From: cashman@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Geoff Cashman)
Subject: Seawolf program (was Re: Greatest Military Blunders of All Time)
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 07:56:38 GMT

cote@cs.ucsd.edu (Brad Cote) writes:
>cashman@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Geoff Cashman) writes:
>
>>[...], I could say that one of the greatest military
>>blunders of all time is and will be the sharp reduction of the Seawolf
>>program.
>
>To start another thread: Why do you think that the Seawolf program
>will be a lynchpin for the near future of the US military?

I didn't say that I think it is a lynchpin in the future of
the US military, I was just asserting that I could :-)

But, as long as we're starting a new thread, and it is understood
that I *didn't* say it's a lynchpin.... :-)

The Los Angeles class of submarines has proven their worth repeatedly
in numerous situations.  I feel that the Seawolf class can carry on
and enhance that role, whereas the Centurion class simply isn't capable
enough to do so.  The Centurion class is in some ways inferior to
the L.A. class.  

I can also argue it from another angle...
Yes, the cold war is definetly over.  However, the lesson that was
learned from WWI and WWII which can not be forgotten, despite the fact
that it was part of the reason the cold war started.  That lesson is
that we can not afford to let down our guard again.  Yes, we definetly
need to downsize our military, we can not as a country (the U.S.) afford
to field the conventional power that we have been fielding for the
last five decades.  As a result of downsizing however, we need to be
able to increase the effectiveness of individual units in all branches
of the service, through various methods.  This to include more capable
weapons, multi-role weapons in particular.  (this is beginning to 
stray into politics, which I do not wish to do. I'm assuming the current
politics to be 'valid' viewpoints, and do not wish to debate them).

	The Seawolf program fulfills the need for downsizing while 
maintaining effective for structure and is also a multi-role weapon.
I do not believe the Centurion class fits in with this philosophy as well.


I can argue it from yet another angle, though this one
is in some ways similar to the last...

It is naive to assume that the current diplomatic and political situations
that exist in the world today will continue indefinetly.  U.S. Navy ships
are generally built to have an active duty service life of 30 years.  30
years is a long time.  I do not feel that the Centurion class is capable
of answering the various possible scenarios in the future as the Seawolf
is.  The Seawolf, as a result of being a more capable platform, is also
more responsive to more situations than the Centurion. 


Yet one more angle, which is again similar...

Current U.S. military policy is apparently geared towards being able
to deploy substantial power in a regional manner in a global environment.
Ie, power projection anywhere in a region in any given area of U.S. interest
in the world.  The strongest element of the maritime forces of modern day
navies is the sub surface force (go ahead and debate this if you'd like).
To evolve from the L.A. to the Centurion is compromising our maritime 
capabilities for power projection in a global environment. 


Personal feeling:
We didn't balk when we paid large sums of money for the Nimitz class
carriers.  We didn't balk when we built 17 units in the Ticonderoga
class cruisers and spent nearly 20 (???) billion doing so. 

It can be argued that these classes were initiated during the cold war,
and were responses to cold war threats.  I certainly wouldn't disagree
with you, since you are probably right. 

However, I argue (in addition <== note) that we are balking at the
Seawolf program because most people are not aware of the role the
subsurface forces play in the world today.  Subs, no matter how
impressive they are, are shrouded in secrecy and are not intended
as high visibility platforms of policy extension.  How often do you
hear about an L.A. class in the news?  How often do you hear about
a carrier or cruiser in the news?  

			
			- Geoff Cashman

Newsgroups: alt.war