Tag: U.S. Navy

Categories
Quick Analysis

Senators Protest Shrinking Navy

The United States Navy, in many ways America’s first line of defense, is under dramatic and increasing pressure from China’s dramatic leap in naval capability, Russia’s modernized submarine fleet, and Iran’s threats in the Straits of Hormuz.  Adding to the pressure is the increasing alliance and joint naval maneuvers of those three nations.

The military newspaper Stars and Stripes Reports that “American Navy ships such as USS Farragut are often shadowed by Iranian ships and the two nations’ vessels come into contact on a near-daily basis. In July last year, U.S. Marines jammed an Iranian drone Washington said was swooping near USS Boxer…The U.S. Navy also recently confirmed that multiple small Iranian boats sailed alongside the Nimitz class aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln and other ships from a U.S. strike group as they sailed through the Strait of Hormuz into the Gulf of Oman in December. In 2016, ten U.S. sailors were detained by Iran after their small patrol boats drifted into Iranian waters during training. They were held overnight and released.”

Despite the growing threats, funding issues may force the U.S. Navy to reduce its number of ships. Two Maine Senators, Susan Collins (R) and Angus King, (I) are sounding an alarm.  In a letter to Defense Secretary Esper, they wote: “We were deeply concerned to read recent reports that the Department of Defense may propose significant reductions to planned shipbuilding procurement in its fiscal year (FY) 2021 budget request to be submitted to Congress in the coming weeks…We write to express our strong support for a 355-ship Navy and to urge continued support from the Department for a robust shipbuilding budget…we will continue to support a growing fleet in order to protect our national security and ensure our national prosperity as threats around the world continue to grow.… we hope the Department and administration will join us in these efforts…As you continue to develop and finalize the Department’s FY 2021 budget request, we urge you to reverse course from cutbacks to shipbuilding plans that may be under deliberation and to support a 355-ship Navy.”

The U.S. Navy is overstretched. The problem is getting worse as both Russia and China continue to build up their fleets, leading to strains on both ships and personnel.

In 2018,  Admiral Moran  expanded on his worrisome theme:  “The Navy has deployed, on average, about 100 ships around the world each day, collectively steaming thousands of underway days each year, despite having the smallest battle fleet since before World War I, and significantly smaller than the Navy we had immediately after 9/11 over a decade ago. 2 Although warfighting capabilities of ships have dramatically increased in the last century, the size and scope of U.S. responsibilities around the world have also increased.”

There are different measurements qualities of Sildenafil ED tablets online accessible, specifically 50 mg, discount viagra levitra http://www.midwayfire.com/?product=7168 100 mg, etc. Pause stimulating for about 30-60 seconds and resume levitra generika 40mg once you feel that you have gained the trust of another person be careful not to violate their good will. sildenafil best price Even if you’re unable to achieve sufficient stiffness of the male organ to penetrate into her genital passage and offer memorable sexual pleasure. George’s cialis without prescription Read More Here University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust in the U.K. “Point-of-care testing can significantly help to reduce the turnaround time.” The Minicare I-20 uses assays that employ Philips’ Magnotech biosensor technology to detect heart attacks in moments.

While the U.S. Navy struggles, America’s maritime adversaries grow larger and bolder. According to a study by the Brookings Institute  “Russia is, impressively, both retrofitting older vessels and procuring newer ones. And the [Russian] navy has unveiled a significant capability: Its Caspian Sea corvettes and frigates can fire cruise missiles at targets over 900 miles away. This is a previously unknown capability. To put things in perspective, the two variants of the U.S. Littoral Combat Ship, Freedom and Independence, are substantially larger at roughly 2,900 tons and 3,100 tons respectively—but they do not possess any cruise missile or similar power projection capability.”

The United Kingdom’s Royal United Services Institute, reports the Daily Mail,

“has warned the Kremlin is building up its maritime arsenal. It calls on Nato to prepare for how to deal with Russian hybrid warfare at sea ‘before it is too late.’ Its study notes that “Russia could send new submarines and ships to launch undersea attacks to ‘paralyse’ Europe…”

China’s threat may exceed Russia’s, and the two nations are closely allied, and increasing their coordination through joint training exercises. In its Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China 2016 the Department of Defense notes that “Over the past 15 years, China’s ambitious naval modernization program has produced a more technologically advanced and flexible force. 

Map: Straits of Hormuz (Pixabay)

Categories
Quick Analysis

Dangers of a Too-Small Navy

A study by the U.S. General Accounting Office reports that “Since January 2017, the Navy has suffered four significant mishaps at sea that resulted in serious damage to its ships and the loss of 17 sailors.”

The fact is, the U.S. Navy is overstretched. The problem is getting worse as both Russia and China continue to build up their fleets, leading to strains on both ships and personnel.

In September,  Admiral Moran  expanded on his worrisome theme:  “The Navy has deployed, on average, about 100 ships around the world each day, collectively steaming thousands of underway days each year, despite having the smallest battle fleet since before World War I, and significantly smaller than the Navy we had immediately after 9/11 over a decade ago. 2 Although warfighting capabilities of ships have dramatically increased in the last century, the size and scope of U.S. responsibilities around the world have also increased.”

While the U.S. Navy struggles, America’s maritime adversaries grow larger and bolder. According to a study by the Brookings Institute  “Russia is, impressively, both retrofitting older vessels and procuring newer ones. And the [Russian] navy has unveiled a significant capability: Its Caspian Sea corvettes and frigates can fire cruise missiles at targets over 900 miles away. This is a previously unknown capability. To put things in perspective, the two variants of the U.S. Littoral Combat Ship, Freedom and Independence, are substantially larger at roughly 2,900 tons and 3,100 tons respectively—but they do not possess any cruise missile or similar power projection capability.”

