Navy’s financial pivot to Pacific

Navy’s financial pivot to Pacific

As their service turns 237 years old, U.S. Navy leaders can walk the Pentagon’s halls with a different sense of confidence than their sister services as the dark cloud of severe cuts to planned defense spending hover on the horizon.

Ever since the Obama administration released the new defense strategy featuring a pivot out of the Middle East and toward the Pacific, the Navy has known it will have a special ace in the hole when it comes to reigning in defense spending that has ballooned the past ten years to fight two land wars.

“We see a central role for the U.S. Navy in that strategy,” said Deputy Defense Secretary Ash Carter.

The Army is the service struggling to define its future after ten years of growth to fight the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Army leaders know their force structure will shrink and they’re trying to set its service up for the forthcoming cuts.

Army generals have tried to crash the Pacific party by promoting potential training missions with Pacific partners. The Navy quickly counters with the millions of miles of ocean covering the Pacific.

It’s clear Navy admirals don’t worry, and probably would encourage, the election of Mitt Romney after he has spelled out his plans to expand the Navy to 350 ships to include building three submarines to support a pivot to the Pacific. He went further explaining his plans to build an 11th aircraft carrier wing and keep production of the F/A-18 Super Hornet running past 2014.

“We would almost immediately reverse the Obama decision to stop production of the F/A-18 Super Hornet in 2014. We think it’s essential to keep the F-18s in production, as well as the F-35,” John Lehman, one of Romney’s top advisers and former Navy secretary, told Defense News.

Loren Thompson, a defense industrial analyst for Lexington Institute, questions how a Romney administration plans to pay for such a boost. He questions if steps such as “early stabilization of engineering requirements, cutbacks in unneeded staff, and greater reliance on competition to discipline pricing” would fit the bloated bill.

“Such steps would barely begin to cover all the increased costs entailed by the plan,” Thompson wrote.

Of course, the Navy’s budget could grow with each menacing pass made by Chinese ships in the Pacific near the sets of disputed islands that have raised tensions in the region with Japan, the Philippines and Vietnam.

The Navy plans to shift 60 percent of their fleet to the Pacific by 2020. U.S. 3rd Fleet Commander Vice Adm. Gerald R. Beaman explained the importance of growing the fleet in that process in order to maintain support in the Atlantic.

He can count on support from the Pentagon despite the threat of a $500 billion cut to defense spending over the next 10 years spurred by sequestration.The Navy has the Pacific pivot in play.

Join the Conversation

Before everyone else chimes in with all of their opinions about the importance of this service over the other I would like to take a moment to remind everyone that there are only two types of people who wear the uniform of the United States Armed Forces:

Infantry and support.

I love the Navy. I think canceling Super Hornet production would be stupid at this point. We’ll need a good aircraft that we can make in large numbers if we are to spread our forces in the pacific. The Super Hornet is that aircraft. The F-35C is too problematic, too expensive, too maintenance intensive, and not armed well enough to deal with a numerically superior opposing force. We don’t really need the F-35C as a set of upgraded anti-radar missiles would allow Super Hornets to kill enemy SAM batteries instead of sneaking around them and leaving them still a threat. The International Roadmap upgrades would give the Super Hornet a significant increase in capability to be just as good as the F-35C at a fraction of the cost per aircraft and at a fraction of the operating cost it takes to use the JSF. The upgrades would also give the Super Hornet a significant increase in low observability that would make it good enough for air-to-air combat for the long run against any opposing enemy aircraft:


Trying to augment naval air is not likely to be a cost-effective way to deal with Pacific realities.

Not with the out of control costs on the Ford-class CVNs, and with the disastrously flawed F-35 as the only new manned airframe in the acquisition pipeline.

Big broadly worded hint as to what *would* be a cost-effective way to deal with Pacific realities: SSGN.

Because when you mix obsolecence with failure you get success LOL

Every failed aircraft project starts off with grand visions, evolves into a limited role and limited deployment and ends up as a static display, the F-35 is no different.

The pivot has been rightly lampooned in Asia as a man wih one leg in a steel trap walking around and around in a circle.

