Before I present this article to you I have to go over how much the Marine Corps has basically FUCKED with the Navy. We've had them jumping thru hoops to develop ships and then changed our doctrine on the fly.
The America Class LHD's? The first couple were built without well decks, then the Marine Corps reversed course and said well decks were needed.
The Expeditionary Sea Base. I marveled at this ship. It was built for Ship To Objective Maneuver. The Marines dumped it and then ya know what the rallying cry was? We gotta get it before we figure out what to do with it.
We toyed with the LCS and dumped that.
We demanded a next gen LCAC to get our tanks ashore and suddenly we dump tanks.
The Navy has a right to say a quick fuck you to the Marine Corps.
But on this issue the sad reality of Force Design vs Sea Battle is highlighted.
The Navy rightfully is prioritizing its battle fleet at the expense of amphibs. It hurts but makes sense.
The Marine Corps is caught in a trap of its own making. Its saying it will contribute to the sea battle by acting as the eyes and ears of the fleet (if you've been paying attention to the latest drivel, the kinetic effects of a few shore based anti-ship missiles is taking a back seat to the idea of Marines being a living breathing sensor node).
The Navy obviously believes that it can do the same with carrier launched drones & manned recon and land based drones/recon.
No need to maintain the current amphibious fleet along with a new class of light weight amphibs.
via Defense News.
In FY23, the Navy requested to decommission four — Germantown, Gunston Hall, Tortuga and Ashland, each of which would be between 31 to 37 years old.
According to an FY24 Navy budget memo obtained by Defense News, the service wants to decommission four more in FY24 — Rushmore, Harpers Ferry, Carter Hall and Pearl Harbor, each of which will be between 26 to 33 years old. Pearl Harbor, the youngest on the list, is two-thirds of the way through its expected service life.
According to the memo, “these legacy ships are in poor material condition due to their age and require significant resources to continue to maintain and operate them. Shifting resources to other capabilities better supports the amphibious fleet, and provides more operational capability to the Navy and Marine Corps in support of the National Defense Strategy.”
The first four would cost about $150 million apiece to put back into the FY23 budget, and upward of half a billion dollars each to keep for five years, according to a second document obtained by Defense News.
In short?
The US Navy is screwed. The Chinese Navy will put into service approx 10 Burke Class Destroyers this year. The US Navy will decommission (I believe) 2 Cruisers.
The Marine Corps labored hard and came up with a plan that just does not fit the Navy budget or their future concept.
Quite honestly the Marine Corps could actually become a bill payer for US Navy requirements.
The vaunted fast movers the Marine Corps has? I can see them getting gobbled up by the Navy. All those drones? Gobbled up by the Navy.
The Marine Corps wants to be subservient to Navy command? That might be the price.
The Marine Corps is already useless to combatant commanders. We've so tied ourselves to the Navy that independent action is no longer a thing.
I said before and I'll say again.
Force Design 2030 is gonna lead to the demise of the Marine Corps....by budget, stupid arrogance that they were building the force of the future and by being a terrible change agent by doing it all in secret without buy in from the parties that actually had the interests of the Marine Corps at heart.
No comments :
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.