Need SWO Input For Military Fiction Research

[BigRed389]

Essentially, at the end of your sea tours you would branch off into either Engineering or a Topsider specialty with engineers becoming experts in how to operate and maintain the engineering plant while the topsiders focus on driving and fighting the ship. The Merchant Marine and Coasties already do something similar and so do every other Navy. The issue that took us away from this was the engineering types complained about not being able to hold command and being discriminated against for promotion since they couldn't hold command at sea. I think the idea of mixing and matching COs and XOs would fix this problem.

@Aluroon broke it down into a three branch system with the differentiation between Ops, Weps, and Eng, but it's the same idea. The three branch system would likely gain more traction since these are already tracked via AQDs and there are unspoken specializations based upon those AQDs. The other issue with the Topsider/Engineering approach is that there's no career option for major command equivalency for Engineering types since big deck CHENGs are EDOs and the SWO community would need to radically alter it's accessions path and retention policies to recruit engineering types and would run afoul of career programming for EDOs (Essentially removing career opportunities for our equivalent of O6 major command at sea for carrier construction and industrial maintenance specialists).

I spent a few years working very closely with a Commonwealth Navy (ie one that stills calls ships “Her Majesty’s.”
Their answer is that their EDOs go to sea then go back ashore to run material support and acquisition functions. Obviously this would make PERS and both the SWO and EDO communities have a collective heart attack.

Their Warfare Officers are branched into Ops, Nav, and basically Tactical Specializations (eg ASW, IAMD, etc).
Engineers focus on keeping the equipment (either “WEPS” or “Engines”) running.

My 2c - both sides have their pros and cons. I think the right answer is pulling from the best of both, but the bureaucratic inertia of changing a system as large as ours would be impossible without us actually losing a whole lot of people in combat.

Threadtax:

All sub-light RF. Funny that you described it that way as that's exactly the phrase I used lol. Do current weapons systems allow anything like laser target designation? Given the ranges (over the horizon) that any theoretically missile shots at enemy ships would take place, that doesn't seem likely, but it's one way around an RF hash. Bonus points for the IFF being knocked out. I had hoped that's the case, but it's good to have it confirmed.

Laser is theoretically possible but impractical due to the ranges involved as you’ve pointed out. With ships, due to the power they generate, if you have LOS with a laser, you’d rather just blast it with a destructive laser though obviously that is still a bit away from being practical.

 

[AllAmerican75]

All sub-light RF. Funny that you described it that way as that's exactly the phrase I used lol. Do current weapons systems allow anything like laser target designation? Given the ranges (over the horizon) that any theoretically missile shots at enemy ships would take place, that doesn't seem likely, but it's one way around an RF hash. Bonus points for the IFF being knocked out. I had hoped that's the case, but it's good to have it confirmed.

I don't know of any weapons systems on board most large warships that still allow for laser or visual target designation. OHP FFGs used to be able to do this with the single armed bandit launchers and a dude with binoculars on top of the bridge, but that is ancient technology.

Roger. I think you would want another SWO track for Coastal/Riverine/VBSS, leading to PC command?

The mission need would be to develop the small boat skill sets to avoid another Farsi Island incident.

I understand some of these are perceived as collateral duties (VBSS) or dead end career paths (PC CO)... but as an outsider looking in, maybe that’s part of the issue?

I think VBSS, Riverine, and small boat tactics could be handled easily by somebody in the Ops and/or Weps realm. Many of the skill sets cross over. That being said, I think we need to either create specialized VBSS units or get out of the VBSS game for regular, non-SPECWAR or EOD Sailors. It's treated as a collateral duty which is dangerous as those specific skills atrophy without regular use and training.

Regarding PC and MCM command, I don't think it's a dead end at all. Every single person I know who was a PC or MCM skipper has gone on to hold O5 and even O6 command. Hell, I know one guy who is on his third successive command tour as an O5 after proving himself as a PC skipper. The only exceptions are those that retired or switched over to do something different in another community. The issue is that many don't want to do the job. Right now, early command is treated like a third DH tour so it's another 18 to 24 months at sea and many are exhausted after two DH tours and want to go relax on shore duty.

