Stand yer ground We got yer 6

[sonny]

By far the best department head i served with was gay (Operations Officer) This was back in the early Ninety's. The man Knew his #hit and looked after his department. 98% of my time in the Navy was spent at sea. Six ships and 10 Sea Service Ribbons. (six month deployments) Combatants, Amphibious and one support ship (Oiler) so we have a fair idea of how the Navy operates from the deck level. The training that takes place prior to a deployment is very intense. Almost as bad as the deployment itself. Countless hours of training teams coming on board and assisting in the training of the crew. Everything from Damage Control to CIC operations. Every operation of the ship is inspected and improved upon. When the battle group leaves port for deployment it is ready for ANYTHING PERIOD. Sure there has been a few black eyes lately for the Navy. #hit happens. Over all comparing the U.S. NAVY to foreign navy's is like comparing apples to oranges. We are better trained and better equip for sustained operations at sea. Never viewed it from a desk but have from the deckplates. (Just my 2 cents worth)12 consecutive years of Sea duty. No breaks (Shore Duty) Not much for a SMC to do on shore

 

[sijtwin]

Nowt new there - didn’t the Ruskies take pencils into space, where nasa spent oodles on high tech pens?
I don’t believe that technology always wins, cos sometimes you can’t beat sheer presence (eg boots / ground )

 

[Navigator]

Meaning no disrespect to your years of sea service and experience Sonny, but while the deck plate level experiences and observations are definitely valuable and contribute to the service understanding of conditions, it is one level of perspective.

The final report on collisions of USS Fitzgerald and McCain painted a significantly different picture and the concluded that the conditions that existed were systemic throughout the Surface Force. From the report on Fitzgerald:

"Failure to plan for safety
Failure to adhere to sound navigation practice.
Failure to execute basic watch standing practices
Failure to properly use available navigation tools.
Failure to respond deliberately and effectively when in extremis."

Not only did the officers and enlisted fail in the above, the investigation confirmed that they did not know basic seamanship, navigation and ship handling. They were inept. Further, the OOD and CICWOs, both female, weren't talking to each other during the events leading up to the collision, and apparently in the wardroom. They were said to be in "a snit". This came after the report.

The investigation of the McCain collision is almost more damming because the CO was on the bridge and gave the orders which eventually led to the collision, with the report conclusion that the watchstanders operating the steering and propulsion systems having insufficient knowledge and proficiency of the systems.

The Navy in which I enlisted in 1967 was not the same as the Navy from which I retired in 2003 and I do not mean technology. The most significant degradation of our forces was due to the DoD leadership during the Obama administration and I'm including the flag officers who fell in line. It will be a long road back. Secretary Mabus did more damage to our Navy than any SECNAV in history.

My point is that we are entering a very dangerous time with respect to Naval dominance of the high seas. Our technological lead is still significant but our strategic adversaries are fast closing that gap.

 

[sijtwin]

I’ve done a little online digging, and as suggested, China and Russia don’t appear to have the capabilities to build large carriers.
But just how transparent is the situation - Putins not known for it - perfume anyone?

 

[RKTNMYPKT]

Less nukes, more windshields that’s what I always say...

 

[scot in exile]

Less nukes, more windshields that’s what I always say...

That's the core of the problem---windshields--- they soften the guys so when hard times come they start crying or even worse ride Indians.

 

[TRIIICK]

If I was the Donald I'd throw a couple more bucks towards defense spending...!!

 

[Navigator]

That's the core of the problem---windshields--- they soften the guys so when hard times come they start crying or even worse ride Indians.

It just had to come down to WINDSHIELDs. I still like them, especially for open road touring when the weather turns foul.

What is interesting is that the old WWII Royal Navy corvettes, and I believe some other light escort vessels, were all open bridges, with not only no windshields but no tops. And they protected the convoys in the North Sea in the middle of winter taking 33 degrees F seas not only over the bow but over the bridge. And the guns were also open to the elements. Imagine handling naval artillery rounds in weather so cold that one couldn't even feel his hands.

Now those were great seagoing officers and men. Tough as nails they were.

sijtwin. The Russians don't want to build large carriers. They just want to sink them. Their carriers, as do the Chinese, which are based on the Russian "jump" deck carriers, have a very limited mission capability.

I recall visiting a Slava guided missile cruiser back in the 80s and seeing all of those 12 SS-N-12 Sandbox surface to surface missiles lined up along the main deck and thinking "God help us if we ever go toe to toe with one of these". And then there was the Kirov, to me the most magnificent surface combatant ever built. I watched her emerge from a fog in the Med on a summer Sunday morning and we were in awe of her.

And the two newest Chinese Type 055 destroyer is a beautiful, high tech ship with multi-function phased array radars, similar to our Aegis system. While it approaches the size of of our Ticonderoga class cruisers (which are actually built on our DD-963 Spruance destroyer hulls), they have 112 vertical launch tubes that will pack an incredible punch.

 

[sonny]

It just had to come down to WINDSHIELDs. I still like them, especially for open road touring when the weather turns foul.

What is interesting is that the old WWII Royal Navy corvettes, and I believe some other light escort vessels, were all open bridges, with not only no windshields but no tops. And they protected the convoys in the North Sea in the middle of winter taking 33 degrees F seas not only over the bow but over the bridge. And the guns were also open to the elements. Imagine handling naval artillery rounds in weather so cold that one couldn't even feel his hands.

Now those were great seagoing officers and men. Tough as nails they were.

sijtwin. The Russians don't want to build large carriers. They just want to sink them. Their carriers, as do the Chinese, which are based on the Russian "jump" deck carriers, have a very limited mission capability.

