South Korean ship ramming North Korean ship in a 1999 clash.
Some South Korean military experts have reached conclusions on the recent clash between North and South Korean boats that don’t exactly agree with the facts. The article “How S.Korea Beat Back N.Korean Gunboat” is from Chosun.com:
Arms experts and military officers say it was technological superiority that allowed South Korea to send a North Korean patrol boat scuttling back trailing a cloud of smoke across the Northern Limit Line after an incursion Monday.
While there is little doubt the well-off South can build better boats than the impoverished North, read further down and you get a different story (I will be skipping around):
“Four South Korean vessels are said to have focused their attacks on one North Korean patrol boat”
So it appears that numbers, not “technological superiority” reined here. Then there is the fact that 4 more heavily armed SK boats couldn’t sink or even disable a single NK attack ship:
The cannon mounted on the Chamsuri are computer-controlled and capable of delivering accurate fire even when the boats are bobbing on choppy waters. The 40 mm cannon were made by Italian arms manufacturer Breda. The 20 mm Sea Vulcan gun is capable of firing between 2,700 and 3,300 rounds per minute on its targets. In contrast, North Korea’s Shanghai class patrol boats were manufactured in the 1960s and their guns must be fired manually…
The South Korean vessel is believed to have fired between 1,000 to 2,000 rounds at the North Korean patrol boat on Tuesday, which sustained heavy damage but did not sink, while the South Korean vessel was shot around 15 times.
While yours truly is all for having the best equipment, it is disturbing that the wrong conclusions might be given to justify a certain end, with little doubt the South is investing heavily in new Blue Water programs for possible rivalry with China and Japan. Meanwhile, as we see here, the threat of the North isn’t going away or even subsiding:
North Korea vastly outnumbers South Korea in gunboats. But South Korea has the edge when it comes to the size and capability. The South has around 120 battleships and the North around 420, but the North has only three of more than 1,000 tons while the South has 10, including the 7,600-ton Aegis destroyer King Sejong and others in the 3,000 ton or higher class.
What if the numbers have been different, with the North using swarming tactics, taking advantage of their numerical superiority to overwhelm the more technically advanced SK boats? If each NK vessel is as hard to sink as this one from the 1960s, then certainly the SK will have a fight on its hands. As the experts say, don’t get complacent.
Graf Zeppelin: The only aircraft carrier launched by Germany during World War II
German Light Carrier in the Works?
I love these names navies tag on warships to disguise their true purpose. More on this subject later, but here is one from Germany a “multi-purpose ship”, officially “Mehrzweckeinsatzschiff”. Mike at Combat Fleet of the World (one of my favorite new naval blogs!) provides some details of what this may be like:
- 2 large LHDs, 27/30000 tons, carrying/supporting 800 men (“JSS 800″). Maybe a TKMS MRD150/MHD150/MHD200 or a Spanish BPE design’s…?
- 3 LPD/LHD, + 20000 tons, carrying/supporting 400 men (“JSS 400+”). Maybe a French Mistral or Dutch Enforcer 16000 design…?
- 3 LPD/LHD, – 20000 tons, capable of carrying 400 men, but not enough supplies to support them organically for 30 days, e.g. MZES would be used in addition to that (“JSS 400″).
- no JSS, more MZES instead as a limited solution.
- a mix ?
Multi-role carriers is where it is at. America should emphasize their own more, with less reliance on attack carriers.
Intriguing, and we’ll keep you posted. If the Japanese navy can make a comeback, why not the Kreigsmarine?
*****
Sanity Returning to British Shipbuilding
In wartime or peace, it is better to have a great many good warships, than a few exquisite ones. Proof of this can be seen as BAE expands their building plans beyond the two increasingly uncertain Queen Elizabeth supercarriers. From the Telegraph we learn:
BAE, which took full control of its naval shipbuilding joint venture with VT Group last month, is pursuing orders in Oman and North Africa, as well as looking for opportunities in countries such as Saudi Arabia and Australia where other divisions of BAE have significant businesses.
“We have to put the ground work in now to develop these markets,” said Alan Johnston, managing director of the newly-formed surface ships business “The international business will be about ship support and ship building, using our designs and our system management skills.”
As an example Mr Johnston cites the recent sale of a patrol boat design to the Thai navy, which was based on a ship being built for export to Trinidad and Tobago.
He said the division is looking at contracts worth from £5m up to £4bn. A proportion of future export work would be carried out in the countries that place the orders, he said. Mr Johnston insists the British yards have at least another five to six years of steady work, despite increasing speculation over the future of the two aircraft carriers after next year’s election.