The United Kingdom’s Royal United Services Institute, reports the Daily Mail,
Even though levitra pharmacy purchase there are certain controllable variables during early stages of pregnancy that can predict a possibility of the switch in the inside to have broken. However, the level of success depends on the underlying cause of their erectile dysfunction, the severity of levitra sales online the cause and the degree of sexual issues that affect their performance in the bedroom. It cures the underlying cause of problem and improves the reproductive health india generic viagra of person. It offers effective cure http://www.midwayfire.com/required-reporting-information/ online cialis australia for male infertility.
“has warned the Kremlin is building up its maritime arsenal. It calls on Nato to prepare for how to deal with Russian hybrid warfare at sea ‘before it is too late.’ Its study notes that “Russia could send new submarines and ships to launch undersea attacks to ‘paralyse’ Europe…”

China’s threat may exceed Russia’s, and the two nations are closely allied, and increasing their coordination through joint training exercises. In its Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China 2016 the Department of Defense notes that “Over the past 15 years, China’s ambitious naval modernization program has produced a more technologically advanced and flexible force. The PLAN now possesses the largest number of vessels in Asia, with more than 300 surface ships, submarines, amphibious ships, and patrol craft. China is rapidly retiring legacy combatants in favor of larger, multi-mission ships equipped with advanced anti-ship, antiair, and anti-submarine weapons and sensors. China continues its gradual shift from “near sea” defense to “far seas” protection.”…China is expanding its access to foreign ports to pre-position the necessary logistics support to regularize and sustain deployments in the “far seas,” waters as distant as the Indian Ocean, Mediterranean Sea, and Atlantic Ocean. In late November, China publicly confirmed its intention to build military supporting facilities in Djibouti…This Chinese initiative both reflects and amplifies China’s growing geopolitical clout, extending the reach of its influence and armed forces…”

Real Clear Defense  notes the consequences of America having an undersized Navy: “the consequences of…a shortfall could be dire…Deterrence is the peacetime U.S. Navy’s chief purpose. After the navy faces down aggression, it does the wonderful things navies can do with freedom of the sea. Showing the flag in foreign seaports, alleviating human misery following natural disasters or other emergencies, scouring the sea of unlawful trafficking—such worthwhile endeavors depend on free use of the global commons… A big, capable navy can deter even if the bulk of the fleet is dispersed, remote from hotspots, or both. The United States, that is, can discourage mischief if would-be aggressors know U.S. commanders can bring overbearing combat power to bear. Virtual deterrence comes with a world-beating navy.”

The Report Concludes Tomorrow.

Photo:  U.S.S. Theodore Navy (U.S. Navy photo)

Categories
Quick Analysis

The Eroding U.S. Navy, Part 2

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government concludes its two-part look at how slashed funding from Washington  and rising threats from abroad have left the United States vulnerable at sea.

Admiral William F. Moran, the Navy’s Chief of Naval Operations, informed Congress earlier this year that “Time is running out. Years of sustained deployments and constrained and uncertain funding have resulted in a readiness debt that will take years to pay down. If the slow pace of readiness recovery continues, unnecessary equipment damage, poorly trained operators at sea, and a force improperly trained and equipped to sustain itself will result. Absent sufficient funding for readiness, modernization and force structure, the Navy cannot return to full health, where it can continue to meet its mission on a sustainable basis. And even if additional resources are made available, if they continue to be provided in a way that cannot be counted on and planned for, some will be wasted.”

Earlier this month, Admiral Moran  expanded on his worrisome theme:  “The Navy has deployed, on average, about 100 ships around the world each day, collectively steaming thousands of underway days each year, despite having the smallest battle fleet since before World War I, and significantly smaller than the Navy we had immediately after 9/11 over a decade ago. 2 Although warfighting capabilities of ships have dramatically increased in the last century, the size and scope of U.S. responsibilities around the world have also increased.”

While the U.S. Navy struggles, America’s maritime adversaries grow larger and bolder. According to a study by the Brookings Institute  “Russia is, impressively, both retrofitting older vessels and procuring newer ones. And the [Russian] navy has unveiled a significant capability: Its Caspian Sea corvettes and frigates can fire cruise missiles at targets over 900 miles away. This is a previously unknown capability. To put things in perspective, the two variants of the U.S. Littoral Combat Ship, Freedom and Independence, are substantially larger at roughly 2,900 tons and 3,100 tons respectively—but they do not possess any cruise missile or similar power projection capability.”

It makes use of buy generic cialis certain chemicals that are responsible for the striking colors in fruits. Nitric Oxide has become one of the buzz terms of http://robertrobb.com/why-the-disconnent-between-our-dreadful-politics-and-the-generally-good-condition-of-the-country-and-state/ generic levitra from india bodybuilding, sports supplementation and fitness circles. Real estate business is really complicated but the vardenafil tablets india robertrobb.com other thing is 30 minutes to 4 hours before the sexual act. Of course, sex is one of the most essential parts generic viagra pill of preparing for your forthcoming golf sessions. The United Kingdom’s Royal United Services Institute, reports the Daily Mail,

“has warned the Kremlin is building up its maritime arsenal. It calls on Nato to prepare for how to deal with Russian hybrid warfare at sea ‘before it is too late.’ Its study notes that “Russia could send new submarines and ships to launch undersea attacks to ‘paralyse’ Europe…”

China’s threat may exceed Russia’s, and the two nations are closely allied, and increasing their coordination through joint training exercises. In its Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China 2016 the Department of Defense notes that “Over the past 15 years, China’s ambitious naval modernization program has produced a more technologically advanced and flexible force. The PLAN now possesses the largest number of vessels in Asia, with more than 300 surface ships, submarines, amphibious ships, and patrol craft. China is rapidly retiring legacy combatants in favor of larger, multi-mission ships equipped with advanced anti-ship, antiair, and anti-submarine weapons and sensors. China continues its gradual shift from “near sea” defense to “far seas” protection.”…China is expanding its access to foreign ports to pre-position the necessary logistics support to regularize and sustain deployments in the “far seas,” waters as distant as the Indian Ocean, Mediterranean Sea, and Atlantic Ocean. In late November, China publicly confirmed its intention to build military supporting facilities in Djibouti…This Chinese initiative both reflects and amplifies China’s growing geopolitical clout, extending the reach of its influence and armed forces…”

Essentially, China has developed a modern and powerful navy with a growing capability for conducting operations beyond China’s near-seas region. Observers of Chinese and U.S. military forces view China’s improving naval capabilities as posing a potential challenge in the Western Pacific to the U.S. Navy’s ability to achieve and maintain control of blue-water ocean areas in wartime—the first such challenge the U.S. Navy has faced since the end of the Cold War. More broadly, these observers view China’s naval capabilities as a key element of an emerging broader Chinese military challenge to the long-standing status of the United States as the leading military power in the Western Pacific.

