Back to news

May 11, 2020 | International, Naval

The US Navy’s modernization rush must not harm mine countermeasures

By: Rep. Rob Wittman

As the world continues to grapple with the COVID-19 pandemic, we are reminded that even in a time of unprecedented technological growth and development, simple and primitive threats have the ability to radically alter our way of life. In spite of astonishing medical advancements, some threats, unfortunately, remain timeless.

Many people have drawn comparisons between the current coronvirus pandemic and the Spanish flu pandemic of 1918. The Spanish flu was caused by an H1N1 virus that was first identified in the United States in military personnel in the spring of 1918. It would eventually infect one-third of the global population, killing approximately 675,000 people in the United States and an estimated 50 million people worldwide. All of this was happening in the midst of the “war to end all wars” — World War I.

While the homeland was battling the flu pandemic, the U.S. Navy was battling the U-boat threat in the Atlantic.

In World War I, German submarines sank almost 5,000 ships, most of them merchant vessels. To help counter the U-boat threat, the United States and the United Kingdom embarked on an unprecedented and ambitious project: the construction of the North Sea Mine Barrage — a 230-mile-long underwater barrier of sea mines stretching from Aberdeen, Scotland, to Ekersund, Norway. The effort was a marvel of modern manufacturing, producing 1,000 sea mines every day. Over five months, the allies eventually laid over 70,000 sea mines, helping to contain the U-boat threat and protect allied shipping.

As a second wave of the flu pandemic raged across the globe, World War I finally came to an end in November 1918. The American and British navies now had the task of cleaning up 70,000 live sea mines in the unforgiving North Sea. These primitive mines were anchored to the bottom of the sea, and the U.S. and U.K. had the advantage of knowing precisely where they were located because they had laid them. Despite those advantages, it took 82 ships and over 4,000 men — 10 times the assets that were required to lay the mines — to clean up the North Sea Mine Barrage.

After almost a year of mine-clearing efforts, the operation was declared complete. Navy studies would later reveal that only approximately 40 percent of the American mines had actually been cleared, and mines continued to wash ashore for years after the end of the war.

Fast forward a century and sea mines have proliferated around the world. Since the end World War II, sea mines have damaged or sunk four times as many U.S. Navy ships as any other method of attack.

U.S. adversaries have paid attention. Russia was a pioneer in mine warfare and is estimated to have as many as 250,000 sea mines in its inventory. China is not far behind, with an inventory of around 100,000, including some of the world's most advanced mines. China has hundreds of mine-capable ships and aircraft, and could deploy thousands of mines a day during a conflict.

To counter the mine threat, the U.S. Navy relies on 11 wooden-hulled Avenger-class mine countermeasures ships, 31 MH-53E Sea Dragon helicopters and a handful of explosive ordnance disposal platoons. The Navy wants to retire both the Avengers and Sea Dragons by 2025, while efforts to field any replacement capability have continued to falter.

While the U.S. Navy has focused its research and funding on countering emerging threats such as advanced radars and hypersonic missiles, a time-tested threat waits patiently in the waters around the globe; and if we ignore the lessons of history, a centuries-old technology could lead to our defeat. Mine warfare, like public health, is an area that rarely attracts attention or significant investment until a crisis emerges. We should not wait until American lives are in peril before we take action.

We need to change course immediately. First, the Navy must maintain its existing mine countermeasures forces until a credible replacement is fielded. Second, the Navy must make a significant investment to recapitalize the mine countermeasures force both in time and quantity to deliver a credible force.

Unfortunately, the Navy has spent billions of dollars and wasted precious years pursuing a mine countermeasure module program that, even if it worked as advertised, would have neither the capability nor the capacity to effectively counter an enemy mine threat anticipated in our National Defense Strategy.

Whether it's a pandemic or a proliferated naval threat, our citizens expect the United States to respond effectively, and we must make the necessary investments to counter the threats to our nation and our Navy.

https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/05/08/the-us-navys-modernization-rush-must-not-harm-mine-countermeasures/

