Maritime forces include Navy ships, aircraft, and shore support, as well as Marine Corps air and ground forces. These forces ensure the United States' use of the sea, including access to selected land areas through expeditionary amphibious operations. They provide peacetime overseas presence and prompt crisis-response capabilities, and can redeploy worldwide with unmatched independence from foreign basing and overflight limitations. Once committed to a conflict, these forces are capable of projecting significant firepower ashore.
The inherent characteristics of maritime forces -- flexibility, self-sustainability, and mobility -- are vital in the post-Cold War world, where crises may arise outside areas where long-established U.S. alliances and bases exist. These qualities have been exploited frequently over the past year in operations both overseas and close to American shores.
The FY 1996 budget and Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) will maintain these qualities through selective modernization programs for key elements of the force. Combat readiness will be preserved, and quality of life enhancements will be pursued using savings accrued from the deferral of lesser-priority development and procurement programs. The result will be a modern, highly versatile force, smaller than its Cold War-era predecessors but possessing the diverse capabilities needed to meet evolving challenges.
MISSIONS
The primary focus of maritime forces has shifted from global to regional threats. In this context, maritime forces perform the following missions:
To carry out these missions, maritime forces conduct antiair, antisubmarine, and antiship operations as well as a variety of land attack missions. Amphibious, airborne surveillance, mine warfare, and fleet support operations also are vital to ensuring control of the seas -- a requisite capability in the successful employment of naval forces.
Maritime forces operate under joint command as appropriate, and ships can offer particularly suitable facilities for command and control of joint operations early in a contingency. When employed in a joint operation, maritime forces both provide support for other force elements and receive support from them. As an example, carrier-based aircraft and cruise missile-equipped ships and submarines can join land-based aviation forces in attacking ground targets, as they were called on to do in the Persian Gulf War. Likewise, land-based forces can contribute significantly to maritime operations, an important example being the aerial-refueling support provided to carrier aircraft by Air Force tankers.
In 1994, the Navy and Marine Corps (both active and reserve elements) participated in operations around the world spanning the full range of naval missions. Maritime forces spearheaded Operation Uphold Democracy in Haiti; participated in U.N. and NATO operations in Bosnia; enforced U.N. sanctions against the Haitian military; supported U.N. resolutions against Iraq, including enforcement of the no-fly zones and maritime interdiction operations; delivered humanitarian aid to Somalia and provided security for relief workers there; supported the evacuation of American citizens from Rwanda; provided support for Haitian and Cuban refugee operations; and used naval patrols and surveillance assets to help counter drug trafficking in the southern approaches to the United States.
THREAT
Naval forces could face a variety of threats while employed in forward areas. Potential regional adversaries, although not as powerful as the former Soviet Union, could still pose strong challenges to forces operating close to the shore. Among the most worrisome threats are antiship cruise missiles, which are becoming increasingly available throughout the world. These sophisticated, relatively inexpensive weapons can be launched from the air, sea, or land. The short reaction times inherent in countering them, once airborne, pose a significant challenge to existing antiair systems. Advanced weapons produced in several countries are being deployed in the Persian Gulf region, for example, presenting new and challenging threats to surface vessels.
The proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and tactical ballistic missiles poses another serious threat to U.S. forces operating in littoral environments. The risk that these weapons would be employed in a regional conflict has increased substantially over the past two decades. Currently, more than 25 countries possess or are developing nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons, and more than 15 nations have ballistic missile delivery systems.
Naval mines also pose a significant threat in littoral environments. Potential adversaries can accomplish offensive and defensive mining not only by using inexpensive, primitive techniques, but also by exploiting new mine technologies that are resistant to current clearance measures. To counter this threat, U.S. forces would first attempt to avoid minefields by maneuvering around them. If evasion were impossible, or if undetected fields were encountered, U.S. forces would move promptly to clear passages so that seaborne operations could proceed.
Diesel-electric submarines constitute another undersea threat with which U.S. forces must be prepared to deal. These vessels, operated by numerous navies around the world, can be difficult to detect when patrolling in shallow water. Uncountered, they can disrupt shipping and shut down vital sea lanes in littoral areas.
U.S. military strategy assumes that potential regional aggressors will field a diverse range of capabilities with which U.S. maritime forces might have to deal. The FY 1996 budget and six-year program will ensure that the Navy and Marine Corps are equipped and trained to deal effectively with these threats.
