Extend sub deployments? What could go wrong?
Found this at washingtonexaminer.com, my comments within the article are in bold:
Navy explores longer sub deployments
By: MICHAEL MELIA
The Navy is considering lengthening the standard deployment of attack submarines beyond six months as it faces rising demands with a fleet that has been shrinking since the end of the Cold War, the commander of American submarine forces told The Associated Press in an interview.
Already, attack submarines are at times asked to stay out longer than six months — extensions that can be trying for sailors who serve in tightly confined spaces with limited outside communication as members of the "silent service."
Vice Adm. John Richardson told the AP this week that keeping subs out longer is one of several options the Navy is considering as the number of attack subs is projected to continue dropping in the next decade and beyond. Older boats seeing more use, that'll mean more equipment failures at the worst possible times. Lovely, just stinking lovely.
"I think we're looking at all the options," he said. "As you try and maintain the same presence with fewer hulls, there are all sorts of variables in that equation. One would be extending deployment lengths. So that's certainly on the table."
Submariners are not alone in seeing deployments extended periodically, as two wars and evolving threats strain the entire U.S. military. A spokeswoman for the admiral, Navy Cmdr. Monica Rousselow, said it is impossible to say how long sub deployments might become because so many factors are involved. To my successors in the sub force: BOHICA shipmates!
Extending deployments permanently would save resources because the Navy could complete more missions with the nuclear-powered submarines that it has available. The fast-attack subs travel to far-flung corners of the globe for missions including intelligence gathering and firing missiles, but they can maintain a presence only for so long before making the time-consuming journey back to U.S. bases. The real restriction is the crew, running out of food will get the attention of most people. Those boats ARE tight as far as space goes, you just can't dump an extra couple of months of groceries down the hatch and walk away thinking, "They'll figure a way to store it".
Navy contractors began stepping up submarine production this year, but pressure on the defense budget has raised uncertainty about future procurement. While some critics describe the multibillion-dollar vessels as costly relics of a different era, Richardson says submarines remain integral to America's nuclear deterrence strategy and the security of a nation that conducts the vast majority of its trade by maritime channels. They perform a host of other missions also. For a glimpse of what a boat's capabilities can include I recommend reading "Blind Man's Bluff" by Sontag and Drew.
Enlisted crew members on the attack subs sleep six to a room, stacked in bunks areas barely larger than a closet, and navigate corridors so narrow only one person can pass at a time. That would be if they're lucky enough to have their own rack(bunk). The Los Angeles class of subs were initially designed for more crewmembers than could be accomodated by assigning each sailor his individual rack. So the practice of "hotbunking" was used.The deployments are typically broken up by port calls, but they can remain at sea for weeks or months at a time. The bigger, roomier ballistic missile subs generally stay closer to their home ports and have shorter deployments.
Sailors in the elite, all-volunteer submarine force go through psychological screening to make sure they can cope with the tight quarters and extended time beneath the ocean's surface. Nobody with claustrophobic tendencies is allowed on board.
But retired submariners say the time at sea does take a physical and emotional toll, particularly when a mission is suddenly extended.
"You establish a battle rhythm in your mind where 'Six months is how long I'll be' and then, if it becomes seven months, you have to shift your mind a bit," said retired Rear Adm. John Padgett III, who remembers a particularly grueling 7 1/2-month submarine deployment during the Vietnam War. "You get a little tired of it."
Deployments longer than six months are unlikely to cause problems for specially trained sailors, but they would probably entail challenges for their families, said Army Col. Tom Kolditz, a psychologist at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. DUH!! Then the problems the wives & kids are having come back on those same sailors, this guy talks like an idiot. But wait a minute, we can always go back to the mindset of "If the Navy thought you needed a wife, they'd have issued one in your seabag". Yeah, that'll do wonders for retention.
"You can probably find business decisions in the community based on that six-month cycle. You can find various kinds of financial planning done on that six-month cycle. If you take something like that that people are used to and change it, it can create problems," said Kolditz, director of the military academy's Department of Behavioral Sciences and Leadership.