Proof that placing all of one’s eggs in a couple pricey baskets isn’t always a smart move. The USAF learned this with the F-22 Raptor, while its aging fleet of warplanes from the 70s and 80s fought its wars, and 25 years later continue to keep going, and going…
Meanwhile the 2 British aircraft carriers are hanging on by a thread, but thanks to high costs of ships and planes, while threats mount world-wide, their demise can only be a matter of the next government in power.
*****
Rafale versus F-35
One of the handful of remaining carrier-capable, non V/STOL jets in the world today is the French Rafale, a possibility for an F-35 alternative. Judge for yourself from this article via Peter Collins at Flight Global:
It is worth remembering that stealth-optimized, or fifth-generation fighters such as the Lockheed F-22 Raptor and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter are not only likely to be hugely expensive, but they can only preserve their stealth characteristics by carrying a very limited weapons load in their internal weapon bays.
Therefore, in the current and predicted financial defence climate, it could well be that so-called fourth-generation fighters will remain the aircraft of choice for most nations – perhaps even including the UK.
Moreover, the fact that the Rafale is the only European fighter in production that is carrier-capable gives it, in my opinion, a distinct advantage in any future export “fly-off” competition as a single combat type that can equip a country’s air force and naval air arm.
*****
You’ll Be Sorry…
France is intent on selling Russia up to 4 light amphibious carriers no matter the cost, and I’m not referring to money here. From Joseph Farah at World Net Daily:
Never at a loss to pass up a commercial deal that could hit Western strategic security interests, the French government is on a fast track to sell Russia one or more helicopter carriers that will provide the amphibious capability it now lacks in the Black Sea, according to a report from Joseph Farah’s G2 Bulletin.
Such a capability could allow the Kremlin to move troops and tanks into neighboring Georgia more quickly, for example allowing Russian Spetznaz, or Special Forces, to invade in a matter of hours rather than the days it took in its August 2008 invasion.In 2008, Russia literally took away from Georgia two contentious breakaway provinces of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Ironically, the French government negotiated the end of hostilities that allowed the Russians to militarily occupy the two breakaway provinces which Moscow immediately recognized as independent countries.
*****
When a carrier is not a carrier
From the same WND post, here is some sly bit of terminology on the difference of an aircraft carrier and an amphibious warship. Russia uses the confusion to bypass an international naval Treaty barring flattops from passing through Turkish waters:
In pressing its power projection capability in the Black Sea again, Russia asserts that introduction of the Mistral-type helicopter carriers in the Black Sea does not violate the 1936 Montreux Convention, which is interpreted and enforced by Turkey, Russia’s other “strategic partner.”
Under the Montreux Convention, aircraft carriers are banned from passing through the Turkish Bosporus and Dardanelles Straits. However, Russia claims the Mistral carriers do not meet the criteria of carriers as outlined in the convention.
If the French approve the sale slated for sometime in November, the Russians will most likely put their Ka-27 and Ka-29 helicopters on the Mistral.
But consider what function each particular ship performs, which is power projection by the use of airpower, in the Mistral’s case, helicopters rather than fixed-wing jets. We had this argument in the comments last week when yours truly referred to the planned Australian Canberra class “Landing Helicopter Dock” as light carriers. We also recall a time back in the 70s when a certain naval power was constructing “through deck cruisers” to avoid the prevailing political bias against large decks. And Japan just received first of the new Hyuga class, ahem, “helicopter destroyers”.
Tomato-Tomahto.
*****
Who Would Notice?
Northrop Grumman Corp, the builder of the mighty Ford class supercarrier, promises it will keep costs in line for the $14 billion vessel. Honestly, who would notice if they did go over budget?
Northrop will lay the keel of the Gerald R. Ford, the first of a new class of aircraft carriers — an enormous floating city that will be nearly as long as the Empire State Building is tall — at its Newport News shipyard on Saturday,
The Navy put the cost of research and development on the new ship at $3.6 billion plus $2.87 billion for detailed design work. The first ship, CVN 78, will cost $8.7 billion to build, excluding those costs, said Lieutenant Commander Victor Chen.
Mike Shawcross, Northrop vice president for the Ford-class carrier program, said the company had implemented several measures to beef up oversight and make sure the Navy clearly understood the production impact of any design changes.
When you start getting into the billions of dollars, savings is no longer a factor. Note that this price doesn’t even include the $100 million each fighter jets needed to make her more than a gold-plated barge. Want to show savings? Don’t build this monster of another age! Rely more on smaller ships which don’t strain our shrinking shipbuilding budget to the brink, like small carriers, and missile firing warships.
*****
The Northrop Grumman Corporation-developed Unmanned Aerial Vehicle MQ-8B Fire Scout hovers over the flight deck of the guided-missile frigate USS McInerney (FFG 8).
