US Navy of 2028: How Many Warships? Which Types?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 4 січ 2024
- Related briefings:
Chinese Navy of 2028: How Many Warships? Which Types? • Chinese Navy of 2028: ...
USS America - "Lightning Carrier"
• USS America - "Lightni...
Arleigh Burke Flight III • Arleigh Burke Flight I...
Sources:
U.S. Navy: Report to Congress on the Annual Long-Range Plan for Construction of Naval Vessels for Fiscal Year 2024
Navy’s Force Design 2045 Plan
Congressional Research Office: Navy Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans: Background and Issues for Congress, December 21, 2023
Congressional Budget Office
Finally a real defnse channel not some robot voice chinese made video. Thanka you got my subscription
Thank you, much appreciated.
Can you an updated analysis of the Army Aviation Corp now that we are receiving UH-60M and Ah-64e?
?
Yes, absolutely. Just waiting on some information.
If you are looking for video ideas, I’d love to see one concerning the New Zealand Air Force. For an island nation that can be rather isolated, it always surprises me that they have an “Air Force” that doesn’t actually have any combat capability. (And no, I don’t count the P-8’s. Maritime patrol and ASW are far different than air to air combat)
I will be doing one on the New Zealand Air Force (RNZAF) in the not too distant future, as a follow on to the one I did on the New Zealand Army.
We need a bunch of corvettes on top of all the other stuff. We need to make up for those ridiculous LCS. There are much better and less expensive options.
The Australian Navy (RAN) may yet get corvettes as part of its surface combat force review. If it does, might be something the U.S. will want to look at.
Excellent, frankly a fair bit more interesting than the Chinese one although that's mostly to do with the fact that we know much more detail about the capabilities of US Navy ships.
Thanks, Rob.
Why would it be more interesting to hear something you already know rather than learning something new? You should always strive to learn new things everyday, ESPECIALLY about our enemies. Know your enemy better than they know themselves and you will surely come out on 🔝
As a matter of fact, I still would like to see more China-related content from your channel. Plz keep it up.
Great analysis regarding the ships. As you say it doesn’t include naval air power or airborne missile capabilities which put a more accurate and “bigger picture” aspect when comparing to PLAN.
Great job and well researched as usual.
Thanks, much appreciated.
@@Strategy_Analysisyes well laid out but where is the analysis as to the purpose of this fleet design and how do they intend to fight it because it seems the axis is getting bigger and the alliance hasn't changed..
no one can fight the world, and those that think so will destroy it..
@@user-yt7go3ki9h Thanks, that would be a separate briefing. The short answer, its designed to fight China, but cognizant of world-wide commitments. U.S. officials, including Navy personnel, make this quite clear. As to how they intend to fight, that would be classified, but from public statements, and looking at capabilities and numbers, there will likely be a focus on the use of SSNs, long-range strike, and extensive use of allies in the region.
@@Strategy_Analysis true. it's a great time to be an analyst.
i just have to wonder why the aussies are payin to lrrp that china straight when if it's that important surely a discount would've been easily negotiated..
Good video. Appreciate the solid solid research and how you put this together. Thank you. I will watch more from your channel. The algorithm got it right this time !
Thank you, greatly appreciated. The algorithm has not been my friend of late!
And Australia has 3x Destroyers. What a joke and we can't even put f35B on our LHD. I give up and just hope we never have to go to war again.
Australia does have the capability to put up a great defense force. To do so requires the restructuring of the ENTIRE military/industrial complex and education complexes. A 30 year bipartisan approach. It's not actually the equipment that poses a problem. It's the manpower.
Our air warfare destroyers are actually frigates in the Spanish Navy as they are too light. Good ship but we're were dudded.
@@bestestusername my statement is that to have a defense force that counters specifically China you need an entire restructuring of the military industrial complex and education system. A 30 year minimum bipartisan approach.
Long as yall conti ue to be a real Allies to America then yall have no worries. Australia is 1 country I don't mind our tax dollars to help protect. Ausies have fought alongside American men and woman through every war.
@@evrydayamerican it's got nothing to do with your loyalty. It has do do with self sufficiency and TOTAL RESTRUCTURING of your and our education and military industrial complex. Wars will now be fought won and lost with the countries with the greatest EMIC. a 30 year BIPARTISAN APPROACH that obviously needs 30 years to show maturation.
projecting power requires carrier aircraft supported by subs and protected by pickets.
Would you consider doing a video about anti ship weapons and current navy bases that would be used in a war
At this point in time I would decommission any ships they can still go for a while longer just different Mission package
Could you make an similar for all the "enemy side" ? RU, China + optionals
I've done one on China. It's linked in the description, or you can find it on my homepage.
Just to put the u.s. navy into proper perspective of how powerful this behemoth is,it has 11 super nuclear aircraft carriers carrying a total of approximately 770 fighter jets plus support airframes.There are three more on various stages of completion,that’s,USS Kennedy,USS Enterprise and USS Doris Miller,mind you this is only part of it that demonstrates the huge $800b military budget although not all on navy but an excellent demonstration!
s.a.c, i got one more question for you..
there seems to be a lack of infantry anound all that expensive armour in and amonst that rubble.
whats goin on there..
