New Drydock

It is a rare occasion when ComNavOps gets to sincerely recognize and praise a US Navy accomplishment but such is the case with the recent delivery of a new dry dock intended to support Columbia class ballistic missile submarines.
 

The new dry dock, designated “Atlas” was announced as received by General Dynamics Electric Boat’s primary shipyard in Groton, Connecticut … [1]
 
Atlas was constructed by Bollinger Shipyards in Louisiana and completed the ~2,100 mile (3,380km) journey to Groton on January 3rd. …
 
As detailed by GD Electric Boat, the dry dock stands at 618 feet long, 90 feet tall, and maintains a width of 140 feet.[1]

Dry Dock Atlas

As a reminder, the first Columbia class submarine began construction in May 2019 and will be delivered sometime around 2030.  This is a discouragingly poor construction performance but at least the dry dock is ready.  As a point of comparison, the first modern, tear-drop shaped submarine, the USS Albacore, a truly revolutionary vessel, was laid down in Mar 1952, launched in Aug 1953, and commissioned Dec 1953.  Adding nuclear power to the modern submarine, in the form of the USS Skipjack, SSN-585, resulted in the vessel being laid down in May 1956 and launched in May 1958 with commissioning in Apr 1959.  Clearly, over a decade to build the Columbia class is disappointing compared to what we used to do routinely.
 
Submarine construction woes aside, the delivery of the dry dock is a rare moment of accomplishment that deserves recognition.  Good job, Bollinger.
 
 
_____________________________

 
[1]Naval News website, “Electric Boat receives new floating dry dock to support Columbia-class submarines”, Ethan Gossrow, 7-Jan-2026,
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2026/01/electric-boat-receives-new-floating-dry-dock-to-support-columbia-class-submarines/

We’re Doomed

China has announced its UAV mothership/carrier, a UAV capable of launching 100 drones.  Well, that’s it.  We’re doomed.  I don’t know about you but I’m starting right now to learn to speak Chinese because I’m certain this means the US will be conquered within a year or two.  The Chinese can’t be stopped and this proves it.
 

The world's first drone mothership, Jui Tian, took to the skies for its first-ever flight on December 11th, 2025, in the Pucheng region of Shaanxi province in China. The massive remotely piloted jet carries up to 100 drones, which it can launch while airborne to reach faraway targets. Able to take off with a payload over 13,200 pounds and with a wingspan of 82 feet, Chinese military aviation analyst Fu Qianshao noted that it can carry more weapons and equipment than modern fighter jets and bombers. It has designated hardpoints for guided missiles and bombs on top of the 100 drones.[1]

Some Chinese reports suggest an endurance of 12 hours and a range of 7,000 km.
 

No doubt about it.  This is a weapon system that is absolutely invincible.
 
The fact that it is large, slow, non-maneuverable, and not particularly stealthy, all of which are the definition of a target drone, should in no way diminish the awesomeness of the aircraft.
 
Similarly, the fact that the hundred UAVs it carries would each be on the order of a foot or two wingspan and something around a one pound payload which makes them incredibly short ranged and of no significant lethality relative to a ship should in no way diminish the sheer terror these tiny UAVs inspire.
 
And, of course, none of these miniature UAVs can mount any sort of useful sensor so, unless they have a very close controlling/sensing aircraft nearby (how does a controlling aircraft survive near a combat ready ship?), they’re blind and helpless but that doesn’t diminish the fearsomeness of the system, at all.
 
Being that small and with that small a payload, they certainly can’t have any defense against electronic warfare but that doesn’t lessen the war-winning capability of these tiny machines, in the least.
 
As I consider all this, I can only conclude that we should preemptively surrender.
 
 
 
[1]Redstate website, “China's Giant New 'Flying Aircraft Carrier' Completes Debut Flight”, Ward Clark, 30-Dec-2025,
https://redstate.com/wardclark/2025/12/30/chinas-giant-new-flying-aircraft-carrier-completes-debut-flight-n2197616

Billet Gaps

We noted in a 2022 post that the Navy had a gap of 5,000 – 6,000 unfilled at-sea billets.[1]  Today, that gap has widened to over 20,000.[2]
 

The Navy has a total of 20,683 gaps-at sea as of Dec. 3 … [2]
 
There was an overall fill rate of 88.2 percent for operational sea-duty billets … [2]

In three years the Navy has managed to worsen the billet gap by 14,000 – 15,000.  That’s impressive even by the Navy’s standards for failure!
 
Of course, I could end the billet gap by the end of today.  We have hundreds of thousands of sailors on shore duty.  Here’s a crazy thought … why don’t we put sailors in ships instead of buildings?  You know most of those shore positions are worthless.  Hell, we’ve got at least 200 worthless admirals with a total of a few thousand staff personnel.  Those staff personnel could easily return to sea duty and we wouldn’t lose a thing.  In fact, getting rid of admirals would improve the Navy!  Want to bet there are no gaps in any admiral’s staff?
 
How many tens of thousands of sailors are ashore just pushing papers?  Here’s another wild thought … abolish paperwork!  Who cares if we don’t document stuff?  It’s not like the military cares about passing an audit or anything, right?
 
Billet gaps in ships betrays the Navy’s true priority and it’s not manning the fleet – it’s budget and job security.
  
