Rueters: China building second aircraft carrier: reports

     From Rueters:

(Reuters) - China is building its second aircraft carrier, which is expected to take six years, and the country aims to have at least four such ships, Chinese and Hong Kong media reports said on Sunday.

After two decades of double-digit increases in the military budget, China's admirals plan to develop a full blue-water navy capable of defending growing economic interests as well as disputed territory in the South and East China Seas.

The country's first aircraft carrier, the Liaoning - a Soviet-era ship bought from Ukraine in 1998 and re-fitted in a Chinese shipyard - has long been a symbol of China's naval build-up.

Successfully operating the 60,000-tonne Liaoning is the first step in what state media and some military experts believe will be the deployment of locally built carriers by 2020.

In comments carried on Chinese news websites, Wang Min, the Communist Party boss of the northeastern province of Liaoning, where the first carrier is based, said the second carrier was being built in the port city of Dalian.

Its construction would take about six years, and in future China would have a fleet of at least four carriers, Wang told members of the province's legislature on Saturday, the reports added.

Dalian is the port where the existing carrier was re-fitted for use by the Chinese navy.

Read the rest here. 

Hat tip XBRADTC for spotting this.

India's New Carrier Almost Ready

      From Aviation Week:

India, looking to boost its naval presence in the Indian Ocean, is one step closer to putting its first indigenous aircraft carrier (IAC) into the water—as soon as August.

The first sea trials are likely to follow 10 months later, says a senior government official. Still, the IAC, named INS Vikrant after India's first carrier, will not see deployment for another five years.

The carrier is being constructed at the Cochin shipyard and the vessel “will be floated out on Aug. 12 and taken to the repair dock to carry out remaining work,” says Commo. K. Subramaniam, chairman and managing director of Cochin Shipyard Ltd. Hull work will be completed by June 2014, he adds.

The carrier is expected to be handed over to the navy for induction by January 2018.

The 45,000-ton IAC is estimated to cost $5 billion.

Cochin shipyard personnel have been working with the navy on the vessel for more than six years. The contract for the construction of the aircraft carrier was signed in 2007, and the keel was laid in February 2009, Subramaniam says.

The IAC was originally slated to enter service in 2014. Through last year, Indian officials insisted it could be 

commissioned in 2017. But a number of factors led to construction delays, including lack of adequate and appropriate steel from Russia and technical issues in the gearbox and other systems, a defense ministry official says.

India's other aircraft carrier, the 45,000-ton, 284-meter-long (932-ft.) INS Vikramaditya, formerly the Russian Kiev-class Admiral Gorshkov, is undergoing trials and will soon join the current sole carrier, the INS Virat.

Increasing India's naval force in the Indian Ocean is crucial, especially to combat sea piracy, says Ajay Lele, a defense pundit at the New Delhi-based Institute for Defense Studies and Analyses.

     India is finally launching their first homebuilt aircraft carrier, with a second planned. This is a continuation of the arms race throughout South and East Asia. Still, it is good to see the Indians making advances, only question is which side will they be on when the shooting starts.

ComNavOps is Preaching It

Hop on over to Navy Matters and read a post discussing small carriers versus no carriers in light f the current budgetary situation.

Japanese Navy Sinks The Varyag

That's what this photo of a model the Hyuga shows in the far left center. It also shows JF-17s dumping fuel, and a pair of AAVs on the fore deck of the Hyuga. Click to enlarge.

Nuclear Reactors In The Navy, CGs And Up

     What with Sequestration and all, the Navy has been forced to cut numbers of CGs and cut back on CVN deployments. This post is written for a hypothetical just world where Sequestration won't happen, and the Navy is focused on fighting conventional opponents. Several decades ago the Navy wanted a totally nuclear Navy with every ship powered by a nuclear reactor. This fell through about the 1970s when reactors started to be demonized, and also the high costs associated with running reactors. However, a return is needed to the reactor for large surface warships, cruisers, and the hypothetical BBG.

     1. DDGs, FFGs, and smaller. These vessels are small by definition and have to built in large quantities, and thus have to powered using conventional powerplants. Nuclear reactors simply aren't feasible because of the large numbers needed. 

