Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Former Miss. governor nominated for Navy post

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
The Straight Story Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-28-09 11:31 AM
Original message
Former Miss. governor nominated for Navy post
Former Miss. governor nominated for Navy post
March 28, 2009


JACKSON, Miss. - President Obama yesterday nominated former Mississippi governor Ray Mabus to be secretary of the Navy.

Mabus, 60, campaigned extensively for Obama last year. He had been previously talked about as a candidate for a place in Obama's Cabinet as secretary of education.

A Democrat, Mabus was governor of Mississippi from January 1988 to January 1992 and also served as US ambassador to Saudi Arabia from 1994 to 1996 under President Bill Clinton. Mabus served in the Navy from 1970 to 1972 as a surface warfare officer on the Newport, R.I.-based USS Little Rock. Before then, he was in the Naval ROTC while he was an undergraduate student at the University of Mississippi.

Obama also nominated former pilots' union chief Randy Babbitt to head the Federal Aviation Administration. Babbitt, a consultant who led the Air Line Pilots Association in the 1990s, would become the top safety regulator of passenger and cargo airlines.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2009/03/28/former_miss_governor_nominated_for_navy_post/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Optical.Catalyst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-28-09 12:22 PM
Response to Original message
1. The first thing Ray Mabus needs to do is complete evaluation of Naval ship procurement
The Navy does not need any more nuclear powered submarines. The Navy does not need the DDG-1000 Zumwalt destroyers. The Navy could probably go a full decade without laying down another nuclear powered aircraft carrier.

The acquisition of the Littoral Combat Ship has been left in a shambles by the Bush Administration, and will take years and many millions of dollars to fix. Under the watchful eye of chimpy's SecNav, Mr. Winter, every ship building program went behind schedule and over budget. Not by just a little, but by orders of magnitude.

We don't even need the overpriced, oversold, behind schedule, and under performing F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The F/A-18 is still in production and can serve our needs for the next 20 years if we keep making improvement to the basic air frame.

The Military Industrial Complex needs to be halted, and brought under control before they suck up every available dollar in the budget.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NutmegYankee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-28-09 03:48 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Why does the Navy not need attack Submarines?
The current ones are being constantly deployed on missions and the 688 Class submarines that are doing most of those missions are being decommissioned at a rate of almost 3 per year. Even with the building of 2 Virginia Class Attack submarines a year, the number of submarines in the US navy will fall by half, well below the navies of other countries around the world. The Seawolf Class was canceled because it was expensive and a Cold War design, which was a good decision but put back the replacement for the 688 Class. Virginia Class was designed for Post-Cold war missions like littoral warfare and asymmetric warfare just like what we are engaged in today, and is the intended replacement for the 688 Class submarines. The Navy maintains that they need them for these missions.

And forget what you saw in some movie, that was Hollywood, not a documentary on what submarines do. The problem with the Silent Service is it tends to not speak up when attacked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Optical.Catalyst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-28-09 04:49 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. I'm sure Osama bin Laden is duly impressed every time he sees a periscope go past his hideout
Fast attack submarine mission? They don't have any mission.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NutmegYankee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-28-09 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. I find your ignorance amusing.
There are other missions out there, but hey, why not just be ignorant instead?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Optical.Catalyst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-29-09 05:55 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Missions against the Russians maybe?
The Russian submarine crews have a grueling training regime that requires them to go on a cruise once a year.

The Russians can't even put a submarine they intend to sell to India through sea trials.



Russian nuclear submarine accident leaves 20 dead

By Adrian Blomfield in Moscow
Last Updated: 5:18AM GMT 10 Nov 2008
The reputation of Russia's accident-prone navy has suffered a major blow after it was forced to admit that 20 sailors and technicians on a nuclear submarine died after inhaling poisonous gas.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/3411831/Russian-nuclear-submarine-accident-leaves-20-dead.html


Most submarines our adversaries are fielding today are small diesel-electric models that operate near the coasts in shallow (Littoral) water. SUBROC missiles don't work in shallow water near the coast. MK-48 ADCAP torpedoes will not arm in shallow water. The ADCAP torpedo is in shallow water at 500 feet (how much of the Persian Gulf is greater than 500 feet deep?)

What other mission could a fast attack do? Spying? It is cheaper and quicker to use satellites and Predator drones these days.

What have been the major uses of submarines in combat recently?
General Belgrano sinking after being torpedoed by HMS Conqueror? That was a needless loss of life by sinking a ship that was of no military significance to the operation.
The Kursk, which killed 118 submariners? Oh wait, they sank themselves and they were those highly skilled Russians.
The USS Hartford's attempted sinking of the USS New Orleans? Oh wait, we did that to ourselves, in Littoral waters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NutmegYankee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-29-09 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. The torpedoes work in shallow water -
Part of the Cold War era was hunting Subs under the Arctic ice, which is shallow water in many places. You can still torpedo a ship from periscope depth also. In addition, Satellites cannot remain on station 24/7, and UAVs are restricted by airspace and radar.


As the US Navy puts it - http://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?cid=4100&tid=100&ct=4

With the number of foreign diesel-electric / air-independent propulsion submarines increasing yearly, the United States submarine force relies on its technological superiority and the speed, endurance, mobility, stealth, and payload afforded by nuclear power to retain its preeminence in the undersea battlespace.

There are three classes of SSNs now in service. Los Angeles (SSN 688) class submarines are the backbone of the submarine force with 45 now in commission. Thirty-one Los Angeles class are equipped with 12 Vertical Launch System tubes for firing Tomahawk cruise missiles.

The Navy also has three Seawolf class submarines. Commissioned on July 19, 1997, USS Seawolf (SSN 21) is exceptionally quiet, fast, well armed, and equipped with advanced sensors. Though lacking Vertical Launch Systems, the Seawolf class has eight torpedo tubes, which can also fire Tomahawks, and can hold up to 50 weapons in its torpedo room. The third ship of the class, USS Jimmy Carter (SSN 23), has a 100-foot hull extension called the multi-mission platform. This hull section provides for additional payload to accommodate advanced technology used to carry out classified research and development and for enhanced warfighting capabilities.

The Navy is now building the next-generation SSN, the Virginia (SSN 774) class. The Virginia class is tailored to excel in a wide range of warfighting missions. These include anti-submarine and surface ship warfare; special operation forces; strike; intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance; carrier and expeditionary strike group support; and mine warfare. The Virginia class has several innovations that significantly enhance their warfighting capabilities with an emphasis on littoral operations. Virginia class boats have a fly-by-wire ship control system that provides improved shallow-water ship handling. The class has special features to support special operation forces. The torpedo room can be reconfigured to house a large number of special operation forces and all their equipment for prolonged deployments and future off-board payloads. The class also has large lock-in / lock-out chamber for divers. In Virginia class boats, traditional periscopes have been supplanted by two Photonics Masts that house color, high-resolution black and white, and infrared digital cameras atop telescoping arms. With the removal of the barrel periscopes, the ships’ control room has been moved down one deck and away from the hull’s curvature, affording it more room and an improved layout that provides the commanding officer with enhanced situational awareness. Additionally, through the extensive use of modular construction, open architecture, and commercial off-the-shelf components, the Virginia class is designed to remain state of the practice for its entire operational life through the rapid introduction of new systems and payloads.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThomWV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-29-09 12:44 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. Who are they supposed to attack and aren't guided missiles cheaper?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NutmegYankee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-29-09 01:05 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. They are armed with cruise missiles for land attack.
Sea attack is quicker with a torpedo.

http://www.sublant.navy.mil/html/virginia.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 09:09 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC