 Holy cow packed house great to be back for For I guess my fourth year in a row here I Think four years ago. I was three years ago. I think I had been in 96 or at the time in 86 For all of about I know four and a half days or something like that and I was wide-eyed It was the first time really I had had the opportunity to attend this symposium in In quite a while as I have been out doing some other things But I have to tell you That in the past three years This has grown to be my absolute favorite time of year Because we get to do a bunch of things I Get to spend the time as I did today And I have to tell you if I if I stopped to talk to you and it and it feels like I'm getting pulled away It's probably because I got to hit the head because I've turned 55 and you know, I got to make sure that I take care of business but But talk about seeing friends seeing old shipmates seeing folk I mean, it's just mentors friends the whole nine yards And it gives us an opportunity to spend a few a few days Concentrating on I think what we can all collectively agree is our favorite subject Surface warfare. It certainly is mine and it's certainly my one that I have a passion for certainly and I feel very very blessed that C&L Greenert saw Fit to send me out to San Diego because I get to spend 100% of my time I got to spend a hundred percent of my time is up Nevin 96 Working on surface warfare and that continues today Before I get going I want to recognize that I wanted I want to thank the surface Navy Association for once more I think raising the bar yet again, so I'll have that a quick hand for all the folks that have put that on and Just continue to do a superb job for it every day I'd like to thank the sponsors as Barry did and obviously your support is absolutely vital in order to Ensure that we continue to have this professional dialogue I'd like to recognize a couple groups First group flag warden Can I get the flag warden to stand up here real quick? And I just want to point out that these are the folks that are taking the surface warfare community into the future Okay These and a bunch more that you'll probably see out and around and I just like you to give a hand to these guys Because the support that they give the surface warfare and to me and to everybody is sincerely appreciated so well done folks Thank you very much The other group I'd like to identify and I think they're back there in the back. Yes. They are The midshipman from the United States Naval Academy came down. They are the future of our Navy. They're the future of surface warfare. I Am so happy that you all are here. Thanks so very much for coming down. Okay. Look forward to talking to y'all The final person I'd like to recognize Is Admiral Jim Doyle? I Think we all know That the reason that we have the fleet today, there's a lot of people that were involved in it But probably no one more invested and no one who cared as passionately when we when things were coming at us from all sides And Admiral Jim Doyle and his job is up a three so Admiral Doyle Thank you for being here today, sir, and thank you for everything you've done for our Navy so Opting the car with my 17 year old son to drive across country last summer to go out and be served for He said he was going to drive if you're 17 year old son says he's going to assist you in driving across country That's not true. I think I got a grand total of about an hour out of him the rest of the time. It was kind of like this But I had the opportunity to think I mean I obviously had taken the opportunity and it talked to a bunch of folks as I prepared to Go relieve as the commander of surf pack and the commander of the surface forces And I thought you know really what I what I wanted to do and what I wanted to understand very early In my tour and talking to a lot of folks that I admire greatly. I think we needed I needed to build a foundation understand Where it is we need to take surface warfare and I think what I really wanted to concentrate on first and foremost was What it is we value So at the first surface warfare officers of flag officer training symposium that I held last summer I brought the leadership of the surface warfare community in and I asked them one question What do we value What do we value Because I think that Should be the foundation for where we take surface warfare into the future now going back Shoot to prior to senile greeners time. I was on senile greeners transition team And I was in the room with a bunch of really smart folks And we had been assigned the task of trying to lay down some tenants for senile greener and It was a robust discussion and and and at that time We came down on certainly the first tenant that's war fighting first I Said I think we're done War fighting first sounds like exactly where it is we need to go this and now we got to come up with three and so We came up with some supporting tenants. I think you know operate forward and be ready really they feed into the war fighting first piece and As I discussed with my 17 year old son as we were driving across country and as I thought about it and in my moments of quiet reflection I said to myself really it's all about war fighting first It's all about war fighting first. It's all about war fighting first So what you're looking at is the grand total of all of my slides today, and I'm gonna concentrate on this Because I think this is where we are I think this is where we need to go This is what needs to guide us as we press forward into the future so One of the products and the other thing I thought about was I said, you know We used to have a thing called surface warfare magazine and for budgetary reasons we it went away It's back Okay, there are copies here. There are copies outside. There are going to be copies in the ward room There are going to be copies in the chief's mess. They're going to be copies on the mess decks We're gonna we have reinstituted surface warfare magazine, and I'm really really glad that it's back Not that I don't really enjoy reading things online, but I kind of like to hold it and bend it and move it around and I will direct your attention to this one because this really is Is focused on there's a bunch of great articles in here, but on page. I think it's four and five is the vision for surface warfare and The first principles of surface warfare Okay, this was the foundational piece. This was the product that I was really going after in that first meeting that I had