What Clinton has done to our military is, in my opinion, yet
another scandal.
CommentMax
Analysis: Navy Vulnerable to Cruise Missles
by
Christopher W. Holton Wednesday, July 19, 2000
The General Accounting Office has released a report concluding
that our Navy is growing more vulnerable every day to anti-ship
cruise missile attacks. The July 11 report, "Comprehensive
Strategy Needed to Improve Ship Cruise Missile Defenses," surely
comes as no surprise to anyone familiar with defense and maritime
issues.
It doesn�t take a rocket scientist to understand this
vulnerability, and the GAO�s 58-page report could probably have
been written in five pages or less by anyone who has served in
the U.S. Navy over the past decade.
Seven Years of Downsizing and Neglect, or, 'Sorry, Paul, Peter Is
Out of Money'
During the years of the Clinton administration, the U.S.
fleet�s ability to defend itself against anti-ship cruise
missiles has been frozen in time in some aspects and degraded in
other aspects. During this seven-year period, not one new weapon
system has been added to the inventory to defend against cruise
missile attack.
Sure, a few systems that were developed and ordered during the
Reagan and Bush administrations came on line during the early
Clinton years (AEGIS Vertical Launch System, Rolling Airframe
Missile, or RAM), but no new items have been added in seven
years.
Meanwhile, the threat has been growing.
Cruise Missiles: The Forgotten Threat
When the Royal Navy�s HMS Sheffield and the U.S. Navy�s U.S.S.
Stark were struck with Exocet cruise missiles in the 1980s, there
was a high degree of awareness of the anti-ship missile threat.
Today, the focus has shifted to the dangerous ballistic missile
threat.
But proliferation of cruise missiles is a serious threat also.
Here is a list of some of the countries that have armed
themselves with modern anti-ship missiles:
Iran Iraq Red China North Korea Russia Libya Cuba And the cruise
missiles are getting faster and harder to hit. According to
Great Britain�s authoritative Center for Defense and
International Security Studies (CDISS), Russia, Red China and
Iran are all believed to possess Russia�s Sunburn anti-ship
missile, with its large payload (1,000 pounds or more) and Mach
2.5 speed (1,650 mph) at just above sea level.
This threat is in another world from the Exocet that struck the
Sheffield in 1983, which carried a 250-pound warhead at a speed
of 500 mph.
With these three countries in possession of such a weapon, you
can be sure that countries such as North Korea, Iraq and Libya
will start asking for the same thing. All they need to get the
Sunburn is money.
There are more countries with more anti-ship cruise missiles
around the world in 2000. Meanwhile, the U.S. Navy�s ability to
defend itself against this threat was arguably greater back in
1991, before Bill Clinton got elected, than it is today.
Defense in Depth
The U.S. Navy�s strategy for defense against anti-ship missiles
has always been based on "defense in depth." That defense in
depth was composed of five rings:
The first ring was manned by the E-2C Hawkeye Airborne Early
Warning and Control (AEW&C) aircraft operating in tandem with the
F-14 Tomcat armed with AIM-54C Phoenix air-to-air missiles.
The E-2C, operating 100 miles or so from the carrier battle
group, can detect threats out another 200-300 miles at altitudes
from near sea level all the way to 100,000 feet. The E-2 can
detect aircraft and ships long before they get close enough to
the carrier to launch a missile (anti-ship missiles have ranges
up to about 185 miles).
It can also detect missiles launched from submerged submarines,
after the missile breaks the surface. This information is
transferred to the F-14 Tomcat. The Tomcat�s powerful radar can
track 24 targets simultaneously and guide Phoenix missiles to six
of them (the last 10 miles or so, the Phoenix guides itself with
its own radar). The Phoenix is big enough to knock a strategic
bomber out of the sky and smart enough and fast enough to knock a
Sunburn down.
The first ring is aging and close to becoming extinct. The E-2C
has been around since the early 1980s. It has received some
upgrades, but its radar and systems are still basically the same.
Potential adversaries have had 20 years to study the E-2C and
develop ways to get around it. The F-14 Tomcat is one of the
tragic stories of naval aviation. Its latest version, the F-14D,
is arguably the world's best fighter, but budget considerations
and politics ensured that few of these were built. The majority
of Tomcats in service are carrying the same radar and missiles
they carried 20 years ago.
Worse yet, the Tomcat�s numbers are shrinking. Fifteen years
ago, each carrier air wing included 24 F-14s. Today�s carrier
air wing has just 10. And those 10 are overworked on other
tasks, namely night attack and photo reconnaissance.