     2. CVNs. Carrier have to nuclear powered because they have to maintain high speeds for long periods of time to launch and recover aircraft. Thus, they require nuclear reactors to supply the power needed for long sprints. Conventional propulsion is feasible, see the Midway-class, but it not the best for  current CVs.

     3. CGs. This is where things get a bit hypothetical. I would like to see a class of "heavy cruisers" of Long Beach size (hypothetical designation CSGN, yes the old Strike Cruiser), massive ships meant for missile warfare equipped with large numbers of VLS cells. These ships would be nuclear powered, not to keep up with the carriers, but rather for the much increased endurance and higher average speed over conventional power plants. At the same time a class of "light cruisers" about the size of the Ticonderoga-class (hypothetical designation CLGN) to provide striking power to SAGs while the CSGNs escort the carriers. These would be essentially the same as the Tico-class, but armed perhaps with a Mk 71 MCLWG for gunfire support. 

     Like I said this is for a just world, but this could go a long way to beefing up the Navy's AAW and ASuW capability. 

CVN-80 To Be Named Enterprise

     From the DoD: 

Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus announced today via video message at the USS Enterprise (CVN 65) inactivation ceremony that the third Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier will be named Enterprise. 

            Mabus selected this name to honor USS Enterprise (CVN 65), the Navy’s first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, which was inactivated today in Norfolk, Va. Commissioned in 1961, CVN 65 served for more than five decades. It participated in the blockade of the Cuban Missile Crisis, launched strike operations in Vietnam, and conducted combat missions in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. 

            “The USS Enterprise was the first of its kind, and for 51 years its name has been synonymous with boldness, readiness and an adventurous spirit,” said Mabus. “Rarely has our fleet been without a ship bearing the name.  I chose to maintain this tradition not solely because of the legacy it invokes, but because the remarkable work of the name Enterprise is not done.” 

            The future USS Enterprise, designated CVN 80, will be the ninth ship to bear the name.  

Mabus did real good on this one, now he needs to name the rest of the Ford-class: Hornet, Wasp, Ranger, San Jacinto, Lexington, and Yorktown. 

Photo Credit: US Navy

Help Name The Varyag

     The Diplomat has a little contest ring on where you can suggest a name for the ex-Varyag. Read it:

China needs your help.

Shipwrights in Chinese yards worked wonders transforming a Soviet hulk sold for scrap into a working aircraft carrier. The flattop formerly known as Varyag has ventured out of port on sea trials several times this past year. The People’s Liberation Army Navy appears satisfied with its performance. In fact, some press outlets speculate it could be placed in commission as early as thismonth. But it needs a name. It must stop being the Prince of the naval-aviation world.

Our friends in Beijing are evidently having a hard time settling on a name, though. The vessel was reportedlygoing to bear the name Shi Lang, for a long-ago conqueror of Taiwan. When word got out, the ensuing uproar apparently convinced China’s leaders they were being a tad heavy-handed—especially when they were cultivating an era of good feelings across the Taiwan Strait. Since then the poor ship has gone by “ex-Varyag,” truly an undignified moniker to grace China’s first operational carrier.

That’s where you can help. What kind of name should the ship have? Should it overawe all who behold it, sporting a name like Indisputable Sovereign of the Sea? Should it emphasize the cuddly side of Chinese sea power, with something like Panda Bear or Hello Kitty? Or something else? Please tell us! Enter your response in the comments below. Our crack editorial team will judge the responses and publish the winner next week. The prize will be … a date with editor Harry Kazianis!! (Editor's Note: What?)

And China will thank you.

     Currently, there are names like, Missile Magnet, The Great Leap Forward, Russian Roulette,

  and The Pain Train, among many others. So hop on over there and post your suggestion.

Hat tip to Bayou Renaissance Man for spotting this.

Flashback Friday: Ulyanovsk-class

     This week the topic of discussion is the USSR's planned class of supercarriers, the Ulyanovsk-class. The Ulyanovsk-class was supposed to be a Soviet analog to the American Nimitz-class supercarriers. The main mission of the Ulyanovsk-class would have been power projection and sea control, versus ASW as with all previous Soviet carrier designs.