If we want something with more capability we should cancel the F-35C and let the Navy develop a new aircraft from the F/A-XX program. Until that new aircraft is made we should buy upgraded Super Hornets with all of the add-on technology that Boeing is proposing. We really don’t need the F-35C at all and these upgraded Super Hornets will be able to satisfy the same needs the F-35C tried to at a fraction of the cost.

We are in the steel trap of our own making. We pay our weapons contractors a profit incentive to fail, and then we wonder why they fail. Obviously none of us is as stupid as all of us.

So how did the infantry force Japan to surrender in WW II? Yeah, they didn’t. Come back to reality.

sequestration based defense slashes may be just the beginning…Navy shouldn’t be so confident…as a retired Naval Officer, I agee with the first post…boots on the ground with rifles are the ones who win wars…Army is the lead service, with everyone else either enabling trigger puller success or enabling defeat…no direct effort resulted in japans capitualtion at the end of the war, but there was a whole lot of folks who had to occupy territory (islands) that resulted in surrender! Global Reach — Global Power and Gun Boat Diplomacy only go so far…

Why do we still have 4 different military services anyway? Congress needs to save our nation before we go bankrupt!! History is repeating itself.…. Rome, Spain, England and Russia all lost their empires because of over extending their military spending. All of the self serving greeding defense contractor CEOs and retired high ranking officers that work for them and “consulting” firms are leading America to doom by wanting to spend more on pentagon waste!! Consolidate the services. Reduce O-6 and above billets and civilian overhead positions. Maybe we need a corporate raider in the white house to accomplish this in ordwer to save our republic. Everyone within the pentagon that woerk in budget and program offices already know that a 10 percent hit on thier budget will work. Each year billions are left over for lavish furniture, travel, last minute conferences. POGO and this site should do some checking and see what the OH is for the multitudes of programs and what the money is being spent for. I see it everyday WASTE WASE!!!

I’m sorry zak, no one’s going to remember that on this board.

They captured the islands that the Navy operated from.

The aircraft that dropped the atomic bombs were Army aircraft.

All of our capabilities are increasingly interdependent and can be applied in ways that generate synergy — amplifying the effects of any one. It’s important to not only look at our capabilities, but also consider concepts of employment.

Building up the navy is just a Romney sop to WW2 nostalgia. Geopolitically it is a joke.

The Chinese are currently demonstrating to the Japanese that if they side with America, just how easily China can hurt them. The Chinese dont even have to even do anything or announce a policy and they can wipe a percentage point off Japanese GDP.

Chinese tourism to Japan has been wiped out, whole resorts are looking to close, sales of Japanese products are plummeting. Toyotas sales are down 40% just for instance.

The message is clear, cooporate and you can be part of the Asian century, tie yourself to a bankrupt America and you will sink with it.

Clinton and Pannetta toured the region earlier this year trying to stir up trouble with China and some Japanese commentators are starting to ask where Clinton and Panneta are now there are tens of billions of dollars to be made up.

How and what the US purchases w/r/t navy assets is dictated by what our economy is able to support. Unfortunately, regardless of who ended up running the nation after the previous administration left office, there were gong to be severe consequences of gross financial/economic mismanagement of the nation. This is the challenge the current administration has — and that challenge will persist regardless of who is running the nation after the election.

Everyone knows taxes are going to increase (regardless of party): the only questions are when, how much, and who.

Once the economy gets moving again, there will be a lot more flexibility as revenues increase. Because if we are truly going to pivot to the Pacific — we’re going to have to bolster our visible (and underwater/invisible) assets considerably — thats a lot of ocean.

hey Champ, maybe you should apply your energy to 70% of the budget that a WASTE WASTE! that is-entitlements.

That’s what killing this country not defense spending which is 19%

there is waster everywhere in government but go after the biggest waste first in entitlements,
billions in failed green loans
billions spend on bailouts
billions handed over to banks
billions handed over to home owners
billions in foreign aid
billions spend on parties
billions spend on graft
billions spent on useless and non-constitutional agencies
billions spend on czars and hidden government programs which the congress has no control over

here’s a question for you, can you tell me how many government agencies are in existence? I bet
more American have no clue how massive and much money all of these agencies spend

That was a reasonable post without all the bravado of branch partisanship.