The Tomcat has to perform in the attack role because the Navy
gave up its only dedicated all-weather, night attack aircraft,
the A-6 Intruder, several years ago, without a replacement. The
Fleet Air Defense role has been handed over to the F/A-18 Hornet,
a great dogfighter with very limited range and no long-range
missile like the Phoenix. (The F-18 enjoys the unique advantage
of being built in the district of Rep. Richard Gephardt, D-Mo.
The F-14 could not compete with that.)
Speaking of the Phoenix, its numbers are also dwindling. The
decision was made a few years back to stop production and cancel
upgrades. Once again, our naval aviators are tasked with
defending themselves against emerging threats using decade-old
technology.
The second ring consists of the very capable AEGIS missile
defense system on board the Ticonderoga-class cruisers and the
Arleigh Burke-class destroyers.
First envisioned during the Ford administration, the AEGIS can
protect a task force for hundreds of miles from the center of the
group. This ring is the only ring still intact, but AEGIS ships
are expensive and thus not numerous. Should a submarine sink an
AEGIS-armed escort, the task force that escort is supposed to
protect will suddenly be very naked. The Navy has a lot of eggs
in one basket here.
The third ring consists of the surface ships� own self-defense
missiles, usually the NATO Sea Sparrow, sometimes called the
Improved Basic Point Defense Missile System (IBPDMS).
The Sea Sparrow has a range of up to six miles, but, as the GAO
points out, its operational readiness is poor. In other words,
the IBPDMS doesn�t work about as much as it works. It is a
relatively old system, designed in the late 1970s. Budgetary
considerations have delayed upgrades and extended deployments
have overtaxed maintenance schedules.
The fourth ring is made up of different electronic
countermeasures, such as the SLQ-32 electronic warfare system and
the Super RBOC (Rapid Bloom Onboard Chaff).
The SLQ-32 is designed to confuse incoming missiles, but, once
again, as the GAO reports, its operational availability is low.
Once again, it is a 20-year-old system that has not been
upgraded, and deployment schedules during the Clinton
administration that have gone far beyond anyone�s wildest
imagination have resulted in maintenance shortfalls.
The Super RBOC is a system that shoots "chaff" (metal strips)
into the sky to decoy missile radar. It�s been around since the
1980s also.
The fifth and final ring consists of the "last ditch" weapons:
the Vulcan/Phalanx Close In Weapon System (CIWS) and the Rolling
Airframe Missile (RAM).
The CIWS is a radar-directed, six-barrel 20mm gun with a rate of
fire of 4,000 rounds a minute. It is an effective weapon, but,
once again, it is a 20-year-old design, and it too has suffered
from the Navy�s high operational tempo and resulting maintenance
problems.
The RAM is the newest defensive weapon in the arsenal.
Developed in cooperation with the West German Navy in the 1980s,
the RAM entered production in early 1993 and has performed
brilliantly in tests. However, its 21-tube launcher has only been
installed on a small number (27) of the Navy�s ships.
Conclusion: Seven Years of Neglect Have Left Our Sailors and
Marines in Danger
Today, rogue nations including Red China possess anti-ship
missile capabilities that far exceed the threat that existed in
the late 1980s. Meanwhile, the U.S. Navy�s ability to defend
itself against these threats is less today than it was in 1990.
The Clinton-Gore administration has been asleep at the wheel.
Not only have potential adversaries such as China benefited from
technology transfers from the United States, they have enjoyed a
"grace" period in which they were able to exponentially increase
their capabilities with no corresponding increases in defense
capability in the United Stateszq.
The Navy is almost totally dependent on the AEGIS defense system.
Defense in depth has become eroded. One of the five rings of
defense has been allowed to die on the vine. Three of the others
are withering.
Those who will pay the price for this neglect do not reside in
Washington, D.C. They live and work on board our Navy�s ships.
They are the young men and women we ask to do that which no one
else is willing to do: defend our country and our way of life.
***
Christopher Holton is the president of Blanchard and Company and
has been writing about geopolitical issues, economics and defense
topics for more than 10 years. He can be reached at
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
=================================================================
Kadosh, Kadosh, Kadosh, YHVH, TZEVAOT
FROM THE DESK OF: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
*Mike Spitzer* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
~~~~~~~~ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The Best Way To Destroy Enemies Is To Change Them To Friends
Shalom, A Salaam Aleikum, and to all, A Good Day.
=================================================================
<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
<A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
