Comments

You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name

Your e-mail (optional)

Website (optional)

	My Original Nic Pic-a-Nic Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Foto

Submit your comments on this article

-Obits-

Pentagon To Retire USS Truman Early, Shrinking Carrier Fleet To 10

2019-02-28

[Breaking Defense] The move could save more than $30 billion over 25 years -- but Congress is sure to explode in outrage.

Amidst rising anxiety over whether the US Navy’s thousand-foot-long flagships could evade Chinese missiles in a future war, the Pentagon has decided to cut the aircraft carrier fleet from 11 today to 10.

By retiring the Nimitz-class supercarrier USS Truman at least two decades early, rather than refueling its nuclear reactor core in 2024 as planned, the military would save tens of billions on overhaul and operations costs that it could invest in other priorities. But the proposal, part of the 2020-2024 budget plan due out mid-March, is sure to inspire outrage on Capitol Hill.

“I can’t imagine this will go over well at all,” one Hill staffer told me. We’re pressing congressional leaders for official responses, but the Pentagon decision seems to have blindsided them entirely. Navy officials have declined to comment on the forthcoming budget.

Posted by:3dc

#11 Hmmm, carriers that run on fracked natural gas. perhaps even the launch system. If we could run a ship on bull poop Washington DC could keep us going for several centuries.

Posted by: Snavimble Bucket1794 2019-02-28 21:33

#10 Somebody found a buyer.

Posted by: Tarzan Hatfield9100 2019-02-28 17:30

#9 We had 12 carriers recently and now it is 10. Are we going to shrink the number of Flag Officers by 16% ??

Posted by: magpie 2019-02-28 16:37

#8 Keep the Truman, retire the Ford and all the Ford class what with the unworkable Jetson launch system and all the other high teckky gee whizzy but unuseable in the real world toys ( despite what the consultants say)

And while you are at it congress; look into how good the new medical program Genisis is working. Go on, I dare ya.

Posted by: USN, Ret. 2019-02-28 15:55

#7 Our carrier fleet is designed to secure the entire world, if we no longer intend to do that we should scale back. Drop even one carrier and you no longer need the carrier fleet that supports it.

Posted by: rjschwarz 2019-02-28 14:40

#6 Carriers have had a great run, and continue to be relevant now, but in 30-50 yrs, they'll probably be too risky and expensive. intermediate/long range missiles will make huge advances, drone-ish techs will have made huge advances, etc.

Posted by: Yosemite Sam 2019-02-28 11:57

#5 What percentage of the world's population is within 200 miles of the coastline? If you need a sustained aerial campaign and no local SOF Agreement then -- carriers. The smaller ships and submarines will quickly run out of cruise missiles and the Air Force has only so many tankers for long missions...

What Is worrisome is that the US Navy seems to be building fewer and fewer of the smaller vessels that would be needed to screen these ships and do all of the other odd jobs. Flash back to the Age of Sail where the navies never seemed to have wnough frigates!

Posted by: magpie 2019-02-28 11:06

#4 Don't need a Mother-May-I SOF agreement with the oceans.

Posted by: Procopius2k 2019-02-28 09:42

#3 Carriers are becoming obsolete fast. Nobody inside or outside the Navy wants to admit it.

Posted by: M. Murcek 2019-02-28 07:53

#2 I'd be more concerned about running low on qualified personnel to man them all, given all the 'issues' we've had lately.

Posted by: Procopius2k 2019-02-28 07:11

#1 ...Word from the herd is that this one is an absolute non-starter and at best is a fairly clumsy tactic to get Congress to cough up a few extra bucks...not to mention that as a practical matter, it leaves us with nine carriers through most of the 2020s and 2030s.

Mike

Posted by: Mike Kozlowski 2019-02-28 04:24

00:00