Back to news

April 22, 2020 | International, Naval

Defense Department study calls for cutting 2 of the US Navy’s aircraft carriers

By: David B. Larter

WASHINGTON – An internal Office of the Secretary of Defense assessment calls for the Navy to cut two aircraft carriers from its fleet, freeze the large surface combatant fleet of destroyers and cruisers around current levels and add dozens of unmanned or lightly manned ships to the inventory, according to documents obtained by Defense News.

The study calls for a fleet of nine carriers, down from the current fleet of 11, and for 65 unmanned or lightly manned surface vessels. The study calls for a surface force of between 80 and 90 large surface combatants, and an increase in the number of small surface combatants – between 55 and 70, which is substantially more than the Navy currently operates.

The assessment is part of an ongoing DoD-wide review of Navy force structure and seem to echo what Defense Secretary Mark Esper has been saying for months: the Defense Department wants to begin de-emphasizing aircraft carriers as the centerpiece of the Navy's force projection and put more emphasis on unmanned technologies that can be more easily sacrificed in a conflict and can achieve their missions more affordably.

A DoD spokesperson declined to comment on the force structure assessment.

"We will not comment on a DoD product that is pre-decisional,” said Navy Capt. Brook DeWalt.

The Navy is also working on its own force structure assessment that is slated to be closely aligned with the Marine Corps' stated desire to become more closely integrated with the Navy.

Cutting two aircraft carriers would permanently change the way the Navy approaches presence around the globe and force the service to rethink its model for projecting power across the globe, said Jerry Hendrix, a retired Navy captain and analyst with the Telemus Group.

“The deployment models we set – and we're still keeping – were developed around 15 carriers so that would all fall apart,” Hendrix said, referring to standing carrier presence requirements in the Middle East and Asia-Pacific. “This would be reintroducing reality. A move like this would signal a new pattern for the Navy's deployments that moves away from presence and moves towards surge and exercise as a model for carrier employment.”

A surge model would remove standing requirements for carriers and would mean that the regional combatant commanders would get carriers when they are available or when they are needed in an emergency.

With 9 carriers, the Navy would have between six and seven available at any given time with one in its mid-life refueling and overhaul and one or two in significant maintenance periods. The net result would be significantly fewer carrier deployments in each calendar year.

The assessment reducing the overall number of carriers also suggests that the OSD study didn't revamp the Carrier Air Wing to make it more relevant, Hendrix said.

Esper has taken a keen interest in Navy force structure, telling Defense News in March that he had directed the Pentagon's Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation (CAPE), along with the Navy, to conduct a series of war games and exercises in the coming months in order to figure out the way forward toward a lighter Navy, but said any major decisions will be based around the completion of a new joint war plan for the whole department, which the secretary said should be finished this summer.

“I think once we go through this process with the future fleet — that'll really be the new foundation, the guiding post,” Esper told Defense News. “It'll give us the general direction we need to go, and I think that'll be a big game changer in terms of future fleet, for structure, for the Navy and Marine Corps team.”

When it comes to carriers, Esper said he saw a lot of value in keeping carriers in the force structure, and that it wasn't going to be an all-or-nothing decision.

“This discussion often comes down to a binary: Is it zero or 12?” Esper said. “First of all, I don't know. I think carriers are very important. I think they demonstrate American power, American prestige. They get people's attention. They are a great deterrent. They give us great capability.”

Revamped Surface Fleet

The OSD assessment also calls for essentially freezing the size of the large surface combatant fleet. There are about 90 cruisers and destroyers in the fleet: the study recommended retaining at least 80 but keeping about as many as the Navy currently operates at the high end.

The Navy's small surface combatant program is essentially the 20 littoral combat ships in commission today, with another 15 under contract, as well as the 20 next-generation frigates, which would get to the minimum number in the assessment of 55 small combatants, with the additional 15 presumably being more frigates.

The big change comes in the small unmanned or lightly manned surface combatants. In his interview with Defense News, Esper said the Navy needed to focus integrating those technologies into the fleet.

“What we have to tease out is, what does that future fleet look like?” Esper said. “I think one of the ways you get there quickly is moving toward lightly manned [ships], which over time can be unmanned.

“We can go with lightly manned ships, get them out there. You can build them so they're optionally manned and then, depending on the scenario or the technology, at some point in time they can go unmanned.

“To me that's where we need to push. We need to push much more aggressively. That would allow us to get our numbers up quickly, and I believe that we can get to 355, if not higher, by 2030.”

The Navy is currently developing a family of unmanned surface vessels that are intended to increase the offensive punch for less money, while increasing the number of targets the Chinese military would have to locate in a fight.

That's a push that earned the endorsement of the Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Michael Gilday in comments late last year.

“I know that the future fleet has to include a mix of unmanned,” Gilday said. “We can't continue to wrap $2 billion ships around 96 missile tubes in the numbers we need to fight in a distributed way, against a potential adversary that is producing capability and platforms at a very high rate of speed. We have to change the way we are thinking.”

Aaron Mehta contributed to this report from Washington.

https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2020/04/20/defense-department-study-calls-for-cutting-2-of-the-us-navys-aircraft-carriers/

On the same subject

  • Better combat robot connectivity among improvements at major US Army network exercise

    September 7, 2021 | International, Land

    Better combat robot connectivity among improvements at major US Army network exercise

    Other advances at the annual experiment could translate to future battlefield capabilities.

  • Army Reassures Anxious Industry Over Stryker Cannon Competition

    June 18, 2020 | International, Land

    Army Reassures Anxious Industry Over Stryker Cannon Competition

    While at least two of six competitors have dropped out, the Army says it will still have plenty of 30mm turret options to choose from as it starts testing this fall. By SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR.on June 17, 2020 at 2:43 PM WASHINGTON: “This is a healthy competition,” the head of the Army Stryker program, Col. Bill Venable, reassured reporters. “My No. 1 mandate as the overall program manager was to protect the competition in this first phase.” Venable was allaying anxieties yesterday about the five-year-old effort to upgun the infantry transport version of the Stryker, an 8×8 armored vehicle that's become an Army workhorse worldwide since its controversial introduction in 2003. The wheeled Stryker was criticized for having lighter armor than the tracked M1 Abrams and M2 Bradley, although it's far better protected than Humvees. It often struggled over Afghan terrain. But its ability to move rapidly by road – with fewer stops for gas and maintenance than heavy armored vehicles – made it a favorite of US commanders from Iraq to Estonia. So, while overshadowed by high-tech prototypes from hypersonic missiles to high-speed helicopters to robotic tanks, the Army is doubling down on the proven Stryker in several ways: Two light infantry brigades are being converted into Stryker units, which increases the number of active-duty Stryker brigades from five to seven. (There are two more part-time units in the National Guard). Original manufacturer General Dynamics has a $2.4 billion contract to rebuild hundreds of existing Strykers as DVHA1 models with bigger engines, upgraded electronics, and mine-resistant “double-V” hulls. Leonardo DRS is developing a new anti-aircraft variant called IM-SHORAD. It is several months behind schedule due to COVID disruptions and software issues. And the Army is upgunning the basic infantry-carrier variant from an exposed 12.7mm (0.50 cal) machinegun, viable against infantry and unarmored trucks, to a turret-mounted Medium Caliber Weapon System (MCWS), a 30mm autocannon capable of killing light armored vehicles widely used by Russia General Dynamics urgently built 83 upgunned Strykers to reequip a single Europe-based brigade. Now the Army is holding an open competition for an official Program of Record (POR) to upgrade at least three more brigades with a more refined 30mm turret design – but we've heard some anxiety over whether any other vendor can really unseat the incumbent. Out of six companies awarded $150,000 design contracts last summer, Venable confirmed that at least two have dropped out. At the current — sensitive — stage of the competition, the program manager said after a quick consultation with his staff, he isn't allowed to disclose how many companies remain and how many have quit. But Venable did tell reporters that one vendor dropped out because it wasn't making adequate progress to meet the technical requirements, while another decided it didn't have a good enough chance of winning to justify the investment. While the Army gave competitors free Strykers and 30mm guns, they must provide their own turrets, electronics and other components to integrate the weapon and the vehicle into a functional fighting system, to be delivered to the Army for testing by August 10. “We're not funding their development,” Venable said, “[which is] in some cases millions of dollars they're going to invest.” While he won't second-guess any company's cost-benefit calculus, he's been working with all of them to try to keep them in the running, despite disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. “We have adjusted the evaluation strategy in order to maintain the competition as robust as we can,” he said. “This isn't the first competitive selection effort that I've run, and I will say we have more [viable competitors] than the incumbent, significantly more than the incumbent,” Venable told reporters. “We're going to present a variety of choices to the source selection authority to evaluate starting on 10 August.” Once the vehicles arrive in August, the Army will live-fire the 30 mm guns, check out the armor, and conduct a host of other tests. By January, Venable expects to have that data ready for the evaluation board, which aims to announce a winner by the end of April, 2021. After that, the winning company will start mass production, with the first vehicles scheduled for delivery to a Stryker unit in August or September 2022. That meets the Army's previously announced deadline to start fielding by the end of fiscal '22, Venable said. But the brigade will spend months more taking possession of the vehicles and training on them – a “Rubik's Cube” of logistics and scheduling, Venable said — before it's officially declared the “First Unit Equipped,” probably around March 2023. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/06/army-rebuffs-anxiety-over-stryker-cannon-competition