with the surface warfare officers to Understand where it is we're taking the force Something foundational So here's where we are and I'm it's is it perfect. No, but is it pretty damn close. Yep. I think it is Okay, and I think this will guide us as we as we move into the future Another thing I did when I pressed out into San Diego was You know, I had spent time obviously right in the budget for surface warfare and I wanted to Understand if the budget that we had been executing Was having the effect that we thought it was having in the two and a half years that I was that I was running so Oh, thank you very much If anybody else would like one I don't need more than one really Thank you very much Hey, how we doing and and and oh by the way, I'm the I'm the man trained in a quit person We are the man trained in a quit people without a surf pack So and and and what do you got to do you got to go out? You got to put eyeballs on So I went out and I put eyeballs on I traveled up to Everett Saw the ships and Everett went down to vigor So I'll ship in the shipyard there. We had the opportunity to go out to for harbor see the ships there Traveled to sassabow Saw our amphibious ships in sassabow even went down to Okinawa saw the Peleleu down there on her final deployment Yacuzca obviously went over to Yacuzca Saw the ships there. I even had the opportunity to obviously the ships of San Diego and had the opportunity to spend a little time with my My compadre peeking with Tao Tao out in out in Norfolk and saw some ships out in Norfolk and what I found was this On the manning side of the house I Am pleased with what I saw is it perfect? No, are we manned to a hundred percent? No Do when are 100% of the Navy in listed classification codes? resident on the ship no It's not now and it and and it really never has been But what I am seeing is this and I've got to tell you I got to give a tip of the hat not only to To rear Admiral Dave steindal who's the deputy chief of naval personnel, but also also vice Admiral Bill Moran an Innovative thinker a fantastic leader and a person who is really making a difference in the distribution of our people And so what I'm seeing is this the trends are all positive The ships are being manned to a higher level the number of people that are The training that is required of the people is that a higher level and I'm also seeing that love that higher level being achieved earlier in the training cycle And so I think it's good The trends are good now. We have put a lot of energy into this To move this in the correct direction and and I think it would be foolish of us To high-five each other and to say yep, we've slayed that dragon. Let's go find another one to slay We're gonna have to continue to put energy into this But with the great leadership of The chief of personnel the deputy chief of naval personnel all the professionals that we have working personnel distribution I think we'll continue to trend in a positive direction. I'm certainly gonna pay attention to that And I'd be remiss if I didn't say also Fantastic support from fleet forces command and from packed fleet as well On the training side of the house what I saw was this I Was very very pleased with the work that we had done in op-nav in 96 to define the requirement Requirement for training and then defend that requirement in the budgetary process The process was Matured by about three or four years and it was going very well What I am seeing in the fleet is I am seeing the impact of that deliberate and disciplined process on our ships I'm seeing it in the voices of the sailors. I'm seeing it in the Reaction that I get when I say hey, how's training? How we doing now? Have we slayed the dragon? No Well, we know But boy golly, we're gonna continue to push it as hard as we possibly can And we're gonna continue to put energy We're gonna continue to put emphasis and we're gonna continue to our focus on that So on the training side of the house Well, it's not perfect We're doing pretty darn well Now on the equipping side Give it again our experience in op-nav in 96. I had the opportunity to Really at this point kind of develop the process With a bunch of phenomenal people not only a C21 But at surf map at RMC Working with Dave Gale and Bill Galinas Larry Creavy In order to understand How we define and how we engineer a requirement for the maintenance of our ships and how we then Ensure that those investments are properly defended and And again a tip of the hat to all the professionals that work on that Because I think they've done a superb job of moving us forward in In defending that fungible asset of funding maintenance in our fleet today And so as I proceeded west I felt pretty good About where we were now I'll tell you when I when I arrived out in San Diego I spent some time on the ships and What I found was there was a disconnect if you will a disconnect between the processes that we were going through in order to Determine what funding was needed and the execution piece So in the wake of that what I did was I said hey I've really got to understand this so Out in San Diego. We gathered really all of the flag officer leadership associated with With maintenance and modernization of our surface ships For a two-day summit The resource sponsors major General Walsh and we're Admiral Fonter were there Admiral Hortes came the fleet maintenance officers came the seal of RMC came and I wanted to know obviously Admiral Gume Tautow Wanted to know what the barriers were Wanted to know how we're gonna knock down that barriers and how we're gonna get after this execution piece robust discussion a Great day of conversation a great day of really digging into and understanding why we were missing Came up with a plan of action Admiral Gume Tautow is is executing that along with his His partners in crime Admiral Galenis and Admiral Creavy with a lot of work or with a lot of work and a lot of help from other folks Second day we brought the leadership from from art from our private yards and Talked to them about what we had learned Talked to them about how it's gonna be different this time and how we're gonna move forward Ladies and gentlemen, I'm focused like a laser On getting to where it is we need to be with respect to the maintenance of our ships We have to We're transitioning to the optimized fleet response plan We have to have a commitment To get our ships in on time get them out on time and get the maintenance and modernization