Questioning the Carrier: Opportunities for Fleet Design in the U.S. Navy

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 21 ноя 2024
  • Host Bill Hamblet talks with naval officer and frequent Proceedings contributor Jeff Vandenengel about his new book, "Questioning the Carrier: Opportunities in Fleet Design for the United States Navy" from the Naval Institute Press.
    This episode of the Proceedings Podcast is made possible by the members of the U.S. Naval Institute. For more information, visit: www.usni.org/join

Комментарии • 17

  • @PapaOscarNovember
    @PapaOscarNovember 10 месяцев назад +1

    Great to see Navy has people who are self critical, look at situation objectively, and be able to discuss without being captive to biases.

  • @jameswalker7899
    @jameswalker7899 9 месяцев назад +1

    This was a refreshing podcast. It's nice to see cracks in the monolithic "battleship mentality" which seems to dominate USN thinking. The points made here need to be echoed until there is finally recognition that the carrier's role needs to be reassessed, particularly in the case of conflict w/peer or near-peer adversaries. One point that could have maybe been emphasized here a bit more is the opportunity cost imposed by construction and operation of carriers, w/their 5k crews and their protective flotillas. It's understood that such cost doesn't leave much money left over for other fleet resources. :(

  • @PreyingWolf1
    @PreyingWolf1 11 месяцев назад +2

    Makes total sense... one thing we learned from Kamikaze attacks in WW 2 ... precision guided missiles, which what Kamikaze attacks were, did, by far , the greatest damage to naval vessels during the entire war... we should learn from that.... I agree with Vandenengel...

  • @jeffheiner
    @jeffheiner 11 месяцев назад +1

    Thank you for another round of interesting insights into the Navy!

  • @vmpgsc
    @vmpgsc 11 месяцев назад +2

    Great discussion! I just bought the book and look forward to reading it.

  • @frankfischer1281
    @frankfischer1281 11 месяцев назад +5

    The ideas proposed by Commander Vandenengals' book should be given serious looks. The nuclear-powered mega-carrier has done the job during the Cold War, and on, for 70-odd years. In todays' missile-rich combat scenarios, a Ford-class carrier would take 5,000 sailors and 13 billion dollars with it, if it was sunk. Doubtless, the Navy has maximized a carriers' defensive capabilities, but an off-script, lucky shot anomaly is always possible. Can the US population take a loss of 5,000 people, and 13 billion dollars at one time?

  • @phil20_20
    @phil20_20 11 месяцев назад +1

    We need more small ships. We need more big ships! Yeah, build a couple of NEW battleships "from the ground up", so to speak. I think we're going to need more than 6 Ford Class carriers, but we need corvettes and cruisers too.

  • @MultiCconway
    @MultiCconway 11 месяцев назад

    The man has a point. I would add a Flt II version of the Frigates with a few upgrades (ex: more VLS cells).

  • @j.d.winter4529
    @j.d.winter4529 11 месяцев назад

    I believe a better balanced fleet would be best. An even split of large and small surface combatants. With more offensive capabilities from the new DDGX. The carrier fleet should be 8 CVN’s and 8 smaller CVA’s. Arm the LPD’s with better air defense capabilities and most importantly have the maintenance capabilities to meet demands.

  • @richarddeniz2094
    @richarddeniz2094 11 месяцев назад +2

    Although I agree with his theory, I still don't hear anything on how to accomplish on a flat budget. Lots of "we need this and that". Navy is still lacking on "how". A flat budget combined with a CR is the elephant in the room.

    • @cragnamorra
      @cragnamorra 11 месяцев назад +1

      What's needed is civilian political leadership & commitment at the highest level for something of this magnitude. An administration (and Congress) which not only recognizes and is serious about countering a peer-level adversary (or adversaries), but which goes beyond a general increased attention to defense and specifically emphasizes the US Navy, not just with dollars but with vision and policy as well. e.g., someone like a Roosevelt (either one), or a Reagan. tbh, yeah, it's not clear that anything like that is coming in the near/mid-term future in the current political landscape.

  • @BaronVonHobgoblin
    @BaronVonHobgoblin 11 месяцев назад

    How is the modern navy going to sea lift the Army? Will the Navy at least augment the piecemeal transport ships that the Army operates? Surely the resources that go into one Aircraft Carrier could be put into an entire Amphibious Fleet that might integrate army units in a way that would be distinctly different from the existing Marine Corp Amphib Capes - perhaps more along the existing lines of Army Seagoing operations.

  • @russelltatum262
    @russelltatum262 11 месяцев назад

    Having more ship yards wouldn't hurt.

  • @VunderGuy
    @VunderGuy 11 месяцев назад +3

    Bring back battleships and make them missile spammers.

    • @phil20_20
      @phil20_20 11 месяцев назад +1

      New ones! With nuclear reactors, Lasers, and (maybe) railguns. Subs and cruisers are fine, but there is a need for a few dedicated, large, weapons platforms. 16"/56 Scramjets can go 700 miles.

  • @tekteam26
    @tekteam26 11 месяцев назад

    Columbia-class SSGN? I don't think so. The new SSGN's will be the Virginia-class Block V boats, not Columbias.

  • @Grouse2275
    @Grouse2275 10 месяцев назад

    There are too many capabilities that aircraft carriers provide to replace them. A large scale war with China would put our carriers at risk but there are many contingencies where a carrier would be most effective.