In an era marked by rapid technological advancements and shifting geopolitical landscapes, the United States Navy faces a critical junction in deciding the future composition of its fleet. As nations worldwide grapple with the optimal balance between aircraft carriers and submarines, the U.S. Navy confronts the same strategic dilemma, magnified by the high costs and complex logistics associated with nuclear-powered vessels.
The Last of a Dying Breed
The USS Blueback, the last conventionally-powered submarine commissioned into the U.S. Navy, exemplifies the efficiency and capability of diesel-electric technology. Her record-setting underwater voyage from Japan to San Diego and the two battle stars awarded for Vietnam War service reflect the prowess of diesel submarines. However, since her decommissioning in 1990, the U.S. Navy has steadfastly committed to a nuclear-only submarine force. Ensigns Michael Walker and Austin Krusz argue that nuclear power offers nearly unlimited endurance and supports global blue water operations, a critical advantage given America’s ocean-bordered geography.
Nevertheless, the authors acknowledge that diesel-electric technology is catching up, proposing that diesel subs, possibly augmented by air-independent propulsion (AIP) systems, could be constructed faster and at lower cost. Such vessels could quietly cruise underwater for weeks, as evidenced by the Swedish HMS Gotland’s repeated “sinkings” of the USS Ronald Reagan in war games. These capabilities suggest that diesel-electric AIP submarines could provide a cost-effective expansion to the Navy’s undersea forces.
The High Price of Nuclear Dominance
The impending dismantlement of the USS Enterprise, the world’s first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, underscores the immense cost and time-consuming nature of dealing with nuclear vessels. While the storied carrier’s disassembly at a private yard relieves pressure on overburdened Navy shipyards, it also portends the staggering expenses and logistical challenges of nuclear fleet maintenance and retirement.
Indo-Pacific Tensions and Fleet Dynamics
In the Indo-Pacific, a key theater of naval power, the balance between carriers and submarines takes on heightened significance. Aircraft carriers project air power and serve as potent diplomatic tools, as seen in the U.S. Navy’s diverse historical engagements, from the Cuban Missile Crisis to the Global War on Terror. However, the vulnerability of carriers to modern missile threats cannot be overlooked.
Submarines, with their stealth and reconnaissance capabilities, offer a stark contrast to the visible might of carriers. Diesel and nuclear variants provide options for nations prioritizing stealth over endurance.
The Future Naval Equation
For the U.S. Navy, the question of whether to invest in additional carriers like the forthcoming USS Enterprise (CVN-80) or to diversify with AIP submarines presents a complex challenge. The answer may lie in a nuanced approach, blending the strategic visibility of carriers with the discreet deterrence of submarines. As Walker and Krusz suggest, it’s time for a serious conversation about the optimal mix of naval power—a conversation with implications that echo far beyond the deep blue sea.
Relevant articles:
– Why Doesn’t the U.S. Navy Build Diesel Submarines?, nationalinterest.org
– U.S. Navy Will Dismantle Carrier USS Enterprise at a Commercial Shipyard, The Maritime Executive
– Carrier vs submarine naval power in the Indo-Pacific, Universidad de Navarra