that is needed executed And we're gonna work on that We're gonna work on that hard So manning training, I thought we were in pretty good shape I think from the Issue of defining the requirement and then defending that requirement. I think we're in pretty good shape And with the great work of a lot of great people We're gonna start moving forward and getting getting our ships Getting our ships maintained and modernized properly and on time and I think all three of these things Are about war fighting first you look at another aspect of war fighting first and That is our relationship with the United States Marine Corps Again on the transition team when I was listening to You know greener talk he spoke emphatically and he said spoke with great passion since then that the United States Marine Corps So number one joint war fighting partner of the United States Navy Well, I will take that a step further and I will tell you that the United States Marine Corps the number one joint war fighting partner of the surface forces our amphibious ships Take those 2200 Marines on board our amphibious readiness groups and we do we deliver them Where they need to be when they need to be there and we must be there for them So it's no mistake That when I took over as the commander of surface forces back on August 7th First three ships I visited on the San Diego waterfront with our New Orleans the Harpers fair in the Boxer I Wanted to know exactly where we were with respect to those ships And I wanted to start to learn very rapidly what it is We need to do to make sure that we can be there for the United States Marine Corps My first trip to the Western Pacific I'd bypassed Yacuzca, and I flew right into Sassabou. I Wanted to see Bon Amrishard. I wanted to see Ashlyn. I wanted to spend time on Peleli To understand where we are I Had the opportunity when I was visiting Amogumatatao in Norfolk to go on board WASP to see the changes that have been made in order for the In order for the embarkation of The Joint Strike Fighter on that ship. I wanted to put eyeballs on it. I wanted to understand what it is We need to do Because as I look around the world today And as I look into the future, what do I see? I See a trip I I See a tremendous capability in our amphibious readiness groups Whatever the number of ships are 2200 Marines the ace which includes MV-22 ascended the not too distant future the Joint Strike Fighter And what I see in that is I see a lot of different options For the leadership of the country as we move forward, and I think it is the surface forces responsibility to deliver that and So I'm going to be focused very keenly on Making sure that we are doing our part in Recognizing that our joint number one joint warfighting partner of the surface forces is the United States Marine Corps and in my mind That's all about Warfighting first Well, let's talk a little bit more about warfighting first and what we're doing in surface warfare Last year at this at this symposium Tom Copeland at the time mentioned that we were Going to stand up an organization called the Navy surface and enlisted and an expeditionary warfare development command That has morphed now and we are in the process of standing up the naval surface warfighting development a warfare center back not warfare center a Warfare development We're going to stand it up under the under the leadership of rear admiral Jim Kilby and we're working on Implementation guidance that the CNO has provided to us We're working on implementation Transition plans in order to fully instantiate the naval surface warfighting development center but I every time I sit down and talk to Admiral Kilby every time I think about the work that we're going to be doing in Raising the tact the level of tactical expertise in Our surface forces. I get very very excited. I think this is a tremendous Tremendous step forward for the surface forces in getting to where it is We need to be tactically and from a proficiency perspective Now this is not to say that we have not been working on this for a while We have in the fleet now being produced at in Dahlgren and out at the and out in San Diego Warfare tactics instructors in both anti-submarine warfare and an integrated air and missile defense Now this is not your fly-by-night course by any stretch of the imagination This is a difficult difficult course and the feedback that I'm getting from the deserans the feedback that I'm getting from the ships The feedback that I'm getting from the fleets is that these people are making a tremendous tremendous impact across the board on the tactical excellence of our fleet and we're going to continue to move this program forward warfare tactics instructors Apple kill we has the dot on his forehead to continue to expand this in the amphibious warfare in the mine warfare in Anti-surface warfare. I think this is all positive in all the direction that we need to go to get after Warfighting first Well, what else are we doing? I had the opportunity to head up to the naval postgraduate school and again You walk into a room that's got a hundred lieutenants That have got just spirit and enthusiasm and you say to yourself What a fantastic place what a fantastic opportunity. So I started thinking about how we could better leverage The naval postgraduate school and surface warfare Dr. Admiral Ellis the the the undersea chair Dr. Admiral Rick Williams the mine warfare chair and I started to think to myself How can we better plug in as well as I've got this naval surface warfighting developments command standing up We certainly are going to be focused very heavily on tactical proficiency tactical execution at the surface forces level I said, you know what I? Think the time has come To stand up the surface warfare chair at the naval postgraduate school And we're going to do that. I've identified the billet We're going to put an active duty captain post major command at the naval postgraduate school and That is the person that's going to then bring that massive body of knowledge that are those young swows that are at the naval postgraduate school and the linkage between the naval surface warfighting development center swaths Surf for surf land. I Think it's only positive and I've talked to my several route about it We've got some things we've got to work through But it is my goal that when I am standing before you one year from now God willing in the creek don't rise that I Can look you in the eye and I say I can