Carrier (1999) (11 page)
Authors: Tom - Nf Clancy
Admiral Johnson:
Frankly, I don’t see
any
friction today. I think that’s old news. As far as I’m concerned, the Navy is on the leading edge in the joint warfare business these days. In fact, we’re committed to it at all levels. Here’s a case in point. When we do our carrier battle group [CVBG] and amphibious ready group [ARG] workups, that’s all joint. What we used to call a FLEETEX [Fleet Exercise] in the old days is now the JTFEX [Joint Task Force Exercise]. Of course, we still work within our fundamental core sea service [Navy and Marine Corps] competencies during training. But once we get into the JTFEX, it’s units like the 2nd Fleet CVBG, the II MEF [Marine Expeditionary Force] MEU [SOC], the XVIII Airborne Corps, the 8th Air Force, and our allies all together. So we are absolutely committed to the joint warfare arena, right down to training within the Joint Training Matrix. This is not the way it was during Desert Storm where the Navy was still “fighting the feeling.”
Frankly, I don’t see
any
friction today. I think that’s old news. As far as I’m concerned, the Navy is on the leading edge in the joint warfare business these days. In fact, we’re committed to it at all levels. Here’s a case in point. When we do our carrier battle group [CVBG] and amphibious ready group [ARG] workups, that’s all joint. What we used to call a FLEETEX [Fleet Exercise] in the old days is now the JTFEX [Joint Task Force Exercise]. Of course, we still work within our fundamental core sea service [Navy and Marine Corps] competencies during training. But once we get into the JTFEX, it’s units like the 2nd Fleet CVBG, the II MEF [Marine Expeditionary Force] MEU [SOC], the XVIII Airborne Corps, the 8th Air Force, and our allies all together. So we are absolutely committed to the joint warfare arena, right down to training within the Joint Training Matrix. This is not the way it was during Desert Storm where the Navy was still “fighting the feeling.”
That does not mean that we have solved all of our challenges. Full utilization of CTAPS [the joint theater air planning tool] and distribution of the ATO [Air Tasking Order] is still giving us problems, but by and large, we’re on board in the joint arena. I might add that we’re proud to be part of it, because that’s the way that we’re going to be fighting in the future as a nation.
Tom Clancy:
One of the most interesting joint training exercises that has been run recently is Operation Tandem Thrust, down in Australia. Can you tell us about it?
One of the most interesting joint training exercises that has been run recently is Operation Tandem Thrust, down in Australia. Can you tell us about it?
Admiral Johnson:
You have to remember that we have a “special” relationship with Australia, one that has been critical to both countries in this century. Tandem Thrust is just another classic example of that relationship. We just came back from Operation Tandem Thrust. It was
huge,
involving over 22,000 U.S. Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force personnel. We accomplished our objectives and I think everybody learned a great deal.
You have to remember that we have a “special” relationship with Australia, one that has been critical to both countries in this century. Tandem Thrust is just another classic example of that relationship. We just came back from Operation Tandem Thrust. It was
huge,
involving over 22,000 U.S. Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force personnel. We accomplished our objectives and I think everybody learned a great deal.
When you are running a large military exercise, one of the biggest considerations is the matter of finding new range spaces for the joint forces to exercise and train in. If you talk with Chuck Krulak, he’ll tell you about his interest in using some of the range facilities in Australia. They are
beautiful!
And the Royal Australian Navy and the rest of their forces are just superb to work with. They are
wonderful
allies. Australia is an amazing country—just eighteen million people on a land mass the size of the continental United States. You see that when you fly over the place. You just fly for hours and hours and see nothing but open space.
beautiful!
And the Royal Australian Navy and the rest of their forces are just superb to work with. They are
wonderful
allies. Australia is an amazing country—just eighteen million people on a land mass the size of the continental United States. You see that when you fly over the place. You just fly for hours and hours and see nothing but open space.
Tom Clancy:
Talk a little more about modernization if you will. Every couple of generations, there seems to be a CNO who, because of timing and circumstances, defines the U.S. Navy for a period of decades. Elmo Zumwalt filled that role in the 1970’s, since so much of what the Navy uses today was defined, designed, or built during his tenure. You seem to be in a similar situation today in the 1990’s. Given this notion, what kinds of things do
you
want this Navy to do?
Talk a little more about modernization if you will. Every couple of generations, there seems to be a CNO who, because of timing and circumstances, defines the U.S. Navy for a period of decades. Elmo Zumwalt filled that role in the 1970’s, since so much of what the Navy uses today was defined, designed, or built during his tenure. You seem to be in a similar situation today in the 1990’s. Given this notion, what kinds of things do
you
want this Navy to do?
