The Navy’s new vision for the future is a bold attempt to make the service an effective fighting force without peer for years to come. Many of its ideas, however, simply repackage the tried-and-true platforms of the last half century. Combining the striking power of an aircraft carrier and the amphibious capability of an amphib in one hull, with the flexibility of an air wing of unmanned aerial vehicles, is an alternative idea that will be a giant step in the right direction.
Sea Power 21," debuted by Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Vern Clark more than a year ago, is the foundation for the U.S. Navy's transformation efforts. During the past year, other senior Navy leaders have refined Admiral dark's original vision further. The current vision, however, as defined by all these senior leaders, does not go far enough in embracing jointness and is not truly transformational. Instead, it is rooted in the same basic force structures and operational concepts the Navy has practiced since World War II—i.e., the doctrinal primacy of carrier battle groups, amphibious task forces, and independent submarine operations.
For years, the White House and Pentagon leaders have urged the services to embrace joint warfighting concepts and to develop the capabilities required to execute warfare in the future using light, fast, and lethal forces, interconnected by next-generation command-and-control systems. Although the Navy's proposed acquisition of CVN(X) carriers, Joint Strike Fighters, Super Hornets, CG(X) cruisers, DD(X) destroyers, LHA replacements, littoral combat ships, and other platforms meets the general requirements of this executive-level guidance, the Navy nonetheless will fail to transform into a more flexible, agile, and lethal force able to support future joint and combined operations. "Sea Power 21" should provide the Navy with exponential improvements in technology and should allow for the formulation of new operational doctrine. As currently envisioned, it will fail to fulfill these promises.
During Admiral Clark's appearance at the Naval War College on 18 April 2003, he clearly stated his position regarding the Navy's needs. "No Navy program," he said, "should be funded unless it meets the needs of the nation and is in keeping with a transformational Navy." He understands the need for an aggressive acquisition plan for the Navy, but the current purchase plan will mire the Navy in the same basic force structure it has used for 60 years. The Navy's traditional platforms are sacred cows that can J and should be sacrificed over time to build a far more streamlined Navy incorporating advanced technology that enhances the combat lethality and mission flexibility of the afloat forces for expeditionary operations in the littorals.
A Proposed Force Structure
In the past ten years, there have been two examples that provide hints at the kind of framework the Navy should use. The America (CV-66) and Kitty Hawk (CV-63) both embarked special operations forces in Operations Uphold Democracy (Haiti) and Enduring Freedom (Afghanistan), respectively, laying the foundations for the Navy's future role in joint warfare. Although the two carriers were not optimally configured to support these operations, they did provide superb mobility and flexibility for the joint task force commanders. Adroit Navy and Marine Corps leaders advanced this concept when Marine forces were sent more than 1,000 nautical miles from ships in the Indian Ocean into Afghanistan to engage Taliban and al Qaeda forces. In the future, similar operations can and must be done more effectively, on a much larger scale, and even deeper inland.
Carrier strike groups, expeditionary strike groups, and even expeditionary strike forces will, over time, cease to exist as the Navy's primary battle formations. The inherent capabilities of both will endure, but the marriage of the aircraft carrier and large-deck amphibious ship into a single entity will enhance dramatically the Navy's combat effectiveness and efficiency. Traditional aircraft carriers and amphibious ships will be replaced by nuclear-powered "expeditionary carriers" equipped with large well decks, giving them an incomparable amphibious assault capability as well as the ability to project persistent aerial combat power over the battle space. The expeditionary carrier will be the centerpiece of an "expeditionary maritime force" that will include a mixture of advanced-concept escort combatants, submarines, and additional amphibious transports. The expeditionary carrier will have the following attributes:
- It will use all available "smart ship" technologies to pare down crew size, allowing for the embarkation of more combat troops and increased efficiency of the ship's operations. The ship will have a modular design to ease maintenance challenges and to allow for rapid reconfiguration.
- It will have the ability to embark Marine Corps, Army, NATO, or allied forces. It will be possible to scale the embarked forces for routine operations or any contingency, possibly embarking as many as 3,500 troops or more in each ship.
- It will have the ability to carry multiple types of landing craft and all U.S. Army, NATO, or allied combat equipment.
- It will have the ability to carry up to six heavy-lift aircushion landing craft, allowing greater combat power to be put on shore more rapidly than currently available.
- It will have the ability to carry the MV-22 Osprey, possibly as many as 20-25, for vertical envelopment of enemy forces and other lift requirements.
