WT Business Beat

By Nick Wakeman

Blog archive
Nick Wakeman

Should we time-share aircraft carriers?

The fears and concerns around the defense budget are real, and potentially dangerous, particularly if there is a sequestration failure, and if the cuts are made with blunt objects and not precision instruments.

Amber Corrin at FCW.com reported at the end of last week that the Defense Department is looking at freezes on hiring and IT purchases. Contracts are being reviewed for more savings.

The Joint Chiefs of Staff are warning of the creation of a hollow force. They want adequate resources and the freedom to shape the force to “new budget realities.” And they should get that flexibility.

How DOD addresses the new budget realities is going to set the tone for the rest of the government.

Let’s look at some of the actions that the services are talking about: the Air Force may reduce non-readiness flying; the Navy will reduce flying hours and ship steaming days; and the Army will reduce “utilities consumption.” All are talking about curtailing training and conferences.

One of the many unfortunate aspects of this whole sequestration debacle is that so much of the focus is the short-term, reactionary cuts. I guess its survival mode. As Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta says, the greatest threat is uncertainty.

Even saying that, I’m not seeing bold moves that can set the tone for DOD for the next decade.

I wish I could remember who I heard say this, but I heard a speaker some months ago say that the government, particularly the Defense Department, hadn’t gotten serious yet about saving money and making cuts.

I keep thinking about what he said next: We won’t show anyone we are serious until we ask another country to split the costs and share the use of an aircraft carrier. For him, that’s when the cuts will be getting serious.

I can’t remember who said that, and as more time passes, I wonder how crazy an idea it is.

Why not ask the U.K. and France to help pay and man an aircraft carrier that cruises the Atlantic and Mediterranean? Or India, Japan, South Korea and Australia to do the same for one based in the Pacific and Indian oceans?

I can hear the groans and complaints about a loss of control and national security, etc. Maybe that idea goes too far, but it is worth debating, particularly in this era of multilateral military operations.

Why not push “jointness” among the services a little farther and consolidate more units and operations across the Army, Navy and Air Force? I’m sure there are tons of redundancies that continue more for the sake of politics, turf and tradition than for national security reasons.

We need to think beyond simple reductions and cuts. This is actually a great opportunity to rebuild and retool the Defense Department for the next decade or more. DOD needs to be leaner, more creative and smarter in how it uses its resources.

Posted by Nick Wakeman on Jan 23, 2013 at 9:50 AM

Reader Comments

Fri, Jan 25, 2013 Royal Navy Sailor

I'd love to take one of your Carriers to sea, there is however, one small problem; we can't afford the oars to row a boat with, never mind run a Carrier. Back to the drawing board me thinks.

Thu, Jan 24, 2013

A strong U.S. military presence protecting our national interests around the world (and not politically inclined interests) will not be achieved with responsibility sharing, or time-sharing our carrier fleet or marine support battalion. It is going to be hard (impossible) to get our military and civilians at the Flag/General Officer and Senior Executive Service level engaged in/focused on redefining budget needs and requirements when a good portion of their day is spent (mandated)on reviewing and approval travel, conference participation, IT systems and software (something I had authority as a Navy LT)...or genuflecting on the latest crisis outside of national defense.

Thu, Jan 24, 2013 Bill

The Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor because they thought they could cripple the U.S. fleet in one strike. Sharing resources not only doesn't cripple the fleet, it preserves it.

Thu, Jan 24, 2013

Of course there are a ton of redundancies and dupliocations within DoD that could be eliminated. Everyone knows it, but nobody will ever do anything about it util when and if POTUS and Congress order it. Pretty much all the back office and supply functions can and should be common-serviced. And why does each service have their own IT and telco empires? This doesn't even address all the things where DoD has a mirror image of other offices and agencies doing the same thing for the civilian agencies. (ie, Defense Printing Service and GPO, as a minor example.)

Thu, Jan 24, 2013 Washington, DC

As a current service member and US Marine Corps Infantry OIF veteran, I want my Marines to fix our vehicles, and I want Marine and Naval Aviators to be able give me close air support from the flight deck of a carrier. That cannot happen when it is lost in the Pacific Ocean because it's manned by a French or Italian crew. NATO is good, but the US Military is the best. Let our men and women do what they do best, which is serving the citizenry of the United States.

Show All Comments

Please post your comments here. Comments are moderated, so they may not appear immediately after submitting. We will not post comments that we consider abusive or off-topic.

Please type the letters/numbers you see above.

WT Daily

Sign up for our newsletter.

Terms and Privacy Policy consent

I agree to this site's Privacy Policy.