I spent a few years working very closely with a Commonwealth Navy (ie one that stills calls ships “Her Majesty’s.”
Their answer is that their EDOs go to sea then go back ashore to run material support and acquisition functions. Obviously this would make PERS and both the SWO and EDO communities have a collective heart attack.

Their Warfare Officers are branched into Ops, Nav, and basically Tactical Specializations (eg ASW, IAMD, etc).
Engineers focus on keeping the equipment (either “WEPS” or “Engines”) running.

My 2c - both sides have their pros and cons. I think the right answer is pulling from the best of both, but the bureaucratic inertia of changing a system as large as ours would be impossible without us actually losing a whole lot of people in combat.

Threadtax:


Laser is theoretically possible but impractical due to the ranges involved as you’ve pointed out. With ships, due to the power they generate, if you have LOS with a laser, you’d rather just blast it with a destructive laser though obviously that is still a bit away from being practical.

Our cultural inertia is what is really holding us back on many improvements or modernizations like changing our personnel management system. But that's probably a discussion for another thread.

 

[Scott M]

Laser is theoretically possible but impractical due to the ranges involved as you’ve pointed out. With ships, due to the power they generate, if you have LOS with a laser, you’d rather just blast it with a destructive laser though obviously that is still a bit away from being practical.

Sooo close, though, lol. I remember geeking out when they mounted that first testbed on the Portland.

So what would that look like if a captain tries a missile shot given that 1) the RF is gone, the datalinks are gone, 2) there's tons of crap in/on the water, and 3) range is extremely close and both ships are hemmed in by terrain, and 4) they are definitely going to shoot at each other. A CG (Bunker Hill) and an DDG (Stockdale) vs two DDG's and a couple of Canadian FFG's.

 

[Aluroon]

I don't know of any weapons systems on board most large warships that still allow for laser or visual target designation. OHP FFGs used to be able to do this with the single armed bandit launchers and a dude with binoculars on top of the bridge, but that is ancient technology.

5'.

Not really much reason at all to utilize available missiles inside 10nm when more effective tools are available.

I think VBSS, Riverine, and small boat tactics could be handled easily by somebody in the Ops and/or Weps realm. Many of the skill sets cross over. That being said, I think we need to either create specialized VBSS units or get out of the VBSS game for regular, non-SPECWAR or EOD Sailors. It's treated as a collateral duty which is dangerous as those specific skills atrophy without regular use and training.

Agree on all points here. With the shifting mission sets of the Marines this makes a lot more sense as something for them to focus on honestly. They'll do it better, it gives them a stronger purpose, etc. In an ideal world in which I had absolute power to make changes without the absolute mountain of pushback, I'd repurpose the Independence LCS into mini-amphibs and use them for that mission set and other small tactical purposes, instead of trying to pretend they can be actual warships. Attach one to each ARG and forward deploy the rest out of Bahrain / SASVEGAS / Singapore. Use them to source the stupid ass missions we're using shooters for right now in 7th fleet and to replace the PCs that they want to have entirely Decomm'd in the next 2-3 years.

Regarding PC and MCM command, I don't think it's a dead end at all. Every single person I know who was a PC or MCM skipper has gone on to hold O5 and even O6 command. Hell, I know one guy who is on his third successive command tour as an O5 after proving himself as a PC skipper. The only exceptions are those that retired or switched over to do something different in another community. The issue is that many don't want to do the job. Right now, early command is treated like a third DH tour so it's another 18 to 24 months at sea and many are exhausted after two DH tours and want to go relax on shore duty.

I had an XO that held PC command and got passed over for DDG fleet up. Guy was a piece of work though. Easily the most difficult O5 I've ever worked with, but he was the exception I think to how early command usually works out, vice the rule.