say we've stood that chair up and This is the benefit that we're seeing in surface warfare And this is where we're going to go in the future But I think it is a tremendous tremendous positive step again. What's it all about? It's about war fighting first okay, now I'd like to Shift for a little bit and I'd like to get into really the heart and soul of Our symposium talking to Dave Hart as we were working on the The theme for this year I Kind of landed on distributed lethality going on the offensive and If you have been Notting off to this point I Would ask you to please listen to what I'm going to say Because I think that this is the start of the formulation Of really where we need to take surface warfare in the future. I spent quite a bit of time Working on this portion of the presentation and so if you will indulge me I'm going to spec spec step to my notes. I'm going to speak From my notes As opposed to extemporary any sees I have in the past You know surface warfare has been a lot in the news lately, you know most recently the senator for a strategic and budgetary assessment But out of report in November called commanding the seas a Plan to reinvigorate US Navy warfare Copy of it right here Written by blind Brian Clark right back there, you know Brian I think is a true is Brian I know is a true friend of surface warfare and a great mind as we think about this I commend this study to you And while I can tell you that I don't buy into every single one of the recommendations lock stock and barrel There is a considerable amount of good thinking and thinking that should all get us talking About where we're going at the heart of this report and the heart of other writings Whether it was professor Wayne Hughes out in the Naval post graduate school Whether it was able John Harvey at the heart of all those things And what I considered to be the real story that is worth focusing on today and That is how the surface force Can more effectively Execute its critical role in ensuring that our country's interests are protected and sustained There was a growing recognition that surface warfare the face of our Navy Can and should step up That is what I want to talk to you about today I hope that some of you have had the opportunity To read this month's issue of the Naval Institute proceedings Actually, I would hope that all of you are faithful subscribers Pete daily. You're welcome in that article Pete Fanta Pete Fanta Pete Guma tautow and I lay out a vision for the future of surface warfare that we call distributed lethality and The three of us owe a debt of gratitude to the man I replaced in the command as command of the surface forces by Samuel Tom Copen Who in his last two vision statements? Sounded the call for increasing force lethality. I want to spend some time talking to you about distributed lethality Why we need to move in this direction and how the surface force will develop and implement this concept But I think to understand Where it is we need to go We got to start by doing a little bit of a review about where we've been the Navy that stood down the Soviets Was a well-balanced force? Capable of sustained combat operations across the depth and breadth of naval missions It was a Navy that was equally adept at sea control as it was at strike And it was a Navy in which carrier strike group missions were distributed broadly among the assets available With surface ships capable of targeting and destroying enemy ships over the horizon Prosecuting submarines scores of miles from the main body and Controlling the outer air battle in conjunction with airborne early warning and at 14 Tomcats Keep in mind also that the land attack capability That we in surface warfare came to price so strongly after the wall fell Was originally to be integrated into the balance fleet Defoded to deterring and if necessary fighting the Soviets But the wall did fall and The world was left with one dominant naval power unchallenged at sea and Unstoppable as a power projection machine Because no one could stop challenge our dominance at sea we valued some missions higher than others As I talked about on this stage last year We got really good at T land strikes. We got really good at VBSS at anti piracy Because there was no real threat to our sea control. We got rid of S3's on on aircraft carriers We stopped building ships with long-range ASUW weapons And we moved to a paradigm Well, we would move the aircraft carrier off the hostess coast And we would generate as many strike sorties as the crew could handle that fleet architecture Radically different than the Cold War Was there was a reflection of a number of factors? First it was the recognition of reality There really was no one who could challenge us at this at sea and Blindingly ignoring that fact would have been a terrible suboptimization of our scarce resources second The lack of a blue water flow Colored the manner in which we formulated and conducted campaign analysis The kind of analysis that revealed gaps in warfighting wholeness across the spectrum of missionaries Simply put our campaign analysis made assumptions that were sensible for the times Given the lack of any significant maritime threat against which to plan and the desire to reap some financial savings after our victory in the Cold War Cashing in on the peace dividend Those assumptions included an approach to scenario planning and war gaming in which all of the elements of the force were employed together Such that aircraft carrier battle groups would operate in close proximity to surface action groups and amphibious readiness groups Which we would would be mutually apported but was supported by land-based maritime patrol aircraft While this scheme is as effective effective in identifying gaps and seams in capabilities across the entire ensemble it Presupposes that the entire ensemble will be in place and ready to fight when the fighting starts And since there's no was no real maritime foe to seek out destroy When the surface force wasn't supplementing the striking power of the air wing with tea land It was devoted primarily to defensive operations in the vicinity of aircraft carrier or the other high-value units In the name of efficiency and cost savings the surface force got out of the offensive SUW game and The mission migrated almost exclusively to our airway again. This approach makes sense in a relatively unchallenging maritime environment and When the force fights in close proximity, but the