The Navy should start thinking more offensively in terms of how it arms of the surface fleet and develop more multi-mission weapons to maintain control of the seas, according to a former naval officer now think tank analyst.
The Navy should shift away from the multi-layered approach to air warfare that counters different threats in the same way, and adopt more varying approaches to taking out those threats, says Bryan Clark, and analyst at the Center for Strategic Budgetary Assessment.
“We need to shift our concept for how we do anti-air warfare,” he said at an event Friday hosted by the Hudson Institute.
Clark said the vertical launch systems on large surface combatants such as cruisers and destroyer are overly loaded with defensive systems, and space needs to open up for more offensive weapons. He noted, however, that the Navy’s future plans to deploy lasers and the electromagnetic rail gun for defense should help create room for more offensive weapons.
He said as the Navy moves to replace the Tomahawk Land Attack Missile it should pursue the notion of combining the new version to hit land targets but also operate as an anti-ship missile.
The SM-6 missile the Navy is developing is a good example of a multi-mission missile as it is designed to engage in terminal ballistic missile defense as well as take out over-the-horizon air threats, Clark said.
To fund the necessary technologies to meet the future warfare environment and keep its ships and their capabilities relevant, the Navy should reconsider other acquisition programs, such as the F-35C, Clark said. He said the aircraft is not ideal for operating in the future anti-access area denial warfare environment.
The Navy and Marine Corps should also rethink its approach to the amphibious ship fleet, and examine the use of less survivable ships based on commercial designs yet could do more to support war efforts while saving money, Clark said. He cited the Navy’s afloat forward staging base ships as an example.