On the same subject

  • The US Military Is Genetically Engineering New Life Forms To Detect Enemy Subs

    December 7, 2018 | International, Naval, C4ISR

    The US Military Is Genetically Engineering New Life Forms To Detect Enemy Subs

    BY PATRICK TUCKER The Pentagon is also looking at living camouflage, self-healing paint, and a variety of other applications of engineered organisms, but the basic science remains a challenge. How do you detect submarines in an expanse as large as the ocean? The U.S. military hopes that common marine microorganisms might be genetically engineered into living tripwires to signal the passage of enemy subs, underwater vessels, or even divers. It's one of many potential military applications for so-called engineered organisms, a field that promises living camouflage that reacts to its surroundings to better avoid detection, new drugs and medicines to help deployed forces survive in harsh conditions, and more. But the research is in its very early stages, military officials said. The Naval Research Laboratory, or NRL, is supporting the research. Here's how it would work: You take an abundant sea organism, like Marinobacter, and change its genetic makeup to react to certain substances left by enemy vessels, divers, or equipment. These could be metals, fuel exhaust, human DNA, or some molecule that's not found naturally in the ocean but is associated with, say, diesel-powered submarines. The reaction could take the form of electron loss, which could be detectable to friendly sub drones. Full article: https://www.defenseone.com/technology/2018/12/us-military-genetically-engineering-new-life-forms-detect-enemy-subs/153200/

  • Bulgaria overhauls Mi-17 and Mi-24 helicopters

    August 7, 2018 | International, Aerospace

    Bulgaria overhauls Mi-17 and Mi-24 helicopters

    Igor Bozinovski On 30 July, the Bulgarian Ministry of Defence published a tender for the general overhaul of two Mi-17 transport and four Mi-24V combat helicopters of the Bulgarian Air Force (BuAF). The deadline for submission of bids is 3 September, with a framework agreement covering a period of 48 months to be signed with the successful bidder. The procurement is valued at BGN37.3 million (USD22 billion): BGN11.3 million for the Mi-17s and BGN26 million for the Mi-24Vs. Full Article: https://www.janes.com/article/82199/bulgaria-overhauls-mi-17-and-mi-24-helicopters

  • European Nations Are Teaming Up to Make a 6th-Gen Fighter. Can the US Keep Up?

    June 19, 2019 | International, Aerospace

    European Nations Are Teaming Up to Make a 6th-Gen Fighter. Can the US Keep Up?

    By Oriana Pawlyk SALON DU BOURGET, PARIS -- France made a splash at this year's Paris Air Show, unveiling a sixth-generation fighter design, the Future Combat Air System. The Dassault-made aircraft, which is set to be made in collaboration with Airbus and acquired by Spain and Germany as well as France, represents a renaissance in European aviation, French President Emmanuel Macron said. The unveiling comes just a year after BAE Systems debuted a concept model for a future British 6th-generation fighter, the Tempest. Is Europe now on a trajectory to beat the U.S. to acquisition of 6th-generation fighter technology? "I would have to say no," Acting Air Force Secretary Matt Donovan said here Monday during the airshow. Donovan and Dr. Will Roper, assistant secretary of the Air Force for acquisition, technology and logistics, both noted last year upon the unveiling of the Tempest fighter in the U.K. that, while competition is "a good thing," any fighter NATO partners and allies aim to produce in the future should be complementary to U.S. capabilities. They stressed the same message after France unveiled the Future Combat Air System. "We're putting a lot of focus into our next-generation programs right now to make sure we're going to lead the way to sixth-generation systems," Roper said. Roper and Donovan said they have yet to have a full briefing about what Europe's latest fighters, including the United Kingdom's Tempest jet, look like beneath the surface design. "We would just like to cooperate and collaborate ... as well as to share technology, [which is] absolutely important for future interoperability if we're going to go to war as coalitions, which we always do, so that's really important," Donovan said. Roper said it's not just about what a fighter can do, but also how it's made. Discussions are ongoing within the Air Force about the need for a sixth-gen fighter, he said. Leveraging the use of "digital engineering," which sometimes allows the service to bypass the regular manufacturing process for parts, will give developers the ability to design and change blueprints with more flexibility, Roper said. The Air Force is currently using digital engineering for A-10 Warthogs, as well as the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent program, which is set to replace the Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile system. "We [believe the] production technology may be the most game-changing component if it allows us to move into a different paradigm of doing rapid design spirals and updates," Roper told reporters here, adding that technology growth paired with digital engineering will allow for faster production of future aircraft. Roper said the Defense Department is used to outdated acquisition practices, out of step with what the pilot may need to outpace adversaries. "In addition to looking at a lot of classified capabilities we want to give future warfighters, we also want to give manufacturers a different way of making that cutting-edge technology. Expect [that] for what we bring to the table for sixth-gen," he said. "We're here to also ... connect with the future," Roper added. "Aviation is a booming business right now in Europe, so we're interested in seeing who the new movers and shakers are, engaging with some of the companies here in France, but also showing that some of the systems that we bring to bear from the U.S. are the best in the world, and we see a future where we maintain that edge far past our successors." https://www.military.com/daily-news/2019/06/18/european-nations-are-teaming-make-6th-gen-fighter-can-us-keep.html

All news