world has changed and with it So must our assumptions and our preconceptions That is what we're doing in surface warfare We are challenging our own assumptions and The assumptions of others and rethinking our our role in future naval warfare We are adapting to a changed environment We are responding to national strategic imperatives and We are going on the offensive The underlying approach to this premise is pretty simple Which is good because I work better on simple things The surface force is going to be more lethal across all major warfare areas through distributed lethality Which has two parts one architectural and The other operational from the fleet architecture standpoint distributed not lethality means we're going to up gun as Many existing platforms as we can to achieve more total lethality From a given size and composition From the operational standpoint it means taking these now more lethal ships and Combining and operating them in new and novel ways Ways that threaten things the adversaries value both assure and afloat while simultaneously adding complexity To their surveillance and they're targeting problems when we talk about the architectural or fleet Let's we'll talk about the architectural or fleet design part first Let's face it When Secretary Hagel told us to go off and take a good hard look at our small-surface combatant program last year He wasn't telling us to perfect cold fusion Our history is replete with examples of steadily increasing the lethality of ships and classes Throughout the lives of those ships We added rast in the 19th tale to the Oliver hazard Perry class in the sprow it's class We replaced the mark 26 launchers and the T lamb armored box launchers on our taiko's and our spruances with the vertical launch system We added a hangar CEC and BMD capability to many of our Arleigh Burke destroyers My point is we have never looked at a warship at commissioning as a finished product And we don't design ship classes to a point solution We build ships to last for decades And we know from the beginning that new technologies will have to be integrated in order for that ship to pace the threats it will face Some instances in lethality are planned into a probe into the program from the get-go and Some have to be backfitted and integrated later in the ship's life So moving in this direction is really second nature to us What we're doing differently today, however is We're looking closely at the fleet as a system and Identifying where the fruit is low hanging or otherwise So that we can harvest it Irrespective of ship size and type by adding by adding weapons and sensors This is a smart play irrespective of the level of resourcing we receive But especially important against the best backdrop of flat defense budget We are actively looking around the fleet to target lethality upgrades wherever they make sense For instance Most of you are aware that we're actively beginning a program to acquire an offensive anti-surface weapon One that puts us back on the positive side of the range equation with respect to our potential adversaries We need to think about this weapon as something that we can back fit throughout the DDG fleet Starting most personally with 79 and up which were built without a long-range ASUW capability Perhaps this weapon is or one similar Can be both forward fit and back fit on our small on our small surface combatants including the LCS But why stop there? We'll have between 30 and 33 amphibious ships in our fleet throughout the life of the current 30 30-year ship building plan What's to keep us from equipping these ships with offensive SUW with an offensive SUW weapon? Now I know I know and I spoke before That are that that our responsibility is to deliver our Marines Our Marine Corps Joint Warfighting Partner where they're needed when they need But can you imagine and and we've got to look at the benefits and trade-offs associated with putting an ASUW weapon on these ships But I think that the benefits for for for sea control and for sea power is significant I think we gotta go take a look at that. I think we've got to look at the LXR Before its requirements are set in stone One that can project power through activities the activities of a 19-year-old infantryman or dispatch enemies in long range Not saying we need to do it, but I think we need to think about it Or maybe we look at an affordable land attack weapon that fills the gap between surface fires on the advanced gun system on the 1,000 and the t-land Why couldn't we feel a 300 to 500 monocle mile missile that can be fired from existing ships? including But again, why stop here? Why not think about putting offensive weapons on our combat logistics force ships? I realized fully there are legal implications associated with that I think we probably got to work at that, but I got to tell you if you think about the logistics force You've got to have it in order to be able to fight and I think that they're gonna be right in the enemy's wheelhouse Going right after them. Why don't we give them? Something more to think about rather than just taking out the log, but that log can reach out and touch them Again, I think we got to think about so the picture I'm painting is one of an of a surface force That is bristling with offensive capability One of which large number of ships cannot be ignored in terms of assigning surveillance and targeting assets. I Realized that there are those of you who saw the recent recent proof of concept Where we took a launcher and we bolted it on the back of a lateral combat ship and we fired it as some kind of a gimmick and I had to say to you I think you you've missed the important the point of the exercise pretty significantly That experiment that demonstration started back in March when I went up to the naval war college to Do a war game that included a significant number of lateral combat ships and in that war game We played a hundred and twenty mile missile off the off of the total combat ships and What was interesting to me and What was really eye-opening was the response that we forced from red in that game I Think red had the preconceived notion that they could walk in and they didn't have to even worry about us They kind of get to them when they got to Wasn't the case after I put a hundred and twenty mile missile on that ship They had to worry about them all the time because they could do real damage to their fleet and So when we put that launcher on the fan tail