tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post2284868499653208266..comments2024-03-28T07:56:09.239-07:00Comments on Navy Matters: Offset Strategy Follow UpComNavOpshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-86433847934768187662014-11-27T12:04:50.402-08:002014-11-27T12:04:50.402-08:00Tomahawks are no less stealthy than they have ever...Tomahawks are no less stealthy than they have ever been, but they are no more so, and defences are better.<br />Low flight offers no defence against airborne radar.<br /><br />Once spotted, its a slow target that doesn't dodge.<br /><br />1000 would be a knock out blow<br />100 might barely scratch the paintTrThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07316335177828136131noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-32249123160680736042014-11-25T16:00:51.497-08:002014-11-25T16:00:51.497-08:00Foreign Policy magazine reports today that Michele...Foreign Policy magazine reports today that Michele Fluornoy has decided to stay at CNAS. She will not consider being nominated to replace Chuck Hagel as SECDEF-- probably a wise move on her part. Scott Brimnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-66742174928699793732014-11-25T09:26:42.028-08:002014-11-25T09:26:42.028-08:00This is Bryan McGrath's take over at Informati...This is Bryan McGrath's take over at Information Dissemination:<br /><br />===================================<br /><br />On the Hagel Firing<br />Bryan McGrath, Information Dissemination<br /><br />http://www.informationdissemination.net/2014/11/on-hagel-firing.html<br /><br />Monday, November 24, 2014<br /><br />Secretary of Defense Hagel was shown the door today in one of those classic Washington scenes that reminds one of a Soviet show trial. We are led to believe that Mr. Hagel initiated this process himself, and that is entirely possible, given the recent revelations from former Defense Secretaries Panetta and Gates about the degree to which the White House staff's micromanagement and meddling had become intolerable. Presumably, Mr. Hagel encountered similar conditions, as the message mismatch between what came out of the White House and what came out of the Pentagon was hard to ignore.<br /><br />And so, the President will now look for a new Secretary of Defense, and it is likely that one of the conditions of hiring will be that this person will have to go the distance. Second terms are famous for the degree to which senior people seek employment elsewhere, tired from the grueling jobs they held and aware of the half-life of their value on the open market. Several names dominated the news this morning when the job opening was announced, but the two most often named were Senator Jack Reed (D-RI) and former Under Secretary of Defense (Policy) Michele Flournoy. <br /><br />In Senator Reed's case, I simply could not see why he would take the job. He is likely to be returned to office every six years until he decides not to (a good thing, as he is a superb Senator), and leaving that job now to spend two years across the testifying table from John McCain is probably not high on his bucket list. His staff put the kibosh on this fairly quickly, so it looks like he is out. As for Flournoy, I imagine her chances of taking the job are only a tiny bit higher, as she knows first hand the degree to which the White House staff dominated policy-making. Additionally, Secretary Flournoy is a close confidant of Hillary Clinton, and is certain to be on the short list for this position (and others) in two years if Mrs. Clinton is elected.<br /><br />Some have suggested Information Dissemination favorite (and a favorite of mine) DepSecDef Bob Work for the job, and I think he has a good chance for a couple of reasons. The first is that he is ultra-competent. Maybe one of the most competent men I have ever been around. But more importantly--and this is not an insult, just reality--he is relatively unknown and he has no independent power base. A White House that seems intent on protecting its prerogatives and minimizing static from across the Potomac might see Work as their kind of guy. They would underestimate him at their own risk.<br /><br />But, I have a feeling Bob won't get the nod. The White House will cast about a bit looking for someone with some profile, but not too much profile, and a resume of government service in their background, likely on the Hill. This person will be a team player, and will understand the rules under which they are appointed. My dark horse prediction: Secretary of the Air Force Deborah Lee James.<br /><br />===================================<br />Scott Brimnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-47334762231901081062014-11-25T06:01:36.283-08:002014-11-25T06:01:36.283-08:00Scott, what a terrifying question. I'm afraid...Scott, what a terrifying question. I'm afraid that the choice is going to be Work. I can't imagine a worse choice to lead defense than a man who is absolutely intolerant of any questions or criticism. Talk about stifling creativity and initiative!<br /><br />I don't really know much about the other choices you mentioned. My choice, considering it has to be a left-democrat person would be recently retired Senator Carl Levin from Michigan. He headed the main defense committee for many years and had a reputation as being reasonable with both sides of the political spectrum. Beyond that, anyone I would suggest would be totally unacceptable to a Democrat administration.ComNavOpshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-15074499005249690762014-11-24T11:06:29.157-08:002014-11-24T11:06:29.157-08:00ComNavOps, now that SECDEF Hagel has announced his...ComNavOps, now that SECDEF Hagel has announced his resignation, there is talk of three possible candidates as his successor, Michele Fluornoy, Ashton Carter, or Bob Work. <br /><br />In light of your comments here concerning the Offset Strategy, which of these three would you like to see, and why? <br /><br />My own vote would be for someone else, Christine Fox, but I doubt she would ever come under serious consideration by the Obama Administration.Scott Brimnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-51130144811641780612014-11-24T09:26:48.913-08:002014-11-24T09:26:48.913-08:00About SSGN's can they 'unplug' the tom...About SSGN's can they 'unplug' the tomahawk launch clusters and add them to another Ohios or other subs that can handle the size of a trident?