LCS versus the Swarm
Recently reading an interview over at Defense News with Vice Adm. Barry McCullough, who is leaving his job with developing the Navy’s shipbuilding program to the 10th Fleet, the service’s new Cyber command. Here is his thoughts on the LCS:
First, there are some current critical war-fighting gaps that LCS will fill. There’s anti-mine capability, mine hunting and clearance. There’s shallow water anti-submarine warfare, especially against quiet diesel electric submarines. And there’s a capability against multiple incoming swarming boats, dependent on the intel. Multiple is much greater than 10.
Sounds like its going to be a little crappy busy ship, but it was that last comment which struck me: expecting a single LCS to fight “10″ enemy boats at a time? What exactly does it expect to fight the enemy missile and gun boats with, “spitballs”? Or the little 57mm cannon, NETFIRES rockets in a box, or CIWS? I like this quote from CDR Salamander:
Does your PC or LCS or for that matter DDG have the close in small to medium caliber guns (and ammo to feed them for 4 hours) ready for that? Trained? Ready to take 4 hits from a RPG-7? Think you can do everything with CIWS and missiles? If so, you are a fool. Like air to air combat, in the end you have to be prepared to close the enemy and use the gun because that is what works and is available. The enemy will.
The best weapon to deal with small warships is another small warship. Recent clashes off Korea between Northern and Southern patrol boats emphasize this as specialty warfare where Big Ships have little place, according to Raymond Pritchett at Information Dissemination:
Before pointing out that Standard Missiles, ESSMs, or Harpoons would work in this situation, check your chart first, and someone tell me which Admiral, or Captain, is sending a large warship into those waters during periods of potential hostility. South Korea has major naval assets, and you will not find them in those waters. Someone tell me what ship the US Navy would use in waters like these, which are found everywhere around the world. When giving it serious thought, I think we either need a lot more armed USVs, or need to rethink our approach to littoral warfare. This thing was over in 2 minutes, way too late for air support.
Also to misquote Winston Churchill let me add that never in the field of human conflict has so much been expected of so few warships. Good luck to the hapless crew when the swarm comes. They will need it.
*****
UAVs seek home at sea
The Navy’s new MQ-8B Fire Scout unmanned aerial vehicle is the latest victim of that service’s inability to put practical hulls into commission on time and within budget. But progress waits for no one, as Strategypage reveals:
The most urgent demand is for the navy’s new helicopter UAV, the MQ-8B (formerly the RQ-8) Fire Scout. Already on the fast track, the MQ-8B is being assigned to another class of ships, besides the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) it was first designed for. That’s because the LCS is behind schedule and the Fire Scout isn’t. The first ship to carry this helicopter UAV is a Perry class frigate, the USS McInerney (FFG-8). This ship is assigned to the 4th Fleet, and will be operating in the Caribbean, chasing drug smugglers. This will give the Fire Scout some real world experience, although not with the fire Hellfire missiles it can carry. Prior to this assignment, the Fire Scout underwent 110 takeoffs and landings on the frigate, and 600 hours of flight testing. But the navy wants to get the MQ-8B on more ships, in every part of the world.
We see the impending deployment of UAVs at sea on a large scale this century as revolutionary as the advent of manned naval airpower in the last century. Concerning this, here is something we wrote not long ago:
The use of UAVs in ongoing Middle East wars have proven that such individual strike planes armed with many of the same PGMs of large manned jets can perform strategic bombing and close air support missions. The continued use of armed drones will further duplicate the role of the giant aircraft carrier in many circumstances, in such a dramatic difference in cost, again as has occurred on land, that the politicians and admirals cannot possibly ignore.
When the unmanned aerial vehicles, often likened to “reusable cruise missiles” go to sea, there will no longer be any valid arguments, because the drones can do all of the above at least cost without putting a pilot and his $100 million aircraft at risk, or a $20 billion strike group as it nears the shore. Then the surface ships will finally be unfettered from the shelter of their giant motherships, where they have been bound for almost 3/4 of a century, now used to their full potential thanks to the power of modern robot weapons.
Where the Navy sees it’s mission is to deploy the best possible hull whatever the cost, their real purpose should be to get these as many of these new weapons to sea as fast as possible. The much maligned small warships, by the use of new technology will be more powerful and versatile than ever. They will possess an ability to do many missions which we now use our most powerful battleships, or the over-engineered and much delayed littoral combat ship for. Smart weapons do not require smart platforms!
*****
Fractured LCS Acronyms
I forgot about this last week. Please keep them coming!
Look! We’re Clueless about the Shallows
OK, thats just terrible, and you can turn it around:
See, we could Care Less.