of LCS and we fired it off the Southern California coast What we were really doing is we were really closing the loop on really an early step in distributed lethality Taking idea war game it see if you can do it And we did and so the question I have is if we can do it on LCS Can we do it on other ships? And I think the answer is we can And I think we should Now that I've covered the fleet architecture aspects of distributed lethality Let me spend a little bit of time on the concept how the concept could be employed operationally If our Navy's going to adequately respond to the national strategic imperative to rebalance to the Asia Pacific We're gonna have to get used to the fact that we're gonna have fewer number of ships And the Pacific is as big as it ever was In order to provide our friends partners and allies With the insurance that and deterrence that we expect and they desire I Think it's it's it's I think what we have to do is we have to think about our fleet and It may in fact be spread more thinly across this maritime expanse Therefore every ship in the fleet needs to be prepared to close and engage adversaries When they're called upon and may need may be required to do so without the air cover That we will typically have when we're operating with a carrier strike group the campaign analysis and assumptions that I spoke to you About earlier. I think again We've got to take a look at that and this different world that were that were moving into Our fleet's probably not going to be fully deployed in a raid in a mutually supported postures It's going to be spread across thousands of miles of the ocean Far from the protective look protective cover a swing-loaded hordes In order to target harass and neutralize an adversary in a large maritime theater The surface force will operate in its critical and historic role in Defense of the high-value units such as aircraft carriers amphibious ships and our logistics ships But it will also be dispersed throughout the theater And what I'm referring to is hunter killer surface action groups Netted together when those nets exist, but also capable of autonomous dispersed operations Should those overarching networks break down if we take care of the first aspect of distributed lethality Impewing as many ships as possible with offensive punch the second aspect Which is dispersed operations Creates multiple attack axes and a considerably more complicated targeting problem for any adversary It will give us the ability to hold his forces ashore and its sea at risk At distance Which is really what we're driving at By multiplying the pure number of naval activities that he must target We dilute both desires are and is available weapons inventory I urge you to take a look at the proceedings article Which was published this this month In it I lay out a couple of week Pete that Pete and I Lay out a couple of notional surface action And as I've done more thinking since we finished the article You know, we look at not only the LCS and its instantiation today With the installed anti submarine warfare package on board As a significant contributor to a future hunter-hunter killer act surface action groups Or the follow-on modified little combat ship that came out of the small surface combatant task force Certainly, I got a missile destroyer Whether it would be flight one flight two or flight three, but I think we have to take that further I Think we have to also think about the significant contributions that we can receive that would that will be Contributed to these type of formations these type of operations by our friends partners and allies I Had the great good fortune of Serving over in the Republic of Korea and spending some time on their on their on their guided missile destroyers Tremendously professional fleet and a tremendously capable ship that would fit very well in this type of use and The exact same thing with the tremendous professionals across the Sea of Japan with respect to the JMSDF Or our Aussie Park or any of our friends Their ships do not routinely work with our larger ships and are much more comfortable Fitting into our surface action groups. I think there's tremendous benefit here. I think we really need to go leverage that Evolving the force to deploy distributed lethality is going to be a generational task It will take time effort and resources to accomplish It's going to take a concerted effort of the leaders in this room To make it happen. We aren't talking about missiles and sensors alone We're talking about people About developing a whole new generation of war fighters comfortable with detached operations and able to accept the realities of mission command and Decentralized execution in a high-tempo combat environment Critical to this effort is the work that I mentioned earlier at the naval surface warfighting development command and The work that Abel Jim Kilby is doing to stand that up We are raising the science and the art of surface warfare up a notch With the aim of producing certified tactical experts that will be closely managed and detailed To the billets where their talents will have the most impact in the end it will be these experts and The sailors they impact that will ensure our surface force Remains of head of all who challenge it. I'm certain that we're headed in the right direction We've got a lot of work to do. We've got a lot of meat to hang on the bones of distributed lethality But I think it's the direction that we have to go I really appreciate your time and attention Again my gratitude to the surface Navy Association and all the sponsors for everything that they're doing for surface warfare and I look forward to your questions. Thank you very much Sidney Sidney Friedberg breaking defense and Frequent thorn in a friendly way in the admiral side debatable. Yes Yeah, I shouldn't argue with somebody who has long range offensive weapons. Maybe let me ask this is a powerful vision I've read Clark study as well the question is You know, how do you get there because right now? We have a fairly short-ranged harpoon that not all the ships can fire. We have no tomahawk Anti-ship missile that was the tazen was phased out gosh in the 90s and Modified LCS will not have will not have a VLS cell though. We'll have some kind of to be defined Anti anti surface over the horizon missile Plus before you can fire your new weapons, whatever they are You need to actually lock on which means a lot of Electronic warfare a lot of sensors