     The Ulyanovsk-class would have had a displacement of just under 80,000 tons fully loaded, a length of 325 meters, a beam of 40m, and a draft of 11m. The Ulyanovsk-class would have had a top speed of at least 30 knots, and crew of roughly 3,800 men. 

     As with all Soviet carrier designs the Ulyanovsk-class carried their own offensive firepower in the form of 12 SS-N-19 Shipwreck ASCMs in 12 VLS launchers between the forward catapults. The Ulyanovsk-class also carried 24 SA-N-9 Gauntlet SAMs in VLS cells scattered around the deck. However, the Ulyanovsk-class departed from previous Soviet carrier designs in that they were not equipped with ASW weapons, sonar, and large guns. 

     The lead ship of the Ulyanovsk-class, the Ulyanovsk, was under construction when the USSR collapsed in 1991, and was scrapped in 1994 and her metal sold on the world metal market, as was the metal being readied for the second ship. However, there are rumblings that the Ulyanovsk-class design may be used for China's future aircraft carriers (unfortunately the Aviation Week article that I was going to link to is no longer available, so here is a blog post I wrote a year ago with some links on the subject).

     The Ulyanovsk-class was a rather interesting aircraft carrier design, but ultimately was a colossal boondoggle for the USSR, sapping precious resources from more valuable projects. The USSR attempted to build ships that were equal to U.S. Navy ships, rather than concentrating on submarines and cruise missiles which would have been cheap and and hard to kill solutions. In other words, we out spent them, and in trying to catch up they bankrupted themselves.

Photo Credit: Harpoon HQ, K.E. Cepreeb

Interior Photos Of The Varyag

     It's been some time since any photos worthy of note have come out of the Varyag. However, Alert 5 just posted some photos of the inside of the Varyag. Take a look:

Photo Credit: Alert 5

North American RA-5C Vigilante

Video Credit: jaglavaksoldier

India Plans To Build 2nd Indigenous Carrier

    From Aviation Week:

India plans to build another indigenous aircraft carrier in addition to the INS Vikrant, which is expected to join the country’s navy in 2016.

“The indigenous aircraft carrier [IAC] program is planned to be [a] continuing process over the next decade-plus, with the Indian navy’s medium-term aim being to have at least two fully operational and combat worthy carriers available at any 

given time,” says Chief of Naval Staff Adm. Nirmal Verma.

The second planned IAC could weigh about 65,000 tons and is likely to be christened INS Vishal.

Vikrant is under construction at the public-sector Cochin Shipyard in the southern Indian state of Kerala. The keel-laying for Vikrant, which will weigh about 45,000 tons, took place in February 2009.

Verma says the Indian navy has articulated a development plan up to 2027 that is “capability-based rather than threat-based.”


     This comes after the converted-Kiev sailed for sea trials. I think with this, and other plans, we are seeing a new power bloc appear in Asia. Either way India will be quite interesting to watch over the next few years.


Photo Credit: Russia Today 

Flashback Friday 6/22: USS United States (CVA-58)

    This week's Flashback Friday looks at the USS United States, what could have been the world's first supercarrier. The USS United States was primarily envisioned as a carrier that rather than support amphibious operations or sea control, would perform nuclear bombardment as it's main mission. Later on during the design period, the United States was redesigned to carry more fighters, but her main mission overall was for nuclear bombardment.  The United States would have had a flight deck that could handle 45,500kg aircraft because of the heavy weight of early nuclear weapons (some early nuclear weapons could weigh as much as 6000kg).
      One of the unique aspects of the United States was that she was designed without an island on the flight deck. Most carriers that have been built have been constructed with an island amidships of varying sizes. The main problem with the lack of an island it that the functions performed in an island (air traffic control, combat information center, steering, among others) have to be moved belowdecks. And while this provides greater armor, it denies the captain, air boss, and others a view of their surroundings. The other problem with the lack of an island is that  there is no place to locate radar and communications antennas.
     However, what was probably the most interesting feature of the United States was the fact that she had 4 catapults on the bow and amidships, and yet was designed to be able to recover aircraft at the same time she was launching them. This was a capability not available for the U.S. Navy until 1955 on the USS Shangri-La with the SCB-125 upgrade for WWII-era Essex-class carriers. And even then modified carriers could only use 2 of 4 catapults when recovering aircraft.