 
____________________________

 
[1]https://navy-matters.blogspot.com/2022/02/at-sea-billet-gaps.html
 
[2]USNI News website, “Navy Has 20,000 Gaps at Sea Due to Training Backlog, Past Recruiting Shortfall”, Heather Mongilio, 15-Dec-2025,
https://news.usni.org/2025/12/15/navy-has-20000-gaps-at-sea-due-to-training-backlog-past-recruiting-shortfall

NSC Patrol Boat

I applauded the Navy’s decision to terminate the Constellation program and still do.  I also, initially, viewed the decision to build a NSC-frigate as a poor choice but one that had some slight potential to produce a useful vessel if certain constraints and discipline could be applied such as a rigorous CONOPS and an obsessive fixation on a single mission, presumably ASW.. 
 
Sadly, the program is already doomed. The vessel will, apparently, have almost no weapons or useful sensors and no mission focus, whatsoever.
 
The initial NSC “frigate” will have 1x 57mm gun and 1x RAM mount.[1]  That’s it for weapons.  Nothing else.  That’s not a frigate.  That’s barely even a patrol boat and is hideously oversized, overpriced, and overmanned for that level of firepower.
 
The initial NSC “frigate” will NOT have a 5” gun, VLS, anti-ship missiles, strike missiles, ASW sonar, towed array, anti-submarine torpedoes, or CIWS.[2]  What it doesn’t have is far more impressive than what it does have.
 
Looking at the equipment list (or lack thereof) one can’t help but wonder, in stunned disbelief, what the purpose of the ship is?  What is the mission?  It barely qualifies as a patrol boat.  What is the Navy going to do with it?
 
It sounds like we’re just going to be building Coast Guard cutters and not even good ones.
 
I know the Navy is incapable of learning lessons but after decades of hitting themselves in the head with a hammer wouldn’t you think they’d at least stop just to make the pain go away?  I guess not.  They’ve just picked up a new hammer and immediately started whacking themselves in the head again. 
 
Enjoy the pain, Navy!  What a bunch of morons.  Good work, SecDef, SecNav, and CNO!

 
 
_______________________________

  
[1]The War Zone website, “Navy’s New Frigate Will Not Have A Vertical Launch System For Missiles”, Joseph Trevithick & Howard Altman, 22-Dec-2025,
https://www.twz.com/sea/navys-new-frigate-will-not-have-vertical-launch-systems-for-missiles
 
[2]USNI News website, “SECNAV: New Frigate will be Based on National Security Cutter, First FF(X) to be Built at Ingalls”, Sam LaGrone, 19-Dec-2025,
https://news.usni.org/2025/12/19/secnav-new-frigate-will-be-based-on-national-security-cutter-first-ffx-to-be-built-at-ingalls

Merry Christmas !

 May Jesus fill your heart and Santa fill your stocking!

Trump’s Battleship

All right, settle down.  We’re not going to build “Trump Battleships”.
 
Come on, now. You should know by now that you have to take everything Trump says with a battleship size grain of salt. He routinely puts forth ideas that are not meant to be serious and/or never come close to fruition. Remember Canada as the 51st state, buying Greenland, replacing EMALS with steam catapults, etc.?  Sometimes he makes these statements as part of negotiating ploys and sometimes just for amusement value. I note the article indicates he wants to have the ships operational in 2.5 yrs! We barely built BBs in 2.5 -3 years even during WWII. The Navy can't even build a LCS or frigate in 2.5 yrs let alone a BB.
 
The schematic of the vessel is pure fantasy and shows non-existent equipment (lasers, rail gun).  Even calling the drawing a battleship is ridiculous.  A supposed battleship with 28 VLS, one major gun (rail gun), and 12 strike missiles is a joke.  That barely qualifies as a destroyer.
 
Do you recall what happened just a couple days before Trump announced his battleship?  That’s right, China announced a supposed large UAV mothership that could launch a hundred tiny UAVs.[1]  Then, a couple days later, out of nowhere, Trump announces a battleship.  Anyone see a connection, here?  Do you think Trump may have just been trying to one up China and grab the public relations spotlight back?
 
This is an amusing story but it ain't gonna happen. Just treat it as fun!  Think of it as a Christmas present of humor.

 

______________________________

1]https://www.armyrecognition.com/news/aerospace-news/2025/chinas-giant-jiutian-drone-mothership-debuts-with-internal-bay-for-one-hundred-mini-uavs
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Navy Flag Officer Numbers

According the Navy’s web page, the service has 305 admirals[1] and 290 ships of all types[2].  That’s more than one admiral per ship. 
 
If the useless ships, such as the LCS and others are excluded, the ship count is much, much less.
 
How many admirals is the Navy allowed to have?  This is set by law with the controlling legislation being Title 10, Section 526 of the U.S. Code. The limit is supposedly set to 150 admirals.  Here’s the initial text of the legislation.
 
 
10, §526. Authorized strength: general officers and flag officers on active duty
(a) Limitations.-The number of general officers on active duty in the Army, Air Force, Marine Corps, and Space Force, and the number of flag officers on active duty in the Navy, may not exceed the number specified for the armed force concerned as follows:

(1) For the Army, 219.
(2) For the Navy, 150.
(3) For the Air Force, 171.
(4) For the Marine Corps, 64
(5) For the Space Force, 21
 

Unfortunately, the legislation goes on to carve out many, many exceptions and waivers, chief among them being joint duty exceptions, which explains why the Navy has 305 admirals while only authorized to have 150.
 
If you skim through the titles of the 305 admirals, as listed on the Navy website[1], you can’t help but laugh at many/most of them.  Talk about make-work and busy work!
 
This is yet another area where SecDef Hegseth should be taking aggressive action to reduce the flag officer ranks and yet he is not.  He continues to disappoint.

 
__________________________________

 
[1]https://www.navy.mil/Leadership/Flag-Officer-Biographies/
 
[2]https://www.nvr.navy.mil/nvr/getpage.htm?pagetype=shipbattleforce