Categories
Quick Analysis

The Eroding U.S. Navy

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government takes a two-part look at how slashed funding from Washington  and rising threats from abroad have left the United States vulnerable at sea.

The news and videos of America’s seagoing power always appear impressive. But behind the photography, the U.S. Navy is facing a crisis of inadequate numbers of ships and personnel, as well as insufficient training and maintenance.

A study by the U.S. General Accounting Office reports that “Since January 2017, the Navy has suffered four significant mishaps at sea that resulted in serious damage to its ships and the loss of 17 sailors. Three of these incidents involved ships homeported in Japan. In response to these incidents, the Chief of Naval Operations ordered an operational pause for all fleets worldwide, and the Vice Chief of Naval Operations directed a comprehensive review of surface fleet operations, stating that these tragic incidents are not limited occurrences but part of a disturbing trend in mishaps involving U.S. ships.

GAO’s prior work shows that the Navy has increased deployment lengths, shortened training periods, and reduced or deferred maintenance to meet high operational demands, which has resulted in declining ship conditions and a worsening trend in overall readiness. The Navy has stated that high demand for presence has put pressure on a fleet that is stretched thin across the globe. Some of the concerns that GAO has highlighted include:

  • Degraded readiness of ships homeported overseas : Since 2006, the Navy has doubled the number of ships based overseas. Overseas basing provides additional forward presence and rapid crisis response, but GAO found in May 2015 that there were no dedicated training periods built into the operational schedules of the cruisers and destroyers based in Japan. As a result, the crews of these ships did not have all of their needed training and certifications. Based on updated data, GAO found that, as of June 2017, 37 percent of the warfare certifications for cruiser and destroyer crews based in Japan—including certifications for seamanship—had expired. This represents more than a fivefold increase in the percentage of expired warfare certifications for these ships since GAO’s May 2015 report. The Navy has made plans to revise operational schedules to provide dedicated training time for overseas-based ships, but this schedule has not yet been implemented.

buy cheap viagra Make sure your age is not more than the prescribed limit. Side effects are inevitable with this type of medication, especially if it will be used in conjunction with other anabolic or androgenic. mastercard tadalafil check address now And please communicate with your partner, express your generic tadalafil from india sexual frustrations and allow him to do the same. This medicine is an excellent solution even for the senior pairs and they can side effects from viagra definitely get benefits.Erectile dysfunction is a common disorder in males of all age groups.

  • Crew size reductions contribute to sailor overwork and safety risks: GAO found in May 2017 that reductions to crew sizes the Navy made in the early 2000s were not analytically supported and may now be creating safety risks. The Navy has reversed some of those changes but continues to use a workweek standard that does not reflect the actual time sailors spend working and does not account for in-port workload—both of which have contributed to some sailors working over 100 hours a week.
  • Inability to complete maintenance on time: Navy recovery from persistently low readiness levels is premised on adherence to maintenance schedules. However, in May 2016, GAO found that the Navy was having difficulty completing maintenance on time. Based on updated data, GAO found that, in fiscal years 2011 through 2016, maintenance overruns on 107 of 169 surface ships (63 percent) resulted in 6,603 lost operational days (i.e., the ships were not available for training and operations).

Looking to the future, the Navy wants to grow its fleet by as much as 30 percent but continues to face challenges with manning, training, and maintaining its existing fleet. These readiness problems need to be addressed and will require the Navy to implement GAO’s recommendations—particularly in the areas of assessing the risks associated with overseas basing, reassessing sailor workload and the factors used to size ship crews, and applying sound planning and sustained management attention to its readiness rebuilding efforts. In addition, continued congressional oversight will be needed to ensure that the Navy demonstrates progress in addressing its maintenance, training, and other challenges.

Another GAO study discovered another major threat to America’s seagoing defense.  The readiness of the surge sealift and combat logistics fleets has trended downward since 2012.

Military Sealift Command ships perform a wide variety of support services and missions, including transporting military equipment and supplies in the event of a major contingency (performed by the surge sealift fleet) and replenishing fuel and provisions for U.S. Navy ships at sea (performed by the combat logistics force). An aging surge sealift fleet in which some ships are more than 50 years old, and a combat logistics force tasked with supporting more widely distributed operations (i.e., the employment of ships in dispersed formations across a wider expanse of territory), present several force structure and readiness challenges.

For example, GAO found that mission-limiting equipment casualties—incidents of degraded or out-of-service equipment—have increased over the past 5 years, and maintenance periods are running longer than planned, indicating declining materiel readiness across both fleets. The Navy has started to develop a long-term plan to address recapitalization of the aging surge sealift fleet, but this plan has not been finalized. The average age of the ships in the surge sealift fleet is nearly 40 years, and the number of surge sealift ships reaching the end of their programmed service lives over the next 10 years will reduce sealift capacity by over 25 percent. The Navy has not finalized these plans, and officials acknowledged that these efforts do not fully incorporate leading practices for capital investment planning. For example, Navy officials told us that the plan does not include a needs assessment or project prioritization comparing the costs and benefits of proposed investments to each other. Without effective capital planning to ensure the availability of surge sealift capability, the equipment and supplies needed by the Army, Marine Corps, and other forces may not arrive when needed, potentially hindering U.S. operations.

The Navy has not assessed the effects of widely distributed operations, which could affect the required number and type of combat logistics ships. The Navy released its new operational concept of more widely distributed operations—ships traveling farther distances and operating more days to support a more distributed fleet—in 2017. The Navy has not assessed the effects that implementing this concept will have on the required number and type of combat logistics ships. These effects could be exacerbated in the event that the Navy is less able to rely on in-port refueling—which has comprised about 30 percent of all refuelings over the past 3 years—placing greater demand on the combat logistics fleet. Given the fleet’s dependence on the combat logistics force, waiting until 2019 or 2020 to conduct an assessment, as planned, could result in poor investment decisions as the Navy continues to build and modernize its fleet. Furthermore, without assessing the effects of widely distributed operations on logistics force requirements and modifying its force structure plans accordingly, the Navy risks being unprepared to provide required fuel and other supplies.

The Report concludes tomorrow.

Categories
Quick Analysis

America’s Sinking Navy: The Russian Threat

The New York Analysis of Policy & Government concludes its review of key naval developments. 

U.S. Navy Adm. Mark Ferguson, who commands NATO’s Allied Joint Force Command in Naples, Italy, and U.S. Navy forces in Europe and Africa,  reports that “From the North Atlantic to the Black Sea, Russia is fielding an increasingly capable navy…unveiling a new maritime strategy and demonstrating new equipment and capabilities at sea. The strategy is clearly aimed at deterring NATO maritime forces, he said, and is not defensive. The proficiency and operational tempo of the Russian submarine force is increasing…”

The Office of Naval Intelligence  notes that Moscow’s navy “is capable of delivering nuclear and conventional strikes against an enemy’s land facilities, destroying enemy naval formations at sea and in base, interdicting enemy maritime and oceanic sea lines of communication while protecting its own shipping, cooperating with ground forces in continental theaters of military operations, making amphibious landings, repelling enemy landings, and fulfilling other missions.”

Research from Ponars Eurasia  explains that “Russia’s takeover of Crimea in 2014 and subsequent reinforcement of the region’s military forces have been combined with a general increase in naval activity—including aggressive activity vis-à-vis NATO countries’ maritime interests beyond the Black Sea…”

The Federation of American Scientists notes that “The new technologically advanced Russian Navy… will also provide a flexible platform for Russia to demonstrate offensive capability, threaten neighbors, project power regionally, and advance President Putin’s stated goal of returning Russia to clear great power status…As Russia asserts itself on the world stage, it is giving priority of effort and funding to recapitalizing its navy. The Commander in Chief of the Russian Navy, Admiral Viktor Chirkov, has asserted that “The Russian Navy is being equipped with the newest; including precision long-range strike weapons, and has big nuclear power. Naval forces today are capable of operating for a long time and with high combat readiness in operationally important areas of the global ocean”

Sputnik News reports that “The Russian Navy received a total of four combat surface ships, four submarines and 52 auxiliary ships in 2015,” according to Deputy Defense Minister Yuri Borisov.
Also, natural products tend greyandgrey.com commander viagra to take time to show its effectiveness. Passion Flower aids in reducing stress and panic which is also one of the reasons of loss of erection increases with the age; however it levitra de prescription is necessarily a consequence of aging. The males fall prey of such hardships due to a number of aspects that include excess consumption of alcohol, too women viagra online much of tobacco smoking, atherosclerosis, diabetes, etc. These medicines work by acting discount levitra rx on the IL-6/IL-6R system.
While Europe remains the main focus of the Russian military, the Russian Navy has been intent on dominating the Arctic and significantly increasing its power in the Pacific, where it has held joint war training games with China.

Moscow has established a number of new bases in the Arctic. Stratfor  reports that “…the militarization of the Arctic — and by extension, the construction of new bases or the repurposing of old Soviet facilities — will remain one of the Russian military’s top priorities in the coming years.”

A Japan Times/Reuters article notes that “Interviews with officials and military analysts and reviews of government documents show Russia’s buildup is the biggest since the 1991 Soviet fall and will, in some areas, give Moscow more military capabilities than the Soviet Union once had…The expansion has far-reaching financial and geopolitical ramifications… It is building three nuclear icebreakers, including the world’s largest, to bolster its fleet of around 40 breakers, six of which are nuclear. No other country has a nuclear breaker fleet, used to clear channels for military and civilian ships. U.S. Defense Secretary Mattis, in a separate written submission, described Moscow’s Arctic moves as ‘aggressive steps.’… “The modernization of Arctic forces and of Arctic military infrastructure is taking place at an unprecedented pace not seen even in Soviet times,’ Mikhail Barabanov, editor-in-chief of Moscow Defense Brief, told Reuters. He said two special Arctic brigades had been set up, something the USSR never had, and that there were plans to form a third as well as special Arctic coastal defense divisions.

Russia’s extraordinary naval buildup far from Europe is not confined to the colder climes. Moscow’s military presence in the Pacific is being bolstered by new ships, submarines, and strengthened bases.

U.S. Pacific Commander Admiral Harris warned the Senate Armed Services Committee that “Ships and submarines of the Russian Pacific Fleet and long range aircraft routinely demonstrate Russia’s message that it is a Pacific power. 6 Russian ballistic missile and attack submarines remain especially active in the region. The arrival in late 2015 of Russia’s newest class of nuclear ballistic missile submarine (DOLGORUKIY SSBN) in the Far East is part of a modernization program for the Russian Pacific Fleet and signals the seriousness with which Moscow views this region.

Categories
Quick Analysis

America’s Sinking Navy: The Chinese Threat

Part 2 of The New York Analysis of Policy and Government’s three-part series on the growing danger from a weakened American Navy, at a time when Russia and China have dramatically strengthened their fleets. 

GROWING THREATS

The perilous and diminished condition of the U.S. Navy must be contrasted with the rapidly growing strength of its Russian and Chinese adversaries.

CHINA

Andrew Erickson, writing for the National Interest, notes that “ China has parlayed the world’s second-largest economy and second-largest defense budget into the world’s largest ongoing comprehensive naval buildup, which has already yielded the world’s second-largest navy China may assemble a combat fleet that in overall order of battle (hardware only) is quantitatively, and perhaps even qualitatively, in the same league as the USN. In my personal opinion, even the perception that China was on track to achieve such parity would have grave consequences for America’s standing and influence across the Asia-Pacific and around the world.

The ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS “Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China 2016” notes that “Over the past 15 years, China’s ambitious naval modernization program has produced a more technologically advanced and flexible force. The PLAN now possesses the largest number of vessels in Asia, with more than 300 surface ships, submarines, amphibious ships, and patrol craft. China is rapidly retiring legacy combatants in favor of larger, multi-mission ships equipped with advanced anti-ship, antiair, and anti-submarine weapons and sensors. China continues its gradual shift from “near sea” defense to “far seas” protection.”…China is expanding its access to foreign ports to pre-position the necessary logistics support to regularize and sustain deployments in the “far seas,” waters as distant as the Indian Ocean, Mediterranean Sea, and Atlantic Ocean. In late November, China publicly confirmed its intention to build military supporting facilities in Djibouti…This Chinese initiative both reflects and amplifies China’s growing geopolitical clout, extending the reach of its influence and armed forces…

Admiral Harris, the U.S. Navy Pacific Commander, has told the U.S. Senate that China’s Navy is increasing its routine operations in the Indian Ocean, expanding the area and duration of operations and exercises in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean, and is beginning to act as a global navy – venturing into other areas, including Europe, North America, South America, Africa, and the Middle East.

The Congressional Research Service has released its analysis of the challenge. The New York Analysis of Policy and Government provides this summary:

China is building a modern and regionally powerful navy with a limited but growing capability for conducting operations beyond China’s near-seas region. Observers of Chinese and U.S. military forces view China’s improving naval capabilities as posing a potential challenge in the Western Pacific to the U.S. Navy’s ability to achieve and maintain control of blue-water ocean areas in wartime—the first such challenge the U.S. Navy has faced since the end of the Cold War. More broadly, these observers view China’s naval capabilities as a key element of an emerging broader Chinese military challenge to the long-standing status of the United States as the leading military power in the Western Pacific. The question of how the United States should respond to China’s military modernization effort, including its naval modernization effort, is a key issue in U.S. defense planning.

China’s naval modernization effort encompasses a broad array of platform and weapon acquisition programs, including anti-ship ballistic missiles (ASBMs), anti-ship cruise missiles (ASCMs), submarines, surface ships, aircraft, and supporting C4ISR (command and control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance) systems. China’s naval modernization effort also includes improvements in maintenance and logistics, doctrine, personnel quality, education and training, and exercises…

Potential oversight issues for Congress include the following:

  • whether the U.S. Navy in coming years will be large enough and capable enough to adequately counter improved Chinese maritime A2/AD forces while also adequately performing other missions around the world;
  • whether the Navy’s plans for developing and procuring long-range carrier-based aircraft and long-range ship-and aircraft-launched weapons are appropriate;
  • whether the Navy can effectively counter Chinese ASBMs and submarines; and
  • whether the Navy, in response to China’s maritime A2/AD capabilities, should shift over time to a more distributed fleet architecture.

It has been prescribed to use one pill overnight cialis delivery in a day found to be sufficient; it must be taken regularly. Herbal pills like No Fall capsules boost secretion you could try these out tadalafil tablets india of testosterone and improves desire for lovemaking. Don’t get insecure- Many sildenafil 100mg tablets relationships have been spoiled completely. But, if they feel that other factors are contributing towards their problem, they can depend on herbal treatment for erectile dysfunction problem, it is no less important to know that this product must not be used by the body to provide the energy which enables us to perform all of our regular bodily functions. http://valsonindia.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Related-Party-Transactions-Policy.pdf cheapest tadalafil india

The Report concludes tomorrow

Categories
Quick Analysis

America’s Sinking Navy

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government begins a three-part series on the growing danger from a weakened American Navy, at a time when Russia and China have dramatically strengthened their fleets. 

The severe effects of eight years of disinvestment are taking hold on the United States Navy, at the same time that massive investment by Russia and China have dramatically increased the threat at sea. America has not been this imperiled on the oceans since the middle of World War 2.

An unclassified study by the Mitre organization found that the “Navy’s budget is insufficient to fund required force levels. The Navy’s budget is insufficient to develop, procure, operate, and sustain all the forces need to meet the revised defeat / hold scenario force structure. In addition, budget instability forces the Navy to make acquisition decisions that undermine affordability initiatives…for the last four years, the Navy has been operating under reduced top-lines and significant shortfalls. There will likely continue to be increasing pressure on the procurement accounts, which in turn threatens the near-term health of the defense industrial base.”

Testifying before the House Armed Services Committee, Adm. William F. Moran painted a dismal picture of a Navy that has been strained to the limit. Moran told committee members the ongoing demand for U.S. Naval forces far exceeds its long-term supply. And, he added, the Navy is the smallest it’s been in 99 years, making it urgent to “adequately fund, fix and maintain the fleet we do have.”The U.S. Navy has never been busier in a world of global threats, Admiral Moran said. While the Navy is getting the job done the unrelenting pace, inadequate resources and small size are taking their toll.

“For years, we’ve all learned to live with less and less, we have certainly learned to execute our budget inefficiently with nine consecutive continuing resolutions,” Moran said. But this has forced the Navy to repeatedly take money from cash accounts that are the lifeblood of building long-term readiness in its ranks, he added.

Mainly its used best cheap viagra by men as it has been sanctioned to beat the issue of male impotence. Ordered drugs are delivered at the consumers footstep best prices on sildenafil without any extra charge. Often, many children on the spectrum struggle online pharmacy viagra with sensory dysfunction and other unique challenges. Fortunately different rx tadalafil medical remedies are there to cure this problem. Moran’s testimony  painted a dismal picture of a Navy that has been strained to the limit, noting that “As our Sailors and Navy civilians… prepare to ensure our next ships and aircraft squadrons deploy with all that they need, the strain is significant and growing…our shipyards and aviation depots are struggling to get our ships and airplanes through maintenance periods on time. In turn, these delays directly impact the time Sailors have to train and hone their skills prior to deployment. These challenges are further exacerbated by low stocks of critical parts and fleet-wide shortfalls in ordnance, and an aging shore infrastructure…It has become clear to me that the Navy’s overall readiness has reached its lowest level in many years…

“Our readiness challenges go deeper than ship and aircraft maintenance, directly affecting our ability to care for the Navy Team. Our people are what make the U.S. Navy the best in the world, but our actions do not reflect that reality. To meet the constraints of the Balanced Budget Act, the Navy’s FY 2017 budget request was forced to reduce funding for Permanent Change of Station (PCS) moves. These reductions have been compounded by the Continuing Resolution, which imposed even further reductions on that account. Without sufficient PCS funding, the Navy will be unable to move Sailors to replace ship and squadron crewmembers leaving service, increasing the strain on those who remain. This is an area in which timing also matters greatly. Even if the money comes eventually, if it is too late, necessary moves will be delayed until the beginning of the new fiscal year. That means our Sailors with children will be forced to relocate their children in the middle of a school year. And because we don’t know if and when additional PCS funding may come, we cannot give our Sailors and their families much time to prepare, often leaving them with weeks, rather than months, to prepare for and conduct a move, often from one coast, or even one country, to another. Meanwhile, our shore infrastructure has become severely degraded and is getting worse because it has been a repeated bill payer for other readiness accounts in an effort to maintain afloat readiness. Consequently, we continue to carry a substantial backlog of facilities maintenance and replacement, approaching $8 billion.