  • New COVID-19 bill extends contractor reimbursement, but no new funding

    December 17, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

    New COVID-19 bill extends contractor reimbursement, but no new funding

    By: Joe Gould WASHINGTON ― A bipartisan group of lawmakers has unveiled a $748 billion coronavirus relief proposal that includes an extension of a prized reimbursement program for federal contractors, but without the billions of dollars previously sought by defense firms. Defense officials have warned they will need to tap modernization and readiness funds if Congress does not appropriate at least $10 billion for defense contractors' coronavirus-related expenses, as authorized by Section 3610 of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act. However, the new proposal doesn't appropriate funding for the Section 3610 reimbursements. Negotiations on a final relief deal are ongoing, but the package includes a Section 3610 extension through April 30, 2021. The provision applies to all federal agencies, but it has been of particular interest to the Pentagon and defense industry. Added funding could come in the $1.4 trillion omnibus spending package for fiscal 2021, which is expected this week, or it could come with the next Congress and the incoming Biden administration in 2021. The defense industry has of late pushed for the extension of Section 3610 first, over added appropriations. “You have people who can't feed their families, you have people who are going to get evicted, you have people whose unemployment insurance is going to run out. They need Congress to pass this legislation,” Arnold Punaro, National Defense Industrial Association chairman, said of the new bipartisan relief package. “We prefer the defense industry have 3610, and we believe we'll have an opportunity with the new administration to make the case to them that it's still an important provision,” Punaro said, adding that the extension gives the incoming administration time to work on a “much more comprehensive approach.” Fifteen defense companies implored Congress on Friday to extend the program. In a letter to congressional leaders, they argued the extension is needed to maintain national security, but also “thousands of critical employees who would be difficult to replace within the industrial base.” “As COVID-19 rates hit record levels that were unanticipated not only when the CARES Act was enacted but just weeks ago, agencies are shifting work plans, reducing hours and taking other steps to ensure the health and safety of the workforce,” the letter stated. The reimbursement window was extended until Dec. 18 under the continuing resolution Congress passed on Friday. Originally the support was to stop at the end of fiscal 2020 in September. NDIA was among eight trade organizations that signed a Nov. 20 letter to Congress urging an extension of Section 3610. There have been a spate of similar letters from lawmakers to congressional leaders in recent weeks. “The current authority has saved thousands of NASA and defense contractors from being furloughed,” Florida Republican Rep. Bill Posey said in a letter with nine other lawmakers. “If the authority is not extended, many contractors — through no fault of their own — will face dire economic and financial consequences if they are restricted again from conducting their regular work on a NASA center or defense program and may be limited or unable due to the nature of their work to do so through a telework alternative.” Senate Intelligence Committee acting Chairman, Marco Rubio, R-Fla., and Vice Chairman Mark Warner, D-Va., pressed congressional leaders earlier this month to extend Section 3610. “Section 3610 has proven to be an important means of providing necessary relief during the pandemic to critical Intelligence Community industry partners ― and particularly to small businesses that provide highly specialized capabilities ― to retain key national security capabilities,” they said in a joint letter. https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2020/12/15/contractor-reimbursement-extension-in-new-covid-19-bill-but-no-new-funding/

All news