Blue-water Navy Information
The term blue-water navy is a colloquialism used to describe a maritime force capable of operating across the deep waters of open oceans.[1] While what actually constitutes such a force remains undefined, there is a requirement for the ability to exercise sea control at wide ranges. The term used in the United Kingdom is expeditionary.
Contents |
Capabilities of a blue-water navy
HMS Vanguard of the Royal Navy Vanguard-class ballistic missile submarines.Blue-water (high seas) naval capability[2] means that a fleet is able to operate on the high seas. While traditionally a distinction was made between the coastal brown-water navy (operating in the littoral zone to 200 nautical miles (370 km)) and a seagoing blue-water navy, a new term green-water navy has been created by the U.S. Navy.[3] Green-water navy appears to be equivalent to a brown-water navy in older sources. The term brown-water navy appears to have been altered in U.S. Navy parlance to a riverine force.
In modern warfare, the term blue-water navy implies self-contained force protection from sub-surface, surface and airborne threats and a sustainable logistic reach, allowing a persistent presence at range. In some maritime environments, such a defence is given by natural obstacles, such as the Arctic ice shelf.
Few navies can operate as blue-water navies, but "many States are converting green-water navies to blue-water navies and this will increase military use of foreign Exclusive Economic Zones [littoral zone to 200 nautical miles (370 km)] with possible repercussions for the EEZ regime." [4]
As there is no clear definition of a blue-water navy, the status is disputed. Usually it is considered to be strongly linked to the maintenance of aircraft carriers capable of operating in the oceans. "In the early 80s there was a bitter and very public battle fought over whether or not to replace Australia's last aircraft carrier, HMAS Melbourne. Senior navy personnel warned without a carrier, Australia would be vulnerable to all types of threat. One ex-Chief of Navy went so far as to claim that Australia "would no longer have a blue-water navy (one capable of operating away from friendly coasts)." [5]
The term blue-water navy should not be confused with the brown-, green- and blue-water capability of a ship. U.S. Navy Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Michael Mullen pointed out in an interview with KQV (Pittsburgh): "We are looking at, in addition to the blue-water ships which I would characterize and describe as our aircraft carriers and other ships that support that kind of capability, we're also looking to develop capability in what I call the green-water and the brown-water, and the brown-water is really the rivers . . . These are challenges we all have, and we need to work together to ensure that the sea lanes are secure." [6] The capability for blue, green or brown water depends on the vessel's specifications. For example, vessels of a green-water navy can often operate in blue water. A number of nations have extensive maritime assets but lack the capability to maintain the required sustainable logistic reach. Some of them join coalition task groups in blue-water deployments.
While a blue-water navy can project sea control power into another nation's littoral, it remains susceptible to threats from less capable forces. Maintenance and logistics at range yield high costs, and there might be a saturation advantage over a deployed force through the use of land-based air or surface-to-surface missile assets, diesel-electric submarines, or asymmetric tactics such as Fast Inshore Attack Craft. An example of this vulnerability was the October 2000 USS Cole bombing in Aden.[7][8][9]
Navies described as blue-water navies
These are navies that have successfully used the capabilities of their blue-water navies to exercise control at high seas and from there have projected power into other nations' littoral waters.[10]
- The French Navy (Marine Nationale) has the ability to deploy an aircraft-carrier-based task group and maintains a Continuous At Sea Deterrence included in the Force Océanique Stratégique (Strategic Oceanic Force). The Amphibious assault capability is provided by the Mistral-class amphibious assault ships. France also has a wide range of naval deployments throughout the world.[11]
- The United Kingdom has recently retired the Harrier jets that fly from the nation's aircraft carriers,[12] leaving the Royal Navy temporarily without a fixed wing carrier strike capability.[13] Current plans will see the regeneration of this capability in 2020.[14] The navy currently maintains one task group based around an amphibious assault ship. The Royal Navy uses both HMS Ocean and HMS Illustrious in the Landing Platform, Helicopter role as well as deploying the two Albion-class amphibious transport docks as the center of a task group. The United Kingdom operates a Continuous At Sea Deterrence policy through its Vanguard-class ballistic missile submarines utilizing Trident missiles. The Royal Navy also supports a number of standing commitments worldwide on a continuous basis.[15] The Royal Navy Submarine Service operates an active force of seven fleet submarines, which operate globally.
- The United States Navy maintains eleven Carrier Strike Groups (one centered on USS Enterprise, the remainder on Nimitz-class carriers), of which six are deployed or ready for deployment within 30 days, and two ready for deployment within 90 days under the Fleet Response Plan (FRP). The US Navy also maintains a posture of Continuous At Sea Deterrence (CASD) through the Trident submarine-launched ballistic missiles on Ohio-class submarines. It also maintains a continuous deployment of Expeditionary Strike Groups that embark a Marine Expeditionary Unit with an Aviation Combat Element of Landing Helicopter Docks and Landing Helicopter Assault.[16]
See also
References
- ^ British Maritime Doctrine, BR 1806, Third Edition, dated 2004.
- ^ China's aircraft carrier ambitions: seeking truth from rumors Naval War College Review, Wntr, 2004 by Ian Storey, You Jiinfers.
- ^ Q&A with Adm. Michael G. Mullen 2006 CNO's Guidance Release Media Roundtable Pentagon, Washington, DC 13 October 2005
- ^ Naval activity in the foreign EEZ—the role of terminology in law regime Alexander S. Skaridov, St. Petersburg Association of the Law of the Sea, 7 Kazanskaya St., St. Petersburg 191186, Russia, Available online 11 November 2004
- ^ Why buy Abrams Tanks? We need to look at more appropriate options By Gary Brown - posted Wednesday, 31 March 2004
- ^ KQV RADIO (PITTSBURGH) INTERVIEW WITH JOE FENN MAY 19, 2006
- ^ "HMS Norfolk goes back to the day job". Eastern Daily Press. June 7, 2003. http://www.edp24.com/Content/Frontline/2003/030607HMSnorfolk1.asp. Retrieved 2009-02-23.
- ^ Rob van Heijster (April 6, 2005). "Smart Range of Burst fuzes". TNO. http://proceedings.ndia.org/5560/Wednesday/Session_III-A/Heijster.pdf. Retrieved 2009-02-23.
- ^ "Protecting Naval Surface Ships from Fast Attack Boat Swarm Threats". defense-update.com. January 10, 2007. http://www.defense-update.com/newscast/0107/news/110107_fiac.htm. Retrieved 2009-02-23.
- ^ http://www.henryjacksonsociety.org/stories.asp?id=279
- ^ French Navy official website
- ^ The Harrier takes its final bow
- ^ Flagship's return ends carrier strike capability
- ^ No wonder we can't even topple a tin-pot gangster like Gaddafi
- ^ current fleet deployments
- ^ Status of the U.S Navy
External links
Categories:
|