we've seen before.” Gripen EWS sales director Inga Bergstrom added that electronic warfare was not the aircraft's primary function. Rather, EWS was “an enabler to . . . a successful mission” and because it was upgradeable software, it could deal with evolving threats. Asked about having to compete in some markets with used aircraft, Smith said these were, at best, an interim solution. “We're going to operate it for 30 to 40 years,” he replied. “Second-hand fighters . . . need to be replaced after maybe 10 years, and the capability that we bring is somewhat different to those old fighters. . . . Even though there has been, as you say, some headwind recently, I remain very optimistic about the outlook for Gripen both short term and longer term.” Jonas Hjelm, head of Aeronautics at Saab, acknowledged that although the company can't compete with used fighters because of the price difference, he agreed that the upgradeable Gripen could be operated for potentially more than 40 years without having to go through a new acquisition process, so the total package “makes sense for very many of the countries that are now in process of actually selecting a new fighter system.” Asked how the Gripen could compete with “stealth” platforms, Hjelm declined comment on competitors' aircraft but conceded that it was a difficult challenge. Calling stealth a “fashion word,” he said that while the newest Gripen variants have “stealth features,” Saab has chosen “different paths to have a low signature.” Besides, with “every smart technique you come up with to defend yourself, there will be a pushback from the other side to detect you . . . . We continue all the time to see what we can develop . . . to become more invisible.” https://www.skiesmag.com/news/saab-positions-gripen-e-canadas-next-generation-fighter/

All news