I recall visiting a Slava guided missile cruiser back in the 80s and seeing all of those 12 SS-N-12 Sandbox surface to surface missiles lined up along the main deck and thinking "God help us if we ever go toe to toe with one of these". And then there was the Kirov, to me the most magnificent surface combatant ever built. I watched her emerge from a fog in the Med on a summer Sunday morning and we were in awe of her.

And the two newest Chinese Type 055 destroyer is a beautiful, high tech ship with multi-function phased array radars, similar to our Aegis system. While it approaches the size of of our Ticonderoga class cruisers (which are actually built on our DD-963 Spruance destroyer hulls), they have 112 vertical launch tubes that will pack an incredible punch.

Most of the Slavo class and Kirov class would sit anchored during the late 80's and early 90's due to equipment failures and lack of parts. When at sea most suffered from engine damage due to incorrect operation. Yes the Russians and Chinese still operate and build there ships with the idea the more rocks you have to throw the better your chances. Plus if you do not have a support system for efficient replenishment then you must leave home with everything on board. Serve on the U.S.S San Jacinto C.G. 56 for two years. Desert shield and desert storm in the Red sea. Fired the tomahawks twice and then headed toward Naples very quickly back in a few days loaded and ready in the Red sea again. Also stopped for gas in what was known at that time as gas ally. One #ell of a support system. I got out of the Navy in 1999. So not to sure what is going on today on the bridges underway. Did have a pretty good understanding back then because even as a enlisted (E-6) qualified and stood JOOD underway. Did the same on Arliegh Burke as a (E-7) No #ull****ing on either ship while on watch. Especially myself due to the fact that i was standing a watch reserved for Officers only. The X.O. of the C.G. became the C.O. of the Burke much to my surprise when i reported on board. Signalman on board had their minds blown when they saw their new Chief standing watch on the bridge. The days of taking naps on the signalbridge were over. Had more than a few OOD's ask for me on the watch bill because they knew i paid attention and had their backs. Never stood watch with a OOD that i did not get along with. Forgot to mention that there is a reason why they are called Carrier battle groups.

 

[Navigator]

Most of the Slavo class and Kirov class would sit anchored during the late 80's and early 90's due to equipment failures and lack of parts. When at sea most suffered from engine damage due to incorrect operation. Yes the Russians and Chinese still operate and build there ships with the idea the more rocks you have to throw the better your chances. Plus if you do not have a support system for efficient replenishment then you must leave home with everything on board. Serve on the U.S.S San Jacinto C.G. 56 for two years. Desert shield and desert storm in the Red sea. Fired the tomahawks twice and then headed toward Naples very quickly back in a few days loaded and ready in the Red sea again. Also stopped for gas in what was known at that time as gas ally. One #ell of a support system. I got out of the Navy in 1999. So not to sure what is going on today on the bridges underway. Did have a pretty good understanding back then because even as a enlisted (E-6) qualified and stood JOOD underway. Did the same on Arliegh Burke as a (E-7) No #ull****ing on either ship while on watch. Especially myself due to the fact that i was standing a watch reserved for Officers only. The X.O. of the C.G. became the C.O. of the Burke much to my surprise when i reported on board. Signalman on board had their minds blown when they saw their new Chief standing watch on the bridge. The days of taking naps on the signalbridge were over. Had more than a few OOD's ask for me on the watch bill because they knew i paid attention and had their backs. Never stood watch with a OOD that i did not get along with. Forgot to mention that there is a reason why they are called Carrier battle groups.

Good on ya. Great maritime experience and significant accomplishments. Senior enlisted standing bridge watches is not common on DD/CG class combatants and generally only when there are not sufficient commissioned officers to stand the watches. Thus you must surely have distinguished yourself, unlike the officers on the Fitzgerald who didn't have an understanding of such fundamental concepts of relative motion and CBDR.

I do not understand the meaning of our last sentence.

I disagree somewhat with your first two assessments of why the Russian ships sat at anchor. Would be a subject for discussion over a campfire and beers. Regardless, they've come a long way since then in both quality, capability, training and logistics support.

On the Russian and Chinese navies today, unlike us, they are designed for defense of the homeland, which has never changed. Ours is world wide power projection and naval dominance.

Imagine 112 surface to surface missiles fired from one Chinese DD at two carrier strike groups and with precision location and guidance. This is the nightmare we face in the western Pacific and the South China Sea.

The Navy you retired from in 1999 is a far cry from the Navy of today.

Edit: I neglected to mention the sorry incident in 2015 when a female Sailor gave birth aboard the USS Dwight D Eisenhower. Nice. As expected, the creepy Public Affairs Officer for Naval Forces Central Command said that the ship's primary focus was now "caring for the health and welfare of the Sailor and the newest member of the Navy family" instead of the primary mission of fighting the ship.

While our adversaries are training their crews on how to send our ships to the bottom of the ocean, we are focusing our efforts on pregnancy aboard our combatants.

The US Navy allows pregnant women to serve on sea duty for up to 20 weeks; longer if they don't even know they are pregnant. They then leave the ship with no replacements.

Feature this. Surface to surface and air to surface missals are slamming into a US Navy ship along with torpedoes hitting below the waterline. Fire and flames are everywhere with crewmen pulling hoses to put out the fire while others are trying to plug the flooding below decks. Meanwhile, the pregnant women are wondering around holding their bellies and looking for someone to take care of them. And let's not even get into the inability of the gals to drag a P250 de-watering pump up two decks unassisted like I had to do during my years at sea as both an enlisted and commissioned officer.