     What sank the United States however, was inter-service rivalry. At the same time the United States was being designed, the Air Force had begun pushing for a fleet of B-36 Peacemakers to use in lieu of carriers for nuclear deterrence. The SecDef at the time, Louis A. Johnson, canceled the construction of the United States 5 days after her keel was laid (see picture above). This led to the famous "Revolt of the Admirals" which cost the then CNO Admiral Louis Denfield his job. However, the "revolt" saved carrier aviation, as the then-new thinking was that strategic bombing with nuclear weapons would win any future war. This was proved wrong in the Korean War a year after the United States was canceled.

     The USS United States was a revolutionary design, and could have altered the design of U.S. Navy carriers for many years afterward. However, at the same time, it might have been a good thing that she was canceled, as she was designed with nuclear deterrence in mind, rather than air support and sea control which have always been the traditional missions of an aircraft carrier. 

   

Yet Another Example Of Media Hype Over Nothing

     Fox news reports:

PEARL HARBOR, Hawaii –  The commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet said Monday the Navy will be sending its most advanced vessels and aircraft to the Asia-Pacific region as it builds up its presence by assigning most of its fleet there.

Adm. Cecil Haney said a policy recently outlined by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta to deploy 60 percent of the Navy's ships fleet to the Pacific by 2020 is about capabilities as well as quantity.

"It's not just numbers -- it's also what those platforms, what those units, bring to the table," Haney told The Associated Press in an interview at his headquarters in Pearl Harbor.

Haney cited as an example the Littoral Combat Ship which can operate in shallower waters than other vessels. The U.S. plans to begin deploying one of the ships to Singapore next year.

The EA-18G plane -- which can jam enemy air defenses and fly faster than the speed of sound -- is another. Haney said squadrons of these aircraft would be coming through the region.

There's also the Navy's most advanced submarine -- the Virginia-class. Several of these subs are based at Pearl Harbor.

"Yes, it's about having numbers in that 60-40 split, but also about having the right capability," he said.

The policy offers further details to the Obama administration's announcement earlier this year of a new defense strategy that places greater emphasis on a U.S. military presence in the region in response to Asia's growing economic importance and China's rise as a military power.

The Navy now has about 285 ships about evenly divided among the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. The total number of ships will decline in coming years as some vessels are retired and not replaced.

It has 11 aircraft carriers. A majority -- six -- are already assigned to the Pacific.

The policy is an extension of a 2006 Bush Administration-era policy that had the Navy base 60 percent of its submarines in the Pacific.

The service had for years split its submarines evenly between the Atlantic and Pacific. During the Cold War, the Navy kept 60 percent of its subs in the Atlantic as a deterrent to the Soviet Union.

     This article is making a big deal over the fact that Navy is moving most of it's ships to the Pacific, when that has been underway for the last 6-7 years. The other areas this article blows things up are when the writer mentions the LCS, and the E/A-18G. 

Haney cited as an example the Littoral Combat Ship which can operate in shallower waters than other vessels. The U.S. plans to begin deploying one of the ships to Singapore next year.

The ability to operate in shallow water does not make a ship advanced. The Arleigh Burke-class destroyers can operate in waters as shallow as 9.5m, and the Perry-class frigates can operate in water up to 7m deep. Just because the LCS can operate in a swimming pool does not make it advanced (both classes have a draft of about 4.5m). The LCS may have an advanced electronics suite, but it's only weapon is it's wake and sheer speed. Until the LCS can carry a real anti-ship missile, it is under-armed and is little more than a large patrol boat.

The EA-18G plane -- which can jam enemy air defenses and fly faster than the speed of sound -- is another. Haney said squadrons of these aircraft would be coming through the region.

     Yes, the E/A-18G Growler is an advanced aircraft, and arguably the best ECM aircraft in the world. However, if the best selling point the Navy can come up with is the fact that it's supersonic, they might want to spend a little more time thinking about what they want to say, before talking to the press.