The first expeditionary carrier could not be completed until sometime around 2015. Initially, it will carry Super Hornets, Joint Strike Fighters, and other conventional naval aviation platforms. Eventually, however, a minimum of 100 modularly configured unmanned combat aerial vehicles (UCAVs) equipped with sensor suites to conduct aggressive and persistent intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance and real-time strike missions will be embarked. Modular designs will allow them to drop mini- or micro-UAVs or unattended ground sensors to provide continuous coverage of the battle space. Without pilots, UCAVs will maneuver in higher "G" envelopes and will not require life-support systems. UCAVs also will eliminate pilot casualties and prevent enemies from capturing downed aviators.
The UCAV air wing concept is the logical choice to replace completely the Navy's aging manned aviation inventory. The Navy must attain the Defense Department's goal of committing 3-4% of its annual budget toward research and development and rapid prototyping to bring UCAVs to maturity as quickly as possible. The expeditionary carrier also will be designed to support Air Force tactical and unmanned aircraft, but only if the Air Force develops short take-off and vertical landing platforms as its primary tactical combat aircraft. Army aviation assets also should be factored into the ship's design.
Each expeditionary carrier will be configured to embark and support a joint task force commander and his staff. Command-and-control spaces will be centrally configured around holographic display tables—perhaps as large as 30 feet square and 15 feet high, or even larger—that clearly show the entire battle space to all the warfare commanders and battle staff officers, affording total visual integration of all data input. The "holotables" will have the resolution to display all blue-force positional data acquired from satellite-linked secure digital chips installed in all friendly units and principal equipment, as well as all enemy positions as they become available. The tactical output data from this coordinated fusion effort by the warfare commanders and battle staffs will be sent immediately to field units, enhancing their situational awareness and aiding combat units in striking enemy forces.
The expeditionary carrier will take advantage of advanced distributed computing technologies to enhance situational awareness. The carrier's systems will feed directly into any escorting vessels' computers and displays to ensure total awareness for the entire expeditionary maritime force. Ideally, distributed computing will be available between every ship in the force, allowing for continuous situational awareness even if one node is lost in combat.
Every ship in the expeditionary maritime force will be equipped with a significant tactical and strategic cryptologic collection and direction-finding capability, interlinked with all stations worldwide to support theater combat operations and national collection requirements. The expeditionary carrier will incorporate available stealth technology, be built to operate in a weapons-of-mass-destruction environment, and have a hull form allowing the ship to maintain high speeds.
The expeditionary carrier will incorporate highly advanced missile-defense technologies, including directed high-energy weapons for use against cruise missiles and enemy aircraft, advanced electronic countermeasures, and perhaps even reactive armor. The expeditionary carrier still will need to be escorted into the littoral battle space, however, because the ship's design and function probably will inhibit the ability to defend against all threats. Surface escorts will be vessels that have many of the capabilities of the once popular arsenal ship concept. Each modularly configured and smart-ship designed "multipurpose combatant" will carry at least 1,000 hypersonic missiles for land attack and antiship strike, and even long-range (500 or even 1,000 nautical miles) surface-to-air missiles steered to engagement against enemy aircraft and unmanned vehicles. The hypersonic missiles might even have a multiple-warhead capability to strike several targets simultaneously, exponentially improving the lethality of multipurpose combatants.
Multipurpose combatants will possess sensors to detect and engage incoming air threats and will have distributed computing command-and-control networks linked directly to other ships, submarines, and UCAVs in the expeditionary maritime force. The combatants also will possess rail guns to engage targets using low-cost precision-guided munitions and be able to fire these in rapid succession to ranges of 100 nautical miles or more. Multipurpose combatants will incorporate directed-energy weapons for defense against cruise missiles and enemy aircraft. These weapons also might be the most effective option for dealing with theater ballistic missile threats or against enemy troops in the littorals, offering added dimensions to the expeditionary maritime force's use in national defense.
Multipurpose combatants will use numerous unmanned underwater vehicles to serve as sensors for mine countermeasures and for submarine detection armed with ultrahigh-speed torpedoes to defeat enemy submarines once they are detected by the force's netted acoustic sensors. These combatants will be stealthy, able to sustain high speeds for very long ranges to match the endurance of expeditionary carriers, and will take advantage of advanced reactive armor hull technologies. High-speed-vessel designs should be used to afford the combatants the greatest speed, maneuverability, and survivability against future weapon systems. The ship also should share many modular configuration designs with the next generation of maritime prepositioned ships. The most effective force probably will consist of a smaller number of cruiser-sized (or larger) ships. This option will allow for more effective coordination between ships, better crew habitability, the space requirements for directed-energy weapons, an effective load of hypersonic missiles, rail guns, and the advanced power-generation systems required to ensure the ship can provide all these capabilities when required.
The best platform for submarine defense traditionally has been another submarine, and that fact is not likely to change in the future. The Navy will continue to pursue building submarines for their stealth, deadly effectiveness, and ability to strike targets without warning. Building a limited number of multibillion-dollar submarines may not be the most cost-effective approach, but the trade-offs are worth it.