Light Cruiser? Sure.*(see below)
*****
More on the Speed Issue
You recall those old horse cavalry movies that still come on the classic move channels, where the soldiers always seem to spur their mounts at full gallop through the whole picture? Looks pretty good on film, but not very practical, as your ride will quickly be worn out and useless in no time. Despite early warnings that a similar occurrence might be faced because of the high speed requirements on the littoral combat ships, the plans went ahead nonetheless for huge engines and low fuel stocks. The following info is from Global Security:
A 2003 analysis by David D. Rudko noted that the Navy has stated the Littoral Combat Ship must incorporate endurance, speed, payload capacity, sea-keeping, shallow-draft and mission reconfigurability into a small ship design. However, constraints in current ship design technology make this desired combination of design characteristics in small ships difficult to realize at any cost. Speed, displacement, and significant wave height all result in considerable increases in fuel consumption, and as a result, severely limit Littoral Combat Ship endurance. When operating in a significant wave height of six feet, regardless of the amount of fuel carried, the maximum endurance achieved for a wave-piercing catamaran Littoral Combat Ship outfitted with all modular mission packages is less than seven days. Especially noteworthy is that when restricted to a fuel reserve of 50% and a fuel carrying capacity of Day tanks, the maximum achieved endurance is only 4.8 hours when operating at a maximum speed of 48 knots. The Littoral Combat Ship can achieve high speeds; however, this can only be accomplished at the expense of range and payload capacity. The requirement for the Littoral Combat Ship to go fast (forty-eight knots) requires a seaframe with heavy propulsion systems. The weight of the seaframe, required shipboard systems (weapons, sensors, command and control, and self-defense) and modular mission packages accounts for 84% of the full displacement, and as a result, substantially limits total fuel carrying capacity. Since initial mission profiles required the high-speed capability at most five percent of the time, the end result is a Littoral Combat Ship that has very little endurance and a high-speed capability it will rarely use. Refueling, and potentially rearming, will require the Littoral Combat Ship to leave littoral waters and transit to Combat Logistics Force ships operating outside the littorals for replenishment. Given the low endurance of the Littoral Combat Ship, its time on station is seriously compromised.
Note also that 2003 was 5 whole years before the the first LCS, USS Freedom joined the fleet. Looks like the cavalry ain’t coming.
*****
*LCS Light Cruiser
This interesting LCS analogy comes from Kit Bonner at Sea Classics Magazine (via FindArticles):
The Omaha was at first a destroyer leader at 7500-tons with a main battery of ten 6-in guns. Eventually, the ship was too light and thus required a stronger mast. Next it was top heavy, and had become just a hull crammed with overheated machinery to drive it at 35 kts. The original plans had long been forgotten as new threats presented themselves, and by World War II, the nine ships of this class were almost worthless. Ultimately they were all consigned to the backwaters of combat during the war, quickly broken up at war’s end.
The same could happen to the Littoral Combat Ship which now represents a consortium of every planner’s ideas as well as most senior Naval officers. The result has been a horrendous cost overrun and ships that are obviously unsuitable for the role for which they are intended. The costs of construction have been double the estimate, and the delivery time has been nearly a year late. The original plan was to build 55 of the LCSs; however, the Navy is re-thinking its position.
*****
USS Omaha (CL-4)
Soldiers are Unbowed, Unbroken
David Ignatius says the US Military is “Standing tall in harm’s way“:
In the aftermath of the Fort Hood shootings, some commentaries have examined the damage to the U.S. Army from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. A few have spoken about the alleged shooter, Maj. Nidal M. Hasan, as an extreme version of what can happen with an overstressed force…
In truth, the U.S. military may be the most resilient part of American society right now. The soldiers are clearly in better shape than the political class that sent them to war and the economic leadership that has mismanaged the economy. (I’d give the same high marks to young civilians who are serving and sacrificing in hard places — the Peace Corps and medical volunteers I’ve met abroad and the teachers in tough inner-city schools.)
Through all its difficulties, the military has kept its stride. That sense of balance comes partly from the fact that soldiers are anchored to the American bedrock. This includes the stereotypical small towns in the South and Midwest that have military service in their DNA. But it also counts plenty of hardworking, upwardly mobile Hispanic and African American families in urban America that produce some of the best soldiers I know…
*****
The Old Man…
As I came out of the supermarket that sunny day, pushing my cart of groceries towards my car, I saw an old man with the hood of his car up and a lady sitting inside the car, with the door open.
The old man was looking at the engine. I put my groceries away in my car and continued to watch the old gentleman from about twenty five feet away.
I saw a young man in his early twenties with a grocery bag in his arm, walking towards the old man. The old gentleman saw him coming too and took a few steps towards him.
I saw the old gentleman point to his open hood and say something. The young man put his grocery bag into what looked like a brand new Cadillac Escalade and then turn back to the old man and I heard him yell at the old gentleman saying,
‘You shouldn’t even be allowed to drive a car at your age.’ And then with a wave of his hand, he got in his car and peeled rubber out of the parking lot.
