It seems all too apparent that one of Russia’s [many] problems related to its invasion of Ukraine is that Putin was fed wildly optimistic information in an attempt to keep him happy and keep lesser officials from being seen as the bearers of bad news. That led to some incredibly inaccurate and delusional assessments of the situation that bordered on pure fantasy.
As we know from the many documented examples on this blog, the US Navy (and military, in general) is engaged in the same kind of ‘good news only’ reporting to superiors who are perfectly happy to accept what should be obvious pieces of fantasy.
The latest example of delusional reporting and assessment is this report about the ‘success’ of LCS USS Sioux City during a recent five month deployment. Breaking Defense website reports on the ‘historic’ deployment with the Navy absolutely raving about the success – the ‘success’ being mainly that it didn’t break down. According to Cmdr. Scott Whitworth, commanding officer of the blue crew,
We were able to steam over 28,000 nautical miles and we had no issues with our combining gear during the entire deployment.[1]
We were able to achieve speeds above 30 knots. The engineers have done a fantastic job, both civilian and Navy engineers, developing the procedures where we can operate the ship at high speeds and not cause damage to the combining gear.[1]
The Navy seems inordinately pleased that it was able to
operate a ship for five months without the combining gear breaking down. Avoiding a mechanical breakdown seems to be
the new standard for success in the Navy.
If that’s not delusional, I don’t know what is. Putin Navy leadership will be given
glowing reports about the success of the deployment and they won’t ask any
questions … questions like, the design speed of the LCS was 45+ knots so why
are you bragging about 30 kts? That’s at
least 33% below the design specification.
That’s what you call success?
This deployment represents a failure of the LCS to achieve its minimum design objective regarding speed and yet the Navy is treating the failure as a success.
This is how you wind up with a deluded, hollow Navy and leaders who have no connection to reality.
______________________________________
[1]Breaking Defense website, “Navy’s LCS combining gear problem didn’t interrupt ‘historic’ global deployment”, Justin Katz, 5-Oct-2022,
Is there any hard evidence to support this statement?"
ReplyDeleteI think the performance of the Russian military during the "Special Operation" in Ukraine represents an avalanche of hard evidence.
Lutefisk
I recall an paper that was released by Russian media about 4 or 5 days after the start of the invasion that was congratulatory and talked about occupation of Kyiv....sure sounded confident! And optimistic!!!!
DeleteI've deleted the original comment as pointless. The evidence is overwhelming. If someone chooses not to believe it, that's their choice but we're not going to waste time debating something obvious.
DeleteThe Fred Olsen ship LCS-2 class is based on traveled nearly 91k nautical miles in 2019. It did so at an average speed over 23 knots. It spent 163 days at sea. Given we know its just going back and forth, slowing to dock, and spending a large amount of time loading and unloading, that easily shows what ought to be possible.
ReplyDeleteWhile the general point about excessive happy talk for fear of limiting one's career by giving bad news to superiors in the USN (and other branches of the armed services, cf. twenty years of reports from Afghanistan going up the chain talking about 'progress' ) is certainly true at present, I don't think Cmdr. Whitworth's report is an instance of it, but rather an instance where expectations have simply sunk through the floor:
ReplyDeleteThe LCS-1 class, among many other defects, has suffered from a crippling problem with the combining gear. The Navy paid a firm to do engineering work to fix the combining gear. They then paid to implement the fix on this ship, did basic testing, and now they have completed this shakedown cruise for the combining gear fix. The results of the shakedown cruise is that the fix works and held up under strain, and the fixed ship that was shaken down is able to steam at a militarily useful speed (something not true of the un-fixed ship) that is in line with what the engineers who designed the fix said it should be capable of. That is, the ship has gone from a completely militarily useless failure to a failure of very limited military utility. With great effort and expense, a tiny quantity of potable lemonade has been made from the giant heap of half-rotten lemons that is the LCS program.
When you're used to nothing but complete failure from the procurement system, partial failure feels like success. This isn't a good phenomenon, but it is a distinct one from reporting only good news (even if it's known to be BS) for fear of punishment, which CNO has aptly called Putin Syndrome.
You also see this separate phenomenon with current coverage of the F-35A and F-35C, incidentally.
"partial failure feels like success."
DeleteThis phenomenon is certainly true and at play in the US military. However, consider the absolute gushes of praise that senior Navy leadership have spouted about the LCS (or Zumwalt, or Ford, or whatever). Either senior leadership knows all the problems and are out and out lying to the point of fraud and court-martial dereliction of duty or they believe what they're saying because they've been fed a steady diet of filtered, positive-only reports. I prefer to believe that latter. This example of a 'successful' LCS deployment gets reported as something far better than it actually was and senior leadership is happy. I don't doubt for a minute that the actual deployment was nowhere near the success that the Navy commanding officer claims in the article. Every public statement I've ever heard the Navy make has glossed over significant problems as documented by DOT&E reports and other sources. Recall the 'fantastically successful' LCS shock trials that the Navy claimed? The reality, as documented in DOT&E reports, was that the trials used reduced explosive charges and skipped the closest range test due to anticipated damage. Nothing the Navy says publicly is true. Again, it's either outright lying/fraud or it's the result of highly filtered reports that give only positive news to senior leadership. You can choose which to believe. Neither is good.
