Road to 350: What Does the US Navy Do Anyway?

[Pags]

SDTS isn't really a "test hull." It's a weapons and sensors proving hull...we can mix and match the loadout to what we want to test. Recently that's been the SSDS suite, and now it'll probably shift over to proof out DDG Flight III combat systems.
And the land based labs used by AEGIS are mostly multi-purpose, there's no reason DDG-1000 or LCS couldn't make use (and DDG-1000 has previously for its radar tests).

AEGIS doesn't get away from fighting for hulls with the Fleet either. But it's "important" enough that they get a designated non-deploying...but deployable if we need to "test princess."
Right now it's JPJ, but before that it was Lake Erie (the BMD shooter that did the SM-3 satellite kill then got a CO fired for a shipboard goat when they went back to being a real operational asset again).
And that's probably pretty a good comparison to what DDG-1000 will end up doing...and eventually maybe like Seawolf.

And remember, we even had a big deck amphib (Wasp) for years as designated non-deploying F-35B test bitch.

So there's a long history of Fleet assets being relegated to test long-term.

DDG-1000's challenge is that pumping in a lot of R&D to get it up to par with a late model DDG-51 is a lot of money for a little operational return. At best we'd clone DDG-51 capabilities...which basically only gives us 3 more DDG-51 like ships. I'm not sure where they're drawing the line for its capabilities, but that's the tradeoff we need to balance.
As an at sea test platform to mature technology for use in a next gen surface combatant would be ideal. SDTS cannot replicate the electrical plant capabilities of DDG-1000.

Good post. My only clarification is to better define my term "test hull." What I meant was a ship dedicated to T&E that can be equipped with different systems that need to be tested; somewhere in between a shore lab and a fully fleet representative ship. In my head I'm envisioning a ship that you easily cut big holes in (or maybe has pre-built "holes") that allow you to put on a gun system, a combat system, a missile cell, radar system, or a different propulsion system and all the open spaces that would allow for easier cable runs, instrumentation, etc.

 

[Randy Daytona]

Article today in RealClearDefense on China's expanding fleet.

The Chinese People’s Liberation Army (Navy) – or PLA(N) – is moving towards an ambition of 500 warships, including aircraft carriers, nuclear submarines, amphibious ships and a burgeoning frigate and destroyer force.

https://blog.usni.org/2017/02/08/china-sees-our-350-and-throw-another-150-on-top

 

[hscs]

Article today in RealClearDefense on China's expanding fleet.

The Chinese People’s Liberation Army (Navy) – or PLA(N) – is moving towards an ambition of 500 warships, including aircraft carriers, nuclear submarines, amphibious ships and a burgeoning frigate and destroyer force.

https://blog.usni.org/2017/02/08/china-sees-our-350-and-throw-another-150-on-top

Yawn....Not sure where the money will come from when their credit situation is worse than ours and population is greying.

 

[Uncle Fester]

Article today in RealClearDefense on China's expanding fleet.

The Chinese People’s Liberation Army (Navy) – or PLA(N) – is moving towards an ambition of 500 warships, including aircraft carriers, nuclear submarines, amphibious ships and a burgeoning frigate and destroyer force.

https://blog.usni.org/2017/02/08/china-sees-our-350-and-throw-another-150-on-top

SWO Boss made some comments recently to the effect that the Chinese were just putting hulls in the water, and that their training and capability didn't equal the capacity you'd expect from a fleet that size. On one hand, I find that plausible; on the other, there's that saying about quantity having a quality of its own.

 

[Randy Daytona]

Yawn....Not sure where the money will come from when their credit situation is worse than ours and population is greying.

That is true (article the other day about China needing labor). However, if a government that bases it's legitimacy on improving the material condition of its citizens is no longer able to do so, would it be tempted to distract the population with a military confrontation?

 

[Jim123]

That is true (article the other day about China needing labor). However, if a government that bases it's legitimacy on improving the material condition of its citizens is no longer able to do so, would it be tempted to distract the population with a military confrontation?

When has that ever happened in all of history??

 

[azguy]

SWO Boss made some comments recently to the effect that the Chinese were just putting hulls in the water, and that their training and capability didn't equal the capacity you'd expect from a fleet that size. On one hand, I find that plausible; on the other, there's that saying about quantity having a quality of its own.

True, also many of those hulls, such as the Houbei and other small combatants, are essentially beefed up PCs. Legit little ships for sure, but at they end of the day, they're pretty easy work for the MPRA and H-60 folks.

 

[Uncle Fester]

That is true (article the other day about China needing labor). However, if a government that bases it's legitimacy on improving the material condition of its citizens is no longer able to do so, would it be tempted to distract the population with a military confrontation?

The Russians are playing checkers; the Chinese are playing chess. Hu won't sacrifice short-term gains for long-term losses. The PRC is on the edge of a recession, but nothing so desperate that the leadership would risk a confrontation.

 

[BigRed389]

SWO Boss made some comments recently to the effect that the Chinese were just putting hulls in the water, and that their training and capability didn't equal the capacity you'd expect from a fleet that size. On one hand, I find that plausible; on the other, there's that saying about quantity having a quality of its own.

Also worth noting that it's not particularly relevant if the PLAN can or can't go toe to toe with us.

They have both the PLA Rocket Forces and PLAAF to help them with sea control, and they'll likely bring a lot more capacity than the US Army or USAF could for us in a WESTPAC fight.

 

[azguy]

They have both the PLA Rocket Forces and PLAAF to help them with sea control, and they'll likely bring a lot more capacity than the US Army or USAF could for us in a WESTPAC fight.

This is a controversial point, but I tend to agree with you. Can't really hash out the points and counter-points on here, but suffice it to say, China would be fighting a home game and we'd be fighting an away game.

 

[nittany03]

This is a controversial point, but I tend to agree with you. Can't really hash out the points and counter-points on here, but suffice it to say, China would be fighting a home game and we'd be fighting an away game.

This is nothing new. We haven't fought a home game since 1815, intramural issues not included. It's better if we keep it that way.

 

[azguy]

This is nothing new. We haven't fought a home game since 1815, intramural issues not included. It's better if we keep it that way.

No shit. Just pointing out that you can't compare HIMARS to the PLA Rocket Force. USAF v PLAAF comparison is frankly a much more interesting and nuanced discussion but definitely not one to have on here.

 

[Flash]

SWO Boss made some comments recently to the effect that the Chinese were just putting hulls in the water, and that their training and capability didn't equal the capacity you'd expect from a fleet that size. On one hand, I find that plausible; on the other, there's that saying about quantity having a quality of its own.

You'd be surprised at what they can and can't do. I wouldn't underestimate them but they ain't the bogeyman either.

 

[Recovering LSO]

https://blog.usni.org/2017/02/08/china-sees-our-350-and-throw-another-150-on-top

Sal using a second hand number that PRC is "moving toward" to continue passive-aggressively beating the drum for making the navy great again....yes, yawn indeed. I was somewhat disappointed to see VCNO testifying this week that we need (in this order) more ships, and then more money to take care of what we've got rotting on the line. If you've paid attention to hull counts over the last decade you know it's a shell game and can manipulated quite easily to match political winds. Are we chasing a number to make ourselves feel better about ourselves, or are we pursuing capabilities that are based on threat assessments and anticipated operational reqs?

 

[Pags]

Since I'm still in the throes of reading "Dreadnaught," it sounds to me what the USN needs is a Jackie Fisher to smartly implement new capabilities while gutting dead weight from the fleet.