100% on point about post DH tours and how exhausted the average DH is by the end of their second tour. On the other hand, post DH is a wield beast right now, since like 2nd tour DIVOS like 40% are going to follow-on tours at a 'ron' of some sort, which can be either really ok or absolutely terrible depending on timing. The net result there though has been that taking post DH tours that are perceived as 'easy' instead of another sea related tour (ron, command, etc) that is 'high tempo' is being perceived by the board right now as a lack of commitment to the community (lol what?), and can tank your chances of screening for command.

The advantage then of early command generally speaking post DH is that you end up with some idea of where you're going next and are guaranteed another meaningful observed FITREP if you think you're shaky post DH... and you're also guaranteed not to actually deploy. I've seen plenty of poor fuckers rotate off FDNF-J ships where they get their brains beaten in by the OPTEMPO in 7th right into DESRON 15 jobs that keep them underway 6-8 months a year. And the navy considers that a win, since they don't have to PCS those guys / families, and they keep 7th fleet experience in theater.

There's a reason several FDNF department heads I know went the early command route, and I don't think it was inherent desire to do another sea tour as much as have some control over the follow on sea tour they got (since they both were chasing O5 command and thought non-sea would tank them).

Our cultural inertia is what is really holding us back on many improvements or modernizations like changing our personnel management system. But that's probably a discussion for another thread.

Lotta truth here.

 

[Aluroon]

Sooo close, though, lol. I remember geeking out when they mounted that first testbed on the Portland.

So what would that look like if a captain tries a missile shot given that 1) the RF is gone, the datalinks are gone, 2) there's tons of crap in/on the water, and 3) range is extremely close and both ships are hemmed in by terrain, and 4) they are definitely going to shoot at each other. A CG (Bunker Hill) and an DDG (Stockdale) vs two DDG's and a couple of Canadian FFG's.

If you've got absolutely no RF capability pretty much all your missiles are off the table, since almost all seekers on modern missiles rely on RF of some kind. The US is not an exception here.

Even if you didn't, 5' is 100% the weapon of choice that close either way since it's not subject to engagement by point defenses, extremely accurate, etc.

 

[AllAmerican75]

5'.

Not really much reason at all to utilize available missiles inside 10nm when more effective tools are available.



Agree on all points here. With the shifting mission sets of the Marines this makes a lot more sense as something for them to focus on honestly. They'll do it better, it gives them a stronger purpose, etc. In an ideal world in which I had absolute power to make changes without the absolute mountain of pushback, I'd repurpose the Independence LCS into mini-amphibs and use them for that mission set and other small tactical purposes, instead of trying to pretend they can be actual warships. Attach one to each ARG and forward deploy the rest out of Bahrain / SASVEGAS / Singapore. Use them to source the stupid ass missions we're using shooters for right now in 7th fleet and to replace the PCs that they want to have entirely Decomm'd in the next 2-3 years.



I had an XO that held PC command and got passed over for DDG fleet up. Guy was a piece of work though. Easily the most difficult O5 I've ever worked with, but he was the exception I think to how early command usually works out, vice the rule.

100% on point about post DH tours and how exhausted the average DH is by the end of their second tour. On the other hand, post DH is a wield beast right now, since like 2nd tour DIVOS like 40% are going to follow-on tours at a 'ron' of some sort, which can be either really ok or absolutely terrible depending on timing. The net result there though has been that taking post DH tours that are perceived as 'easy' instead of another sea related tour (ron, command, etc) that is 'high tempo' is being perceived by the board right now as a lack of commitment to the community (lol what?), and can tank your chances of screening for command.

The advantage then of early command generally speaking post DH is that you end up with some idea of where you're going next and are guaranteed another meaningful observed FITREP if you think you're shaky post DH... and you're also guaranteed not to actually deploy. I've seen plenty of poor fuckers rotate off FDNF-J ships where they get their brains beaten in by the OPTEMPO in 7th right into DESRON 15 jobs that keep them underway 6-8 months a year. And the navy considers that a win, since they don't have to PCS those guys / families, and they keep 7th fleet experience in theater.