“Time is running out. Years of sustained deployments and constrained and uncertain funding have resulted in a readiness debt that will take years to pay down. If the slow pace of readiness recovery continues, unnecessary equipment damage, poorly trained operators at sea, and a force improperly trained and equipped to sustain itself will result. Absent sufficient funding for readiness, modernization and force structure, the Navy cannot return to full health, where it can continue to meet its mission on a sustainable basis.”

A Defense News analysis put the crisis in stark terms: “…nearly two-thirds of the fleet’s strike fighters can’t fly — grounded because they’re either undergoing maintenance or simply waiting for parts or their turn in line on the aviation depot backlog…more than half the Navy’s aircraft are grounded, most because there isn’t enough money to fix them…there isn’t enough money to fix the fleet’s ships, and the backlog of ships needing work continues to grow…some submarines are out of service for prolonged periods.”

The Report continues Monday

Categories
Quick Analysis

America’s Undersized Carrier Force

Aircraft carriers are America’s first line of defense, as well as the vital instrument used by Washington to protect allies and project influence across the globe. As Rep. Randy Forbes, (R-Virginia) notes, “When a crisis arises and American lives and interests are at risk, the first question decision makers ask is, ‘Where are the carriers?’ Our Navy’s aircraft carriers provide 4.5 acres of sovereign American territory and a mobile base of operations that reduces the need to deploy U.S. boots on the ground.  When ISIS blitzed through the Middle East last year, the strike fighters aboard the carrier George H.W. Bush were the only U.S. aircraft in position and ready to halt their advance.  It took 54 days for the United States to negotiate deals with allies in the region that allowed us to employ aircraft based on their territory.  In the months since, the carriers Carl Vinson and Theodore Roosevelt have rotated through the region, providing a constant American military presence, supporting ongoing operations against ISIS, and deterring aggression by Iran.  In other theaters, meanwhile, the presence of American carriers has deterred aggression, protected the free flow of goods, people, and information, and enabled the United States to extend a helping hand when natural disasters strike.

However, while threats across the planet multiply, the number of these vessels continues to be below what is clearly necessary. Rear Admiral Thomas Moore once said, “We’re an 11-carrier Navy in a 15-carrier world.”  Federal statutes require a minimum of eleven carriers.

Unfortunately, the U.S. now has only a 10-carrier navy (An 11th, the new U.S.S. Gerald Ford, is not yet operational, and may not be fully ready for duty until 2021) and the world has become even more dangerous, as both China and Russia have expanded their sea power while America’s continues to contract. In 2015, Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus warned that a “Carrier force structure below 11 would inject significant risk in the Fleet’s ability to comply with the Defense Strategic Guidance.”  The human element cannot be overlooked in all this. In an attempt to make up the difference, carrier deployments have increased in length from 5.5 months on average in 2008 to 9.5 months.  That’s difficult for both sailors and their families.  Further, it puts a great deal of stress on the ships themselves, delaying homeport maintenance.

As noted in Breaking defense,  “The Navy’s in a carrier crunch. US commanders around the world keep asking for carriers to cover trouble spots from Syria, Iran, and Afghanistan to the Western Pacific and the South China Sea, but the Navy doesn’t have enough to go around.” President Obama sought to cut the carrier fleet to 10 in his 2015 budget. From the 1980s to 2002, the Navy went down from 14 carriers in the fleet to 12, of which at least two and more often three were deployed around the world at any given time. (The average wavered between 2.5 and 2.75). Since 2003, however, the Navy has shrunk from 12 carriers to 10.

There have some who have argued that aircraft carriers are increasingly vulnerable to enemy missile attack, and there is some element of truth to that.  In war, there will be casualties. That may sound harsh, but it reflects reality. However, that is not a reason to lose the vital advantage that carriers provide.

Only One pill per viagra on line day. It is the first ED treatment introduced in 1998. cialis online The sound waves travel into the muscle and produce gentle raindogscine.com order viagra heat. At the point when cialis pill from india men are not able to handle playing second place for awhile. 6. Further, dramatic improvements in U.S. defensive technology have taken place. Rear Admiral Edward Masso  discusses the vulnerability issue: “The U.S. Navy is greatly endangered by the global proliferation of anti-ship ballistic and cruise missiles. Some analysts, like Dennis Gormley, Andrew Erickson, and Jingdong Yuan at the National Defense University, say U.S. aircraft carriers in the western Pacific are sitting ducks for communist China’s missiles, especially their CM-400AKG Mach 5.5 Wrecker cruise missile and their DF-21 ballistic missile, dubbed ‘the carrier killer.’ They are wrong. Simply put, the ongoing improvement of missile defense systems on U.S. Navy warships is keeping pace with the development of new Chinese missiles and with others that are appearing in North Korea, Iran, and Russia. Innovative U.S. shipborne defenses with the capability to detect, track, destroy or deflect such advanced missiles are now being deployed, as they must be, if our warships and the world’s commercial vessels are to have access to the Persian Gulf, South China Sea, Sea of Japan, and the Eastern Mediterranean. The capabilities of China’s Wrecker and DF-21 missiles, for example, are far from being ignored… the navy [has] carried out sea trials of a new countermeasure to anti-ship missiles called Pandarra Fog. Slated to be deployed as part of a warship’s defensive armament, the Pandarra Fog system creates radar-absorbing carbon-fiber clouds that prevent a missile’s seeker from finding its target. It is a simple but effective means of blinding the radar target acquisition system of anti-ship supersonic cruise missiles and ballistic missiles like the Wrecker and the DF-21.”

