Future maritime security
Posts tagged as:
Last week America lost an MV-22 Osprey, a Special Operator and, in addition, had several servicemen injured in a bungled “fishing expedition” in Yemen. What can we learn from this? Details are trickling out, but regardless of their veracity (first reports are often wrong, and there’s always a lot of CYA in this sort of […]
{ 0 comments }
For a last-second, end-of-year compromise, the “Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act of 2015” does a surprisingly good job of preserving America’s naval industrial base. To me, it’s less about buying ships and more about buying…time. The Act offers the Nation a measure of flexibility–if it advances intact, the 11-Carrier fleet is (relatively) secure for […]
{ 2 comments }
Conventional sub buyers have a lot in common with those pesky teenagers who think, in an iPhone 6 era, it’s tremendously gauche to rock a lowly iPhone 4. Computer guru Steve Jobs could have mined the arms business for ideas on how to build out Apple’s retail empire. Conventional sub vendors learned long ago that […]
{ 17 comments }
Let’s talk sub proliferation! It’s no secret that, for any “on-the-move” developing country, an operational indigenous submarine production capability is the “hot” “must-have” naval accessory. And that’s great. Done right, sub production is an audacious industrial achievement–an exercise in manufacturing mastery, where precision, quality and engineering innovation come together to ensure the survival of humans […]
{ 2 comments }
For an Agency that loves pomp and circumstance, the Pentagon’s ceremony last week to “name and shame” both their good–and their bad–contractors was uncharacteristically muted. If the Pentagon wants to make the Superior Supplier Incentive Program into something that spurs institutional change, a low-profile Friday announcement and the promise of future incentives to the victors […]
{ 0 comments }
The current global crop of “conventional” frigates (which I loosely define as a multi-purpose combatant of somewhere in the vicinity of 2,000-4,500 tons), has reached something of a developmental dead end. These ships cannot be improved–or, in the case of foreign models, brought into compliance with U.S. Navy standards and then improved–without a huge investment–An […]
{ 28 comments }
So, last week the Small Surface Combatant Task Force announced a call for ideas on a small future surface combatant, complete with substantial pricing and production information and–if a boat-load of pricing and production data wasn’t enough–operational concepts as to how the ship will fit and fight with the fleet. Goodness. Where does one sign […]
{ 7 comments }
If the Navy is going to spend time thinking about new frigates or pondering “up-gunning” the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS), then America should also be thinking about developing a low-mix, austere DDG-51. Look, if the U.S. Navy is looking for a low-end Destroyer, then why not use the excellent high-end DDG-51 as a starting point? […]
{ 39 comments }
The LCS and DDG-1000 are both very different, and yet, they are also very similar–each sports controversial non-traditional hull-forms, minimal crews, no bridge wings, non-traditional hull materials, as-yet undeveloped hi-tech weapons and cost-growth. And while the LCS gets kicked around for these qualities/faults/weaknesses, the DDG-1000 always gets a pass. Every time. It’s amazing. Even with something […]
{ 14 comments }
We can all hope CNO Greenert’s sequestered LCS(NEXT) Requirements Team is hard at work, leveraging all the LCS lessons-learned to date, plugging the info into a fancy matrix and boiling their findings into something that will, in time, provide the Nation with an ideal “Small-Ship-Of-The-Future”. It’s just not bloody likely. Sure, the CNO’s “Deep Thinkers” […]
{ 15 comments }
Contact Craig Hooper:
Email Contact: craig.hooper@nextnavy.com
Disclaimer:
This is a personal endeavor. The content available on NEXTNAVY.COM is solely the opinion of the author and does not represent the opinions of his employer(s).
RECENT REVIEWS:
A stakeholder on "Running on empty":Recent Publications
"The U.S. Needs a New Public Shipyard," DefenseOne, January 16, 2019.
"It took Comfort 39 Days to Get Pierside in Puerto Rico: That's a National Security Problem," DefenseOne, November 6, 2017.
"Marine National Monuments are Defense Assets," DefenseOne, September 19, 2017.
"Restoring American Seapower: A New Fleet Architecture for the U.S. Navy," Center For Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, 2017.
"The real game-changers of the Pacific Basin," Proceedings of the U.S. Naval Institute, April 2011; 137
"China at sea," Hoover Digest, March 2011; 2.
"Running on empty,"Proceedings of the U.S. Naval Institute, October 2010; 136: 60-65.
"Nobody asked me, but...the Olympia needs our help," Proceedings of the U.S. Naval Institute, July 2010; 136: 10-11.
"'Get off the fainting couch': Stop worrying and start managing the Chinese ASBM threat," Proceedings of the U.S. Naval Institute, April 2010; 136: 42-47.
"Ospreys mean less at home," The North County Times/The Californian, January 3, 2010.
"America’s fading legacy in the Pacific," The Los Angeles Times, June 5, 2009.
"Preparing for the next big quake," The Berkeley Daily Planet, April 30-May 6, 2009; 11(5); Page 13.
"The Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle: A poster child for next-war-it is?," Proceedings of the U.S. Naval Institute, November 2008; 134: 22-26.
"To win hearts and minds, give Coast Guard new hospital ships," National Defense Magazine, November 2008; 93: 28. With James Doblow
"Don’t hate San Francisco! Engage, don’t estrange," Proceedings of the U.S. Naval Institute. October 2007; 133: 64-68.
"Going down with the ships," The Washington Post, March 5, 2007.
""LCS: A step, not an end - correspondence," Proceedings of the U.S. Naval Institute. February 2007; 133: 6-7.
"Communicable Disease Control in California," White Paper for 2007 California Health Strategy Summit. With R.J. Melton and G. Rutherford.
"The peril of power: Navigating natural gas infrastructure," Proceedings of the U.S. Naval Institute. June 2006; 132: 40-44.
"Emerging issues in natural gas security: Does perception management mask reality?," In Proceedings of Environment Canada’s 29th Arctic and Marine Oilspill (AMOP) Technical Seminar, Environment Canada, Ottawa 2006: 517-524.
"Protein engineering: Security implications: The increasing ability to manipulate protein toxins for hostile purposes has prompted calls for regulation," EMBO Reports June 2006; 7: S14-17. With J. Tucker.
"A Gunboat Navy for the 21st Century—correspondence," Proceedings of the U.S. Naval Institute December 2005; 131: 64-65.
"Biology on the battlefield: Rethinking the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention," The Yale Politic. December 29, 2005.
"The mosquito can be more dangerous than the mortar round: The obligations of command," Naval War College Review, Winter 2005: LVIII, Vol. 1. 77-87. With Arthur M. Smith.
"Building a fleet for coastal rescue," The Boston Globe, January 4, 2005.
"Harbor Safety," The Boston Globe Sunday Magazine, October 12, 2003.
"Projecting biomedical security," Proceedings of the U.S. Naval Institute July 2003; 129: 63-66.
"Strategic biodefense: A call to reinvent the hospital ship," Navy Medicine March-April 2002; 93: 31-35.
"Poxvirus Dilemmas—correspondence," New England Journal of Medicine 1998; 339: 2027-2028.
"Think Small," Foreign Affairs 1998; 77 (3): 158. Letter.