US Navy 'Bases at Sea' Concept

Winter

New Member
U.S. Navy outlines plans to base more clout at sea

(Reuters) The U.S. Navy will seek billions of dollars for a dozen huge new "prepositioning" ships capable of launching jump jets as part of a plan to base more U.S. might at sea, a senior naval official said Friday.

The ships would support a new approach to war under which the United States could launch operations ashore from ships at sea, without necessarily establishing toeholds at the water's edge.

The "Sea Basing" concept reflects U.S. war planners' concern that fixed land bases in the future will be too vulnerable to attack by enemy missiles and that U.S. access to land bases may be severely limited.

Washington's Iraq invasion plans were complicated last year when Turkey and other nations balked at providing a launch pad for U.S. attacks.

The planned new ships would provide Marines with mobile, long-term storage of equipment and supplies near potential trouble spots as well as a platform for a new generation of warplanes, said the official, who spoke on condition he not be named.

They would carry the short-takeoff, vertical-landing variant of Joint Strike Fighter jets being built by Lockheed Martin Corp. The embarked aircraft, as many as 20 to 25 per ship, would be capable of hitting targets hundreds of miles inland.

"We're going to be able to do what we need to do without having a sovereignty problem," the official said. "And this is going to be a dramatically different fighting force than what we have today." Current Navy planning calls for two squadrons, each with six or more of of the new ships.

PAYING THE BILL

The Navy will seek funds as early as 2007 to start building the ships, which will cost billions of dollars, the official said at at a briefing for reporters organized by the Navy. The ships, whose design is still under study, would be aircraft-carrier-sized but able to fit through the Panama Canal, the official said.

The planned new ship is designated MPF(F) for maritime prepositioned force of the future. Currently, the Navy deploys 14 or 15 MPF ships in three squadrons. The existing ships, built or modified in the mid-1980s, must be in port to offload their supplies or meet Marines flown to a nearby air base.

The new ships may be based on commercial cargo ship designs and built to less-rigorous, less-expensive standards than Navy combat ships, said Ronald O'Rourke, a naval analyst at the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service.

To pay for the new ships, the Navy plans a broad streamlining of the way it organizes its combat operations, the official said. Among other things, it will rely much more on "sea-swapping," or rotating crews rather than rotating ships, he said.

In addition, the Navy plans to cut thousands of sailors in coming years, partly thanks to reduced staffing requirements of the its future DD(X) destroyers and other modern warships.

The official said he planned to make the Navy the first service to hire military officers at different ranks and grades, not just bring them up the ladder.

"You're competing (for qualified personnel) against Boeing and GM and the likes," he said, rather than against the other services.

Source: San Diego Union Tribune
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
The USN has a contract with Maersk that has been in operation for about 6 months (IIRC) to look at designing multi-role vessels that could be used as mobile offshore bases. In effect a floating version of Diego Garcia.
 

adsH

New Member
You know gf i always thought that could of been don i mean it can certainly be don right now the US has the skills and resources for sucha project.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
adsH said:
You know gf i always thought that could of been don i mean it can certainly be don right now the US has the skills and resources for sucha project.

Technically, Maersk are saying that it's possible, the issue is whether it makes strategic sense and is viable from a force projection as we as platform protection level.
 

adsH

New Member
gf0012 said:
adsH said:
You know gf i always thought that could of been don i mean it can certainly be don right now the US has the skills and resources for sucha project.

Technically, Maersk are saying that it's possible, the issue is whether it makes strategic sense and is viable from a force projection as we as platform protection level.
i bet it can be don but you would need a hell of a surface sub's ships and a hell of anti AC Bateries and nice coverage radar and alot of defensive systems to defend that piece of metal floating around it would too expensive i think if they build it at a scale i was thinking then they can at the most build two or three at the most. but i think if it is built the Air Craft carrier would not be the ultimate weapon in the sea anymore. the ammount of nucleour reactors required would be huge it would be too expensive to move them around.
 

Winter

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #6
adsH said:
i bet it can be don but you would need a hell of a surface sub's ships and a hell of anti AC Bateries and nice coverage radar and alot of defensive systems to defend that piece of metal floating around it would too expensive i think if they build it at a scale i was thinking then they can at the most build two or three at the most. but i think if it is built the Air Craft carrier would not be the ultimate weapon in the sea anymore. the ammount of nucleour reactors required would be huge it would be too expensive to move them around.
An early MPF concept:



The MPF(F) won't be replacing the CVN-21 design, the future US aircraft carrier. The MPS probably won't be as large either.

The thinking behind this new MPF force seems to be bearing some similarities to the 'Mobile Offshore Base.'
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
As long as they buy those little Aussie HSV's parked next to it, we'll be happy. :D I think they are looking at buying up to 30 of them.
 

Winter

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #8
gf0012 said:
As long as they buy those little Aussie HSV's parked next to it, we'll be happy. :D I think they are looking at buying up to 30 of them.
But to be split fleets between the Army and the Navy?
 

adsH

New Member
gf0012 said:
As long as they buy those little Aussie HSV's parked next to it, we'll be happy. :D I think they are looking at buying up to 30 of them.
yeah trust me Ausie Bro (GF) enjoy the Ship production ability it's a time limited gift when the Australian economy moves onn forward you will experience the same what we are experiencing here in the UK :( but best of lucj with future Surface ships
the only defense industry we have now that actually means anything is BAE systems which is shrinking all the way through. Damm alliances eats up our abilities
 

Soldier

New Member
adsH said:
gf0012 said:
As long as they buy those little Aussie HSV's parked next to it, we'll be happy. :D I think they are looking at buying up to 30 of them.
yeah trust me Ausie Bro (GF) enjoy the Ship production ability it's a time limited gift when the Australian economy moves onn forward you will experience the same what we are experiencing here in the UK :( but best of lucj with future Surface ships
the only defense industry we have now that actually means anything is BAE systems which is shrinking all the way through. Damm alliances eats up our abilities
Nothing to worry about still. US is always there to save UK even if British armed forces are getting degraded.
 

adsH

New Member
Soldier said:
adsH said:
gf0012 said:
As long as they buy those little Aussie HSV's parked next to it, we'll be happy. :D I think they are looking at buying up to 30 of them.
yeah trust me Ausie Bro (GF) enjoy the Ship production ability it's a time limited gift when the Australian economy moves onn forward you will experience the same what we are experiencing here in the UK :( but best of lucj with future Surface ships
the only defense industry we have now that actually means anything is BAE systems which is shrinking all the way through. Damm alliances eats up our abilities
Nothing to worry about still. US is always there to save UK even if British armed forces are getting degraded.
OyE !!! were NOT getting degraded!!! were just restructuring !!!lol :roll
 

Stryker001

Banned Member
Looks likes Australia may have to go it alone in regards to boarder security FFV etc. Perhaps a joint operation with America may be required until Australia takes delivery of the LHD’s to protect Australia’s boarder and waters. It’s a worry that people can travel from West Papua undetected luckily they were not terrorists or narco terrorists.
 

akj

New Member
In what way would these new ships be different from the existin US ships. These ships seems to be a cross between CVN and wasp class designs
 
Top