A new advanced platform, the nuclear-powered "multimission submarine," will carry perhaps 500 hypersonic missiles identical to the types carried in multipurpose combatants, but capable of being fired while still submerged. This submarine also will carry ultra-high-speed torpedoes—similar to the Russian Shkval—to destroy enemy submarines and surface ships. Multimission submarines will use smart-ship technologies to decrease crew size and increase habitability for sailors. They also will be able to travel at high speeds and operate effectively at all critical tactical depths. They will be equipped with a large number of unmanned underwater vehicles (tethered, autonomous, or both) that will collect intelligence, seek out mines, and aid in locating enemy submarines. Multimission submarines also will serve as motherships for the Advanced SEAL Delivery System. As many as two SEAL or Marine force reconnaissance platoons will operate simultaneously from each submarine. Interoperability with allied special forces also will be a key capability. Finally, all tactical data collected by multimission submarines will be linked directly to expeditionary carriers and the other ships of the expeditionary maritime force through a secure distributed command-and-control computing network.
Expeditionary Operational Doctrine
Each expeditionary maritime force will consist of an expeditionary carrier, two to four multipurpose combatants, two or three multimission submarines, and other amphibious ships (such as San Antonio [LPD-17]-class amphibious assault ships or prepositioned ships) to carry any additional forces required for major theater operations. Expeditionary maritime forces will respond to contingencies by entering the littoral battle space in sequential stages. Multimission submarines will penetrate ahead of the main body and employ their embarked unmanned vehicles to clear the seas of hostile submarine threats, locate and clear mines, provide support for landing forces, and maintain persistent reconnaissance of the coastline and signals environment.
Once the subsurface zone is controlled, the remaining ships will move in. The expeditionary carrier will launch UCAVs from well over the horizon to locate and engage enemy surface combatants. Directed-energy weapons or hypersonic missiles from the expeditionary carrier and multipurpose combatants will engage any air threats that penetrate the UCAV screen. Once in total control of the area around the landing objective, the carrier will disgorge its embarked forces using MV-22s and heavy-lift landing craft, building decisive combat power ashore within minutes. If threats to the landing force are within striking range of the maritime force, UCAVs will attack those targets or designate them for engagement by rail guns. For higher-priority targets or those located farther inland, hypersonic missiles will be fired to destroy them. Directed-energy weapons will be used against enemy forces ashore using either lethal or nonlethal engagement.
The landing force will be able to move rapidly deep into the continental interior supported by missiles fired from the multipurpose combatants and multimission submarines, with targeting and additional strike support coming from aerial vehicles. Landing zones for MV-22s will be cleared and secured by UCAVs. Deep penetration into an objective will be executed within minutes or hours, depending on the range required of the operation. Long-range Air Force tactical assets also will leapfrog from airfields to the expeditionary carrier and back as they strike targets ashore.
Once the objective area is secured by Marine forces, additional assets (U.S. Army, NATO, or allied) will flow ashore from other expeditionary maritime forces or prepositioned ships. Ideally, future maritime prepositioning ships—if they are given their own well decks—will work in conjunction with expeditionary forces in any landing situation. If the assets available in prepositioned ships could be moved ashore in any objective area through direct amphibious landings, regardless of whether there is an available port in the area, U.S. forces will be able to strike anywhere at will with ground combat strength.
Conclusion
An expeditionary maritime force is the vision the Navy should pursue to meet national security objectives for the next 30-40 years. The alternative vision presented here goes beyond the three central tenets of "Sea Power 21"—Sea Strike, Sea Shield, and Sea Basing—affording joint forces an even greater ability to move quickly to a crisis zone and introduce significant combat power into that area in an integrated and flexible way. It makes maximum use of technological leaps that are on the verge of being developed. It adopts true joint operational methodology and allows joint task force commanders to tailor their forces and carry them to the fight on fast and lethal ships operating in a fully integrated architecture. Theoretically, the Navy could downsize its current force of 12 carrier strike groups and 12 amphibious ready groups/expeditionary strike groups to perhaps 16 or 18 expeditionary maritime forces, depending on the strategic requirements determined by joint force planners and the operational patterns selected by senior Navy leaders.
The Navy and the other services must transform in a coordinated manner so that joint force planners can identify and purchase capabilities-based forces, then maximize the effectiveness of those capabilities by assigning them to the appropriate service for program execution. The Navy should sacrifice its sacred cows—carrier and expeditionary strike groups, tactical manned aircraft, and traditional thinking and designs of platforms such as cruisers, destroyers, frigates, and submarines—if it wants to be relevant in the 21st century.
Lieutenant Commander Olson is attending the Naval War College in Newport, Rhode Island. Previously he served as the staff officer for intelligence for Amphibious Squadron 11.