New Destroyer is "Navy's Next Major Debacle"

Mike Burleson

Criticism in Congress is swelling against the US Navy’s new $5 billion destroyer, under development since the 1990’s. Planned as a stealthy replacement for the 60 ship Arleigh Burke class, the DDG-1000 Zumwalt is some 5000 tons heavier and up to three times the cost of its long-serving predecessor. It is little wonder that many in Washington are calling for the number of these bulky battleships be kept at the already funded two, with newer Burkes purchased instead.

Some naval experts are declaring this doesn’t go far enough, claiming the Navy has far too many of these huge missiles-firing dreadnoughts already in its steadily shrinking fleet. Noted naval blogger Galrahn is livid over the plan to trade Zumwalts for Burkes:

“It is time to eighty six the battleship, and get moving on building small surface combatants. When we say eighty six, we mean the number and invoke the slang. The Navy has already paid for 22 (cruisers), 62 (Burke destroyers), and 2 DDG-1000s. That is a fleet of 86 battleships, enough already!”

Some are less concerned about the number of ships, as to the entire concept. Loren Thompson seems to be wondering “what was the navy thinking” ?

“The problem with DDG-1000 isn’t the technology, which is cutting-edge and can eventually be applied across the whole fleet. The problem is that the basic concept of the warship was misconceived. It displaces 14,500 tons of water, making it about 50% bigger than current DDG-51 destroyers, because it is built around two rapid-firing 155 mm. guns that are supposed to lob highly accurate shells a hundred miles inland in support of forces ashore.”

This was the Navy’s dubious justification for the DDG-1000 to begin with: that it could lay offshore firing projectiles into caves where terrorists are want to hide. This should be the role of the guided missile in this new age of precision warfare. Meanwhile, others are questioning the need for such a costly vessel, including former naval aviator Sen. John McCain, who often declares “"I've never heard of a $3 billion destroyer."

Defense News says the Navy isn’t trying hard enough to justify the expenditure. They recently reported one veteran retired officer stating:

“"I certainly haven't seen a vigorous defense mounted, The position papers are out there to support the ship, but nobody's standing up for it."

Some are calling it the Navy’s “next major debacle”, referring to numerous cost overruns in shipbuilding of late, from large amphibious ships to the smaller littoral combat ship. Only new Virginia class submarines are coming in under budget, and future plans for expanding the fleet might be at risk, as Rep. Gene Taylor, D-Miss recently warned in a Maine newspaper:

"If Congress authorizes the DDG-1000 program of record, any cost overruns for the program will most likely not become obvious until at least half of the planned seven vessels are placed under contract. This will subject the Navy's budget to significant financial liability and could cripple Navy shipbuilding plans. Other vital ship programs, such as the Virginia-class submarines, the San Antonio-class amphibious assault ship, the Maritime Propositioning Force (Future), and the Littoral Combat Ship would have to be significantly curtailed to cover this liability."

My own thought is we have enough battleships in the fleet already, able to launch a combined fire power of near 10,000 missiles against any potential foe. No other nation on earth deploys ships such as these, save for Russia which has a handful of old Cold War types. A freeze on Big Ships is long overdue to build up the littoral capabilities of the Navy. If the Admirals wish for Congress to take their shipbuilding plans seriously, they need to start taking an interest in the wars we are fighting now. And if they want a true stealthy missile-firing battleship at sea, let them build more submarines.

The US Navy must start focusing on the war we are fighting now, and this includes the epidemic of piracy in the Third World, which is so bad even the normally recalcitrant United Nations has been forced out of its stupor to act. While most of the world’s navies will send corvettes and gunboats, all America has sent against the terrorist dhows and speed boats are Arleigh Burke and Ticonderoga battleships, built to fight a Soviet Navy rusting in its ports. If the Navy will not build an effective fighting force with the funds Congress allocates, it’s time to give the bulk of the defense budget to the Army, who understands the threats we are fighting against and have changed their way of thinking accordingly.

My blog can be found at newwars.wordpress.com

###

Mike Burleson is a regular columnist with Sea Classics magazine and an advocate of Military Reform. He resides in historic Charleston, SC. http://tv.groups.yahoo.com/group/honestnews/ http://newwars.blogspot.com/

charbookguy@myway.com