Senator Webb Calls for Bigger US Fleet

Finding myself in rare agreement with a Democrat on military issues, especially this one. Here's the Navy Times:

The number of the ships in the Navy should be “substantially higher” than today’s 279 ships and the new “floor” of 313 ships that commanders hope for, Virginia Democratic Sen. Jim Webb said Saturday.

Webb endorsed “assessments” that he said called for as many as 350 ships — or more — in a statement timed to coincide with the Navy’s 232nd birthday and the 20th anniversary of the Navy Memorial in downtown Washington, D.C. As President Reagan’s secretary of the Navy, Webb presided at the dedication of the memorial in 1987.

I agree with this assessment completely, as long as we buy the buy the right type of ships for modern warfare. Spending cash on more giant carriers and DDG-1000 super destroyers will make little impression on our Al Qaeda enemy, and offer a useful target for insurgent submarines equipped with long-range cruise missiles.

The cheap and fastest route for rebuilding fallen numbers in our stretched fleet, is small combatants like littoral ships. This should mean greater incentive to fund and complete the long awaited LCS. Outside of this, more Austal ferries should be bought "as is", since these fast catamarans have proved extremely useful in the shallow waters of the Persian gulf, and also showing the flag in the Third World. More patrol craft like the excellent Cyclone class would also be welcome.

Only a small cadre of battle force ships (i.e. aircraft carriers, cruisers, destroyers, and amphibious ships) should be necessary, considering the monopoly we have on such vessels for the time being. These savings gained from a freeze on big ships should fully fund Webb's expansion plan. I would like to see our submarine fleet boosted to perhaps 75 vessels or more, as these have proven so essential in all our wars.