There's a reason several FDNF department heads I know went the early command route, and I don't think it was inherent desire to do another sea tour as much as have some control over the follow on sea tour they got (since they both were chasing O5 command and thought non-sea would tank them).



Lotta truth here.

Sweet baby Jesus, what is PERS-41 smoking?!? The answer to the community's problems isn't to push people harder and burn them out faster.

If you've got absolutely no RF capability pretty much all your missiles are off the table, since almost all seekers on modern missiles rely on RF of some kind. The US is not an exception here.

Even if you didn't, 5' is 100% the weapon of choice that close either way since it's not subject to engagement by point defenses, extremely accurate, etc.

If only we had funded and fielded the 8 inch gun system back in the 1970s.

 

[Hair Warrior]

I think VBSS, Riverine, and small boat tactics could be handled easily by somebody in the Ops and/or Weps realm. Many of the skill sets cross over. That being said, I think we need to either create specialized VBSS units or get out of the VBSS game for regular, non-SPECWAR or EOD Sailors. It's treated as a collateral duty which is dangerous as those specific skills atrophy without regular use and training.

Agree on all points here. With the shifting mission sets of the Marines this makes a lot more sense as something for them to focus on honestly. They'll do it better, it gives them a stronger purpose, etc. In an ideal world in which I had absolute power to make changes without the absolute mountain of pushback, I'd repurpose the Independence LCS into mini-amphibs and use them for that mission set and other small tactical purposes, instead of trying to pretend they can be actual warships. Attach one to each ARG and forward deploy the rest out of Bahrain / SASVEGAS / Singapore. Use them to source the stupid ass missions we're using shooters for right now in 7th fleet and to replace the PCs that they want to have entirely Decomm'd in the next 2-3 years.

I love the LCS Indy idea. That flight deck is huge.

I am guessing it wouldn’t be practical to hand it wholly to the Marines, bc we still may need that capability on a CRUDES that doesn’t embark/isn’t near Marines. I agree we can let them partake in the fun, and it would be a neat Joint-ness, but it also might make that capability atrophy even faster in the Navy.

What about a Small Craft Warrant? Designator 710X or 719X, take your pick. This person would be an expert at coastal/riverine/VBSS, and the extra piece that makes this required to be an officer is better training on blue water navigation (OTH) and all manner of comms gear/comms protocols. Again, mission need is to avoid another Farsi Island (and be able to do it equally well in the SCS/Med/Baltic/Caribbean/GOO/SAG/Gulf of Aden).

I would think that the URL officers coming out of OCS, NROTC, and USNA (e.g. Leif Babin, who was a SWO at first) would be all over that “CRF/VBSS” specialized SWO track though, if the surface community created it. Either to make them more competitive for SEAL/EOD lat transfer (bc they didn’t get that option coming out of USNA/ROTC), or to be a SWO-n-go, or just bc it seems fun and they don’t care about the long term career implications.

 

[Aluroon]

I love the LCS Indy idea. That flight deck is huge.

I am guessing it wouldn’t be practical to hand it wholly to the Marines, bc we still may need that capability on a CRUDES that doesn’t embark/isn’t near Marines. I agree we can let them partake in the fun, and it would be a neat Joint-ness, but it also might make that capability atrophy even faster in the Navy.

I guess my counter points are:

(1) When was the last time we needed to execute that mission set and did so using only organic CRUDES assets? I know SWOS that did real world VBSS mission stuff, but pretty much none of those are events I'd characterize as necessary, and the trend has seemed to be that with any advanced notice at all you just push SEALs out to do it anyway (i.e. Captain Philips, etc).

and

(2) Do you actually think the average CRUDES is meaningfully proficient at executing this mission set in a situation that would require their immediate action, or do you think they're more likely to make it worse?

