Last week the Navy decided to cancel its $5-billion-a-copy DDG-1000 stealth warship and buy more, cheaper Arleigh Burke-class ships instead. Some hailed the move as a smart way to boost a shrinking fleet. Others, especially Congressmen whose districts include shipbuilding contractors, protested. Ultimately, it's Congress' call, since they hold the purse strings.
Observers expected a fight with two possible outcomes: either Congress forces the DDG-1000s on the Navy, or caves to the Navy's wish for more Burkes. In a surprise move yesterday, the House defense appropriations committee -- headed by John Murtha of Pennsylvania -- rejected both, and proposed a third plan, according to GovExec:
It's a smart move, according to my favorite naval analyst Galrahn. Why? Because "neither the DDG-1000 or the DDG-51 is actually replacing an existing ship about to retire." Our destroyer fleet -- the largest and most powerful in the world -- is younger on average than the Air Force's fighter planes.
And besides, the future belongs not to heavily armed destroyers equipped to sink other destroyers, but to the ships that can carry troops, doctors, aid workers and scientists into the world's volatile shallow-water zones. That means cargo ships and amphibs. And for maintaining control of the deep seas in the meantime, you can't do better than a nuclear submarine.
In short, Murtha's surprise plan -- if it gains Senate support -- just might begin building the fleet we need, versus the fleet we think we want.
SEE ALSO:
- Navy River Troops Play War
- Chavez to U.S. Navy Humanitarians: Back Off!
- Congress: Never Mind the Navy, We Want Destroyers!
- 21st Century Battleship, Sunk!
(Photo: me)
