Carrier Truman Early Retirement

The Internet is abuzz with the reports that the Navy plans to skip the carrier Truman’s 2024 mid-life refueling and overhaul (RCOH) and then retire the ship around 20-25 years early (2).  I’m sure regular readers expect ComNavOps to go off on a rant but the reality is that this is a big to-do about nothing.  The Navy is just playing budget games.  They have no intention of skipping Truman’s refueling/overhaul and retiring the ship. 

You’ll recall that the Navy made exactly this ‘threat’ just prior to the Washington’s 2016 (delayed until 2017) RCOH.  The result?  Congress allocated more money for the Navy.  What a surprise.  And now, the Navy is once again floating the idea of retiring the next carrier due up for refueling.  What a surprise.  This is just a transparent attempt to get more money from Congress.

Consider a few factors that demonstrate the fraudulent nature of this threat:

Supposed Savings – Supposedly, an early retirement would save several billion dollars in overhaul costs plus twenty some years of operating costs for a total of, perhaps, $30B spread over the 20-30 years of the carrier’s projected remaining lifespan.  These savings figures are inflated but, even so, represent only around $1B per year – almost peanuts by Pentagon standards.  If the Navy were serious about cutting costs they’d scrap the worthless LCS and all its manning and operating costs … but they haven’t so this is just another budget game.

Law – The Navy is bound by law to maintain 11 operational carriers (1).  Congress doesn’t need to do anything in response to the Navy’s threat because the Navy can’t legally retire the carrier.  It’s an empty threat.

Precedent – Retiring a carrier early would be all the precedent and motivation that Congress would need to institute punitive budget cuts and flag officer cuts, neither of which the Navy will risk.  Again, retiring a carrier is an empty threat.

Air Wings – This entire issue is almost irrelevant since we only have 9 air wings anyway.  So, whether we have 10 carriers or 11 is a moot point since we can only supply 9 carriers with aircraft.

The Navy is already getting the reaction it wants which is Congressional outrage.

Top lawmakers are blasting the Pentagon’s decision to retire one of the Navy's 11 nuclear-powered aircraft carrier two decades early, with one prominent Senator calling the move “mind-boggling.” (3)

The next step in the Navy’s plan is for Congress to pony up more money for the Navy.  I can almost hear the Navy’s Admirals snickering behind their closed doors.

Although the threat to early retire a carrier is just a budget game and Congress doesn’t need to take any action, they should take action – they should fire CNO Richardson for attempting to blackmail Congress.  This kind of action by the Navy is reprehensible and despicable.  CNO Richardson and the Secretary of the Navy, Richard Spencer, who obviously approved this blackmail attempt, must be fired.

Come on, Congress.  It’s past time to remind the Navy that they work for you, not the other way around.

_________________________________

(1)Title 10 › Subtitle C› Part I › Chapter 507› § 5062: (b)The naval combat forces of the Navy shall include not less than 11 operational aircraft carriers. For purposes of this subsection, an operational aircraft carrier includes an aircraft carrier that is temporarily unavailable for worldwide deployment due to routine or scheduled maintenance or repair.

(2)Breaking Defense website, “Pentagon To Retire USS Truman Early, Shrinking Carrier Fleet To 10 ”, Sydney J. Freedberg, Jr., 27-Feb-2019,

https://breakingdefense.com/2019/02/pentagon-to-retire-uss-truman-early-shrinking-carrier-fleet-to-10/

(3)Breaking Defense website, “Carrier Cutback Plan ‘Mind Boggling’: Sen. Kaine”, Paul McLeary, 1-Mar-2019,

https://breakingdefense.com/2019/03/carrier-cutback-plan-mind-boggling-sen-kaine/

Bagikan Artikel ini