     Basically, much ado about nothing. 

Photo Credit: US Navy

INS Vikramaditya Sails For Her First Sea Trial

     India's new carrier the INS Vikramaditya finally sailed for her firstrt sea trial on June 8th RIA Novosti reports. The Vikramaditya has been undergoing an overhaul in Sevmash shipyard since 2005 and has been experiencing many delays, as hes scheduled delivery date was in 2008, and now is this coming December.

Read the article here:

 INS Vikramaditya, formerly the Admiral Gorshkov aircraft carrier, has set sail for sea trials before delivery to the Indian navy. After a delay of four years, one of Russia’s largest military contracts is planned to be completed by the end of 2012, adding a nice sum to the Russia’s arms export revenues.

Twenty years ago

The warship was docked in spring 1992 and later moved to the Sevmash shipyard in the city of Severodvinsk in northern Russia, where it was modernized for the Indian navy as the Vikramaditya.

The sea trials began late at night on June 7, giving India hope that INS Vikramaditya, named after a legendary Indian emperor famed for his wisdom, valor and magnanimity, will be delivered to the Indian navy on schedule on December 4, 2012.

The Soviet-made ocean-going warship will get a new lease on life in the Indian navy, where it will replace the Vikrant-class aircraft carrier INS Viraat, which was commissioned in 1959 as the Royal Navy's HMS Hermes and transferred to India in 1987.

The Admiral Gorshkov, originally named the Baku, was a Kiev-class air-capable warship laid down in 1978. The first Soviet air-capable cruisers, traditionally named after the capitals of Soviet republics, were more like anti-submarine ships than aircraft carriers. They were equipped with helicopters and the Yak-23 Forger vertical take off/landing fighter planes, which had a limited strike capability. These warships were also armed with heavy anti-ship missiles.

The Soviet Union’s first real aircraft carrier was the Admiral Kuznetsov, which was laid down in 1983 and became fully operational in 1995, after the Soviet Union’s collapse.

Only option

The 1990s were a bad period for large Russian warships. The Admiral Gorshkov spent it idling, while its “younger brothers,” including the Varyag, were sold to foreign navies.

Preparations for selling the Admiral Gorshkov to India began in 1994. But India wanted a modern warship, not a rundown behemoth, and so the first agreements were hammered out only by 2000. The warship, which was ordered to go to Severodvinsk a year before that, was officially sold on January 20, 2004 and renamed INS Vikramaditya.

The partners also coordinated the financial aspects of the contract, which were later reviewed several times as upgrade costs grew.

Russia planned to spend approximately $1 billion on the aircraft carrier’s modernization. The refurbished warship was to have a catapult for assisted takeoff and a new air group consisting of 12 MiG-29K single seaters and 4 MiG-29KUB two seaters ($740 million), the Ka-27 Helix anti-submarine helicopters and the Ka-31 Helix helicopters fitted with electronic warfare radars.

At that time, the MiG-29K multirole fighter existed only as a prototype modification of the old Soviet-era carrier based aircraft. India actually commissioned the construction of a new plane, given that all its equipment was completely new. Russia now delivers these planes not only to India under new contracts worth about $1.5 billion, but also to the Russian navy.

The aircraft was the least difficult part of the contract. Under the initial contract, the Admiral Gorshkov was to be delivered to India in 2008, but it soon turned out that the cost of modernization and the amount of work involved had been seriously underestimated.

The situation was complicated by the lack of personnel. Russian shipyards are still short of skilled personnel, which is one reason why the Yantar shipyard in Kaliningrad on the Baltic Sea had to postpone the delivery of the Project 1135.6 frigates to India for at least a year.

While the sides haggled over additional agreements, India stopped financing the modernization of the Admiral Gorshkov. Progress was made on the cost issue only in late 2008, after President Dmitry Medvedev’s visit to New Delhi.

The contract was recalculated at $2.35 billion, although Russia insisted on getting $3 billion or more, which incensed the Indian parliament and media.