Admiral Johnson:
I think that what we’re trying to cast for tomorrow and the future is to be able to say five, ten, twenty, even twenty-five years from now, that this Navy is really relevant. We need to know that the Navy is giving the country a presence force that can still respond across the full spectrum of crises or requirements that the country asks them to respond to. We don’t even know for sure what kinds of crises we’ll be facing in that distant future. But the decisions we make today will have a direct impact on our readiness tomorrow.
I think that what we’re trying to cast for tomorrow and the future is to be able to say five, ten, twenty, even twenty-five years from now, that this Navy is really relevant. We need to know that the Navy is giving the country a presence force that can still respond across the full spectrum of crises or requirements that the country asks them to respond to. We don’t even know for sure what kinds of crises we’ll be facing in that distant future. But the decisions we make today will have a direct impact on our readiness tomorrow.
In general terms, we know exactly where we’re going. The new equipment we’re building and the new shaping of the force that we are currently going through are very important to us, as is the way we push ourselves into the next century. It’s very exciting, though somewhat daunting, to be in this job at a time when the infrastructure is under development to this degree, but I think we’re building a marvelous future for the Navy. In my opinion, the future Navy will still be anchored in the carrier battle group with its air wing, in the amphibious ready group and the embarked Marine Expeditionary Unit. These are the two core assets that the sea services give to the country. I want that to be clearly conveyed as we move forward into the next century.
Tom Clancy:
Let’s talk a little more about that issue of “forward presence.” Several years ago when we interviewed General Krulak [the current Commandant of the Marine Corps], he described it as: “A native in a canoe is able to reach out and touch the gray-painted hull of an American warship in
his
territory.” How does that match up with your vision for American presence in the 21st century?
Let’s talk a little more about that issue of “forward presence.” Several years ago when we interviewed General Krulak [the current Commandant of the Marine Corps], he described it as: “A native in a canoe is able to reach out and touch the gray-painted hull of an American warship in
his
territory.” How does that match up with your vision for American presence in the 21st century?
Admiral Johnson:
The strength of our forward presence is exactly that. The recent Quadrennial Defense Review provided for a strategic vision that carried with it the three elements or phases of military power that our nation requires. These are shaping, responding, and preparing. We’ve talked a lot in this interview about responding and preparing. So let’s take a little time to talk about shaping the world’s military situation.
The strength of our forward presence is exactly that. The recent Quadrennial Defense Review provided for a strategic vision that carried with it the three elements or phases of military power that our nation requires. These are shaping, responding, and preparing. We’ve talked a lot in this interview about responding and preparing. So let’s take a little time to talk about shaping the world’s military situation.
That’s what we do every day. That’s why we have 350 ships afloat in the world’s oceans right now. That’s the guy in the canoe who touches the side of
our
gray-hulled ships. We believe that’s a tremendously powerful mission, both for our Navy and the country, because of what it means to the rest of the world. You know, even if that man in the canoe can’t touch our ship, but can only see it and watch it come and go as it pleases, then that sends a message of great strength to him and to all the other people who see what we can do. Because we’re out there, the world is changed every day.
our
gray-hulled ships. We believe that’s a tremendously powerful mission, both for our Navy and the country, because of what it means to the rest of the world. You know, even if that man in the canoe can’t touch our ship, but can only see it and watch it come and go as it pleases, then that sends a message of great strength to him and to all the other people who see what we can do. Because we’re out there, the world is changed every day.
Tom Clancy:
Let’s talk a little about the material side of the Navy these days. All the ships, aircraft, and other things that were bought during the Reagan Administration are now almost fifteen years old. Military spending has been significantly reduced in recent years. Are you having problems modernizing and reconstituting the Navy for the 21 st century?
Let’s talk a little about the material side of the Navy these days. All the ships, aircraft, and other things that were bought during the Reagan Administration are now almost fifteen years old. Military spending has been significantly reduced in recent years. Are you having problems modernizing and reconstituting the Navy for the 21 st century?
Admiral Johnson:
I would not categorize the Navy’s needs at this stage as problems. I think of them as opportunities, and I would say that the future looks promising. I’m just sorry that I’m not going to be a JO [junior officer] to take advantage of all the things we’re going to be getting in the future.
I would not categorize the Navy’s needs at this stage as problems. I think of them as opportunities, and I would say that the future looks promising. I’m just sorry that I’m not going to be a JO [junior officer] to take advantage of all the things we’re going to be getting in the future.