I saw the old gentleman pull out his handkerchief and mop his brow as he went back to his car and again looked at the engine.
He then went to his wife and spoke with her and appeared to tell her it would be okay. I had seen enough and I approached the old man. He saw me coming and stood straight and as I got near him I said, ‘Looks like you’re having a problem.’
He smiled sheepishly and quietly nodded his head. I looked under the hood myself and knew that whatever the problem was, it was beyond me. Looking around I saw a gas station up the road and told the old man that I would be right back… I drove to the station
and went inside and saw three attendants working on cars. I approached one of them and related the problem the old man had with his car and offered to pay them if they could follow me back down and help him.
The old man had pushed the heavy car under the shade of a tree and appeared to be comforting his wife. When he saw us he straightened up and thanked me for my help. As the mechanics diagnosed the problem (overheated engine) I spoke with the old
gentleman.
When I shook hands with him earlier, he had noticed my Marine Corps ring and had commented about it, telling me that he had been a Marine too. I nodded and asked the usual question, ‘What outfit did you serve with?’
He had mentioned that he served with the first Marine Division at Tarawa, Saipan, Iwo Jima and Guadalcanal .
He had hit all the big ones and retired from the Corps after the war was over. As we talked we heard the car engine come on and saw the mechanics lower the hood. They came over to us as the old man reached for his wallet, but was stopped by me and I told him I Would just put the bill on my AAA card.
He still reached for the wallet and handed me a card that I assumed had his name and address on it and I stuck it in my pocket.. We all shook hands all around again and I said my goodbye’s to his wife.
I then told the two mechanics that I would follow them back up to the station. Once at the station I told them that they had interrupted their own jobs to come along with me and help the old man. I said I wanted to pay for the help, but they refused to charge me.
One of them pulled out a card from his pocket looking exactly like the card the old man had given to me. Both of the men told me then,that they were Marine Corps Reserves. Once again we shook hands all around and as I was leaving, one of them told me I should look at the card the old man had given to me. I said I would and drove off.
For some reason I had gone about two blocks when I pulled over and took the card out of my pocket and looked at it for a long, long time. The name of the old gentleman was on the card in golden leaf and under his name…….
‘Congressional Medal of Honor Society.’
I sat there motionless looking at the card and reading it over and over. I looked up from the card and smiled to no one but myself and marveled that on this day, four Marines had all come together, because one of us needed help. He was an old man all right, but it felt Good to have stood next to greatness and courage and an honor to have been in his presence. Remember, OLD men like him gave you FREEDOM for America .
Thanks to those who served…& those who supported them.
America is not at war. The U.S. Military is at war.. America is at the Mall. If you don’t stand behind our troops, PLEASE feel free to stand in front of them!
Remember, Freedom isn’t Free, thousands have paid the price so you can enjoy what you have today.
*****
The Music Stopped–
For those who are not aware: At all military base theaters, the National Anthem is played before the movie begins.
This is written from a Chaplain in Iraq :
I recently attended a showing of ‘Superman 3′ here at LSA Anaconda. We have a large auditorium we use for movies, as well as memorial services and other large gatherings. As is the custom at all military bases, we stood to attention when the National Anthem began before the main feature. All was going well until three-quarters of the way through The National Anthem, the music stopped.
Now, what would happen if this occurred with 1,000 18-22 year-olds back in the States? I imagine there would be hoots, catcalls, laughter, a few rude comments, and everyone would sit down and yell for the movie to begin. Of course, that is, if they had stood for the National Anthem in the first place.
Here in Iraq , 1,000 Soldiers continued to stand at attention, eyes fixed forward. The music started again and the Soldiers continued to quietly stand at attention. But again, at the same point, the music stopped. What would you expect 1000 Soldiers standing at attention to do ?? Frankly, I expected some laughter, and everyone would eventually sit down and wait for the movie to start.
But No!!… You could have heard a pin drop, while every Soldier continued to stand at attention. Suddenly, there was a lone voice from the front of the auditorium, then a dozen voices, and soon the room was filled with the voices of a thousand soldiers, finishing where the recording left off:
“And the rockets red glare, the bombs bursting in air, gave proof through the night that our flag was still there. Oh, say does that Star Spangled Banner yet wave, o’er the land of the free, and the home of the brave.”
It was the most inspiring moment I have had in Iraq and I wanted you to know what kind of Soldiers are serving you. Remember them as they fight for us!
Free download via Amazon.com. About 30 minutes of Patriotic music by The Bands and Ensembles of the US Armed Forces.
