
Several factors have figured into this process, building on the high-profile missile attacks in wars from Afghanistan to Libya, plus the longtime role of the Trident ballistic-missile subs as “the backbone of the U.S. nuclear deterrent,” Thompson said.For the future, “as surface ships become more vulnerable to attacks by China and other countries, submarines are becoming the preferred way of controlling sea lanes and attacking targets ashore.”
For one, the stealthy Virginia-class attack subs — a far more cost-effective successor to the Seawolf — “can collect intelligence where other intelligence systems wouldn’t work,” Thompson said. “Whether it’s tracking Chinese submarines or intercepting electronic transmissions in Libya or putting people ashore to fight terrorists, there’s a huge role for submarines that cannot be fully understood by people who don’t have top security clearances.”
I continue to read opinions that the US Navy needs to be thinking about conventionally powered submarines. I do not agree. What the US Navy needs to get right is unmanned underwater vehicles including the MIW and ASW modules for the LCS, because unmanned vehicles should one day help take on these roles of submarines - indeed will significantly enhance the ability of submarines in the future to carry out these critical roles.
If the US Navy can get unmanned underwater systems right, and specifically the energy and communications aspects of unmanned underwater systems right - the Navy can reduce the total number of submarines and still be much, much more capable than an enemy force with 3-4 times as many submarines.
It is a lousy answer, but Loren Thompson is right when he says "there’s a huge role for submarines that cannot be fully understood by people who don’t have top security clearances." However, the Navy can do a lot more to explain the value of submarines without having to dive into a full explanation, because the Navy really only needs to discuss just enough to inspire imaginations.
No comments:
Post a Comment