If you look at the programs that we’ve got on the boards for the next decade, it’s a long list. There are the DDG-51-class Aegis destroyers, which we are continuing to build at a rate of between three and four a year. We’re getting those ships at between $800 and $900 million a copy, depending upon whose numbers you use, which is quite a bargain. I know that sounds like a lot of money for a tin can [the traditional nickname for destroyers], but it’s a pretty impressive tin can!
After the Aegis, the next class of surface combatant will be the Surface Combatant-21 [SC-21], which we’re just coming to clarity on right now. The first phase of that program will give us what we call a “land attack” destroyer or “DD-21.” Downstream from that will probably be a group of those ships that will begin to replace the early units of the Aegis fleet.
We can be sure of one thing—SC—21 is going to have to be much more affordable than the DDG-51’s. That’s the bottom-line challenge in all this. That’s why we’re invested in something called “Smart Ship” [the USS Yorktown [CG-48], which is being outfitted]. We want to see what we can learn about making these ships not only less expensive to buy, but to operate and maintain as well.
But they’ll never be cheap. You have to remember that Navy combatants are not cruise ships. They need to have combat capability
all
the time. How you make the different trade-offs for crew size, displacement, engineering plants, weapons, sensors, and other things is very, very important. One day, lives may depend on how well we make our decisions now.
all
the time. How you make the different trade-offs for crew size, displacement, engineering plants, weapons, sensors, and other things is very, very important. One day, lives may depend on how well we make our decisions now.
Tom Clancy:
What other new classes of warships do you have on the horizon? I know that the first of the new-generation ships will be the
San Antonio-class
[LPD-17] amphibious ships, which are under construction right now.
What other new classes of warships do you have on the horizon? I know that the first of the new-generation ships will be the
San Antonio-class
[LPD-17] amphibious ships, which are under construction right now.
Admiral Johnson:
The
San Antonio-class
[LPD-17] amphibious ship replaces four different classes of older ships in just one hull. It’s an important ship to me, as well as to Chuck Krulak [the Commandant of the Marine Corps]. As you know, the ARG [Amphibious Ready Group] of the 21st century is going to be a three-ship force. There will be a big deck aviation/amphibious ship like a
Tarawa
[LHA-1] or Wasp [LHD-1], one of the
Whidbey Island
[LSD-41] or
Harpers Ferry-
class [LSD-49] dock ships, and a
San Antonio.
That
San Antonio-class
ship is going to be the inshore fighter, which will launch the new AAAV amphibious tractors, as well as air-cushioned landing craft and helicopters.
The
San Antonio-class
[LPD-17] amphibious ship replaces four different classes of older ships in just one hull. It’s an important ship to me, as well as to Chuck Krulak [the Commandant of the Marine Corps]. As you know, the ARG [Amphibious Ready Group] of the 21st century is going to be a three-ship force. There will be a big deck aviation/amphibious ship like a
Tarawa
[LHA-1] or Wasp [LHD-1], one of the
Whidbey Island
[LSD-41] or
Harpers Ferry-
class [LSD-49] dock ships, and a
San Antonio.
That
San Antonio-class
ship is going to be the inshore fighter, which will launch the new AAAV amphibious tractors, as well as air-cushioned landing craft and helicopters.
The design and mix of the ARG and these new ships will give us the ability to fight both in the littorals and in the “blue water” of the open oceans. It’s going to be an awesome platform. That ship is coming along well, as well as CVN-77, which we see as a transition carrier to take us to some technological developments on our way to the next generation of carrier, the CVX.
Tom Clancy:
Tell us some more about the CVN-77, if you would.
Tell us some more about the CVN-77, if you would.
Admiral Johnson:
Some of the improvements we contemplate for it are not unlike what we’re doing with the Aegis cruiser
Yorktown,
which we’re adding a number of different automation systems to for things like assistance on the bridge, damage control monitoring, and a fiber-optic local area network [LAN] backbone. These improvements are designed to reduce the manning of the Aegis platforms, if it proves practical. We want to see what technology can do for us as a practical matter on future combatants. Once we’ve been to school on that, then we will do the same kinds of things with CVN-77.
Some of the improvements we contemplate for it are not unlike what we’re doing with the Aegis cruiser
Yorktown,
which we’re adding a number of different automation systems to for things like assistance on the bridge, damage control monitoring, and a fiber-optic local area network [LAN] backbone. These improvements are designed to reduce the manning of the Aegis platforms, if it proves practical. We want to see what technology can do for us as a practical matter on future combatants. Once we’ve been to school on that, then we will do the same kinds of things with CVN-77.
