DOCSLIB.ORG

Restoring American Seapower a New Fleet Architecture for the United States Navy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Restoring American Seapower a New Fleet Architecture for the United States Navy RESTORING AMERICAN SEAPOWER A NEW FLEET ARCHITECTURE FOR THE UNITED STATES NAVY BRYAN CLARK PETER HAYNES BRYAN MCGRATH CRAIG HOOPER JESSE SLOMAN TIMOTHY A. WALTON RESTORING AMERICAN SEAPOWER A NEW FLEET ARCHITECTURE FOR THE UNITED STATES NAVY BRYAN CLARK PETER HAYNES BRYAN MCGRATH CRAIG HOOPER JESSE SLOMAN TIMOTHY A. WALTON 2017 ABOUT THE CENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND BUDGETARY ASSESSMENTS (CSBA) The Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments is an independent, nonpartisan policy research institute established to promote innovative thinking and debate about national security strategy and investment options. CSBA’s analysis focuses on key questions related to existing and emerging threats to U.S. national security, and its goal is to enable policymakers to make informed decisions on matters of strategy, security policy, and resource allocation. ©2017 Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. All rights reserved. Updated January 23, 2017. ABOUT THE AUTHORS Bryan Clark is a Senior Fellow at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. Prior to joining CSBA in 2013, Bryan Clark was Special Assistant to the Chief of Naval Operations and Director of his Commander’s Action Group, where he led development of Navy strategy and implemented new initiatives in electromagnetic spectrum operations, undersea warfare, expeditionary operations and personnel and readiness management. Mr. Clark served in the Navy headquarters staff from 2004 to 2011, leading studies in the Assessment Division and participating in the 2006 and 2010 Quadrennial Defense Reviews. He is the recipient of the Department of the Navy Superior Service Medal and the Legion of Merit. Peter Haynes is a Senior Fellow at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments specializing in grand strategy, maritime and naval strategy, the development of strategy and operational concepts, naval and air warfare, the future of conflict, special operations, and irregular warfare. Prior to retiring from the U.S. Navy in 2016 as a captain, he served as the Deputy Director, Strategy, Plans, and Policy (J5) at U.S. Special Operations Command. He is the recipient of the Defense Superior Service Medal, the Legion of Merit, the Air Medal with Combat “V,” and the Navy/ Marine Corps Commendation Medal with Combat “V,” as well as the 2009–2010 Naval History and Heritage Command’s Samuel Eliot Morison Naval History Scholarship. Bryan McGrath is the Assistant Director of Hudson Institute’s Center for American Seapower and the Managing Director of The FerryBridge Group LLC. An active duty naval officer from 1987 to 2008, he served in cruisers and destroyers, commanding USS BULKELEY (DDG 84) from 2004– 2006, during which time the ship earned the Battle “E” Award and the USS ARIZONA Memorial Trophy, signifying its status as the most combat-ready ship in the Fleet. Craig Hooper is an author and commentator on naval affairs at www.NextNavy.com. After earning a Ph.D. in Immunology and Infectious Diseases at Harvard University, he lectured at the Naval Postgraduate School. In 2011, Dr. Hooper was recruited to serve as a Vice President at Austal USA, builder of the Littoral Combat Ship and Expeditionary Fast Transport. He now works for Maryland-based Gryphon Scientific as a Senior Analyst, focusing on national security solutions. Jesse Sloman is an analyst at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. Prior to joining CSBA, Mr. Sloman worked for the Council on Foreign Relations. He served as an intelligence officer in the Marine Corps from 2009 to 2013 and a civil affairs officer in the Marine Corps Reserve from 2013 to 2016. He is the recipient of the 2012 Major General Michael E. Ennis Award for Literary Excellence. Timothy A. Walton is a Senior Analyst at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. Mr. Walton focuses his research and analysis on trends in future warfare and Asia-Pacific security dynamics. Prior to joining CSBA, Mr. Walton was a Principal of Alios Consulting Group and an Associate of Delex Consulting, Studies, and Analysis, both defense and business strategy firms. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The opinions and analysis in this study are those of the authors, but draw from the results of an integrated series of workshops, wargames, and exercises. Any shortcomings, however, are solely the responsibility of the authors. This study benefited greatly from the independent reviews of Karl Hasslinger, Dr. Frank Hoffman, and Steven Anderson. The authors would like to thank Maureen Smolskis, Michelle Shevin-Coetzee, and Ryan Boone for their terrific work on the graphics for this report, without which the concepts would be much more difficult to explain. We also want to thank CDR Robert Wells, LCDR April Bakken, Dr. Renee Fye, William Hardy, James Goodheart, and Patrick Nagel for their assistance on the logistics analysis. Most importantly, the authors would like to thank Kamilla Gunzinger for her infinite patience and expert editing and production to get this report completed on time. CSBA receives funding from a broad and diverse group of funders, including private foundations, government agencies, and corporations. A complete list of these organizations can be found on our web site at http://csbaonline.org/about/contributors. Cover Photo: America-class LHA 6 courtesy of Huntington Ingalls Industries. Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................. I A New Strategic Approach .................................................i New Operating Concepts ..................................................ii Changing the Deployed Fleet ..............................................iii A Revised Naval Posture. iv New Force Packages, Platforms, and Unmanned Systems ...........................v Changes to Readiness and Training Cycles .................................... vi Composition and Costs of the Proposed Fleet . .vii Implementing the Proposed Fleet Architecture .................................. ix Conclusion ........................................................... ix CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ......................................................... 1 A Changing Strategic Environment. 1 Shifting from Efficiency to Effectiveness ...................................... 3 Developing a New Fleet Architecture ......................................... 5 Sustaining American Competitive Advantage ................................... 8 CHAPTER 2: THE EMERGING GREAT POWER COMPETITION ................................. 9 The Imperative to Deter Great Power Conflict ................................. 13 Conventional Deterrence in the 21st Century. 13 The Role of Naval Forces in Deterrence. 15 CHAPTER 3: OPERATING CONCEPTS AND WARFIGHTING APPROACHES OF THE FUTURE FLEET .... 17 Implications for Missions and Concepts ..................................... 18 Air and Missile Defense ................................................. 19 Electromagnetic Spectrum Warfare ......................................... 23 Anti-Submarine Warfare ................................................. 26 Undersea Warfare ..................................................... 30 Surface and Strike Warfare ............................................... 32 Mine Warfare ......................................................... 33 Amphibious Operations ................................................. 35 Implications for Fleet Architecture .......................................... 40 CHAPTER 4: THE ORGANIZATION OF THE DEPLOYED FLEET—THE DETERRENCE FORCE AND THE MANEUVER FORCE ....................................................... 41 The Fleet of Today ..................................................... 41 A New Structure for the Fleet ............................................. 44 The Deterrence Force .................................................. 46 The Maneuver Force ................................................... 48 CHAPTER 5: NAVAL POSTURE ....................................................... 49 North and South America Deterrence Force. 50 Northern Europe Deterrence Force ......................................... 51 Mediterranean Sea and West Africa Deterrence Force ........................... 54 Western Indian Ocean and Persian Gulf Deterrence Force ......................... 58 Indian Ocean Deterrence Force ............................................ 60 East China Sea and South China Sea Deterrence Force .......................... 60 Western Pacific and Philippine Sea Deterrence Force ............................ 62 Arctic Deterrence Force ................................................. 65 Maneuver Force ....................................................... 65 Logistics and Support Forces ............................................. 67 CHAPTER 6: NEW SHIPS, UNMANNED VEHICLES, WEAPONS, SENSORS, AND MISSION SYSTEMS .. 71 Aircraft Carriers ....................................................... 71 Submarines ......................................................... 73 Unmanned Underwater Vehicles ........................................... 74 Surface Combatants ................................................... 77 Unmanned Surface Vehicles .............................................. 79 Amphibious Vessels .................................................... 80 CLF Vessels ......................................................... 81 Unmanned Vehicle Support Vessels/Tenders .................................. 83 Salvage Ships ........................................................ 84 Weapons, Sensors, and Mission Systems. 84 CHAPTER 7: IMPLICATIONS FOR
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Roy Williamson
    #214 ROY A. WILLIAMSON: USS PYRO Steven Haller (SH): My name is Steven Haller and we're at the Sheraton Waikiki Hotel in Honolulu, Hawaii. It's December 5, 1991, at about 3:30 PM. And I have the pleasure to be speaking with Mr. Roy A. Williamson today. We're doing this tape as a part of the USS ARIZONA Memorial and National Park Services' oral history program, in cooperation with KHET-TV, Honolulu. Mr. Williamson was on the ammunition ship, PYRO, at the time of the attack. He was twenty-five years of age and was a Carpenter's Mate, First Class. So I want to thank you very much for joining us and taking the time to share your memories. Let's see, how did you get in the Navy? Roy A. Williamson (RW): Back during the depression, whenever there was no -- there was jobs, but no money, and I saw a sign on the corner, says, "Come join the Navy and see the world," and I went in and, and they were only taking a couple of 'em a month from Oklahoma. And I went out and passed the examination, and they told me that if you don't get called within a month or within six months, then come back and take it over again to keep on the list. And yet I was called within six months, before the six months was up, and went into the service and spent four years in the Navy, and then got out and they told me that since the war was like it was, or would be coming up probably, that I was draft age and if I didn't ship over, they would draft me.
