via SLD.
On 24 January 2012, the Military Sealift Command posted a bid request to retrofit the USS Ponce to make it a “mothership” for helos and smaller high-speed boats. By mid-April 2012, the Ponce was being prepared for its new role.Besides the usual bravado that accompanies any interview given by a Flag Officer these days, the article is wrong on another level.
If anything was needed to demonstrate the ability of the MSC to contract effectively and to support the USN-USMC team’s global mission, this performance certainly was it. The mother ship will perform a “lilypad” role for the MH-53 helicopters in a mine-clearance role, as well as for other assets.
In a comprehensive interview with Second Line of Defense on April 13, 2012, Rear Admiral Mark Buzby, Commander of the MSC, underscored the performance of MSC to meet the USN-USMC needs. The full interview will be published soon on Second Line of Defense.
Admiral Harvey, Commander Fleet Forces Command, asked Admiral Buzby: “Can your mariners operate the Ponce as an afloat operating base?”
And Admiral Buzby commented: “Although we don’t have a forward operating base in MSC, operating a steam ship which has a flight deck, which has a well deck we can operate that. And under the authorities which I have in MSC, I can refurbish the ship as well. I can do that very quickly for you. I can give you high value for the dollar. I can deliver that capability quickly. And my mariners along with USN personnel can execute the mission. I can probably give you that capability faster than anyone else.
This entire effort isn't to support USN/USMC operations.
This effort is to support SOCOM.
SOCOM alone.
As usual, the Admiral in charge of SOCOM spouts off a bit much (something thats seen throughout the SEAL community...check out Webb's new book...) and somehow he has in essence captured for his services use a retired LPD and seems to be getting ready to rope in a couple of MH-53's to boot.
Left unsaid is the fact that the USN is already rushing mine sweeping assets to the Middle East. Which means that the cover story about this ship acting as a mine sweeping base is pure bull shit.
Its going to be a SOCOM mothership.
The MH-53's will be used to establish Forward Rearming and Refueling Points. The SOCOM Admiral is even putting forth a battle plan that would keep conventional units in Afghanistan to SUPPORT SOCOM while his units attack terrorist holdouts.
Let that sink in.
A Division plus of Special Operations Personnel still need the support of conventional units.
The arrogance makes me sick!
Cut these bubbas loose and let them operate on their own. That includes the "Maritime Raid Force"....a Battalion Landing Team is part of every MEU. If all they're good for is holding the perimeter while the "Raid Force" does its thing then let them spend time with the family instead of deploying.
Its all BULLSHIT.
Well the party line is that the PONCE is going to be an interim AFSB. Stated mission is to support mineships and mine sweeping helos. Ok I can live with that cover story. As we should know the Ponce has much more capacity for more than helo ops, and of course boat ops from wet well is the USN currentl in vogue method.
ReplyDeleteAs to what COMSC said: MSC and sealift ships have been supporting NSW, the Navy and other services for decades in forward areas - they just weren't called "forward operating bases". I would point out that NSW boats were on the USNS GySgt Fred W. Stockham years ago (a modified LMSR). They called it AFSB for awhile.
I'll buy AFSB (I) as a good cover story and leave it at that~
yeah i've been looking at MSC ships but i'm not sure of the issues regarding there use in frontline combat.
ReplyDeletei wasn't aware of the NSW boats on USNS GYSGT STOCKHAM....i'll have to google that for more info.
I will send you the photo. The problem with using USNS civilian crewed ships in combat is ALL hung up in the minds of US Navy lawyers. Merchant ships of old, sealift ships since 1950 have all gone into "War Zones" which is a legal distinction. Current naval fudgy thinking is that USNS ship cannot participate in combat. WTF the ships have weapons mounts, they routinely embark naval security teams to operate weapons and sensors - I ask repeatedly what is the freaking problem? And get referred back to the Navy Office of General Counsel. Is the USN being denied the full use of ship assets in the "National Fleet" (per Bob Work), YES and that is wrong IMHO
ReplyDelete