FORCE STRUCTURE AND CAPABILITIES
During the Cold War, carrier battle groups and amphibious ready groups were the centerpieces of the maritime force structure. Carrier battle groups usually consisted of one aircraft carrier and about six cruisers or destroyers and one or two attack submarines, augmented by various support ships. Amphibious ready groups were composed of four to five assault landing ships and their embarked Marine components. Emphasis on these basic force elements continues in the post-Cold War period, although significant changes are being made in some of their components and in the ways they are employed in joint operations.
The flexibility of U.S. naval forces enables their capabilities to be tailored to match a wide range of contingencies. Forces of varying size and composition can be committed to an operation, depending on the nature and scale of response required. For operations not likely to involve high-intensity combat, a naval expeditionary task group (NETG) or an amphibious ready group with embarked Marines might be employed. Depending on the situation, an NETG could consist of amphibious ships plus a mix of surface combatants and submarines armed with long-range Tomahawk land-attack and antiship cruise missiles. For operations requiring a more robust response, a larger naval expeditionary task force could be deployed. Such a force would consist of one or more aircraft carriers with multimission air wings plus amphibious ships with an embarked Marine air-ground task force. In all cases, maritime forces will be capable of operating jointly with other forces, both U.S. and allied.
The maritime force structure supports the warfighting strategy called for by the Bottom-Up Review, which requires U.S. forces to be capable of fighting two major regional conflicts (MRCs) nearly simultaneously. Maritime forces often would provide the first response in an MRC. The equivalent of one carrier battle group and one amphibious ready group/Marine Expeditionary Unit are deployed on a continuous basis in the Western Pacific, Mediterranean, and Indian Ocean regions, or could be dispatched there in one or two weeks. These forces could undertake a range of operations in the initial phases of a conflict, from evacuating U.S. citizens to conducting aircraft and cruise missile strikes against surface and air targets.
To augment these deployments, additional maritime forces in a combat-ready condition could be ordered to a crisis region from U.S. waters within a matter of days. Once in the theater, these forces could help stabilize conditions ashore and provide secure afloat basing for command, control, and sustained combat as the U.S. buildup proceeded.
Ultimately, four to five carrier battle groups and one to two Marine Expeditionary Forces (MEFs) could be employed in a single MRC. For two nearly simultaneous conflicts, eight to 10 carrier battle groups and two to three MEFs could be required. These forces would prosecute the final phases of the campaign, supporting a counteroffensive and ensuring the prompt restoration of any friendly territory still in enemy hands.
Beyond warfighting requirements, maritime force needs are driven by forward presence goals in areas critical to U.S. interests. In some cases, sustaining planned levels of presence generates a larger total force requirement than does the two-MRC warfighting strategy. Accordingly, the FY 1996-2001 program provides sufficient maritime forces to prosecute two major regional conflicts and to meet peacetime requirements for overseas presence, while ensuring that an adequate rotation base is available to support Navy and Marine Corps goals for personnel operating tempo.
Force Structure
Twelve aircraft carriers and 12 large-deck amphibious ships constitute the core of the Navy's projected fleet, as shown in the following charts. Of these ships, one carrier will serve primarily as a reserve/training vessel and one amphibious ship will be designated as a reserve vessel.
One aircraft carrier and one amphibious assault ship were deactivated last year. Additional deactivations in 1994 included 18 cruisers, eight reserve frigates, 12 amphibious ships, and four attack submarines. Taking into account other planned ship retirements and future delivery schedules, the naval force in 1995 will consist of 373 ships (see Table VI-3).
Further adjustments, reflecting post-Cold War needs, will trim the force to about 330-346 vessels by FY 2001. The FY 1996 budget and associated FYDP support the following force structure goals:
Unforeseen deployments over the past year placed extremely heavy demands on some elements of the force. Guided-missile frigates provided the greatest relative share of added underway time in the surface combatant force. Because these ships are the least costly surface combatants to operate, and because they are multipurpose vessels, they are especially well-suited for operations such as those conducted last year in the Caribbean. Accordingly, the Navy is reconsidering its current plans to retire these ships before the end of their projected service lives.