Heated naval combat occurred yesterday after a North Korean provocation, according to the Korea Times:
At around 10:30 a.m., the North Korean boat crossed the Northern Limit Line (NLL), and ignoring repeated warnings, he said.
In response to a South Korean patrol boat firing warning shots ― in accordance to the rules of engagement ― at 10:36 a.m. the North returned fire directly at the vessel, said JCS spokesman Kim Young-chul.
Kim said some 15 rounds hit the side of the South Korean boat without causing any serious damage or causalities.
The South fired back, causing the North Korean vessel to retreat toward northern waters at 10:40 a.m. badly damaged and engulfed in flames, he said.
The latest incident came amid expectations that Pyongyang and Washington may soon engage in direct talks.
There were no S Korean casualties, but we are assuming there were in the heavily damaged Northern boat.
The DailyNK has further details:
The Joint Chiefs of Staff told reporters in a press briefing this afternoon that the North Korean patrol vessel crossed the NLL at 11:27AM at a point 11.3 kilometers off the east coast of Daecheong Island, which lies in South Korean territorial waters just 2.2 kilometers from North Korea on the west side of the peninsula.
According to the briefing, the South Koreans broadcast two warning messages between 11:22 and 11:25. However, the North’s vessel continued to advance southwards and so, between 11:28 and 11:31, two more messages were sent, instructing the North Koreans that, “Your vessel is continuing to violate our border despite our warnings, and this is causing tensions to rise. If you do not change course, we will open fire.”
The North Korean vessel apparently did not change direction, so at 11:36 the South Korean naval vessel fired warning shots across its bow.
At 11:37, the North fired approximately 50 shots at the South Korean vessel, and the South simultaneously returned fire with around 100 shots from a 40mm cannon.
The battle lasted for approximately two minutes, until the North Korean patrol vessel went back across the NLL at 11:40 after suffering “considerable” damage.
The two Koreas have engaged in bloodier clashes, the last in 2002 where 19 died on both sides. A Navy source also revealed “About 15 holes were found on the South Korean patrol boat that engaged in a skirmish with a North Korean vessel on Tuesday“.
According to Global Firepower, the North Korean Navy is the third largest in the world in terms of numbers, including about 500 small coastal craft, nearly 100 submarines and 100 other vessels. The South Koreans possess 75 coastal craft but also several powerful surface combatants and large amphibious ships.
Coast Guard Marine Safety and Security Team Boston and New York City Police Department marine and air units escort the amphibious transport dock ship Pre-Commissioning Unit (PCU) New York (LPD 21) into New York Harbor.
Today we note the commissioning of the US Navy’s latest and most famous member of the LPD-17 class amphibious ship, the USS New York. Most of the public who are appropriately celebrating a vessel made with World’s Trade Center steel have little inkling of the troubled history of this entire class, which we touched on yesterday. The endless delays, the mechanical difficulties, doubling in cost, and the questions of its survivability in a new century are forgotten in the midst of the media spotlight.
Instead of sending in Blue Water ships which are ever fewer in number and extremely visible to modern missiles and aerial threats, we think there is a better way. New hull forms, some even currently in use by civilian shipping companies, the Army, and Navy offer alternatives to sending billion-dollar wonders into harms-way with their many hundreds of crewmen.
Warships, Off the Shelf
Where I see amphibious lift going in the near future is toward high speed vessels. This must happen if the concept is to survive the new century, where missile threats abound and the cost of last century “Gator’s” which are constantly packed with armor and weapons until their are priced out of range. As proved by exorbitant prices, their increase size and cost, such giant amphibious are too costly to risk in a full scale war, and too exquisite for the low tech warfare they most often perform. As proof of this, we need look only to the new $3 billion future helicopter carrier USS America, estimated pricing at $3 billion each, about twice as much as the recently commissioned USS Makin Island. Yet, unlike her predecessor, the America doesn’t come with the well deck considered essential for amphibious landings, making it more of a mini-carrier.
So we see these high tech giants getting pricier, but less capable. We must do better and can, with off the shelf vessels like this:
The idea is to combine the speed of the Navy’s hovercraft, with the range and seakeeping of the HSV such as those already deployed as navy auxiliaries. Instead of a massive amphibious mothership, with an expensive crew, protection, and refueling problems, the lander itself would go direct from port to the beach. Though, most of these ferry conversions are unable to beach, they can get to close enough to shore for their cargo to be safely floated in. Back in January, we wrote:
Where then does the HSV fit into this? How about as a fire brigade, the nautical equivalent of the old west horse cavalry, always on standby, prepared to race to any world hotspot in time to save the day. Here is where the fast cats high speed, which some has questioned as irrelevant to littoral warfare, would come into play. The HSVs would bring with them troops armed for bear with Stryker or Abrams armor ( a feat which the C-130 cargo plane is incapable) ready to strike at pirates in their supposed shallow water safe havens. For disaster relief, they would come with numerous supplies to save the needy.