Not sure what you mean. Can you word it a different way?
@@Strategy_Analysis s.a.c my apologies i was tslking about idf
What about DDG-X??
It won't be in service by 1 January 2028.
I need to correct the statement that Nimitz was the first nuclear powered USN carrier. USS Enterprise was. A one ship class.
I never said it was.
@@Strategy_AnalysisI stand corrected. You stated “ Most prominent.” I apologise for my misstatement.
@@NoName-ds5uq Not at all. And I should have been clearer. What would you like me to cover next?
CVN80 maybe Service with the U.S. Navy in 2028
In my opinion
Aircraft Carriers: 12
• 9 x Nimitz
• 3 x Gerald R Ford
Destroyers: 86
Frigates: 3
LCS: 21
Time will tell.
Along with the most advanced fighters.
As I say in the briefing, I didn't cover aircraft. I will do a separate one in the future.
Tangent … Turkey is building an aircraft carrier … this is frankly speaking a very negative development for SE Europe the doorstep of Europe. This needs to be analysed and discussed at a much mor serious and higher level.
I'll give it some thought.
I agree with everything you say, but no doubt within 20 years. The P LA will have caught up with the US navy. In Fleet size and capability, you'd be naive to think otherwise. You just have to compare their ship to building capability to the current usa Ship building capability. China just this year has 1 subamrine 2 destroyers and 7 frigates and this is a slow year.
Yes, China has significant ship building capabilities, as I mentioned in the PLAN of 2028 briefing. And the quality of its vessels is also improving. 20 years is a long range forecast, a lot can happen in that time. This is why I choose a time frame where we can have more certainty as to force levels (not a strict capability comparison though).
Ticonderoga class Guided missile cruisers say "What are we...chopped liver"?
All scheduled to be decommissioned before 2028. So not included.
Is it worth considering our acquisition of the Ticonderoga class ships that are about to be mothballed? After all our stated objective based on the recent DSR is the use of long range missile systems on adversaries on their way to Australia or our region. Your thoughts?
@@jmichos The U.S. is decommissioning them because they are expensive to operate, including high crew numbers. Certainly very capable vessels though.
Idiots who blow hundreds of billions on crap like carbon capture and electric school buses have their fiscal periods about coughing up a few lousy billion to rebuild the 22 Ticos (with combined 2600 missile capacity) and extend the lives of Nimitz, 4 Ohio's, and half a dozen perfectly good Los Angeles SSNs. Also 6 Perry's that can be reactivated.
Moreover, with 150 shipyards, the US is perfectly capable of doubling the Constellation class and expanding construction of current programs. Lots of US yards are underutilized and there are also idled yards that can be reopened.
Defense production act and a large cash injection can solve this easily. All it would take is a Congress, and President, that treats national defense with more urgency than green energy or corporate welfare.
All the lcs's are being retired
Eventually, yes. But not all by 2028, according to the U.S. Navy.
US should give Philippines F16 fighters and Navy destroyers or submarine to fight proxies wars like Ukraine, US Should support Philippines to be the strongest army in Southeast Asia. Maybe 200 billion dollars in financial support, we Thank you US to support Philippines.
Why do you assume the USN will be bigger and more powerful in 2028? Is it not possible it may continue to shrinks and diminish in power instead? Your analysis assumed the US defense budget will continue to grow and so will the US ship building industry? How high can the US defense budget grow when it is already about 4% of GDP, double the world average of 2%? Compare this with the Chinese defense spending which is less than 2% of GDP? Furthermore, with interest on US debt of already 1 trillion, more than defense, how sustainable is this model that you are advocating? Furthermore, a significant portion of US warships are old and have exceeded their expiry date? The Ticonderoga Class warships are in the process of being scrapped and so are some of the Arleigh Burke Class 1and II? So is the state of the art Zumwalt Class which there are only three(?) in service? The Arleigh BUrke Class V is only an upgraded version? No new design warships? For the kind of budget which is bigger than the next 9 countries combined, it has achieved very little? How to compete with the PLAN when it can build 5 times faster and at 30% of the cost? And just as good if not better to the US warships now? Ultimately everything boils down to costs and efficiency ceteris paribus....
…..a stereotype analysis,old narrative of numbers as a basis of comparison and not the quality (firepower) of the number,no consequences in military perspective.
That is not what I said. Perhaps you should re-watch it.
@@Strategy_Analysisnot you sir,the other commenter!❤
Despite its age Arleigh Burke class is armed with the most advanced and powerful firepower that envy the enemy,apart from aegis radar systems it also accomodate laser weapons technology in addition to tomahawk,harpoon and some classified weapon systems.Again, even arleigh Burke is outnumbered numerically in comparison to china ,the firepower it has more than match three equivalent Chinese destroyers,that’s my humble and strategic opinion!
Haha.. US is always wanna to claiming he is the powerfull even just for tonnage and not by quantity. In war, whats tonnage can do? Tonnage cant blasting other enemy ship?
Increased tonnage brings increased capability.
Just reading from Wiki then.