For what it's worth, my answer is to cut away all the extraneous mission sets we've piled on Surface Navy and get back to being a combat force focused on fighting peer competitors. Winning against people with newer ships, newer weapons, more numbers, and homefield is hard enough without splitting your attention on a bunch of secondary shit that is probably never going to be used.

What about a Small Craft Warrant? Designator 710X or 719X, take your pick. This person would be an expert at coastal/riverine/VBSS, and the extra piece that makes this required to be an officer is better training on blue water navigation (OTH) and all manner of comms gear/comms protocols. Again, mission need is to avoid another Farsi Island (and be able to do it equally well in the SCS/Med/Baltic/Caribbean/GOO/SAG/Gulf of Aden).

I would think that the URL officers coming out of OCS, NROTC, and USNA (e.g. Leif Babin, who was a SWO at first) would be all over that “CRF/VBSS” specialized SWO track though, if the surface community created it. Either to make them more competitive for SEAL/EOD lat transfer (bc they didn’t get that option coming out of USNA/ROTC), or to be a SWO-n-go, or just bc it seems fun and they don’t care about the long term career implications.

I mean, however you want to do it, so long as we get SWOs out of the business of wasting time and energy on things they suck at anyway. Marines are a logical choice in my mind because a lot of their pipeline deals with this stuff already, and so you aren't reinventing the wheel / creating new things / spending more money on it, but you wouldn't have to sell me very hard at all on making this something else. Isn't that sort of what they were trying to do with Riverine anyway?

 

[Hair Warrior]

(1) When was the last time we needed to execute that mission set and did so using only organic CRUDES assets? I know SWOS that did real world VBSS mission stuff, but pretty much none of those are events I'd characterize as necessary, and the trend has seemed to be that with any advanced notice at all you just push SEALs out to do it anyway (i.e. Captain Philips, etc).

• https://taskandpurpose.com/analysis/farsi-island-incident-us-navy-iran/
• https://www.military.com/daily-news...izes-huge-iranian-arms-cache-arabian-sea.html
• https://www.southcom.mil/MEDIA/NEWS...8/uss-pinckney-interdicts-second-drug-vessel/
• https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...an-cargo-ship-sanction-violations/1151057001/

One sea story I heard, on a short-notice MIO, a SEAL Chief came out to a DDG (IVO HOA) and led the VBSS - but he was just one guy, and the DDG's regular VBSS team went along with him/ behind him. I don't think the SEALs have the capacity to take on the whole of the VBSS mission, given their op tempo, and even less likely in a peer conflict.

(2) Do you actually think the average CRUDES is meaningfully proficient at executing this mission set in a situation that would require their immediate action, or do you think they're more likely to make it worse?

For what it's worth, my answer is to cut away all the extraneous mission sets we've piled on Surface Navy and get back to being a combat force focused on fighting peer competitors. Winning against people with newer ships, newer weapons, more numbers, and homefield is hard enough without splitting your attention on a bunch of secondary shit that is probably never going to be used.

I would think there's value in having a littoral/coastal/riverine/VBSS capability in a peer conflict. Especially as Russia-China are prolific in "gray zone" conflict, where civilian vessels may be co-opted (or obscured through cut-outs) to support a military effort. Russia of course has already done this on land and can do it at sea. China of course has a well-established maritime militia that could be employed in a peer conflict. For example, I'm not sure how we'd be able to stop China resupplying its SCS bases right under our noses using neutral-nation-flagged merchant ships without at some point in the process using VBSS. And as noted above, Iran and DPRK (while they are not peers) already necessitate MIO and I don't see that going away in a conflict.

I get the whole "need to shift finite Joint/Navy resources to focus on great power competition" but I am not ready to dismiss a need for small boat operations for a peer conflict. If the SWO community doesn't want it, maybe that's a conversation starter about who gets that mission.

 

[AllAmerican75]

I love the LCS Indy idea. That flight deck is huge.

I am guessing it wouldn’t be practical to hand it wholly to the Marines, bc we still may need that capability on a CRUDES that doesn’t embark/isn’t near Marines. I agree we can let them partake in the fun, and it would be a neat Joint-ness, but it also might make that capability atrophy even faster in the Navy.