We also mentioned the same concept earlier when discussing the new MV Susitna ferry, the Navy’s Transforming E-Craft:
The MV Susitna catamaran ferry is an interesting concept similar to the Navy’s current fleet of catamaran vessels with one remarkable difference, it has the ability to transform from a deep water transport to a shallow draft vessel, specifically into 3 distinct modes of barge, catamaran and SWATH (small waterplane area twin hull) ship…The Navy sees it as key for its expeditionary/amphibious warfare sea basing plans, hence the official moniker of “E-craft”. This is also where its transforming abilities come to play, allowing it to morph into a shallow-water “Sealifter” quickly from its Blue Water transport mode.
Rolls Royce has proposed a Intra-Theatre Logistics Vessel, much like the Navy HSVs, which the company describes as the following:
Intra-Theatre Logistics Vessel – A fast steel monohull vessel configured to deliver capability within Operational Theatre. The vessel is designed to operate at an average speed greater than 40 knots and has a long- self-deployment range.
The design uses a monohull commercial ropax hull design with a wave-piercing bow. With a range of 3,000nmiles, 2,500 tonnes of cargo can be transported at 40 knots, almost twice as fast as existing ships of equivalent payload.
The smaller Intra-Theatre Logistic Vessel has a cargo area of 2,310m² and is capable of transporting up to 350 troops over 4,000nm at 40 knots.
Specific military features include a helicopter landing area amidships capable of accommodating an aircraft up to Chinook size.
Check out the link for photos of this interesting concept.
For close-in operations, supporting these larger vessels there is Sweden’s combat boat 90. This amazingly versatile craft defies description, other than being worthy of the US Marines:
More is Less
Since the end of the Cold War, the US Navy shipbuilders has used a set of metrics for its warships, including amphibious vessels which expects “that less is more”. In other words expect to get much more capability and service out of a smaller peacetime fleet. Arguably, since the 1990s, the fleet has been operating at a wartime tempo, since now there are numerous small threats instead of the one Red Navy. Looking at this newest amphibious warship USS New York and her sisterships of the LPD-17 class, it appears that “more is less“, with pricier ships deploying less capability, as well as fewer numbers.
Using smaller, advanced hulls forms as we have mentioned would address two main problems facing the Navy: declining numbers and increasing vulnerability. While a large ship might be seen as being more survivable in modern war, no ship is invulnerable or can deploy in more than a single warzone at once. Lose one ship and here is a tremendous percentage of your capability lost. The smaller, more numerous high speed vessels, constantly in motion, from port to port or port to beach, presenting less a target and available in large numbers will do the job of a few big ships, with less the risk.
An excellent report over at the Times Online, detailing what is known about the MV Arctic Sea hijacking mystery. Also they add even more questions to the story worthy of a spy novel:
WEAPONS CARGO Arctic Sea carrying secret arms cargo. Mossad tipped off Russians.
For Kremlin sent warship to track it down and treated incident with secrecy.
Against Hard to conceal arms on board. Impossible to remove them without unloading cargo at sea.
ACT OF PIRACY Ship hijacked for ransom.
For Alleged pirates demanded €1.5m.
Against First act of piracy in European waters in centuries. How did they think they could get away with it?
INSURANCE SCAM Ship taken to cash in on insurance premium.
For Insured for $4m. Paid if ship sunk or vanished.
Against Damage to shipowner’s reputation.
THEFT OF SHIP Pirates wanted to sell ship in rogue country where it could be re-registered.
For Alleged pirates caught off coast of Africa. They asked crew value of cargo.
Against Difficult to set up without good local contacts.
COMMERCIAL RIVALRY Owners fell out with a business partner.
For Ship’s owners terminated contract with maintenance company.
Against Both organizations claim to have parted amicably.
I have always been a fan of sea mysteries and tales. This certainly belongs to this category as one of the great ones.
The oldest commissioned warship afloat, USS Constitution, went to sea on her 212th birthday.
You can just feel the contempt the Boston councilman has for this complaint. You go guy! From Richard Weir at the Boston Herald:
The Herald reported on Saturday that the 204-foot-long vessel, formally called the USS Constitution, is under attack by residents in a nearby condo complex for being an ear-sore…The homeowners have pleaded with the commanding officer of the nation’s oldest commissioned navel vessel to eliminate the cannon blasts on weekends, reduce the amount of gunpowder charge used at other times and lower the volume of recorded playings of the national anthem during daily flag raising and lowering ceremonies…
“You are moving into a Navy Yard. Come on,” (Boston Councilor Sal) LaMattina said. “I would imagine them knowing about the Constitution being there . . . It’s absolutely ridiculous that people are complaining of Old Ironsides shooting the cannons.”