INS Vikramaditya is to be delivered to India in December 2012, but it seems that problems with the warship will never end. Prosecutors are currently investigating a company that worked on the carrier without a license.

Once the Indian Navy takes delivery of the Vikramaditya she will probably be used to secure Indian energy intersts in the South China Sea, as China has begun bullying Indian vessels there. Still, it will something to keep an eye as India continues to modernize her military.

Photo Credit: Alert 5

A Strategy For The 21st Century, Part 7: The Navy

     The Navy. This service among all 5 is probably the most important not only from a war fighting point of view, but in terms of foreign policy. However, the Navy has made a number of grave errors in recent history which must be fixed.

     1. Cancel the Littoral Combat Ship. Between 2004 and 2011, the Navy ran a contest between General Dynamics and Lockheed Martin for a contract to develop the Littoral Combat Ship. Basically, the LCS is meant to get in the shallows and chase down pirates and other hostiles, hunt mines, and hunt subs. In 2011 the Navy asked Congress purchase both designs, this has since been approved. The price for a single LCS is about 450 million dollars. The LCS also uses "modules" for specialized tasks like ASW, whcih can switched out for other modules to handle other tasks. However, as of 2011 not one of the "modules" supposed to be used in the LCS has become operational. At the same time the missile meant to be used by the LCS, the XM501 has been canceled, which takes away a good deal of the LCS's firepower. At the same time Huntington Ingalls has produced a frigate design based of the Coast Guard's National Security Cutter, called  "Patrol Frigate 4921". This design offers several advantages over the LCS, better handling in heavy seas, longer range, slightly heavier armor (armor does matter in the littorals), greater firepower. All that is required is upgrading the radar and electronics to Naval standards, upgunning the 57mm cannon to a 76.2mm or a 127mm gun, adding several 25mm chain guns for close in fighting, and the addition of a towed sonar array.                                       

     2. Cancel the Zumwalts. Another Navy boondoggle is the Zumwalt-class of destroyers. The Zumwalt-class have an emphasis on land attack, while at the same time handling the duties of a regular destroyer. Originally, there were supposed to be 32 Zumwalts, as of 2012 there will only be 3 Zumwalts built. On top of this the Navy has stated that they no longer want the Zumwalts, and they would rather have more Arleigh Burkes. Also, in this instance quantity over quality should be the mantra, because destroyers are exponentially more valuable. Thus, the loss of one not as capable destroyer of which there are many, would not be felt as much as the loss of an extremely capable destroyer of which there are few. The cost of a single Zumwalt is 3 billion dollars, at the same time 5 Arleigh Burkes can be purchased for the same amount. There are also concerns that even though the Zumwalt is equipped for the land attack role, it will be unable to fufill it's duties as it pertains to naval fire support. In this instance the solution would be simply to purchase more Arleigh Burkes rather than the Zumwalt-class.

     4. During the Cold War the U.S. was the best in the world at anti-submarine warfare (ASW), and had the best sub force in the world. However, since the  so-called "Peace Dividend"  sub force hgas dropped from 93 SSNs and 33 SSBNs, to 53 SSNs, and 14 SSBNs in 2011 (this does not include 4 SSBNs converted to SSGNs.). Some of these cuts are understandable, as the collapse of the Soviet Union there was not as great a need for a large sub fleet. However, with the rise of the PRC there is need for more subs, as carriers and surface warships might not be able to get close to Asia because of ASBM and cruise missile threats. Same goes for the Navy's ASW capability, at the end of the Cold War, American ASW crews were the best, however the skills which were honed by hunting Soviet subs in the North Atlantic have deteriorated with a lack of emphasis on the sub threat. 

     This is just a beginning on the road to rebuilding the Navy, there need to changes in the way the Navy selects it flag officers and makes promotions, naval aviation, women on subs and carriers, and the SEALs. But what is stated above, is an excellent start to rebuilding the Navy.