What about a Small Craft Warrant? Designator 710X or 719X, take your pick. This person would be an expert at coastal/riverine/VBSS, and the extra piece that makes this required to be an officer is better training on blue water navigation (OTH) and all manner of comms gear/comms protocols. Again, mission need is to avoid another Farsi Island (and be able to do it equally well in the SCS/Med/Baltic/Caribbean/GOO/SAG/Gulf of Aden).

I would think that the URL officers coming out of OCS, NROTC, and USNA (e.g. Leif Babin, who was a SWO at first) would be all over that “CRF/VBSS” specialized SWO track though, if the surface community created it. Either to make them more competitive for SEAL/EOD lat transfer (bc they didn’t get that option coming out of USNA/ROTC), or to be a SWO-n-go, or just bc it seems fun and they don’t care about the long term career implications.

I guess my counter points are:

(1) When was the last time we needed to execute that mission set and did so using only organic CRUDES assets? I know SWOS that did real world VBSS mission stuff, but pretty much none of those are events I'd characterize as necessary, and the trend has seemed to be that with any advanced notice at all you just push SEALs out to do it anyway (i.e. Captain Philips, etc).

and

(2) Do you actually think the average CRUDES is meaningfully proficient at executing this mission set in a situation that would require their immediate action, or do you think they're more likely to make it worse?

For what it's worth, my answer is to cut away all the extraneous mission sets we've piled on Surface Navy and get back to being a combat force focused on fighting peer competitors. Winning against people with newer ships, newer weapons, more numbers, and homefield is hard enough without splitting your attention on a bunch of secondary shit that is probably never going to be used.



I mean, however you want to do it, so long as we get SWOs out of the business of wasting time and energy on things they suck at anyway. Marines are a logical choice in my mind because a lot of their pipeline deals with this stuff already, and so you aren't reinventing the wheel / creating new things / spending more money on it, but you wouldn't have to sell me very hard at all on making this something else. Isn't that sort of what they were trying to do with Riverine anyway?

• https://taskandpurpose.com/analysis/farsi-island-incident-us-navy-iran/
• https://www.military.com/daily-news...izes-huge-iranian-arms-cache-arabian-sea.html
• https://www.southcom.mil/MEDIA/NEWS...8/uss-pinckney-interdicts-second-drug-vessel/
• https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...an-cargo-ship-sanction-violations/1151057001/

One sea story I heard, on a short-notice MIO, a SEAL Chief came out to a DDG (IVO HOA) and led the VBSS - but he was just one guy, and the DDG's regular VBSS team went along with him/ behind him. I don't think the SEALs have the capacity to take on the whole of the VBSS mission, given their op tempo, and even less likely in a peer conflict.

I would think there's value in having a littoral/coastal/riverine/VBSS capability in a peer conflict. Especially as Russia-China are prolific in "gray zone" conflict, where civilian vessels may be co-opted (or obscured through cut-outs) to support a military effort. Russia of course has already done this on land and can do it at sea. China of course has a well-established maritime militia that could be employed in a peer conflict. For example, I'm not sure how we'd be able to stop China resupplying its SCS bases right under our noses using neutral-nation-flagged merchant ships without at some point in the process using VBSS. And as noted above, Iran and DPRK (while they are not peers) already necessitate MIO and I don't see that going away in a conflict.

I get the whole "need to shift finite Joint/Navy resources to focus on great power competition" but I am not ready to dismiss a need for small boat operations for a peer conflict. If the SWO community doesn't want it, maybe that's a conversation starter about who gets that mission.

I believe the answer is twofold:

1. Let the Marines embrace VBSS more since they have better capabilities and training for it. As I understand it, each MEU maintains a platoon of Force Recon who are their VBSS bubbas.
2. Adopt the USCG model and bring back HVBSS units and place those under NECC.