The story also makes it sound like Romney has embraced the pivot to the pacific. He hasn’t. His foreign policy speech stressed engagement where we should because if not, someone who may not share our priorities likely will.

Romney is hardly someone to be trusted with advice on running a military. He blusters about getting involved in Syria, while we are still hemorrhaging money in Afghanistan, and owe half a trillion dollars for the credit-card purchased Iraq War. He knows what politicians have known for millenia: to get votes, beat the shields and sound the trumpets. But neither he, nor any of his sons, has ever spent a minute in military service.

No doubt ChiCom intelligence are reading these posts. We do need a larger Navy in the Pacific. That does include more aircraftcarriers. And will do need more F/A-18 Super Hornets and the F-35 which is coming into line with our expectations of it. We also need more Virginia-Class nuclear powered attack submarines, a variant of the Virginia-Class that is armed with at least 96 cruise missiles to counter the Chinese ballistic missile force, more Arliegh Burke-Class DDGs with RIM-174 Standard Sm-6 Extended Range Active Missiles (ERAM) to shoot down ballistic missiles (these missiles work), a new variant of the O.H. Perry-Class FFG, fewer LCSs, a proper force level of 200 P-8A Posiedon maritime reconne aircraft, a variant of the P-8 — EP-8A Trident — to replace the EP-3E Aries II, a carrier on board delivery version of the MV-22 Osprey, CH-53K Super Stallions for VERTREP operations, and additional MH-60S Seahawks for the additonal carriers, destroyers and frigates.


We also need to start work on a replacement for the Ticonderoga-Class AEGIS cruisers and develop or license an air independent propulsion diesel-electric submarine for our Navy and to sell to Taiwan and other allied nations. The pivot will also require the procurement of an adequate number of America-Class LHAs and San Antonio LPDs. To supplement our heavy amphibious lift assets, we need to procure 24 or more High Speed Support Vessles (HSSV) — each able to provide transport ot a battalion of Marines or Army troops and their equipment. The investment we will have to make will also extend to bases. We need to continue to buildup and expand our bases on Guam, Pear Harbor and bases in Hawaii, our bases in Japan and South Korea, seek expansion of our bases in Australia and Singapore, and attempt to obtain basing rights at Cam Rhan Bay in Vietnam and Subic Bay and Clark Air Base in the Philippines. Once that is done, we will have “Peace Through Strength” and a capable force to deter inappropriate acts by China.

Who here besides Cape Esperance and I have worn and retired from the military? Just curious.

You guy’s all need to read some history books. USMC and Navy, especially the Navy submarine force won the war in the pacific. Nuking Japan was the better option to us spending years attacking the mainland and loosing 100’s of k more troops

Big plans Steve, big money, so how would you propose we pay for this ‘lean forward’ posture?

I agree partialy to what you say that army is the lead service but in all the past wars the USMC was the leading factor and they were always the first ones there when a war breaks out just like the navy they are always there first if any branch needs be cut its the Air Force they exceed their budget all the time and every division has their own air force shoot majority of our best pilots are Navy

Me.….USMC 62–68

And I am also sure the Battle of Midway was very pivotal, especially being heavily outnumbered.

I am also sure you would debate this.

The next pacific war’s victor will not be by one who has the most numbers, but by who is more clever.

Perhaps I’ve learned wrong.

Providing the best for our children is every father’s desire. However, if a father does not have money, or deeply in debt like USA, the desire to buy the best toys there are is futile. I am a Filipino and I love USA. No offense. But with 16trillion in debt, which by the way would not be solve even if Romney or Obama will win, America should start to rethink its strategies. A carrier strike group needs MULTI BILLIONS of Dollars..Sadly, American no longer have that much BILLIONS…ONLY TRILLIONS…IN,YES…DEBTS..LOTS OF DEBTS.…I am seeing here another super power in decline..