Capabilities
Maritime forces provide capabilities for a broad range of operations, from peacetime presence to crisis response to major conflicts. Operating independently or as part of a joint force, they perform command and control functions, maintain dominance over the battle area, and project combat power ashore in support of military campaigns.
COMMAND, CONTROL, AND SURVEILLANCE
Maritime forces possess extensive command, control, communication, computer, and intelligence (C4I) capabilities that can be exploited from space, sea, or land. Onboard high-capacity, multimedia communications enable joint force commanders to receive information from centrally-managed national and joint support systems and from tactical surveillance systems such as maritime patrol aircraft, carrier-based aircraft, submarines, and surface combatants. Upgraded surveillance systems for naval forces permit near-real-time delivery of data in support of joint operations.
BATTLESPACE DOMINANCE
Control of the sea and the surrounding airspace is essential to effective maritime operations. Equally critical in littoral areas is the ability to deny an opposing force access to the sea. Aircraft carriers and surface combatants equipped with the Aegis air defense system would maintain air superiority and protect neighboring airspace in a regional conflict. Submarines, surface combatants, maritime patrol aircraft, and mine countermeasure forces also contribute to controlling the surface and undersea environments.
POWER PROJECTION ASHORE
Carrier-based aircraft and cruise missile-equipped surface ships and submarines provide firepower for quick retaliatory strikes ashore. Marine expeditionary forces, either embarked on amphibious ships or supported ashore from maritime prepositioning ships, extend the landward reach of littoral operations. Naval strike and expeditionary warfare forces can mass firepower and air/ground maneuver units to spearhead joint or multinational power projection operations as part of a larger sea-air-land team.
FORCE SUSTAINMENT
The ability to deploy and sustain maritime and other U.S. forces at great distances from American shores has become vital as the overseas base structure is reduced. A comprehensive logistic support system serves as the foundation for worldwide naval operations. It includes airlift and sealift forces, replenishment ships, mobile repair facilities, and advanced logistic support hubs. The Navy maintains about 40 combat logistics force ships to provide fuel, food, munitions, and other supplies to task forces at sea. Another 20 to 25 mobile logistics and support vessels can establish temporary support sites in forward areas. Complementing these forces are afloat prepositioning ships carrying equipment and supplies for U.S.-based forces that would deploy overseas in a crisis. These vessels, maintained continuously on station near potential trouble spots, are augmented in major deployments by sealift forces delivering additional combat and support material from the continental United States. Combat logistics support forces thus contribute not only to the sustainability of maritime forces; they support the deployment and operation of other U.S. forces in forward locations.
READINESS AND SUSTAINABILITY
One of the fundamental strengths of U.S. maritime forces is their ability to bring military power rapidly to bear in defense of U.S. interests worldwide. Navy and Marine forces on station in forward areas are trained and fully ready to operate either independently or as part of a joint force. To maintain readiness, peacetime forward deployments are designed to mirror wartime operating tempos as closely as possible.
This year, maritime forces will participate in more than 120 major unit exercises. More than half of these exercises will involve joint operations with other U.S. or allied forces. Exercises improve the readiness of maritime forces to support peacetime forward presence missions, they train U.S. forces to operate efficiently together, and they strengthen bilateral and multilateral security relationships with U.S. allies.
The number of flying hours and steaming days programmed for FY 1996-2001 is identical to the amount budgeted last year. In FY 1996, steaming days will be apportioned between the Atlantic and Pacific fleets as follows:
Contingency operations this past year have strained the Navy and Marine Corps' people, equipment, and budget. To offset the cost of unanticipated deployments, training and exercises often must be reduced. Prompt additional funding for contingency operations is needed in order to avoid adverse consequences for readiness and training. As discussed elsewhere in this report, the Department is working with the Congress to develop a method of managing and funding contingencies that does not jeopardize readiness.
Sustaining maritime forces in distant regions requires adequate onboard spare parts as well as material maintained elsewhere in the Navy supply system. The FY 1996 budget and FYDP recognize this fact, providing funds to procure the munitions, spare parts, and other supplies needed to achieve sustainability objectives for two nearly simultaneous major regional conflicts.
