"How many ships does the USN need?" Topic

We are projected to have about a 100 fewer ships than what is currently needed. 1/3rd of the carrier fleet is in the docks being repaired at any one time. Add to this the need to update what we currently have as well. It's not as if we are launching a new ship every month either. Again, this is 100 fewer ships that what we currently need and does not take into account some new hotspot coming into focus.

Emphasis mine, but it's not just the carriers. At any given time, 1/3 of the entire US Navy is in refit.

So our 300 ship navy (total numbers) means that we only have 100 ships actually deployed at any given time. About 40 of those are in 4 Carrier Groups. Another 40 of those are in about 8 Amphibious Groups. That lets the US cover 8-12 major trouble spots, usually 8. Nothing says "The US would like you to reconsider your actions" like a carrier group and an amphibious group off your coast.

Guess what?

That leaves 20 ships and subs actually free to go do something that doesn't require the attention of an entire CVBG/ARG. Oh, and about half of that number is subs, which don't visibly project power very well.

10 ships, to cover the entire world. Think about that for a minute, and then tell me that the US has too many ships.

From the other side of the question, why doesn't anyone else in the entire planet think they need a navy 1/2 as large as ours? After reading thru, I have went from pro big navy (I'm even from Annapolis) to seeing Doug's point of view of way too many hammers looking for jobs. If it is just police work for everyone else, then why do we, alone, pay for it?

"If it is just police work for everyone else, then why do we, alone, pay for it?".

'Cause we're suckers…..

If it is just police work for everyone else, then why do we, alone, pay for it?

Because it also benefits us.

If you think that the US does things for any other country out of altruistic intent, well, I've got a wonderful oceanfront property in Arizona you might be interested in.

The US acts and only ever has acted out of naked self interest. I don't mind that actually – it makes perfect sense and I can't think of any major power that has ever done otherwise…

What does annoy me is the way Americans (especially politicians but also regular Joe's) like to pretend that the US is some kind of comic book hero in a world of evil villians. That's just childish.

Skarper, I see exactly what you are saying and 100% agree.

Now let's flip that around and talk about how childish it also is for (insert nation name) sees the USA as some kind of cartoonish villian who is the source of everything evil.

Pandering to the lowest denominator works around the world, apparently…

Mardaddy. Fair enough. The US is not all evil – anymore than the Soviet Union was or Iran is or North Korea.

It is a weakness of the human mind to oversimplify everything.

I myself am rather relieved to see US forces shifting back to Asia (where I live). I wouldn't want US naval forces based in DaNang (again) but they have visited recently. China is getting silly about the South China Sea and the only cop on the block with any clout is the US Navy.

Today 24 warships left the Hampton Roads area to ride out Hurricane Sandy at sea.

Let's just look at surface combatants in servvice today, just cruisers, destroyers and frigates.

22 Ticonderoga Class CG's (with 4 more scheduled to be decommissioned)

62 Arleigh Burke Class DDG's
The first 28 that were built did not have hangers to embark helicopters, they can land and refuel them but they do not carry their own.
27 long-hull Oliver Hazard Perry Class FFG's
The Perry's have had their Mk.13 missile launchers removed and are therefore lacking a SAM and any ASuW capability beyond their 76mm gun.
3 LCS's-gold plated death traps with no armament bigger than a 57mm gun, but they sure do go fast.

So there you have it 84 fully capable ships (Tico's and Burkes's) with 1/3 or 28, hell round that up to 30 available for deployment at any given time. Figure 5 of them with each of the 4 carriers that are deployed and that doesn't leave you with much. 4 Burkes are going to be deployed to Europe for "Missile Defense" and a couple of more are patrolling the Horn of Africa for pirates and that leaves the cupboard pretty bare.

Not to worry, the USAF can do the job in their place.

Oh, wait:

- most airframes are very old, with many suffering cracks, or other issues;
- well, we can deploy those nice, shiny, new F-22s. Oh yes, right, the oxygen system does have its problems so they might be grounded, we bought too few of them, and they really aren't very well equipped for air to surface combat, etc.;
- well, we could launch the F-35s. Oh, right, they are still in development, will end up costing more than the far more capable F-22s, and aren't available yet;
- drones, you say. Well, ignoring the one we lost to the Iranians (and no doubt their allies, the Chinese), they should be able to provide at least some of the support needed. Of course we'll have to ignore the fact they can be tricked into landing on enemy soil, or possibly hacked and used against us.

Hmmmmm, perhaps we should investigate leasing some vessels, or airpower from various nations in the interim.

I hear the British and French are talking about sharing an aircraft carrier. Perhaps we should get in on that timeshare deal too.

Solution seems to be more cheaper less capable ships?

Given the threat is low tech, low intensity and the need is for more hulls to keep on station rather than super ships that cost bazillions but are never enough to go round?

Maybe the USN does need 500 ships or more – but it just has the wrong ones?