We need to eliminate it as a primary warfare area for most CRUDES assets since they simply do not have the time and resources for it. Having done VBSS, we are half-assing it while hoping that we don't ever go up against a real enemy underway. VBSS is difficult and extremely dangerous. You need to practice those skill sets nearly everyday and stay proficient with climbing ladders, rappelling, small arms, CQB, and casualty care. That's the difference between us and SPECWAR is that they practice way more and are far more proficient; the tactics are largely the same.

We should train our crews to serve as support with boats and helos and admin. The VBSS Boarding Officer course is easy and only lasts a week and provides all of the admin support training shipboard personnel would need to support an HVBSS, LEDET, MEU SOF, or SPECWAR detachment. This is something we are already incredibly good and all we need to do is send a det out to a ship we want to do VBSS missions. The no-notice missions already get SPECWAR, MEU SOF, or LEDET teams to fly out anyway like Captain Phillips or some others. Those teams are usually somewhere in the area anyway to make it easy to get them to the mission in a few hours.

That being said, we do need to maintain our Expeditionary warfare assets and proficiency with coastal and riverine warfare and asymmetric tactics. I don't think the SWO community will ever sign on for it as much of the leadership is too busy circlejerking about their Mahanian, deep water fantasies where they'll cross the T and wipe out the enemy forces in mere minutes with Aegis and rail guns and lasers. The reality is that we will need to be able to harass the Chinese supply lines with non-traditional forces and use offensive mining to constrain the PLAN's movement like we did to the Japanese in WW2. But nobody wants to talk about that because it isn't sexy and doesn't fit into the CSG and ESG model. I don't know what the answer is to that honestly as I don't think we'll actually have the political capital to enact the change until we get into a shooting war and actually need the capabilities just like with WW1, WW2, Korea, Vietnam, the Gulf War, and the GWOT.

EDIT: Forgot to mention that we actually re-inherited the coastal riverine mission from the Marines in the early days of Iraq because they couldn't do it and support the land invasion. I see that being the case again in any future war so I don't think giving it back to the Marines makes sense. I think the Navy definitely needs to own the mission but we're too busy with blue water operations to devote resources and people to brown and green water operations.

 

[Hair Warrior]

Would it make sense to completely cut the coastal/riverine/VBSS missions from SWO, establish a new URL designator for some sort of "Expeditionary Warfare Officer" (under NECC), and give them the coastal/riverine/VBSS mission area in partnership with the Marines, SEALs, Coastie LEDETs, and any other NECC components that make sense?

The IWC saw a niche need for a new designator, 1840 Cyber Warfare Engineer, so they created it. That designator tops out at some rank (O4?) and merges the officers back into 1810 CW.

 

[BigRed389]

Would it make sense to completely cut the coastal/riverine/VBSS missions from SWO, establish a new URL designator for some sort of "Expeditionary Warfare Officer" (under NECC), and give them the coastal/riverine/VBSS mission area in partnership with the Marines, SEALs, Coastie LEDETs, and any other NECC components that make sense?

The IWC saw a niche need for a new designator, 1840 Cyber Warfare Engineer, so they created it. That designator tops out at some rank (O4?) and merges the officers back into 1810 CW.

Maybe.

NECC side there is an EXW qual for the enlisted side but it is not closed rate. So you would still have to compete with the Fleet for personnel, eg Gunners Mates - and Fleet GM shit is much more complex than Exped GM stuff.
There would also have to be a real career path - NECC Flag leadership is dominated by EOD right now (rightfully so).

I suspect a lot of the same reasons why the dirt Det HSC or HSC-85 type stuff never really gets the proper amount of funding will come into play with this concept as well. Without the Iraq contingency, the pressing needs for both RIVRON and VBSS mission sets went away.
My opinion - ultimately, that is core SEAL and Marine mission set. Without two land wars to occupy us, the excuse for regular Navy to fill that as a stop gap does not exist.
The only way I see this work is as a branching specialization for Amphib SWOs to get the buy in of the Fleet behind the community and enough mass to compete/rotate with EOD for top level leadership. It won’t survive as a weird niche community alone.