At Naval Submarine Base New London in Groton, support services are available to help sailors' families deal with prolonged deployments, said Beth Darius, a services facilitator for the base's Fleet and Family Support Center.
"We honestly try to tell them, 'Yes, you have a fixed date, but remember that date can always change,'" she said. "We try to help them not cement that date, but I personally know how easy it is to get that date and count down, and then have it change on you." The divorce rate in the sub force is just a bit high. This is coming from a guy who went through Connecticut courts twice for that experience while in the canoe club. I'm a slow learner, shoot me.
Richardson said in the interview Wednesday that constraints on communication are part of the nature of submarining, but that the Navy is working to improve bandwidth on the vessels. He said sailors will be able to communicate with family members more than ever, although e-mail will remain available only when it can be sent without the risk of giving up the sub's location.
Beyond the strain on sailors and their families, U.S. Rep. Joe Courtney said, the longer deployments reflect an increasingly acute security problem. Although Navy contractors received approval this year to double production of Virginia-class attack subs to two a year, he said that will only slow the decline in the size of the fleet and will not fully replace older ships as they are taken out of commission.
The number of nuclear-powered attack submarines in the U.S. force has fallen from a peak of 98 in the late 1980s to 53 at the end of fiscal year 2010, a decline that roughly matches a drop in the overall size of the Navy since the end of the Cold War. Each Virginia-class attack submarine costs about $2.6 billion and carries a crew of roughly 135 officers and sailors.
Courtney, who is pushing for an increase in attack sub procurement, said they are unmatched in their ability to deliver firepower and do surveillance without being detected. THAT is a fact, been there and done that. Nope, can't talk about it.
"Look at Libya. When President Obama said 'unique capabilities,' what he was really referring to was the USS Scranton, the Providence and the Florida, which in a matter of an hour obliterated Gadhafi's air defenses," said Courtney, a Democrat whose eastern Connecticut district includes the sub base and the Groton headquarters of the Navy's primary submarine contractor, General Dynamics' Electric Boat.
Currently, the submarine force can accommodate only about half the support requests from combatant commanders, according to Richardson, who said sub deployments are currently extended a month or more to meet demands on a case-by-case basis. He noted that surface ships also face extended deployments, as all branches of the military contend with increased demands.
As the Navy deals with rising security demands and budget pressures, he said, the force is also looking into repositioning submarines around the globe to reduce transit times and pressing builders to reduce maintenance periods and wring more deployments from aging vessels.
(End of story, my comments follow)
So the Powers That Be recently opened up the sub force to women, they've also scuttled DADT and will soon be actively recruiting flamboyant gays into the military (if you think that statement is a bit drastic, you don't know our military and the kind of assholes in charge in Washington).
Now they're looking at increasing the length of deployments. Yes, I know it's happening in the surface navy as well as the other armed forces of our nation. My chosen screen name is SUBvet for a reason. Check the profile if you're still puzzled.
Gee, what could possibly go wrong?
Plenty.
Eddie and Freddie go to sea aboard the USETAFISH, Eddie hooks up with Suzy Creamcheese who is the boats newest recruit. Suzy and Eddie slap bellies whenever they think they're alone (the photos the roving watch takes of them will go on sale a week after returning to homeport). Suzy dumps Eddie halfway through the deployment and starts banging Freddie (that roving watch loves it, they're making him rich).
Eddie cops an attitude, during one field day he clobbers Freddie. They both go talk to the "old man" (Captain). He discovers Suzy's involvement in this and transfers her skanky ass back to homeport. She promptly files a sexual discrimination complaint against the command (Eddie and Freddie weren't transferred, she was.Therefore she was inappropriately reprimanded, or so the complaint goes). The squadron sends out Lt. Lana, the lesbian JAG (Judge Advocate General) officer, to investigate the onboard climate of USETAFISH in order to determine if there's a problem with discrimination.
Lt. Lana interviews Mona Mattressback who just got denied promotion (if she studied for the test, she'd probably pass). Mona sees the Lt. Lana is a manhater from Jump Street and plays it up, citing numerous incidents where her LCPO (leading chief petty officer) made inappropriate comments to her. In private. No other witnesses cited. The good JAG officer knows she has a case and pursues it. To make a long story short, after the local fishwrap back home gets the story, the officers and crew of the good ship USETAFISH are crucified by the squadron commodore in order to show that "something has been done".
