US Surface Navy is No Longer a Global Force

[Deplorable Yankee]

I disagree.

When the Abraham Lincoln steams in the area of responsibility ergo the middle east, he will join a contingent of the US fleet capable of defeating any navy on earth.

They already have Iran stalling because any potential attack on Israel will see them bombed back to the days of Muhammad...

No wars for Israel

 

[TemplarKormac]

No wars for Israel

That may be out of our control now.

 

[Mushroom]

You can't have 11 huge aircraft carriers and not be the dominate ocean navy. Today' cruisers are being replaced by destroyers which are more effective at escorting the carriers.

Well, yes and no. Ultimately, a lot of it comes down to the role of the ships.

Ships are actually classified for a reason. Destroyers are more patrol dogs, intended for screening early detecting of enemy ships, and doing hit and run style attacks. Like Frigates, they are not really intended for drawn out combat, they are to dip in and out. Cruisers were the larger ships between the Destroyers and Battleships. Larger guns, more armor, intended to be able to take on pretty much anything but a Battleship. And traditionally, having a shore bombardment almost equal to that of a Battleship. Having smaller guns, but most times more of them and capable of firing faster.

But we do need more cruisers, of that I have no doubt. And if we do end up in some kind of conflict in the Pacific, I worry that our lack of shore bombardment capability is going to be a major problem. As well as our ships having no real ability to take any kind of damage without being taken out of action. At least some more traditional cruisers. With at least 2 triple turrets of actual guns of 12-14", and some actual armor so most missiles would not render them inoperable in a single hit.

That is one of the reasons why when President Reagan returned the Iowa class to service, the Soviet about crapped themselves. They had spent a lot of money and resources in making some of the most impressive missile cruisers in the world. In addition to missiles that could take out any Cruiser or Destroyer we had in our inventory. Then we pulled out some 40 year old ships that were damned near invulnerable to any of their missiles short of a nuclear one, and they knew it.

I would love to see some kind up updated compromise designed and built. Like an updated USS Alaska class Battle Cruiser. Enough armor that it would be largely invulnerable to most missiles. And with two triple 12" guns and the rear with VLS cells, it could put the hurt on almost any ship or shore target with ease. Just one such ship as a flagship of each of our amphibious warfare groups would likely worry the hell out of China. Because they know it would largely be unsinkable, and able to throw a hell of a lot of hate in defense, or on the offense if say we had to take some of their islands away from them.

Or even do like we often did with the Iowa class Battleships towards the end. Drive those up close to their shore and unleash a salvo of cruise missiles before returning. Confident that nothing they could have responded with short of a nuke would do any significant damage to her.

Carriers are great, but most tend to forget that they suffer the same problem as any air organization. They can not actually take land or ocean. They extend the range of a carrier, but the carrier itself is not an actual warship. It is just a moving runway. And without her aircraft, she is a sitting duck. And we have so stripped down their air wings, that they are much more limited than they were a few decades ago.