MODERNIZATION
To ensure a capable and ready force for the future, the Department of the Navy is pursuing a plan, initiated last year, for the selective modernization of the fleet. This plan embodies a concept known as recapitalization. Recapitalization aims to create an investment program in which sufficient new acquisitions are funded on a continuous basis to offset the capability lost through the disposal of older equipment. The initiatives planned for FY 1996 and subsequent years will maintain a robust, albeit smaller, maritime force structure while hedging against uncertainties in the threat. To maintain the capabilities needed for littoral operations, critical modernization programs outlined in the Bottom-Up Review are continued in this budget. Several lesser-priority programs have been curtailed or eliminated, however, relative to plans a year ago. These reductions, described in subsequent sections, represent a 10 percent decrease relative to last year's plan. They were undertaken in order to fund higher-priority readiness and personnel programs while remaining within overall fiscal limits.
Shipbuilding
Shipbuilding programs in the FY 1996 budget and FYDP will provide selective replacements for older ships, modernize the existing force, and preserve critical industrial capabilities. Table VI-5 portrays the FY 1996- 2001 shipbuilding program.
AIRCRAFT CARRIERS
Two more Nimitz-class carriers will be delivered by FY 1998, and the Navy's next carrier, USS Ronald Reagan (CVN-76), will enter service in FY 2003. These ships will replace older, conventionally-powered vessels, supporting a long-term force of 11 active carriers. An existing conventionally-powered carrier will serve as a reserve and training ship, which also will be available for limited deployments. Plans for aircraft carrier construction beyond CVN-76 await the completion later this year of ongoing studies of alternative carrier concepts and related technologies.
AMPHIBIOUS SHIPS
Overall plans for the amphibious force structure have changed from a year ago. The unanticipated deployment of the USS Inchon (LPH-12) to Haiti led to a reevaluation of plans, resulting in a decision to maintain sufficient ships to support 12 amphibious ready groups. The retirement schedules of LPHs will be adjusted accordingly. The acquisition of a seventh LHD, programmed for procurement in FY 2001, will sustain a force of 12 large-deck amphibious assault ships well into the next century. Ships of the Wasp (LHD-1) class are large, multipurpose vessels designed to embark and deploy Marine ground forces using a combination of vertical short-takeoff and landing (V/STOL) aircraft, helicopters, landing craft, and amphibious vehicles.
Three additional LHDs and four LSD-49s -- a dock cargo landing ship for transporting and launching amphibious craft and vehicles -- will enter the force by the end of the decade. Procurement of the first LPD-17 amphibious transport dock (formerly designated LX) has been delayed two years, to FY 1998, because of budgetary constraints. Twelve ships of this class will be needed to sustain the goal of providing lift capacity for 2.5 Marine brigade-equivalents. Due to early retirements, one portion of lift capability -- vehicle space -- has dropped relative to desired levels. The delay in the LPD-17 program will slow the recovery of this element of lift capacity, although the retention of 11 older amphibious ships (LKAs and LSTs) in special reserve status will offset this loss somewhat. Nonetheless, the capability and flexibility of future amphibious forces will exceed today's levels.
ATTACK SUBMARINES
The final SSN-688 Los Angeles-class submarine will be delivered in 1996. Two SSN-21-class (Seawolf) attack submarines are under construction, and the FY 1996 budget includes funds for the third, and final, boat of this class. The New Attack Submarine (NSSN), a lower-cost alternative to the Seawolf, has been approved by the Defense Acquisition Board to proceed into the demonstration and validation phase of development. The NSSN will provide a replacement for 688-class submarines, which will begin retiring in large numbers in the next decade. It will incorporate technology improvements developed in the Seawolf program, along with capability enhancements for littoral operations. The FY 1996 budget includes advance funds for the first NSSN, which will be procured in FY 1998; a second ship is planned for FY 2000. This relatively low rate of production, with the third unit to be funded after FY 2001, is sufficient for the near term, given the reduction in the overall size of the attack submarine force. Procurement will have to be increased early in the next decade, however, to sustain a force of about 45 submarines over the longer term.
SURFACE COMBATANTS
With the delivery of the USS Port Royal (CG-73) in 1994, the 27-ship Aegis (Ticonderoga-class) cruiser program is now complete. Deliveries of Arleigh Burke (DDG-51) class guided-missile destroyers are continuing, with seven ships slated to enter service in 1995. The FY 1996-2001 program procures DDG-51s at a rate averaging just under three per year. This represents a net reduction of two ships relative to last year's plan. The adjustment was made in order to fund higher-priority initiatives.