<br /><br />About missiles , just take a look at the russian aproach, it's more flexible and pragmatic , they make super sonic missiles while still producing sub sonic cruise missiles.<br />The US on the other hand relies only on sub sonic.Storm Shadowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10999164214935172607noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-81633165410793928462014-11-24T09:05:03.062-08:002014-11-24T09:05:03.062-08:00Has there been some massive advance in radar that ...Has there been some massive advance in radar that terrain following cruise missiles are suddenly very visible? I thought the flight profile of the Tomahawk was to fly low and (relatively) slow to mask its signature. As radar is LOS it would seem that this would still be effective, yet I hear the Tomahawk getting bashed because it isn't 'stealthy'. To me 'Stealth' isn't just airframes and coatings. Its also tactics and mission profiles. <br /><br />I think retiring the Tomahawk would be very stuipd. Retiring the SSGN's without something of similar hitting power is similarly so. Even at their size the Ohio's stand a much better chance of getting into the A2/D2 area than a 'Burke or a Tico.JFWhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16095723023404412328noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-70459792444486237342014-11-23T14:12:22.359-08:002014-11-23T14:12:22.359-08:00There seems to be a good parallel between US leade...There seems to be a good parallel between US leaders today and Germany's (Hitler's) obsession with wonder weapons. Hitler was convinced his technological weapons would win the war, but it was the American's and the Soviet's ability to leverage their industrial capabilities to out-produce the Germans that won the day.<br /><br />There's a definite need for very high end system's and it would be foolish to throw the US lead away, but I would like to see a focus on producing weapon systems at a cheaper price. A back to basics approach that sees as much emphasis on training and maintenance and good strategy as super weapons.<br />Strategy needs to come from the government and be translated into effective weapon systems at a reasonable price.<br /><br />Having seen what another example of big business is capable of doing to us, ie Banking, are we surprised that big defense firms would equally screw us over for profits? More competition is needed combined with less political interference in acquisition.<br /><br />One high end system I feel is necessary is a new long range naval/air force air superiority fighter (basically a new F-22 with the all-round situational awareness of the F-35). Not only are the Russian's and Chinese producing some good examples, but the US has not invested enough in the ability to conduct high, or low, intensity operations without air superiority without major problems.<br /><br />Dave PAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-53868783509670269102014-11-23T02:24:25.536-08:002014-11-23T02:24:25.536-08:00"The AF has only 19 B-2 bombers and 180 F-22 ..."The AF has only 19 B-2 bombers and 180 F-22 fighters"<br /><br />Yeah, but neither china or russia won't have so many stealth aircraft of this type operational in the next 10-15 years.Storm Shadowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10999164214935172607noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-4169613033978944362014-11-23T02:20:08.120-08:002014-11-23T02:20:08.120-08:00Well, they haven't terminated tomahawk product...Well, they haven't terminated tomahawk production and won't in the near future.<br /><br />www.dodbuzz.com/2014/07/18/congress-plans-to-boost-the-tomahawk-missiles-fleet/Storm Shadowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10999164214935172607noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-25072952003605783092014-11-22T14:25:58.097-08:002014-11-22T14:25:58.097-08:00Totally agree . . . almost.
I've been wonderi...Totally agree . . . almost.<br /><br />I've been wondering about the size, cost and manpower requirements off the Arleigh Burke Destroyers. Whats the point off having a very powerful, expensive and difficult to maintain radar system on a large ship holding large numbers of very long range missiles? The greatest threat posed is sea skimming missiles that cannot be seen due to the curvature of the Earth till about 26 miles out. I'd like to see a greater number of smaller air defence ships.<br /><br />The other problem being that while these ships seem too big and expensive for defending against sea skimming missiles, their radars are not big enough to adequately detect ballistic missiles. Big ships please!<br /><br />Dave PAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-79408572101647540442014-11-22T09:44:45.411-08:002014-11-22T09:44:45.411-08:00It is a mystery to even me how punishment works wi...It is a mystery to even me how punishment works without long range high explosive projection, lots and lots of lrhep.<br /><br />Arsenal subs and arsenal ships with lots of long range, accurate, destructive missiles are pretty much essential in my mind. TrThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07316335177828136131noreply@blogger.com