Yours truly lives right next to the Railroad tracks in one of the world’s historic Railroad Junctions, where the train roles by at least 3-4 times a day, often in the middle of the night. Its a part of history. You get used to it. And I love it!
The amphibious dock landing ship Pre-Commissioning Unit (PCU) New York (LPD 21) has 7.5 tons of steel from the World Trade Center in her bow and will be commissioned Nov. 7 in New York City.
First of all, this ^ isn’t it
Thanks to a timely media blitz, the Navy’s newly commissioned amphibious supership the USS New York is getting much favorable attention, probably ensuring purchases of this class will continue for some time. First off, we love ships and can think of no better way to honor the fallen of 9/11 than to build a floating memorial to the courageous of New York. Wikipedia capably details her story:
7.5 short tons (6.8 t) of the steel used in the ship’s construction came from the rubble of the World Trade Center. The steel was melted down at Amite Foundry and Machine in Amite, Louisiana, to cast the ship’s bow section. It was poured into the molds on 9 September 2003, with 7 short tons (6.4 t) cast to form the ship’s “stem bar” — part of the ship’s bow. The shipyard workers reportedly treated it with “reverence usually accorded to religious relics”, gently touching it as they walked by. One worker delayed his retirement after 40 years’ work to be part of the project.
How cool is that? It is appropriate the ship is seen as a monument, since the design should go directly into a museum. Sadly, the entire LPD-17 family is more fitted for another era when missile threats were fewer and Third World adversaries were not swarming the high seas, many armed with First World weapons. However impressive the ship may look in port, fighting at sea is a different animal altogether, and the San Antonio class is an obsolete legacy of a fleet which hasn’t fought a shooting war in 70 years (except for sinking some Iranian and Iraqi “PT boats”), or conducted a major amphibious landing since 1950.
The Shrinking Fleet
The New York and her kin are a part of a $15.5 billion ship program when the Navy shipbuilding budget only runs about $13 billion annually. Originally intended as a class of 12, we will now get only 9, which further takes away from our already shrinking fleet in an age where the Navy is more important than ever. Wiki also notes:
The (9) planned San Antonio’s will replace a total of 41 ships.
So while the Navy purposely shrinks itself building technological marvels that end up fighting against low tech enemies, China has expanded her Navy with many less costly but very capable additions. Previously the Office of Management and Budget warned the communists would exceed us in number of vessels by 2015. In the last decade alone she has surpassed us in the number of submarines, while the US Navy seems more concerned with impressing the media. Here is a recent article titled “The Chinese Navy is going blue water“:
To build a blue water navy, no expense has been spared. Earlier this year, Chinese defense minister Liang Guanglie confirmed Beijing’s plan to build a new generation of large destroyers and aircraft carrier. From the Yellow Sea to the South China Sea, Chinese shipyards are running flat out. According to the U.S. Congressional Research Service, “By 2010 China’s submarine force will be almost double the size of the U.S., and the entire Chinese naval fleet is projected to surpass the size of the U.S. fleet by 2015.”
A Troubled Past
The entire class is also riddled with faults, each with its own reason but pointing to a larger problem that building smaller number of ever-more complicated warships has wrecked havoc on our shipbuilding capability. For instance:
- USS San Antonio-After suffering through Hurricane Katrina and shoddy construction measures, this lead vessel of the class took twice as long to build as planned, and cost twice as much as expected. Naval expert and author Norman Polmar said “ the San Antonio probably goes down in Navy history as having taken the longest time on record from being placed in commission to first deploymeant.” On its maiden voyage, the $1.8 billion ship broke down in Bahrain with oil leaks.
- USS New Orleans-was delivered to the Navy incomplete and riddled with construction faults, its armament inoperable. A contract shipwright at the Mississippi shipyards would say of her “those ships will never do what they were designed to do.”
This is just touching the surface of the greatly troubled LPD-17 program. It appears when it comes to shipbuilding, the Navy expects too much on too few hulls. Admittedly, they seem to have gotten a handle on the situation, but with so many years lost, so many billions wasted, and too few ships getting built, here is a Navy on a death spiral. In wartime, we have no such luxuries to fix major construction woes in a class as has occurred with the San Antonio’s. CDR Salamander puts the LPD-17 class in perspective:
In the end, this will be a fine ship, but we are not doing things smarter, quicker, faster, better. We owe Congress and the taxpayers better. As a professional group; shame on us.
Finally, the USS New York is a beautiful, magnificent reminder of a proud Navy which has lost its way in a new era of warfare. Tomorrow, looking past all the glitz and glamor, we intend to show her the path back.
