Defensenews.com has a fantastic interview with Mitt Romney’s key Naval advisor, John Lehman, about what exactly a President Romney’s larger and more cash flush US Navy would look. Here are the highlights:
- Increase yearly ship building from nine hulls to fifteen.
- Goal of 350 ship US Navy within 10 years, an addition of about 60 hulls.
- Create an 11th Carrier Air Wing, one for each carrier, the 11th Air Wing will be a reserve unit equipped with front-line gear
- Not only will the Littoral Combat Ship production continue, but a true Battle Group deployable frigate will also be procured to replace the vanishing Perry Class. Romney’s team seems to totally understand that the LCS cannot fulfill the role of a traditional frigate. Cost for this new ship is targeted around $650M per frigate.
- Romney wants a dedicated missile defense ship, sporting the massive Air Missile Defense Radar, which will not fit on the Burke class hull. It looks like the favorite hull for this new class of ship would be based on the new San Antonio Class albeit with major modifications. Utilizing the large San Antonio design would allow the ship to not only carry the massive radar and associated tracking gear required for its challenging mission, but also larger interceptor missiles than the VLS tubes can accommodate aboard current AEGIS equipped ships. These ships could act as theater missile defense ships and would not necessarily escort a carrier. The other hull alternative for this mission is the cutting edge and costly DDG-1000.
- Almost every ship mentioned will feature competition between shipyards or even designers in an attempt to pare down costs.
- F/A-18E/F/G Super Hornet would stay in production past 2014, under Obama it would cease by this time. This would hedge against the F-35 program and would supposedly increase competition and thus lower each fighter’s price. No direct changes to the F-35 program was mentioned due to lack of information.
- Bring development of new fighter aircraft down from 22 years on average to 7 years through “fixing the procurement mess.”
- Dedicated to reducing the massive “bureaucratic bloat” within the Navy, especially of flag officers and high level command folks and refocus any funds saved to field more front-line sailors.
What is not included anywhere in this piece is how exactly Governor Romney plans on paying for all this without cancelling any existing programs. In fact this seems like a very “un-rationalized” vision for the future of the United States Navy. Sure, I think it would be great to have all this, but certainly some programs can go in exchange for others that are more capable. For instance, creating a new Frigate while also keeping the LCS in production seems ridiculous and unrealistic. The same can be said when it comes to building more Super Hornets while also procuring the F-35C. Doing so would put the F-35C in grave jeopardy, which will then put the whole JSF program, including the USMC’s B variant and the USAF’s A variant, at risk as shrinking numbers will lead to spiraling unit costs, which will lead to even smaller procurement numbers overall and so on. In other words, keeping the Super Hornet in production for the US Navy while buying F-35Cs as well will surely put the F-35 program into the quintessential defense program “death spiral.” In fact I think the point of view expressed in this piece is almost adolescent in nature due to its lack of rationality and prudent defense spending controls. If this is truly what Mr. Romney’s key Navy adviser, who was Reagan’s “600 ship” Secretary of Navy (an arbitrary goal that never even got close to being accomplished), thinks are the correct or even feasible investments for our Navy I would beg the Governor to fire this man immediately. I understand that candidates do not want to give full details about what programs they will cut or elevate because jobs are at stake, and thus votes. Yet still, some talk about rationalization would really be beneficial here, even if it remains somewhat vague in nature. Just ordering the whole menu at dinner may be exciting and sure the restaurant will love you, but in the end it’s a total waste and will leave your wallet empty and you will go home with one hell of a stomach ache.
Mitt Romney would promise the NCC-1701D if he thought that would appeal to his Neocon/Tea Party base and get him elected. Groundhogs have a better handle on Military/Foreign Policy than this man has–he’s an embarrassment–and I’m a registered Republican. We need to wrap up two (2) count ‘em 1, 2, LOST wars and come home. Then we need to figure out what went wrong–the last ten-years have been catastrophic to our national security. We went into Iraq and Afghanistan with a 3rd Generation force structure that was absolutely unbeatable, and in under a decade, we ground that force into shit AND taught the entire planet how asymmetrical “4th Generation” tactics could decisively defeat us–everytime. Thanks. Job well done, Neocons and George W. Bush. We don’t need anymore brain-dead Presidents and Mitt Romney is a perfect example of that ilk.
Bronc
I do wonder where the money for of his brilliant ideas going come from GW Bush managed to turn a budget surplus into a huge deficit so I guess Mitt will do exactly the same with a huge increase in defense spending . I wouldn’t vote for this clown if I lived in the US .I am not a fan of the F 35 but you can’t have both Super Hornets and F35 at same time in full production.
If history is any guide he’ll just run up the debt and blame “entitlements” which he’ll then cut even further. The retirement age will be 80 by the time I’m eligible.
None of you are considering election mechanics. It’s not just about attracting votes. It’s also about attracting more money from deep pockets — like the military industrial complex.
Bronc
“Tea party,neo-con and Bush” yeah, you’re a Republican, sure. (sarc) At least have the balls to be honest about who you are.
The only thing worse than the foreign/military policies of the current president would be if they were allowed to continue. Just ask the ambassador to Libya what he thinks…..oh…wait..never mind.
Todd
Entitlements are a crippling burden because they are never reformed so the waste and fraud just grows and grows and grows. Any attempt to fix them brings charges of wanting to kill the poor so nothing is ever fixed.
At the same time the same could be said for military spending, there is never any meaningful reform or attempts to fix the problems.
But the amount spent on entitlements dwarfs what is spent on the military or anything else. In regards to any other spending entitlements will always be a major part of the problem.
@ Mark,
Listen up cowboy, Ty knows exactly who I am. I don’t post on his website misrepresenting myself. I’m a Republican, but I’m not a brain-dead, Neocon, Tea Party Republican like U.S. Rep. Todd Akin, who thinks “doctors perform abortions on women who aren’t pregnant” and Arkansas state Rep. Jon Hubbard, who thinks “slavery may actually have been a blessing in disguise” and Georgia Rep. Paul Broun, who thinks “evolution and the Big Bang theory are ‘Lies straight from the pit of hell.’” These folks are living walking embarrassments–I’m not one of them.
Bronc
Bronc
I call it as I see it,the only people who use the specific terms you use for the right are on the left. The only people who single out one or two people on the right and smear the rest are on the left.
Perhaps you’re just in denial.
Apart from the politics and the fact that Romney and his camp don’t really explain how they are going to pay for all this, some of the buys make little sense.
If you are going to buy more SHs, shouldn’t you really take a serious look at F35C? What would a reduced buy from USN do to costs? How about LCS? I am OK with a new frigate to replace Perry class, I think most people would agree that it is needed but it seems like they intend to keep LCS. What for? Considering the price tag of LCS, I have a hard time believing USN could get a new frigate for less than a 1 billion a pop. An arsenal ship based on the San Antonio sounds interesting but what would be the cost and how many do you need? It won’t be cheap, guarantee that.
Why does the Navy need a 350 fleet? Are we engaging the Soviet navy any time soon? I would like to see some discussion on what USN strategy is and then look what the numbers needed to implement said strategy. I mean, Romney wants to buy another 50 to 60 hulls, that’s a lot of money, we should have a reason to buy that many ships, not just some 80′s throwback…..I think there also was some mention of full buy of ships for Marine Corps, again, not cheap.
That’s just the USN, Romney said he would like more F22s for USAF. What about F35A buy? It just keeps going on, where is the money going to come from and even better, is it necessary?
“Bring development of new fighter aircraft down from 22 years on average to 7 years through “fixing the procurement mess.””
Ha Ha Ha!
7 years my arse.
Good luck with that, Romney.