At the end of 1994, the surface combatant force numbered 111 ships. The retention of two FFG-7-class frigates and two DD-963-class destroyers previously slated for retirement will increase the force to 116 ships in 1996. FFG-7 force structure needs beyond FY 1996 will be examined in future program and budget reviews.
The number of Aegis surface combatants in commission will increase from 39 in 1995 to about 59 by the end of the decade. Ships carrying the Aegis system offer greater flexibility for operations in high-threat environments, while increasing overall U.S. air defense capability. The Aegis system can identify, track, and simultaneously engage many more air targets than could earlier air defense systems. Research and development efforts will focus on providing Aegis-equipped ships with the ability to support theater ballistic missile defense operations, and on planning the next generation of surface combatants. The chart on the preceding page shows the changing mix of surface combatants in the force structure over the FYDP period.
MINE COUNTERMEASURE SHIPS
The Navy is replacing its aging minesweeper fleet with a new mine countermeasures (MCM) force. Last year's programs remain intact in the FY 1996 budget, reflecting the continued high priority accorded this warfare area. The force will include two new classes of ships, minesweeping helicopters, and several new sensor and combat systems. These additions will improve U.S. capabilities to detect both surface and underwater mines, while enhancing mine neutralization capabilities and improving navigation capability.
Two Avenger (MCM-1) class ships were delivered in 1994, completing this 14-ship program. Three more Osprey (MHC-51) class mine-hunters will enter service in 1995, building toward a total of 12 of these ships by 1998. Additionally, the USS Inchon (LPH-12) is being converted into an MCM command and control ship (designated MCS) to be operated by the Naval Reserve. The ship will be transferred to the reserve component in 1996.
COMBAT LOGISTICS FORCES
New AOE-6-class fast combat support ships will enhance the sustainability and flexibility of naval expeditionary forces. These high-speed multiproduct logistics ships will provide munitions, bulk petroleum, oil, lubricants, and dry and frozen provisions to battle forces at sea. The AOE-6 will replace aging AOE-1-class vessels, which will be retired beginning in the next decade. Four AOE-6s have been delivered or are under construction, and a fifth ship is planned for procurement in future years.
For the longer term, the Navy is evaluating designs for a new dry cargo ship, designated ADC(X). Ships of this class will replace combat logistics ships reaching the end of their service lives between 2006 and 2017. The ADC(X) will provide logistics support to seaborne task groups from forward bases ashore or specially-equipped merchant ships. It also will have a landing deck, making it capable of performing replenishment operations by helicopter. The lead ship is planned for procurement in FY 2000.
MAJOR FLEET SUPPORT SHIPS
The Navy is reducing its force of large tenders to four ships in the active fleet and two in a special reserve category. The remaining 11 tenders will be inactivated. The small residual force of active tenders hedges against a lack of overseas basing facilities in major conflicts. Retention of additional tenders in the inactive reserve fleet provides a longer-term hedge against unforeseen future developments.
THE SHIPBUILDING INDUSTRIAL BASE
The shipbuilding industrial base is one of the key supporting elements of U.S. maritime force modernization and preparedness. The ongoing reduction in maritime force levels clearly portends an additional contraction of the U.S. shipbuilding industry. The Bottom-Up Review concluded, however, that maintaining key elements of shipbuilding capability is in the long-term national interest. Maritime forces, in particular, are tied to the industrial base for the production or conversion of militarily-unique items. Essential industrial capabilities must therefore be maintained for ships, submarines, and weapons.
The industrial base supporting new surface combatant construction currently consists of two private shipyards: Ingalls Shipbuilding Inc., in Pascagoula, Mississippi, and Bath Iron Works Corporation in Bath, Maine. Both of these yards have significant design, construction, and combat system integration capabilities. The procurement schedule for DDG-51s, discussed earlier in this section, will preserve design and construction capacity for advanced surface combatants while the industry downsizes to lower-rate production. The industrial base supporting construction of amphibious/auxiliary and sealift ships comprises three private shipyards: Ingalls Shipbuilding Inc.; Avondale Industries Inc., in Avondale, Louisiana; and National Steel and Shipbuilding Company, in San Diego, California. Projected capacity in this sector is sufficient to meet future shipbuilding requirements.