    [Show full text]
  • The Somali Maritime Space
    LEA D A U THORS: C urtis Bell Ben L a wellin CONTRIB UTI NG AU THORS: A l e x andr a A mling J a y Benso n S asha Ego r o v a Joh n Filitz Maisie P igeon P aige Roberts OEF Research, Oceans Beyond Piracy, and Secure Fisheries are programs of One Earth Future http://dx.doi.org/10.18289/OEF.2017.015 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS With thanks to John R. Hoopes IV for data analysis and plotting, and to many others who offered valuable feedback on the content, including John Steed, Victor Odundo Owuor, Gregory Clough, Jérôme Michelet, Alasdair Walton, and many others who wish to remain unnamed. Graphic design and layout is by Andrea Kuenker and Timothy Schommer of One Earth Future. © 2017 One Earth Future Stable Seas: Somali Waters | i TABLE OF CONTENTS STABLE SEAS: SOMALI WATERS .......................................................................................................1 THE SOMALI MARITIME SPACE ........................................................................................................2 COASTAL GOVERNANCE.....................................................................................................................5 SOMALI EFFORTS TO PROVIDE MARITIME GOVERNANCE ..............................................8 INTERNATIONAL EFFORTS TO PROVIDE MARITIME GOVERNANCE ..........................11 MARITIME PIRACY AND TERRORISM ...........................................................................................13 ILLEGAL, UNREPORTED, AND UNREGULATED FISHING ....................................................17 ARMS TRAFFICKING
    [Show full text]
  • Not for Publication Until Released by the House Subcommittee on Defense Committee on Appropriations
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNTIL RELEASED BY THE HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON DEFENSE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS STATEMENT OF VICE ADMIRAL LUKE M. McCOLLUM, U.S. NAVY CHIEF OF NAVY RESERVE BEFORE THE HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON DEFENSE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS FISCAL YEAR 2021 NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVE March 3, 2020 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNTIL RELEASED BY THE HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON DEFENSE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS Contents INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 4 NAVY RESERVE FORCE ................................................................................................................................... 5 Commander, Navy Reserve Forces Command (CNRFC) ........................................................................... 5 Commander, Naval Air Forces Reserve (CNAFR) ...................................................................................... 5 Commander, Naval Information Force Reserve (CNIFR) .......................................................................... 6 Navy Expeditionary Combat Command (NECC) ........................................................................................ 7 PERSONNEL ................................................................................................................................................... 7 Civilian Skills .............................................................................................................................................. 7
    [Show full text]
  • A New Carrier Race? Yoji Koda
    Naval War College Review Volume 64 Article 4 Number 3 Summer 2011 A New Carrier Race? Yoji Koda Follow this and additional works at: https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/nwc-review Recommended Citation Koda, Yoji (2011) "A New Carrier Race?," Naval War College Review: Vol. 64 : No. 3 , Article 4. Available at: https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/nwc-review/vol64/iss3/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at U.S. Naval War College Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Naval War College Review by an authorized editor of U.S. Naval War College Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile Composite Default screen Koda: A New Carrier Race? A NEW CARRIER RACE? Strategy, Force Planning, and JS Hyuga Vice Admiral Yoji Koda, Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (Retired) n 18 March 2009 JS Hyuga (DDH 181) was commissioned and delivered to Othe Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF). The unique characteris- tic of this ship is its aircraft-carrier-like design, with a “through” flight deck and an island on the starboard side. Hyuga was planned in the five-year Midterm De- fense Buildup Plan (MTDBP) of 2001 and funded in Japanese fiscal year (JFY) 2004 as the replacement for the aging first-generation helicopter-carrying de- stroyer (DDH), JS Haruna (DDH 141), which was to reach the end of its service life of thirty-five years in 2009. The second ship of the new class, JS Ise (DDH 182), of the JFY 2006 program, was commissioned 16 March 2011.