a lot of protection for your comms as you said so What are the challenges in terms of both the the kinetic and the electronic armaments? To get the fleet where it needs to be and what's the timeline to get all these things actually on the water? I Think that great questions, Sydney. I think that as I'm fond of saying It's it's more important to build Rome than it is to build Rome in a day Okay So I think the first thing that we have to do is we have to look at the weapons that that currently exist The systems that currently exist and see what modifications that we can make to those systems to increase our offensive punch We started to work on that when I was back as the resource sponsor and I think we we can we are obviously going to continue to do that under under Admiral Fonter Certainly there is work that has to be done in order to a Develop the analytic underpinning that says this is the direction that we're going to go because we have to cover it with analytics It has to make sense and obviously there's there's an aspect associated with resources and you can't ignore that Certainly in the budget that we have What I'm saying is is that? We have the finest combat systems out there and we have the finest engineers out there And we have some pretty darn good weapons out there And as there are things that we can do to the weapons that we have today There are certainly things that we can do with respect to how we bring our ships together and tactically execute In order to be able to start to distribute the lethality of the force And so I think the overarching theme is the fact that we have to distribute our lethality and not concentrate So as a consequence and then and then look at do and different and innovative ways to take our ships that are more offensive However, we built that into our ships in order to be able to utilize them in a more effective fashion. I Think that I am very encouraged by a lot of the rather robust and and Relatively low-cost options with respect to unmanned. I Think we need to think hard about unmanned I think we need to think hard about how we can take those capabilities build an organic capability into our ship or our surface action groups to extend their range to extend their control and then and then and and and force our Adversaries and our potential adversaries to think differently about our ability to reach out and touch them from range So specifics. I think the specifics will come. I think once we Get the analytics that demonstrate. Hey, this is the direction that we have to go and I believe they will prove it out and Then drive in that direction Good to see you. Yes, ma'am. Good. You're here for those of us who've been around a few years in the surface Navy community are we're aware of the surface warfare development group down in Norfolk and The role that they have played off and on over the years in their mission How do you envision the naval warfare development group that you're talking about standing up or has been stood up? How do you see that mission playing with that with respect to how surface warfare development group has played and What how do you see that going forward and what may be the differences right with respect to that mission, right? We have to work our way through that in other words the the surface warfare development group Certainly is going to be the work that they have done in the past is going to be I don't want to say absorbed because that's not the right That's not the right characterization But I what I what we're looking for in the standing up of this of the naval warfighting a development command is Is the ability to Take the mission areas that we address in surface warfare across the Multimissions that we execute and bringing those together in a coherent fashion so that we can then raise the tactical Tactical execution on our ships to to a very high level to a level that we need to raise and to keep pushing it up Okay, mr. Pullman Admiral this day Can you give us a couple of groups on the mine warfare situation? Especially since they were truncating the LCS program, which was to be our future mine countermeasures ship coupled with the problems with the H60 mh 60 s not being able to tow the mine countermeasures gear Where are we in the mine countermeasures area and is anyone really paying attention to it? Thank you sir. Yes Great question Norman. Um, I would say it is not an accurate Characterization to say that the I don't think we're truncating anything the mine the mine warfare that That that the mine mission package that we are that we are developing and that we're gonna test in that this summer on LCS down to the Gulf Coast is going to deliver a Increased capability to hunt mines And I think given the fact that and and so the transition as we press forward in mine warfare and I got to say that That our MCMs that we have out there now And they had the opportunity to visit quite a few of them. They are doing pretty darn good, but we're gonna sundown those ships Sometime in the next decade and we have to be able to step off into where we're going in the future of mine warfare that future is the Littoral Combat Ship and the package that we're putting on the Littoral Combat Ship and There's a couple things that I think are really significant in that the first is We're gonna we're gonna go instantiate capability in that ship this summer and and we're gonna IOC But given the fact that we have again the modularity flexibility that we have built into those ships I think that as new again again One of the one of the many real beauties of the month of those ships is the fact that as new technology comes along It will be able to be integrated into the ship and a much more cost-effective way and a much more effective way to ensure that we That we can continue to move forward in mine warfare so we're gonna go to the Littoral Combat Ships as our see-going mine warfare capability and and then Move into beyond hunting into sweeping etc. Etc. We'll be able to build into those ships, which is and the helicopters will play a role but the And again, it's been about five months as I've stepped out of in 96 and I'm not sure exactly where we are And so I don't know maybe either a Admiral Fanta or Admiral or a General Walsh can address that specific aspect Admiral Andrea Chalal with Reuters and I wanted to follow up on Sydney's question, but then also pose one of my own you know Given the budget climate. What is your ability to move forward