The design and construction of a nuclear-powered submarine involves some of the most difficult tasks performed by American industry. The associated technologies have been refined continuously since the 1950s, and are a vital resource that would be extremely difficult and costly to reconstitute if lost. The third Seawolf-class attack submarine, scheduled for construction at Groton, Connecticut, beginning in FY 1996, will preserve critical design, production, and supporting technologies until the New Attack Submarine enters production later in the decade. NSSN construction will, in turn, ensure the viability of General Dynamics' Electric Boat Division as a submarine builder into the next century.
Weapon Systems
TOMAHAWK
Tomahawk cruise missiles, carried by submarines and ships, allow seaborne forces to attack surface and land targets over distant ranges, in all types of weather. The Navy has taken steps in recent years both to increase the effectiveness of the Tomahawk system and to strengthen mission planning capabilities. Improvements in the latter area have resulted from the introduction in 1994 of the Tomahawk Afloat Planning System (APS), which allows forces at sea to plan or modify land-attack missions more rapidly. Other upgrades, being pursued as part of the Tomahawk Baseline Improvement Program (TBIP), will enhance the terminal guidance, precision strike, and hard-target penetration capabilities of the Tomahawk system.
STANDARD MISSILE
An upgraded version of the Standard surface- to-air missile (SM-2 Block IV) is entering production in FY 1995. In conjunction with the shipboard Aegis system, SM-2 Block IV missiles will provide naval forces with a comprehensive defense against attacks by ships, aircraft, and cruise missiles. Development continues on the next version of the Standard missile, the SM-2 Block IVA, designed to enhance fleet air defenses and provide a limited area (lower-tier) theater ballistic missile defense capability. Details on the Block IVA program are provided in the Ballistic Missile Defense section of this report.
SHIP SELF-DEFENSE SYSTEMS
The proliferation of antiship cruise missiles poses a continuing threat to surface forces. In response, the Navy is enhancing the self-defense capabilities of its warships. Two major initiatives are being pursued: the Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC) and Ship Self-Defense (SSD) programs.
CEC consists of hardware and software improvements that will strengthen the air defense capabilities of naval task groups. Ships with these upgrades will be able to pass detailed target information to other ships within a task force in near real time. Early tests have demonstrated CEC's potential to make a major contribution to fleet defense. Ships will begin receiving these upgrades in FY 1996.
SSD comprises a series of programs designed to improve active and passive ship self-defense capabilities. The Close-In Weapons System (CIWS) is being upgraded to expand its engagement envelope. The Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) -- a lightweight, low-cost surface-to-air missile -- is being added to destroyers and amphibious ships. An additional defensive layer will be provided by the Evolved Sea Sparrow missile (ESSM), scheduled for installation on several new ship classes starting in FY 1999. Other initiatives include enhancements in quick-reaction combat capability, radar signature reductions, improved integration of shipboard weapons, and the introduction of infrared sensors and an improved electronic warfare decoy system.
In parallel with these initiatives, improvements are being made in ship defenses against torpedo attacks. The FY 1996 budget continues procurement of the Surface Ship Torpedo Defense (SSTD) system, which will be installed on aircraft carriers and selected surface combatants and large-deck amphibious ships during routine maintenance periods.
Some modernization efforts have been slowed or canceled in order to fund higher-priority initiatives. RAM and SSD upgrades for FFG-7-class frigates have been deferred in view of the current plans for retiring these ships. Funding also has been reduced for radar upgrades, signature reduction efforts, and improvements in antisubmarine warfare (ASW) combat systems for some destroyers and cruisers.
SH-60 HELICOPTER
The Light Airborne Multipurpose System (LAMPS) combines the SH-60B helicopter with a computer-integrated shipboard system to extend the range and overall capabilities of surface combatants for antisubmarine and antisurface warfare, surface surveillance, and over-the-horizon targeting missions. To enhance littoral warfighting capabilities, the Flight IIA design of the DDG-51 will include the capability to support SH-60Bs. The last seven of these aircraft will be delivered in FY 1996.
The F version of the SH-60 is replacing the obsolete carrier-based SH-3H as naval battle groups' inner-zone ASW helicopter system. The SH-60F employs a new, longer-range active dipping sonar to localize and track submarines, particularly in littoral areas. Future plans call for the conversion and reconfiguration of both the SH-60 B and F classes into a common SH-60R model. The SH-60R program includes a service life extension as well as avionics upgrades, such as the addition of an advanced low-frequency sonar and multimode radar. The aircraft also will be outfitted with gun and missile systems, to enhance performance in littoral regions. The first conversions are programmed for FY 1999.