Nobody could touch America without hurting themselves in the process. For now, in my very low perspective, since they now have 183 F22 5th Gen fighter it would be very economical for America to buy f15 silent eagles, f18 super hornets, f16 vipers with aesa radars. it would be more cost effective also if they would put in their 4th gen warplanes “thrust vectoring” capabilities. Better still if they would put up HUD, and stealth “coatings” to their 4th gen warplanes. These suggestions for now, are for the time being, cost effective and would not bury America all the more in debt.….sometimes, the best time to slow down is when you are down financially…

I retired from the world’s finest Navy after 26 years and 20 days.

You still need platforms and guided missles which the Navy provides. You can not cover that much territory with Chinese presence without a strong Navy.

and a pony for everyone !

I’ve yet to see infantry sink a ship.

we can pay for the navy requirements very easily. close all the bases in europe. the subs and carriers can carry the future conflicts/threats until we are ready to invade a territory with troops. the amount of money spent to keep a base in europe is crazy, let the troops spend their money in the USA. keep upgrading the aircraft like the f35 but keep the, bring home the bacon, aircraft that we currently have(in production) until we have a proven track record of a new aircraft and the money to build a new aircraft. i have 36 years of military service and i have not seen, in previous years, the waste that is going on right now. we just about combined the USMC and the USA just before ww2 maybe we should think about doing it again. if we need we can always provide the service again at a later date.

The last time China engaged in battle was with the Vietnam. It was a devastating loss to China. And to engaged in a war with a maritime nation like Japan is absurd. Temper your nationalist sentiments, just enjoy the fruits of the western-induced wealth.

And why is communist China worried about the pivot? Is it because she is vulnerable?

Super Hornets, F-35s, FXs.…how you gonna get’em close enough to the fight to do any good? Are the carriers going to be stealth?

Jamming, long range cruise missile assistance, coupled with mini-UAVs that give off fake aircraft signatures to provide targets for enemy missiles, a surprise cyber attack before the shooting starts, advanced anti-radar missiles that can kill enemy SAM batteries from a distance, and other classified things that I don’t know of. That’s a good question though. I can also tell you that all of these things would be much more affordable if we dropped the F-35C and F-35B

Certainly it was the threat of a land invaision and the success of the Red Army that caused the Japanesse to surrender, after the naval blockade, and to a much smaller extent the air campaign, collapsed their economy. But if we are talking about China being the main concern in today’s Pacific pivot, I think it is a somewhat different story. We aren’t invading China, and they know it. More likely, we will need to deter and temper Chinese regional aggression. We need enough muscle to counter thier coercive efforts and to defeat an invading force, if necessary. Except for on the ROK, that task will mainly fall to air and naval forces. Land forces will not sink Chinese landing craft in the Taiwan straits, nor will naval/air forces occupy territory and conduct the majority of phase IV/V ops. Different scenairos require different services to take the lead at different times.

He’ll say anything to get a vote. Sure would be nice to see someone look at that sacred five sided cow and trim about 40%.

31 years USN

“There is no existing alternative to the 1970’s technology for the teens, except the F-35, get over it.”

There is the X-47B.

Which is ahead of schedule, under budget, and consistently succeeding in flight test.

The diametric opposite of the far behind schedule, way over budget and regularly failing in flight test F-35.

To say nothing of the superior signature reduction of the X-47B compared to that of the F-35. X-47B has a smaller radar signature, smaller IR signature, smaller visual signature. Better across the board.

But wait. What? What’s that you say? X-47B pilots wouldn’t get to wear dashing jet jock jackets or chivalrous white scarves? There would be no more combat pay or even flight pay bonuses for pilots? It would mean _Top Gun_ being replaced by _Revenge of the Nerds_?

Oh. Well then, F-35 it is. Can’t lose sight of what’s really important here. The egos of aviators.

There are no operating F-35 squadrons, only SDD/ Test and Training activities (Eglin AFB currently, 10 F-35A and 10 F-35B). It is impossible to determine any significant cost either in operation or manufacturing until the LM production line has met and established a maximun production capacity. Any influence in “slowing” the F-35 has immediately driven the current unit costs significantly higher. There is no existing alternative to the 1970’s technology for the teens, except the F-35, get over it.

