Everyone seems to be doing an "end of the year roundup" and Navy Matters is no exception. Here's his list of the good and bad from the past year. A tidbit...
Right and Wrong – Hornet. The decision to abandon specialized aircraft in favor of a generic, combination strike fighter, and a short-legged one at that, marked the beginning of the decline of the air wings and the decline of carrier striking power. On the plus side, the Navy seems to be pursuing a program of evolutionary improvement to the Hornet that looks better and better when compared to the F-35.Read the whole thing here.
There are many other decisions that could be added to this list but this a fair collection of major decisions. The obvious conclusion is that Navy leadership has, generally, been pretty consistent in making poor decisions. Even some of the good decisions are bordering on becoming poor ones, such as allowing the submarine force numbers to decline to far.
The Navy needs to engage in some serious soul searching, recognize its institutional shortcomings, and learn the lessons that its decision making history offers.
The above stands true for the entire DoD
ReplyDeleteAdmiral Greenert: “All the stealth in the world ain’t gonna penetrate everything,” he told the audience at the 50th annual conference of the Association of Old Crows, a group named after a slang term for electronic warfare operators. Greenert puts his stock in jammers. “But we have the means for—way out in the future—with the Next Generation Jammer and what it’ll bring, to be able to get in when we need to and get out.”
ReplyDeleteThe Navy can buy three Growlers for the price of one F-35.
PROGRAM ACQUISITION COST BY WEAPON SYSTEM
OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
(COMPTROLLER) / CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
FISCAL YEAR 2014 BUDGET REQUEST
$M
F-25B/C P. 1-7
2,584 procurement
+ spares 10/19 X 322 = 169
2,584 + 169 = 2,753 / 10 = $275m ea unit procurement cost
EA-18G Growler p.1-20
1,027 + 34 spares = 1,051 / 12 = $86m ea
The Hornets have been developed and proven; the Lightning II is a dream (nightmare).
Sorry, in a hurry I goofed.
DeleteThe spares portion for the F-35B/C should be 10/29 of 322 or 111
This makes the F-35B/C unit procurement cost $217m ea, so--
The Navy can buy two-and-a-half Growlers for the price of one F-35.
Regarding the comment about the decline of the Navy, I think the Navy gained more capabilities with the Super Hornet and Growler than with the complicated F-14. Besides the top speed and range for interception it had exactly the same specs, T/W ratio and rate of climb, but it wasn't a better air to air platform than the super maneauverable Super Hornet with great Alfa, HMD and Aim-9X with off boresight capacity and off course much lower RCS and ellectronic counter measures, and we don't even need to mention the ellectronic attack caracteristics or the Growlers.
ReplyDeleteTha last f-14 tomcat demo:
http://youtu.be/rAwRx4XceGg
FA-18F Super Hornet at RIAT 12th July 2014:
http://youtu.be/f1dVRbunRyg
The one issue that still remains is range. The ASH F-18 with conformal tanks improves the range, but the Navy really needs to think strategically beyond just a good all round strike fighter, particularly for the Pacific theater where distances are vast.
Deleteeducate me because i'm of the thought that the distance thing is overblown. first we have cruise missiles that can be launched from fighters for long range strikes. second, for defense we have the range of the planes plus the missiles to give a total defense from carrier figure and last we're not seeing anything better from anyone else on the planet outside of dedicated bombers.
Deleteso whats the big deal?
“Range for interception” is *everything* for a fleet-defense fighter. It is essential to intercept enemy fighter-bombers before they launch their anti-ship missiles. A massive wave of enemy planes releasing their missiles outside the range of the defending fighters is how a carrier group dies.
DeleteSuper maneuverability is not essential, because even Flankers are not very maneuverable when loaded with anti-ship missiles.
Range is even more essential for the attack planes, because it allows to attack targets without exposing the carrier group to land-based anti-ship missiles.
What kind of missiles the massive wave of airplanes do you think will be able to release outside the range of the Super Hornets range of interception?
ReplyDeleteThe Super Hornets can extend their range of attack simply by buddy buddy refuelling if they need to cover huge distances and then launch long range stand off weapons.