- Joined
- Apr 18, 2013
- Messages
- 94,358
- Reaction score
- 82,750
- Location
- Barsoom
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
7/21/21
The U.S. Navy’s shipbuilding plan doesn’t tell Congress what the service needs, nor does it provide certainty for long-term planning, two House lawmakers say. “It just didn't start with this 30-year shipbuilding plan,” said Rep. Rob Wittman, R-Va. Tuesday during a panel ahead of the 2021 Sea Air Space conference. “It's been in previous other ones, where they've essentially had a check-the-box mentality…kind of a multiple-choice test. You know this is not multiple choice, this is about making the tough decisions and charting a path to get us to 355” ships. Wittman is the ranking member on the House Armed Services’ subcommittee on sea power and projection forces. Wittman said the past three shipbuilding plans have not met the needs of Congress, including the most recent one, submitted to Congress in June along with the 2022 budget proposal. It only provided ranges for each ships, such as nine to 11 aircraft carriers, and stated that a complete plan would not be available until the 2023 budget. The 2022 plan does include the eight ships the Navy wants to buy in 2022 but no other details on how total ship numbers change in the decades to come.
That means it lacks the details Congress needs to see into the future for shipbuilding, said Rep. Joe Courtney, D-Conn., the chairman of the sea power and projection forces subcommittee. “In all honesty, I see it really as the one-year budget plus sort of ranges of ships in the future, which is not, in my opinion, really what the law contemplated,” Courtney said. He was referring to Title 10 U.S. Code 231 which requires a “detailed program” for the construction of combat, support and auxiliary Navy ships over the next 30 years. The Navy’s plan does not show Congress how it intends to get to 355 ships, as required by law, nor what the makeup of the fleet will be, the lawmakers said. Nor does it help lawmakers make sure the 355-ship goal stays on track and it causes material purchasing and workforce issues with the shipyards, Wittman said. Wittman said he wanted to see naval strategy drive the budget, and not the other way around, which would mean a complete shipbuilding plan on how to fund at least 355 ships and which ships to build for that fleet.
A handful of ships for coastguards and rescue vessels is ample . 30- 40 is enough .
The US Navy never does anything constructive and when it occasionally provokes conflict it never wins .
The key military nations -- China and Russia --can blow ships out of the water with DEW or fry them , and long range hyper speed missiles make them a very old fashioned and quaint way of posturing .
What is the point of having more than 30- 40 if you do not know what to do with them save sail round in circles wasting mega amounts of money ?
What proportion of Navy time is spent on exercises and doing nothing to Russia or China other than to make soppy headlines for a couple of days ? 99.0% ?
"Us Navy's Shipbuilding Plan Doesn't meet congress's Needs" What a moronic thing to put to print. Congress "wants", does not need.US Navy’s Shipbuilding Plan Doesn’t Meet Congress’ Needs, Lawmakers Say
The past few have come with a “check-the-box mentality,” Rep. Wittman said.www.defenseone.com
As with the shipbuilders, Congress is also far less than pleased with the Navy's ambiguity regarding the composition of a 355 ship US Navy and the timetable for attaining that goal.
"Us Navy's Shipbuilding Plan Doesn't meet congress's Needs" What a moronic thing to put to print. Congress "wants", does not need.
No, it does not.Take it up with the copy editor. The point stands.
Naw... it is simply piss poor journalism at best or an imbecilic command of English at worst.Take it up with the copy editor. The point stands.
well said but can you place blame on either side here. The Military at the highest level is pledged to uphold the constitution primarily and to defend our country secondarily. Think about it.The problem is, the military has become both very political and intertwined with the military-industrial complex to the degree that our military leadership now makes decisions based not on what we need, but what is best for them politically. Add to that Congress being the same, and it makes a spaghetti mess of things. Such large amounts of money involved, and everyone is looking for their share...
The US Navy never does anything constructive and when it occasionally provokes conflict it never wins .
Let's just examine your first sentence before falling down the rabbit hole of batshit crazy lies that follow it:
The US Coast Guard currently operates more than 240 ships, and they are considered overstretched with that number. Where did you pull this "30-40" number from besides your ass?
Naw... it is simply piss poor journalism at best or an imbecilic command of English at worst.
Gather you would go for fewer .
Risky , but give it a try .
Another poster deflects by arguing that the old fashioned navy should become the means for distributing aid , relief , expertise etc.
In that case , get rid of the weapons etc and let the Red Cross take over the US Mercy Fleet --- half a dozen ships perhaps .
Just think also of the accruing good PR . No more stories about the US wanting to run the world , interfering everywhere to their own advantage and dragging others down to their level .
Very win / win .
One of the absolutely stupidest posts I've seen on this board ever.A handful of ships for coastguards and rescue vessels is ample . 30- 40 is enough .
The US Navy never does anything constructive and when it occasionally provokes conflict it never wins .
The key military nations -- China and Russia --can blow ships out of the water with DEW or fry them , and long range hyper speed missiles make them a very old fashioned and quaint way of posturing .
What is the point of having more than 30- 40 if you do not know what to do with them save sail round in circles wasting mega amounts of money ?
What proportion of Navy time is spent on exercises and doing nothing to Russia or China other than to make soppy headlines for a couple of days ? 99.0% ?
One of the absolutely stupidest posts I've seen on this board ever.
You don't know it is obvious that 40 ships (which would mean 15 able to deploy overseas) isn't even enough to stop pirates from stealing everything in sight.A handful of ships for coastguards and rescue vessels is ample . 30- 40 is enough .
HahahahahahaThe US Navy never does anything constructive and when it occasionally provokes conflict it never wins .
I find myself in the position of cheering for a Dayton post.One of the absolutely stupidest posts I've seen on this board ever.
One of the absolutely stupidest posts I've seen on this board ever.
If ships were so easy to "blow out of the water" why have so few been blown out of the water since World War Two? Because it isn't that damned easy. American carriers can survive and return to combat even if at minimum 6 missiles hit them. This has been proven by explosions and fires aboard carriers over the years. Smaller U.S. ships can withstand one or two missiles.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?