Then we can add in the zip of extending the deployments of the boat because, as a newer craft, it doesn't break down as often as the dinosaurs of the squadron do.
The crew gets the big flick, if you stick around you're screwed by either spending life at sea or by being dragged across the coals for PC purposes. Time to hit the highway by faking claustrophobia (very easy to do) and spending your remaining days in the canoe club aboard a tender (repair ship) that is basically welded to the pier and hardly ever gets underway.
I haven't even factored in a gay sailor or two actually in the crew, this post is already overly long.
Yep, we'll maintain an elite force under these conditions. Sure we will.
When pigs fly.
8 comments:
Exactly right, Senior Chief! One point may benefit from slight elaboration, however.
When the 30% extra medical attention required by women crew (remember Navy dentists pulled out 4 of our perfectly healthy wisdom teeth to avoid similar medical neccessities) interferes with a vital mission, the excuse will rarely be female medical need. You mentioned what it will be above.
Annapolis grad COs, etc. will find a mechanical reason (the way our Beritish allies have been doing for years now) to delay or abort
the undisclosed missions. You already predicted "equipment failures at the worst possible times".
Stuff that resourceful sub sailors used to fix at sea (already a diminishing category) will be further eroded by political necessity. You and I will see such phony equipment failures blamed for
unplanned port visits.
Watch and sea, SubVet.
This is bad for subs. It will have a knock on effect on Marines, Surface Ships and Army Campaigns, because we all need the subs to keep the ships safe while they form the back bone of America's famous sustainability in long term operations--and this will all be so some whining sodomites and feminists can have it their way.
I am a graduate of the Recondo School, which was closed when they were forced to take female students. It seems they whined about "sexual harassment" and "abusive atmosphere", especially in the SERE component. (Where they bread resentment because they were treated with Kid Gloves compared to the males.)Also, most of them could not, under the pt standards used for females, maintain the physical load of the course, and so failed in disproportionate numbers. The end result was an excellent school, with a rigorous POI that resulted in line units being levened with -3 through 5s who were highly trained in raids, recon, ambush, demoitions and evasion loosing that asset, because they D/A was concerned about Congress and Federal Discrimination Suits.
sing me:
One Appalled SSG, USA (Ret)
Excellent article "SubVet"!! Good read! I hadn't heard the terms "BOHICA", Hot-Bunking" and "The Navy issueing you a wife with your Seabag" in many a year.
"The real restriction is the crew, running out of food will get the attention of most people. Those boats ARE tight as far as space goes, you just can't dump an extra couple of months of groceries down the hatch and walk away thinking, 'They'll figure a way to store it.'"
LOL! And you can't get Pizza Hut delivery out in the North Atlantic!
"'You can probably find business decisions in the community based on that six-month cycle. You can find various kinds of financial planning done on that six-month cycle. If you take something like that that people are used to and change it, it can create problems,' said Kolditz, director of the military academy's Department of Behavioral Sciences and Leadership."
Boy, can't catch these guys napping, can you? Chock-full of penetrating insights.
Not the kind of thing you can do to any other kind of worker who picks up a government paycheck. Whenever the government tries to tighten its belt, it's the military that feels the squeeze first and foremost.
Vigilis, I've no doubt those "equipment failures" of both a real and imagined nature will happen. During the Carter years we saw some skippers of the surface navy who said "ENOUGH" and refused to deploy when to do so endangered the ship & crew. We can expect more of the same from the boats.
IR, amen to all of that. But the PC chair polishers in Foggy Bottom could really care less. We're screwed and no doubt of it.
Cookie, glad to bring back so many memories!
Anthony, nope to both Pizza Hut and Domino's. As for the professional chair polisher who made that highly insightful comment regarding the local business community, ya can't sneak any baby elephants past him!
Yes, the ones to take it in the shorts first are always the military.
Post a Comment