    [Show full text]
  • Navy Ship Names: Background for Congress
    Navy Ship Names: Background for Congress (name redacted) Specialist in Naval Affairs December 13, 2017 Congressional Research Service 7-.... www.crs.gov RS22478 Navy Ship Names: Background for Congress Summary Names for Navy ships traditionally have been chosen and announced by the Secretary of the Navy, under the direction of the President and in accordance with rules prescribed by Congress. Rules for giving certain types of names to certain types of Navy ships have evolved over time. There have been exceptions to the Navy’s ship-naming rules, particularly for the purpose of naming a ship for a person when the rule for that type of ship would have called for it to be named for something else. Some observers have perceived a breakdown in, or corruption of, the rules for naming Navy ships. On July 13, 2012, the Navy submitted to Congress a 73-page report on the Navy’s policies and practices for naming ships. For ship types now being procured for the Navy, or recently procured for the Navy, naming rules can be summarized as follows: The first Ohio replacement ballistic missile submarine (SBNX) has been named Columbia in honor of the District of Columbia, but the Navy has not stated what the naming rule for these ships will be. Virginia (SSN-774) class attack submarines are being named for states. Aircraft carriers are generally named for past U.S. Presidents. Of the past 14, 10 were named for past U.S. Presidents, and 2 for Members of Congress. Destroyers are being named for deceased members of the Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard, including Secretaries of the Navy.
    [Show full text]
  • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT of INDIANA SOUTH BEND DIVISION in Re FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE SYSTEM, INC., EMPLOYMEN
    USDC IN/ND case 3:05-md-00527-RLM-MGG document 3279 filed 03/22/19 page 1 of 354 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA SOUTH BEND DIVISION ) Case No. 3:05-MD-527 RLM In re FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE ) (MDL 1700) SYSTEM, INC., EMPLOYMENT ) PRACTICES LITIGATION ) ) ) THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO: ) ) Carlene Craig, et. al. v. FedEx Case No. 3:05-cv-530 RLM ) Ground Package Systems, Inc., ) ) PROPOSED FINAL APPROVAL ORDER This matter came before the Court for hearing on March 11, 2019, to consider final approval of the proposed ERISA Class Action Settlement reached by and between Plaintiffs Leo Rittenhouse, Jeff Bramlage, Lawrence Liable, Kent Whistler, Mike Moore, Keith Berry, Matthew Cook, Heidi Law, Sylvia O’Brien, Neal Bergkamp, and Dominic Lupo1 (collectively, “the Named Plaintiffs”), on behalf of themselves and the Certified Class, and Defendant FedEx Ground Package System, Inc. (“FXG”) (collectively, “the Parties”), the terms of which Settlement are set forth in the Class Action Settlement Agreement (the “Settlement Agreement”) attached as Exhibit A to the Joint Declaration of Co-Lead Counsel in support of Preliminary Approval of the Kansas Class Action 1 Carlene Craig withdrew as a Named Plaintiff on November 29, 2006. See MDL Doc. No. 409. Named Plaintiffs Ronald Perry and Alan Pacheco are not movants for final approval and filed an objection [MDL Doc. Nos. 3251/3261]. USDC IN/ND case 3:05-md-00527-RLM-MGG document 3279 filed 03/22/19 page 2 of 354 Settlement [MDL Doc. No. 3154-1]. Also before the Court is ERISA Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion for Attorney’s Fees and for Payment of Service Awards to the Named Plaintiffs, filed with the Court on October 19, 2018 [MDL Doc.