NAVAL SURFACE FIRE SUPPORT
With the return of its four battleships to inactive status, the Navy is studying near- and long-term improvements in this mission area to support amphibious operations. Currently, most naval fire support is provided by tactical aircraft. While tactical air forces will continue to play a critical role in this area, surface combatants also have important capabilities to contribute. Accordingly, the Navy is investigating gun, missile, and rocket technologies that could provide cost-effective surface fire support at various ranges. Promising examples include advanced projectiles for existing 5-inch guns, advanced guns based on liquid propellant and electro-thermal chemical designs, a shipboard 155mm gun using existing precision-guided munitions, and a new attack missile system aboard ships. Acquisition decisions on specific programs await completion of ongoing analyses and tests.
THE WEAPONS INDUSTRIAL BASE
The ability to design and produce sophisticated weapons is protected in the FY 1996 budget through the acquisition of selected weapons, such as Tomahawk cruise missiles, at minimum sustaining rates from single producers. The cost penalty incurred through buying at less than economic rates is offset by the overall budgetary savings achieved. Maintaining warm production lines will preserve the design teams and technology base needed to increase production in future years.
Upgrades of existing systems also contribute to the maintenance of a technology base. Key programs in this area include torpedo enhancements, modernization of the Close-In Weapons System (CIWS), and improvements to air-delivered weapons, such as the Standoff Land Attack Missile (SLAM).
Surveillance and Communications
The FY 1996 budget includes funds for critical upgrades to naval C4I systems, such as extremely high frequency (EHF) and superhigh frequency (SHF) satellite communication systems, the Joint Service Imagery Processing System (JSIPS), and the Joint Tactical Information Distribution System (JTIDS). These enhancements will strengthen command and control capabilities in joint operations and improve the ability of aircraft carriers to support a joint force air component commander.
The budget also expands unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) capabilities, providing air-capable ships with an organic aerial-surveillance capability. In addition, funds are provided to upgrade the surveillance capabilities of the Navy's E-2C and EP-3 aircraft as well as the fleet of P-3C maritime patrol aircraft (MPA).
P-3C MARITIME PATROL AIRCRAFT
Land-based MPA squadrons provide surveillance support for naval task groups at sea. The responsiveness and utility of these forces in littoral environments has been demonstrated in numerous deployments in recent years.
The MPA force is being reduced to 12 active and eight reserve squadrons as part of the overall reduction in naval forces. With P-3C aircraft no longer in production, modernization is focused on life extensions and upgrades of existing aircraft. The Navy is extending the operational life of its P-3C force to about 40 years. A further extension to about 50 years is planned beyond the FYDP. Enhancements in surveillance capabilities are being made through the Antisurface Warfare Improvement Program (AIP). This initiative entails the application of commercial off-the-shelf technologies to improve MPA capabilities for surveillance, combat identification, and antiship missions. The AIP also includes communication upgrades and a new data link capability that will enable surveillance information to be transmitted in near real time. The FY 1996 budget and six-year plan provide funds to convert 46 of the newest P-3Cs to the AIP configuration. Ultimately, a total of 146 P-3C aircraft will receive these modifications.
Mine Countermeasures
The FY 1996 budget and associated FYDP provide funding for mine countermeasure enhancements called for in the 1994-1995 update to the Navy's Mine Warfare Plan. Both near- and long-term improvements are programmed. Specifically, mine countermeasure helicopters will receive modifications to support night operations, while upgrades to C4I systems will provide enhanced satellite communications links for MCM ships and improve MCM mission planning.
FREEDOM OF NAVIGATION
Freedom of navigation for U.S. maritime forces is discussed in Appendix I.
The FY 1996 budget carries forward the force structure and modernization initiatives undertaken as a result of the Bottom-Up Review. While some modernization programs have been curtailed to fund higherpriority readiness and personnel measures, the overall thrust of the budget and six-year plan supports the force goals and strategy objectives established in the Bottom-Up Review. The initiatives outlined in this chapter will ensure that U.S. maritime forces are organized, trained, and equipped to meet the challenges of the 21st century.