  

Petition To Name CVN-80 USS Enterprise

      Recently, I came across a petition to name CVN-80 USS Enterprise, at the moment the CVN-79 is slated to be named the USS John F. Kennedy. Since the founding of the U.S. Navy, the Navy has had 6 ships named the Enterprise, a 14-gun brig, a 10 gun schooner, a motor yacht, and two aircraft carriers (CV-6 and CVN-65). The Enterprise (CV-6) during WWII earned 20 battle stars, becoming the most decorated ship in U.S. Navy history, the second aircraft carrier to be named the Enterprise (CVN-65) was the worlds first nuclear powered aircraft carrier, and holds the record for length of service for an aircraft carrier (50 years as of this November). It has become a symbol of the U.S. Navy to have a carrier named the USS Enterprise, and it would be a terrible shame to not have a CV named the Enterprise.

     At the moment the petition only has around 300 signatures, and started in August. The petition is looking for at least 10,000 signatures, and then will be sent to Congress and SECNAV. The folks over at the USNI Blog did the same thing last year and ended up at about 3,000 signatures. So, if you would, sign the petition, spread the word, and let's see if the Navy will name CVN-80 the USS Enterprise.

Photo Credit: US Navy

   

     

A Strategy For The 21st Century, Part 2: Asia

     Asia. Since the Communist Chinese took over China in 1949 there has been a secret war waged along the west side of the Pacific Rim. After that was the Soviet naval buildup under Admiral Gorshkov, that turned the Soviet Navy into a true blue-water navy. However, with the collapse of the Soviet Union (and it's navy) there is only one real Communist nation that poses a threat in the Pacific, the People's Republic of China. Just in the last few weeks China's president Hu Jintao urged the PLAN to prepare for combat. This comes as tensions continue to rise over the Spratley Islands in the South China Sea, and the PLAN stopped an Indian Navy ship just outside Vietnamese territorial waters. As China continues to buildup their military, the United States must respond. Here is what I believe the U.S. must do to stop China.
     1. Build new bases, and reopen old ones. Since the U.S. took over the Philippines from Spain in 1896, we operated Naval Base Subic Bay, and Clark Air Base a few miles away. However, after the 1991 eruption of Mount Pinatubo, Clark AB was covered in ash. The year after in 1992 the treaty leasing NB Subic Bay expired. Thus, the U.S. lost 2 very valuable bases located only 1100km from China. With the U.S. backing the Philippines in the Spratly Islands dispute, it would be in the Pilippines' and the U.S.'s best interests to reopen NB Subic Bay, and if possible Clark Air Base, as the former Clark Air Base is now Diosdada Macapagal International Airport. Also, the Marine Corps is in the process of stationing 2500 Marines near Darwin, this should be augmented with a full-fledged Air Force base and Naval Station in Australia, if the Australians are willing. Bases should also be established in Taiwan, and Singapore, existing bases on Guam, Hawaii, and Okinawa should be expanded.
     2. Cease the construction of "Supercarriers", and design and build a new class of aircraft carriers about the size of the USS Midway-class. In that last few years the Chinese have begun developing the DF-21D, as a means of denying most of the Western Pacific to U.S. aircraft carriers. This coupled with the proliferation of supersonic cruise missiles, and Kilo-class submarines poses a grave threat to U.S. naval air power throughout the Pacific. Furthermore, in this case quantity is better than quality, because at the moment if one carrier is lost there is a gaping hole the Navy's capabilities until the next carrier is completed. Thus, it is necessary that the Navy instead of building very few "Supercarriers", build a smaller class of carriers with a displacement not to exceed 65,000 tons, a max speed of 40 knots, and a complement of  50 aircraft. This is feasible as the USS Midway had a displacement of 62,000 and could carry 65 aircraft as of it's decommissioning in 1992. 
     3. Resurrect the Navy's ASW (Anti-Submarine Warfare) capability. During the Cold War the U.S. Navy was the best in the world at ASW. However, since the USSR collapsed in 1991 the Navy's ASW capability has gone down hill. This can be rectified by, 1. Extending the life of Perry-class frigates 2. Investing in more SOSUS systems and towed array sonars. 3. Developing a new class of frigates specifically for the ASW role.
     There is more that I will lay out in future posts, but the ideas I have laid out in this post, I believe are a good start to beating China and maintaining the U.S.'s national security.





Photo Credit: U.S. Navy