    [Show full text]
  • Navy John Lewis (TAO-205) Class Oiler Shipbuilding Program: Background and Issues for Congress
    Navy John Lewis (TAO-205) Class Oiler Shipbuilding Program: Background and Issues for Congress Ronald O'Rourke Specialist in Naval Affairs August 18, 2016 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov R43546 Navy John Lewis (TAO-205) Class Oiler Shipbuilding Program Summary The John Lewis (TAO-205) class oiler shipbuilding program, previously known as the TAO(X) program, is a program to build a new class of 17 fleet oilers for the Navy. The primary role of Navy fleet oilers is to transfer fuel to Navy surface ships that are operating at sea, so as to extend the operating endurance of these surface ships and their embarked aircraft. The first ship in the TAO-205 program was funded in FY2016 at a cost of $674.2 million. The Navy’s proposed FY2017 budget requests $73.1 million in advance procurement (AP) funding for the second ship, which the Navy wants to procure in FY2018. As part of its acquisition strategy for the TAO-205 program, the Navy issued a combined solicitation consisting of separate Requests for Proposals (RFPs) for the detailed design and construction of the first six ships in the TAO-205 class, and for an amphibious assault ship called LHA-8 that the Navy wants to procure in FY2017. The Navy limited bidding in this combined solicitation to two bidders— General Dynamics’ National Steel and Shipbuilding Company (GD/NASSCO) and Huntington Ingalls Industries’ Ingalls Shipbuilding (HII/Ingalls)—on the grounds that these are the only two shipbuilders that have the capability to build both TAO-205s and LHA-8.
    [Show full text]
  • CNA's Integrated Ship Database
    CNA’s Integrated Ship Database Second Quarter 2012 Update Gregory N. Suess • Lynette A. McClain CNA Interactive Software DIS-2012-U-003585-Final January 2013 Photo credit “Description: (Cropped Version) An aerial view of the aircraft carriers USS INDEPENDENCE (CV 62), left, and USS KITTY HAWK (CV 63), right, tied up at the same dock in preparation for the change of charge during the exercise RIMPAC '98. Location: PEARL HARBOR, HAWAII (HI) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (USA) The USS INDEPENDENCE was on its way to be decommissioned, it was previously home ported in Yokosuka, Japan. The crew from the USS INDEPENDENCE cross decked onto the USS KITTY HAWK and brought it back to Atsugi, Japan. The USS INDEPENDENCE was destined for a ship yard in Washington. Source: ID"DN-SD- 00-01114 / Service Depicted: Navy / 980717-N-3612M-001 / Operation / Series: RIMPAC `98. Author: Camera Operator: PH1(NAC) JAMES G. MCCARTER,” Jul. 17, 1998, WIKIMEDIA COMMONS, last accessed Dec. 20, 2012, at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:USS_Independence_(CV- 62)_and_USS_Kitty_Hawk_(CV-63)_at_Pearl_Harbor_crop.jpg Approved for distribution: January 2013 Dr. Barry Howell Director, Warfare Capabilities and Employment Team Operations and Tactics Analysis This document represents the best opinion of CNA at the time of issue. It does not necessarily represent the opinion of the Department of the Navy. APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE. DISTRIBUTION UNLIMITED. Copies of this document can be obtained through the Defense Technical Information Center at www.dtic.mil or contact CNA Document Control and Distribution Section at 703-824-2123. Copyright 2013 CNA This work was created in the performance of Federal Government Contract Number N00014-11-D-0323.
    [Show full text]
  • Geological Evolution of the Red Sea: Historical Background, Review and Synthesis
    See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277310102 Geological Evolution of the Red Sea: Historical Background, Review and Synthesis Chapter · January 2015 DOI: 10.1007/978-3-662-45201-1_3 CITATIONS READS 6 911 1 author: William Bosworth Apache Egypt Companies 70 PUBLICATIONS 2,954 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects: Near and Middle East and Eastern Africa: Tectonics, geodynamics, satellite gravimetry, magnetic (airborne and satellite), paleomagnetic reconstructions, thermics, seismics, seismology, 3D gravity- magnetic field modeling, GPS, different transformations and filtering, advanced integrated examination. View project Neotectonics of the Red Sea rift system View project All content following this page was uploaded by William Bosworth on 28 May 2015. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are added to the original document and are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately. Geological Evolution of the Red Sea: Historical Background, Review, and Synthesis William Bosworth Abstract The Red Sea is part of an extensive rift system that includes from south to north the oceanic Sheba Ridge, the Gulf of Aden, the Afar region, the Red Sea, the Gulf of Aqaba, the Gulf of Suez, and the Cairo basalt province. Historical interest in this area has stemmed from many causes with diverse objectives, but it is best known as a potential model for how continental lithosphere first ruptures and then evolves to oceanic spreading, a key segment of the Wilson cycle and plate tectonics.
