I do know that the USN has for centuries (from the design and acquisition of the first six frigates), through transition to steam, then iron, from paddle wheels to screw propellers, from reciprocating to turbo-electric engines, coal, to oil, to nuclear power. Through treaty modifications, cancellations, two world wars, a two ocean navy, a revolt of the admirals, to congressional hearings, budget cuts, blah, blah blah....The navy has been historically challenged both from outside forces and within. Times change. Budgets change. Technology ebbs and flows and dictates new designs which can succeed or fail.
The challenge for the decision makers always has been and always will be to fund and build. Adapt to change. Balance assets. Meet growing needs everywhere.
It has always been hit and miss with our navy. Fortunately there have historically been enough wise men and women to make more hits than misses. I trust that this will continue
: This link provides a "flow chart" of
: the US defense acquisition process. You can
: click on the chart itself to get it enlarged
: and "clear:"
: THIS is what is governing the process! Not
: Mahan. Not mission requirements. And
: certainly not "common sense."
: As stated in the article, this chart was
: produced by the Defense Acquisitions
: University. Yes, it takes a university
: study program to learn the ins and outs of
: this. I have read it described as a
: "deliberately decentralized
: process." It was created so that the
: whims of any powerful person do not dictate
: our nation's weapons programs. It is meant
: to keep out dictators. (If you live in
: North Korea, you have the navy Kim Jong Un
: thinks you should have. This is what stops
: that from happening here.) It is a
: bureaucratic nightmare.
: The LCS program has already made its way
: through this process. It is an in
: production system. If the Navy submits a
: new, separate requirement for a frigate, it
: must start from the beginning, and go
: through this entire process (one the LCS has
: already made it through.) There must be
: requirements statements, competative
: bidding, milestone reviews, performance
: tests, the works. So, to save time, and
: bureaucracy, the Navy would like the new
: frigate to be a "continuation" of
: the existing LCS program. Given its own
: way, that is the route the Navy would go.
: Congress (and politics) are currently
: "in play" in the process, however.
: So, the situation is "in the air"
: until Congress makes up its ever loving
: As I wrote in a previous post on this same
: topic, "Democracy in action," and,
: "I'm just sittin' here watchin' the
: wheels go 'round and 'round."
: --Previous Message--
: Requirements dictate the hull and once again
: they wish the new "FG" to do
: everything that LCS was supposed to do plus
: more. For example:
: They wish the new frigate to do
: anti-submarine work, protect itself and add
: anti-air to a fleet basket. Ok well anti-sub
: work is slow work so working with fast
: stepping fleet is out of the question.
: Adding to the anti-air basket of a fleet
: also means you have to keep up with the
: fleet. Think fuel and range. So now your
: frigate has to get a bit larger to
: accommodate fuel to range with the fleet and
: a helo hangar.
: Tankers are bottom priority in ship
: And of course they wish the new FG to carry
: drones, ok more storage and maintenance
: space. And it has to operate with minimal
: Does this all sound familar.....In the end
: they Navy will try a redo of Frigate LCS
: with a new name with more toys and Congress
: will balk at the price tag and we will back
: to Burkes.
: The Navy doesn't have a clue what its trying
: to do for they have forgot Mahan. Now its
: all about expensive toys and budget wars not
: war fighting and the possible loss of some
: your toys. These are the people who brought
: the Zumwalts with no ammunition for its
: primary purpose of shore support, the Ford
: CVNs whose catapults light up everybody's
: electro-magnetic scopes and of course LCS
: whose engines are suspect to survive intense
: Oh yeah the taxpayers are jumping for joy
: --Previous Message--
: This might be a surprise to you, Francine,
: the LCS program was to all intents and
: purposes stopped by the Pentagon in 2015,
: and the Navy has been studying frigate
: options since then.
: Your post prompted me to check the status of
: the Navy's planned 2018 block buy request.
: It is not as clear now as it was earlier
: whether the Navy will submit that the way it
: was originally planned, but if they do, and
: Congress approves it, a lot of people will
: be surprised. "Common sense" is
: not governing the proceedure.
: --Previous Message--
: It appears that Navy is finally awakening to
: the truth, the LCS is a useless waste of
: money, and that we need a real frigate
: (FFG). Apparently they are now looking at
: the Huntington Patrol Frigate which are
: navalized versions of the Berthoff Coast
: Guard Cutters.
: Common sense finally prevails.