Enola Gay and Bockscar were rather direct, ask any resident in Hiroshima or Nagasaki!

We have four services to protect you and yours.
If our military left today, tomorrow you would be owned by the next largest military in the world.

It’s just basic human nature.

Employment must be based on benefit. Having culture of hamburger flippers has not left us with much to work with, sorry!

The Chinese will be back. Japan is the 51st state, not the PR. Anytime any other country threatens Japan, the US has to be at there back, immediately. This is more true than even, Israel.

This administration has not so discreetly moved to dismantle our US military. It is intended that the citizens will bare an additional burden to return the strength necessary to defend and protect our resources and international trade.

Our children need the best tools we can provide them to overwhelm any enemy that threatens our resources or international trade.

I’m not sure about that five sided cow, but reducing the federal bureaucracies would be a great step forward in improving efficiency in our government.

Combined arms is what wins wars. Always has.

Direct, but most historians believe, not decisive.

X-47B can and never will be able to perform in air-air combat. They are made to take a small amount of weapons hit a target and return. Thats it.

I will agree that the F-35 is everything you said. The problem with the F-35 is its a political thing not really military anymore. The jobs for votes that the senators and congressmen have passed out are due.

The F-18 upgrades coming along make it a fine strike fighter to fill the current and near term gap. However it cant fill the long term needs. We need LONG RANGE Fighters, bombers, and we need ASW, and Refuelers. We could probably use the same bombers like we did the A-6 for the refuelers.

“X-47B can and never will be able to perform in air-air combat. They are made to take a small amount of weapons hit a target and return.”

However, there’s a concept where you assume the platform doesn’t _need_ to perform per se in air-to-air combat. It just has to not be seen.

Instead, the weapons are smart and high performing enough to engage in combat themselves. Think something like MALD, but a hunting weapon instead of a decoy.

Under that model, all you need is a long endurance, low observable platform to sneak into the threat envelope, quietly drop the hunter-killers when told to by a remote sensor, and leave without creating a fuss.

“The future battle on the ground will be preceded by battle in the air. This will determine which of the contestants has to suffer operational and tactical disadvantages and be forced throughout the battle into adopting compromise solutions.“
Field Marshal Erwin Rommel

The F-35 doesn’t work. We can’t afford it. We don’t need it. You get over it.

The United States has had National Debt forever. For some reason its a BIG deal NOW even though it’s been in the Trillions forever.

Hello Yall,

We here in Alaska are trying to harden our COMS equipment from an EMP if ever that hapens. It would be like a suprize attack and no one would be ready or if we are doing mitigation on the future problem then we might save time and money and not have to replace every component after a EMPstrike. We have decided to be forward thinkeers here in Alaska. FARADAY CAGE DESIGNS and smallest to the biggest.


Rick Wride

Be Prepared is a big deal before you go into the battlefield, then when you get there all the great be prepared plans don’t work. Remember Pearl Harbor, the US Navy Fleet were sitting ducks waiting to be attacked, and then they were attacked not ready for anything. How hard is our COMS to deflect emp pulse strike. I hope the way ships are built they will deflect radiation

Thanks for reading and maybe be prepared yall.


Hey there I met (6) F-15 pilots who said they were shot town in air to air electronic warfare dogfights by one F-22. Our F-22 took on (6) F-15’s and were all embarrassed by the high tech strikke fighter when they never saw the F-22, but he was there and saw all of them and then there were none.

The best thing is not to tie up your economy with China. China got you by the balls ehe…by the throat. Get rid of the free spending democrats. Live within your means. Before the empire collapses!!!!! Totally mismanaged!
When China boycotted the Philippines after their spat in Scarborough, tourists actually went up. When they cancelled and allowed dozens of container rotting bananas in the ports, they were eventually found some new markets. Thanks USA. Don’t be afraid that the goods won’t be made in China anymore. Learn to adjust while its early. Screw China. Move on!


NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

AdChoices | Like us on , follow us on and join us on Google+
© 2015 Military Advantage
A Monster Company.