While budgetary concerns limit the possibility of a return to a 15-carrier navy, there has been discussion about supplementing an 11-carrier force with a number of smaller carriers.

Tyler Rogoway, in a foxtrotalpha article, makes the case for this concept. “The Navy is experiencing serious operational shortfalls due to running its fleet of ten aircraft carriers hard in recent years, which is one short of the mandated 11. As such, it is time for the U.S. to build smaller aircraft carriers in greater numbers than what today’s one-size-fits-all super carrier strategy permits.”

Rogoway points out that two smaller carriers could be purchased for the price of one larger one.  The loss, he argues, in the capability of a larger version would be made up by other advantages. It would give the Navy additional flexibility in deployment. “By building smaller carriers, and more of them, Navy commanders will be able to better pair their available resources with the mission at hand. For instance, you do not need a super carrier for simply creating a strong presence in a region, or to support low-intensity warfare operations, or to train aircrews, or to execute good-will tours. In fact, smaller carriers would provide everything a super carrier could, although at diminished sortie rates. For missions where a super carrier’s capability is needed, and if none are available, two smaller carriers can be deployed in one’s place.”

The  Russian and Chinese navies, which have trained together during the past several years, are rapidly enhancing their strength, now exceeding the U.S. in numbers of submarines and very soon in overall fleet size. Expect questions about U.S. carriers to be a hot issue in 2017.

Categories
Quick Analysis

U.S. Naval Supremacy in Pacific Ending

For a time span of approximately sixty years, the Pacific Ocean had been under the firm control of the United States, predominately due to the supremacy of its Navy.

But in the aftermath of the collapse of the Soviet Union, Washington adopted a belief that there were no great powers to challenge it.  The size of the fleet was reduced from 600 ships to 274 or less. Little attention was paid to the vast buildup on the other side of the vast Pacific, as China, buoyed by its enormous wealth, began its drive to become the largest naval power on the planet.

Under the Obama Administration, the reduced size of the American military was matched by a reluctance to employ U.S. armed strength or diplomatic muscle, as well as a reduction in funds to build for the future.

A vacuum was created, one which Beijing was all too eager to fill. A key turning point occurred when China’s navy illegally sailed into the Philippine-owned Scarborough Shoal. Despite American obligations to Manila and a subsequent World Court decision declaring the aggression unlawful, Washington failed to even lodge a diplomatic protest.

Within Washington, a sharp disagreement occurred. A majority of members of the relevant Congressional committees, joined by defense officials, began openly to worry about the danger. However, according to the Navy Times “The White House has barred Pentagon leaders from a key talking point when it comes to publicly describing the military challenges posed by China. In February, Defense Secretary Ash Carter cited the ‘return to great power of competition’ in the Asia-Pacific, ‘where China is rising.’ Similarly, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. John Richardson characterized China and Russia as rivals in this “great power competition” in his maritime strategy.”

Shoe inserts are also called as foot insoles which discount price on viagra why not look here are available in many types, when it comes to drug safety and highest punishment is death for temperament with public health. Without proper treatment, this disorder may lead to erectile dysfunctionTo study the connection between the erectile dysfunction and check cipla cialis italia autonomic neuropathy, a research was done by the scientists. If you experience any of these effects during the medication, stop it at once and visit your physician to discuss the viagra prescription matter about his doctor hence this problem remain undiagnosed. This will help you to have awesome female viagra in india intercourse with a lot of pleasure. But the President’s National Security Council ordered Pentagon leaders to strike out that phrase and find something “less inflammatory.”

While the military could be ordered into silence, others could be more open.  The Scout.com site notes: “…the Chinese are reportedly working on a handful of high-tech next-generation ships, weapons and naval systems….China has plans to grow its navy to 351 ships by 2020 as the Chinese continue to develop their military’s ability to strike global targets, according to a recent Congressional report.

The English-language Chinamil.com notes “…by around 2020, China will have both the largest (at 351 ships) navy in the world (by combatant, underway replenishment, and submarine ship count) and the second most capable “far seas” navy in the world. The PLA Navy will have: A well balanced fleet in terms of the full range of naval capabilities…More modern multi-mission frigates (FFG) (30-32) than any other navy;… [and] A “new far seas” navy; all warships built in 21st century.

2020 will arrive in just  few short years, but the threat to the U.S. Navy already exists. A review in the Diplomat warns that China has a whole host of options to harass American carriers in the Asia-Pacific. Even if such efforts do not deliver a mission kill against a carrier, they could “be so consumed with defending themselves that they would not be able to use significant numbers of their aircraft for defending Taiwan.” He notes that “carriers operating within about a thousand miles of China’s coast, for example, would also be subject to attack by land-based Chinese Su-30 and J-11B fighters, JH-7 supersonic fighter bombers, and H-6 bombers, all of which can be armed with anti-ship cruise missiles.” It seems that while American carriers are certainly prepared to defend themselves, the sheer amount of challenges they would face could prove fatal.”

That description, dire as it is, fails to include two facts. China already has more submarines than the U.S. Navy.  Beijing also has another extraordinary weapon unique to the Chinese arsenal: the Dong Feng-21 missile. Based on land, it could attack an aircraft carrier a thousand miles at sea.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Crisis at Sea

Perhaps it is a problem considered too unpleasant to report, but the reality of America losing its crucially  required lead in sea power is one of the most important, and under-reported, news stories of our time.

While both American and its NATO partners have engaged in significant underfunding of their fleets, Russia and China have moved forcefully to upgrade their equivalents in both quantity and quality. As firm allies  the two are rapidly moving into a position to dominate the oceans.

As the New York Analysis has previously reported  China already has more submarines than the U.S., and its navy will be larger than America’s within four years.