    [Show full text]
  • Navy Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans: Background and Issues for Congress
    Navy Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans: Background and Issues for Congress September 16, 2021 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov RL32665 Navy Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans: Background and Issues for Congress Summary The current and planned size and composition of the Navy, the annual rate of Navy ship procurement, the prospective affordability of the Navy’s shipbuilding plans, and the capacity of the U.S. shipbuilding industry to execute the Navy’s shipbuilding plans have been oversight matters for the congressional defense committees for many years. In December 2016, the Navy released a force-structure goal that calls for achieving and maintaining a fleet of 355 ships of certain types and numbers. The 355-ship goal was made U.S. policy by Section 1025 of the FY2018 National Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 2810/P.L. 115- 91 of December 12, 2017). The Navy and the Department of Defense (DOD) have been working since 2019 to develop a successor for the 355-ship force-level goal. The new goal is expected to introduce a new, more distributed fleet architecture featuring a smaller proportion of larger ships, a larger proportion of smaller ships, and a new third tier of large unmanned vehicles (UVs). On June 17, 2021, the Navy released a long-range Navy shipbuilding document that presents the Biden Administration’s emerging successor to the 355-ship force-level goal. The document calls for a Navy with a more distributed fleet architecture, including 321 to 372 manned ships and 77 to 140 large UVs. A September 2021 Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report estimates that the fleet envisioned in the document would cost an average of between $25.3 billion and $32.7 billion per year in constant FY2021 dollars to procure.
    [Show full text]
  • The Cost of the Navy's New Frigate
    OCTOBER 2020 The Cost of the Navy’s New Frigate On April 30, 2020, the Navy awarded Fincantieri Several factors support the Navy’s estimate: Marinette Marine a contract to build the Navy’s new sur- face combatant, a guided missile frigate long designated • The FFG(X) is based on a design that has been in as FFG(X).1 The contract guarantees that Fincantieri will production for many years. build the lead ship (the first ship designed for a class) and gives the Navy options to build as many as nine addi- • Little if any new technology is being developed for it. tional ships. In this report, the Congressional Budget Office examines the potential costs if the Navy exercises • The contractor is an experienced builder of small all of those options. surface combatants. • CBO estimates the cost of the 10 FFG(X) ships • An independent estimate within the Department of would be $12.3 billion in 2020 (inflation-adjusted) Defense (DoD) was lower than the Navy’s estimate. dollars, about $1.2 billion per ship, on the basis of its own weight-based cost model. That amount is Other factors suggest the Navy’s estimate is too low: 40 percent more than the Navy’s estimate. • The costs of all surface combatants since 1970, as • The Navy estimates that the 10 ships would measured per thousand tons, were higher. cost $8.7 billion in 2020 dollars, an average of $870 million per ship. • Historically the Navy has almost always underestimated the cost of the lead ship, and a more • If the Navy’s estimate turns out to be accurate, expensive lead ship generally results in higher costs the FFG(X) would be the least expensive surface for the follow-on ships.
    [Show full text]
  • Full Spring 2010 Issue the .SU
    Naval War College Review Volume 63 Article 1 Number 2 Spring 2010 Full Spring 2010 Issue The .SU . Naval War College Follow this and additional works at: https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/nwc-review Recommended Citation Naval War College, The .SU . (2010) "Full Spring 2010 Issue," Naval War College Review: Vol. 63 : No. 2 , Article 1. Available at: https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/nwc-review/vol63/iss2/1 This Full Issue is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at U.S. Naval War College Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Naval War College Review by an authorized editor of U.S. Naval War College Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Naval War College: Full Spring 2010 Issue NAVAL WAR C OLLEGE REVIEW NAVAL WAR COLLEGE REVIEW Spring 2010 Volume 63, Number 2 Spring 2010 Spring N ES AV T A A L T W S A D R E C T I O N L L U E E G H E T R I VI IBU OR A S CT MARI VI Published by U.S. Naval War College Digital Commons, 2010 1 5430_NWCReview_Spring2010_Cover.indd 1 3/1/2010 4:14:52 PM Naval War College Review, Vol. 63 [2010], No. 2, Art. 1 Cover A model from the Naval War College Museum collection of a Korean “turtle ship,” such as those that helped repulse the sixteenth-century Japanese invasion of Korea—a campaign vital to the spirit of the modern Republic of Korea Navy, as noted by Yoji Koda (Vice Admiral, Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force, Retired) in this issue’s lead article.
    [Show full text]