The steady diet of failure only serves to increase the pressure on underlings to report only filtered, good news.
"a tiny quantity of potable lemonade has been made from the giant heap of half-rotten lemons that is the LCS program."
DeleteNow that's how convey a point !
"With great effort and expense, a tiny quantity of potable lemonade has been made from the giant heap of half-rotten lemons that is the LCS program."
ReplyDeleteNothing illustrates a point like a solid metaphor.
Lutefisk
I can't wait to see what transpires when the Ford comes back (under its own propulsion) this abridged "deployment." USS Gerald R. Ford is conducting what the US Navy calls a “service-retained” deployment, meaning it is operating by the authority of the chief of naval operations under command and control of the U.S. 2nd Fleet, rather than under the command and control of a regional combatant commander under the Global Force Management Concept (GFMC). This is from an article on the navalnews.com website.
ReplyDeleteNo matter how much you try to polish a turd, at the end of the day, it will still be a turd. If you lower the expectations, you will raise the level of success.
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2022/10/uss-gerald-r-ford-departs-for-its-first-major-deployment/
Who builds something as critical as weapons elevators to thousandth of an inch clearance? How did these fair under the bomb testing? Was there ever a report put out on what damages the ship took during those tests?
Delete" can't wait to see what transpires when the Ford comes back"
DeleteI 100% guarantee that the deployment will exceed all expectations ... according to the Navy.
"Was there ever a report put out on what damages the ship took during those tests?"
DeleteThe shock test results are classified.
"The shock test results are classified."
DeleteAnd also bad, otherwise they'd brag.
You have several clunkers. Most times, they give you troubles. One day, you steered them for 200 miles without breaking down. You are so excited!
ReplyDeleteSaid it before, it comes down to accountability, there's only a few in Congress and Senate that follow military affairs and try to put a little bit of fire under the feet of USN leaders but it's not enough. It will only change when we lose ships to China in a war than suddenly, all hell will break loose then...
ReplyDeleteWhat really is the crux of the problem, it's not JUST THE FAULT OF THE POLITICIANS, it's also the PUBLIC fault!!! I'm sure I'm not the only that has noticed: general public, John and Jane Doe, they don't really care about this stuff, they on full automatic, they hear, maybe!, every 4 years, POTUS candidates talk about DoD budget, who cuts and who doesn't BUT really, there's no debate or conversations about this stuff, then it goes away for 4 years. There's no policy discussion, no debate on what are we buying and why, does it work or not, costs,etc....It's a sound bite hear or there, that's it!
As long as this state of affairs continues, DoD isn't going to do anything different because there's no pressure to do anything different!
I agree. But getting the public informed and interested is likely impossible. We don't have the same citizenry we did in 1776, 1812, 1942, or even the 1970s. There are organizations like the Navy League, and Vet groups, but itd take Trump-sized financing to make the Navys woes a public issue that gets actual attention. Besides, the average sub-40 yr old American on the street can name all the Kardashian sisters, but cant name the 7 continents, let alone have informed conversation on geopolitics or national defense. Not to be negative, but I just dont see how widespread support for our Navy can be built. Don't misunderstand, Im for it and would gladly take part, but...The bottom line, imho, is: we as navalists, and as a country in general, are in trouble.
DeleteI am a public servant in an Australian health service and I can tell you that Putin Syndrome is endemic here too. So is nepotism and institutional and legalised corruption.
ReplyDeleteSame applied when I worked in private sector in stock broking
Human naturally gravitate to group think and spinning BS to cover up for poor performance. .
The real test is how successful whatever checks and balances the organisation possesses is in limiting the impact of corruption, group think and institutional myopia.
I would suggest the USN's systems are eroded, again not surprising given the nature of the military industrial complex and increased politicisation of the Navy.
In this time of biased urine-stream media, who is to say the pro-Ukraine reports we receive daily on cable news isn’t designed to prop up the latest progressive love affair, that being their incongruent support of Ukraine? The same people who ran to Canada in their late teens to avoid getting hurt fighting Communism in SE Asia, now want to go full-bore in Ukraine, fighting communism! When I was flying in Navy Attack Squadron 85 in the 80’s, we intimately studied our primary foe- the USSR. We know the Russians to be ruthless, (to the point of sadism), to build amazingly rugged combat weaponry, and to be the best strategic chess players on the planet. Hard to believe such an enemy, even after 40yrs of some level of decline, could totally fall flat in a fight against a much smaller nation, equally plagued with corrupt beuracracies. To say nothing of the fact the Ukraine fighting machine has a Commander in Chief trained in COMEDY! It is folly for us to expend American treasure, when all we are doing is financing the eventual total destruction of every structure in Ukraine by the Russians. And like Trump said- we are always the chumps who get stuck with the bill. First, we finance the war, next we will be stuck spending TRILLIONS to rebuild a destroyed Ukraine.
ReplyDeleteLet’s shy away from the politics and sociology and stick to the military matters. Thanks.
Delete