Edit: The only other thing id add on the VBSS discussion is that it also probably is not best left as a pure NSW and MARSOC mission. VBSS on any large scale will chew through the SOF community numbers to support. Marine Infantry, USCG LEDET, pretty much any vanilla shooter community with a maritime mission will likely have to be sucked in. If we expect some sailors to be able to pick it up as a collateral, any DOD outfit that is focused on trigger pullers can do it (the special cases requiring SOF skill sets notwithstanding. Likewise from the Fleet side - any air/surface asset that doesn’t primarily play in the big missile fight will likely have to get pulled in.

 

[AllAmerican75]

Would it make sense to completely cut the coastal/riverine/VBSS missions from SWO, establish a new URL designator for some sort of "Expeditionary Warfare Officer" (under NECC), and give them the coastal/riverine/VBSS mission area in partnership with the Marines, SEALs, Coastie LEDETs, and any other NECC components that make sense?

The IWC saw a niche need for a new designator, 1840 Cyber Warfare Engineer, so they created it. That designator tops out at some rank (O4?) and merges the officers back into 1810 CW.

I think there's definitely something to that.

Maybe.

NECC side there is an EXW qual for the enlisted side but it is not closed rate. So you would still have to compete with the Fleet for personnel, eg Gunners Mates - and Fleet GM shit is much more complex than Exped GM stuff.
There would also have to be a real career path - NECC Flag leadership is dominated by EOD right now (rightfully so).

I suspect a lot of the same reasons why the dirt Det HSC or HSC-85 type stuff never really gets the proper amount of funding will come into play with this concept as well. Without the Iraq contingency, the pressing needs for both RIVRON and VBSS mission sets went away.
My opinion - ultimately, that is core SEAL and Marine mission set. Without two land wars to occupy us, the excuse for regular Navy to fill that as a stop gap does not exist.
The only way I see this work is as a branching specialization for Amphib SWOs to get the buy in of the Fleet behind the community and enough mass to compete/rotate with EOD for top level leadership. It won’t survive as a weird niche community alone.

Edit: The only other thing id add on the VBSS discussion is that it also probably is not best left as a pure NSW and MARSOC mission. VBSS on any large scale will chew through the SOF community numbers to support. Marine Infantry, USCG LEDET, pretty much any vanilla shooter community with a maritime mission will likely have to be sucked in. If we expect some sailors to be able to pick it up as a collateral, any DOD outfit that is focused on trigger pullers can do it (the special cases requiring SOF skill sets notwithstanding. Likewise from the Fleet side - any air/surface asset that doesn’t primarily play in the big missile fight will likely have to get pulled in.

I think that's a good idea to rotate amphib/exped SWOs through the NECC billets. Right now, amphibs are seen as these redheaded stepchildren of the big ships of the line since they are set up to be landing platforms and don't really do the high speed missile shooter stuff. I think we could create two career paths. You'd have CRUDES careerists who learn and perfect the arts of IAMD, BMD, ASW, and SUW. Then you'd have the Amphib/Exped specialists who become experts in how to operate big floating FOBs (Essentially what modern amphibs are) around and tightly integrate with Marines, SPECWAR, USCG, and NECC units to perform landings, maritime interception operations, mine warfare, and coastal-riverine warfare. You could flip flop them between amphib to NECC tours with something like doing your first four years on amphibs, shore duty at a squadron/shore support/fleet command, first DH tour on an amphib, second DH tour at an NECC unit, LCDR tour at squadron/shore support/fleet command, and then they screen for amphib or NECC command. I think that would work quite well. You would have to roll the LCS and MCMs into the amphib community to provide which I think would help immensely getting MCMs the support they need.

 

[Aluroon]

So how did we figure all this shit out in like a week and big navy still can't?

 

[Hair Warrior]

So how did we figure all this shit out in like a week and big navy still can't?

Did you see the AVO Warrant thread...