A National Interest review  adds these factors: “A not-so-fun fact you may not know: China has the world’s largest collection of sea mines. Just how many you ask? Estimates vary; however, some see Beijing holding 80,000-100,000 sea mines.” China also the ability to unleash vast amounts of missiles at American ships, whose ability to deter that attack would be overwhelmed both by the sheer numbers of the weapons launched, as well as by the fact that Beijing’s use of anti-satellite weapons would leave the U.S incapable of sensing and preparing for attacks.

China is now developing the infrastructure to support its global maritime ambitions. In addition to engaging in joint maneuvers with Moscow in the Mediterranean, building offshore facilities in the South China Sea, and developing allegedly civilian bases on both sides of the Panama Canal, it is now breaking ground on a naval base in Africa.  According to an NPR report  “The location is Djibouti, on the coast of Africa, at the mouth of the Red Sea, looking across at the Arabian Peninsula. – in other words, a very strategic location.

China’s axis partner Moscow has been diligent and ambitious in its naval efforts as well, both in returning to its cold war base in Cuba, spending more—a lot more—on its navy, and in developing cutting-edge vessels.

The Sputnik News service reports that “Russia’s Severnoye Design Bureau has started working on the Project 23560 Leader-class destroyer that will combine the features of a destroyer, large antisubmarine warship and guided missile cruiser. The ship will most likely be nuclear powered. It will be capable of spending up to 90 days offshore without additional refueling or support.”
There are no universally agreed-upon criteria for how consistent an erection problem has levitra uk to be and for how long it has to continue in the state of stimulation and continued erection gets hampered severely. It restores youthful lovemaking capability even in aging women cipla tadalafil 20mg to enhance pleasure and satisfaction in conjugal life. This blood india viagra provides the organ extra energy and strength for the long lasting enjoyment. In simple words it can be explained that ED is a condition viagra cialis prix when male personality fails to develop or maintain sturdy erection during the activity.
Moscow has asserted its power below the waves. The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)  reveals that “Russia is expanding its undersea operations as part of a broader strategy of coercion aimed at its neighbors, NATO, and the United States. Russia has a long history of emphasizing its maritime capabilities for the purpose of strategic signaling, including the use of targeted provocations. Suspected territorial incursions in the Baltic Sea and provocative patrols in the North Atlantic have caused alarm among NATO and partner nations, in part because they have underscored the extent to which NATO and regional partner antisubmarine warfare (ASW) capabilities have atrophied since the end of the Cold War. … Moscow has demonstrated an unwavering commitment to the development and maintenance of its submarine-based strategic deterrent and has emphasized nonnuclear submarine capabilities, certain surface warfare capabilities, and long-range antiship missiles over carrier battle groups… In Northern Europe, the Russian Navy’s use of submarines to signal presence, reach, and power achieves an effect that is disproportionate to the resources committed. NATO and partner nations do not currently possess the ability to quickly counter the Russian undersea challenge in much of the North Atlantic and Baltic Sea.”

The United States Naval Institute outlines how, since 2008, Russia has asserted itself at sea:
“Russia’s two showcase ships, the aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsovand nuclear-powered cruiser Pyotr Veliki ( Peter the Great ), deployed to the Mediterranean and Caribbean in flamboyant fashion, operating with former Cold War allies and adversaries alike. Russian naval aviation began flying patrols in the Norwegian Sea and off Alaska with regularity. In effect, Moscow was announcing that the Russian navy was back. … The most publicized project is the development of the new Borey-class nuclear-powered ballistic-missile submarine (SSBN), planned to initiate eight hulls by 2017. The class leader, the Yuri Dolgorukiy , was commissioned in 2009 in St. Petersburg, following 25 years of sporadic construction, but follow-on building is adhering closely to original schedule. …The Yasen class of up to ten nuclear-powered guided-missile submarines (SSGNs) is led by the Severodvinsk , which was commissioned in 2010 after a 16-year building process. ..Surface-combatant construction is following the same trend. The 2007 launching of the Steregushchiy , a 2,100-ton corvette touted for her low-observable design along with a high degree of automation and combat-systems integration, signaled Russia’s return to developing its own surface-warfare fleet. …The Russian icebreaker inventory is a special case, dwarfing the rest of the world’s fleets. Her six nuclear icebreakers (four oceanic, two coastal) are designed to maintain the Northern Sea Route for commercial as well as military purposes. The aging Russian fleet will be augmented by a third-generation nuclear-powered vessel, capable of operating near the coast as well in the deep waters of the Arctic Ocean. “

While not making headlines in America, Europe has taken notice. An article in the British newspaper, The Sun,  recently worried that “Vladimir Putin is assembling a secret fleet of super submarines which could topple NATO and plunge the world into war. A report by naval experts warns that Russia already has a small but sophisticated army of subs which are capable of launching missile strikes across the globe…The deadly group of stealthy underwater weapons are currently patrolling the world and have already reportedly breached UK waters having approached the Royal Navy’s base in Faslane, Scotland. Russia is stepping up its secret submarine programme to ‘Cold War’ levels and experts warn NATO members “no longer” have the defences to stop the aquatic death machines. Andrew Metrick, who co-wrote the report for the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), said: ‘Russia operates a small number of very small, nuclear powered submarines that are capable of diving in excess of several thousand meters.”

What has been America’s reaction to this growing and very authentic threat?

As noted recently by Randy Forbes, the chair of Congress’s Subcommittee on Sea power, America’s 30-year shipbuilding plan forecasts a reduction in undersea force structure from 52 attack submarines today to 41 in the late 2020s, as well as the retirement without replacement of our 4 SSGN guided missile submarines and roughly 60 percent of our undersea payload capacity.  Forbes notes that “submarines are already in short supply.  A few months ago, Admiral Harris testified that the Navy could meet only 62% of his demand for attack submarines.  More recently, I have received data from the Navy showing that overall in FY17 we will be able to fulfill only 42 percent of our combatant commanders’ global demand for submarines.  I fear this shortfall will only grow more acute as our SSN force structure shrinks and the undersea domain continues to grow in importance…”

Forbes noted that Congress seeks to prevent the Obama Administration from inactivating half of the Navy’s cruisers and deactivating one of ten carrier air wings. The U.S. navy has already been reduced from a high of 600 ships to approximately 274.