We think technological improvements will help us a lot on the road to our future carrier designs, especially with regards to things like size, shape, and manning, which are some of the critical design factors that determine the costs of new ships. So the plan right now is that CVN-77 will indeed be a transition ship to take us to CVX. We feel that it is the right thing to do. We’re going to make it just different enough through a “Smart Ship/Smart Buy” concept. What we’re trying to do is to leverage technology to do things differently and with fewer people, and let technology make the Naval platforms of the next century even smarter and better than the ones we have right now.
Tom Clancy:
If you were going to sit here today and describe what CVX will become, what would be your vision of that carrier when it arrives sometime in the 21st century?
If you were going to sit here today and describe what CVX will become, what would be your vision of that carrier when it arrives sometime in the 21st century?
Admiral Johnson: Let me do this based upon my own experience. I started on the
Orisknay
[CV-34, a modernized World War II-era
Essex-class
(CV-9/SCB-27C) carrier], and I’ve flown on and off of everything from the
Midway
[CVA-41] to a number of the
Nimitz-class
[CVN-68] nuclear carriers. I would tell you that what I want CVX to provide is the same kind of flexibility as you can get out of a
Nimitz-class
carrier. I also want it to be able to deliver many of the same kinds of services and benefits that we already get from carriers right now. I especially want it to be able to move around the same way.
Orisknay
[CV-34, a modernized World War II-era
Essex-class
(CV-9/SCB-27C) carrier], and I’ve flown on and off of everything from the
Midway
[CVA-41] to a number of the
Nimitz-class
[CVN-68] nuclear carriers. I would tell you that what I want CVX to provide is the same kind of flexibility as you can get out of a
Nimitz-class
carrier. I also want it to be able to deliver many of the same kinds of services and benefits that we already get from carriers right now. I especially want it to be able to move around the same way.
This ship has implications from the strategic level all the way down to tactical implications—like whether I can crank up enough wind over the deck to be able to land an aircraft with the flaps stuck in the “up” position. So we need tremendous flexibility out of this platform, including areas like berthing, data networks, sensors, and tactical systems.
The CVX will also need to be an “open architecture” ship, so that we can “net” it into the new kinds of “network centric” battle forces that we want to build in the 21st century. We will want to have distributed sensor and firepower capabilities spread throughout the battle group in ways that allow us to have situational awareness on every platform, both ships and aircraft, and not just the carrier. The carrier is still going to be the core ship of the CVBG. Therefore, it will still need to have flexibility on the flight deck, in the systems that it carries, and in habitability, to ensure a decent quality of life for the crew that will man it. I believe that the Navy in the 21st century will continue to be a forward-deployed force, and given that reality, this ship is a blank sheet of paper in every way.
Tom Clancy:
Does that mean that you see every feature of the CVX as being open for new ideas?
Does that mean that you see every feature of the CVX as being open for new ideas?
Admiral Johnson:
As far as I’m concerned, yes. Propulsion, sensors, catapult systems—they are all open to new and innovative ideas, should they be offered or presented. Now, when we talk about a CVX-type carrier, we’re talking about a ship that will arrive at a time where the dominant aircraft it will carry will be the new Joint Strike Fighter [JSF], the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, and something we call the Common Support Aircraft [CSA]. So this ship will have to be optimized to our vision for operating those future aircraft, none of which are operational today.
As far as I’m concerned, yes. Propulsion, sensors, catapult systems—they are all open to new and innovative ideas, should they be offered or presented. Now, when we talk about a CVX-type carrier, we’re talking about a ship that will arrive at a time where the dominant aircraft it will carry will be the new Joint Strike Fighter [JSF], the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, and something we call the Common Support Aircraft [CSA]. So this ship will have to be optimized to our vision for operating those future aircraft, none of which are operational today.
Tom Clancy:
I’ve heard some of the people involved in the design and development of CVX call this the first non-Navy or “CinC‘s” [regional commander in chief’s] carrier. Given your own use of carriers during Haiti in 1994, would you concur with this view?
I’ve heard some of the people involved in the design and development of CVX call this the first non-Navy or “CinC‘s” [regional commander in chief’s] carrier. Given your own use of carriers during Haiti in 1994, would you concur with this view?
Other books
Last Hope, Book One: Onslaught by Drew Brown
Honeymoon from Hell Part I by R.L. Mathewson
Zero and Other Fictions by Huang Fan
The Gold Eaters by Ronald Wright
Salinger's Letters by Nils Schou
Following Christopher Creed by Carol Plum-Ucci
How to Capture a Countess (Duchess Diaries 1) by Karen Hawkins
Project Love (Cascade Brides Series) by Blythe, Bonnie
Noah by Justine Elvira
True Patriot Love by Michael Ignatieff, Michael Ignatieff