with these? Capabilities or distributed lethality that you're talking about and and how much money do you anticipate it will take? I mean how significant of an investment is required the missile that you fired off of LCS was built by the Norwegians Is that something that you're realistically exploring in terms of perhaps netting together those international? Capabilities more you mentioned the importance of getting allies outfitted So I wonder if you could address those two things and then I wanted to ask you about the readiness of the fleet particularly with regard to the amphibious ships we've heard reports about readiness being poor and You know partly because of sequestration and just sort of issues with ships. Are you very concerned about that? How significant is that problem and will it lead to delays in the departure of any new forces? Okay, thank you. Thank you first with respect to Obviously as we go forward and we Look at modification or the development and modification of weapons and systems that we have or the development of additional Weapons and systems. I mean obviously those are going to have to go through the process the budgetary process be defended Be validated and be executed. I think the more Important piece is to look at the weapons that we have now the sensors that we have now the capabilities that we have now See what modifications we might be able to be make to them And I think that we have a tendency to kind of folk to focus on that aspect of it I think it's important to remember that the the other significant portion of the execution of distributed lethality Has to do with the tactical execution how we think about employing our forces in new and different ways and and it's it's perhaps a a You know we if I liken it to a chess match if I would if I were to think about the changing execution about how we aggregate and and and and Employ our forces Really what we're looking at I think is we're looking at changing the rules in the middle of the game So for example, you're playing a game of chess and all of a sudden I get one opportunity to say or whatever to change that The rules and I say you know what ponds can now move through And you've been executing the strategy all the time in order to in order to try to defeat me in the game And all of a sudden ponds can move three it changes your strategy completely That's the tactical piece. I think that's the that's the operational piece that I think we have to get after Okay, on the readiness side of the house You know I was I was up talking to my father this weekend and And and back When I was younger he had command of USS Columbus CG 12 and he was operating in the Mediterranean on his final deployment and He told me a story about he was up out there operating with a with a destroyer and at the time the destroyer could only man a two-section watch and so He said well, I'll just I got a lot of people I'll just give you some watch standards and you can operate a three-section watch bill that ship actually had to go anchor at night Because it didn't have enough people To steam throughout the night Okay, and I was thinking Holy cow talk about a readiness nightmare From the standpoint of not having enough watch standards to be able to steam your ship 24 hours a day Um With respect to the fleet that we have today first of all I can tell you that we can man a three-section watch will be distinct Okay We're probably a little bit better off than we were back in 1970 a long time ago, but I think that's um there are concerns about The readiness of the amphibious for their concerns about readiness of the of the of the ships that we had I can tell you that We are Facing those readiness challenges head-on in my opinion from the time that I have been out at surf back They are all trending in the correct direction. I believe we have a significant number of tremendous professionals Concentrating on understanding Exactly what it is we need to move to do and how to move us in that direction and So and I'm confident with the support of both Admiral Harris and Admiral Davidson of fleet forces And the folks that we have on the waterfront that when we Aggregate those forces and we push them up to surdex That they're trained and They're confident in order to be able to go do the things that we need to do Would we like to have this level of readiness at all times in order to be able to surge forces and do other things I Think the unfortunate reality of it is given the budgeting that we have We're taking some reductions in readiness and and but we've got to again work on making sure that we got it squared away One of the things that I'm concentrating on fairly significantly is to ensure that as we take our amphibious ships into the maintenance Availabilities, we have the correct amount of time in order to be able to get them the work done and The amount of funding and the fungible asset that seems to be tough right now Is not necessarily the funding as much as it is the time And so that's why we're working on the pre-planning piece the planning piece to understand in toto Everything we need to do to get the amphibious ready the readiness of our amphibious ships up to where it is Yes I got I got one more mark. I'll get you later. Okay All right, sir. Sir lieutenant Hipple from ComNAF surflint. Yes, lieutenant Sir you said that it is a generational issue and that you'll it'll require sailors that are comfortable with distributed operations What do you see with the sunset of the MCMs and the uncertain future of the PCs as the future of junior commands? That'll give that kind of training and experience for folks who operate independently at sea Yeah, that's a great question. Okay Um certainly We're about a decade away. I think from the MCM And I and in the timeline for the PCs Certainly, I think early command for surface warfare has always been a tremendous tremendous Opportunity That really exists only in surface warfare I think obviously we're gonna and and would I like to be able to continue to offer early command to our young men and women absolutely but In the event that we go in a direction that doesn't allow that I don't I don't think it relieves us of the training responsibility in order to be able to imbue our our surface warfare officers at the ensign and lieutenant JG level or up through department head and beyond in Understanding how how to execute that and I can tell you I mean I I had one I had commanded Milius. That was the ship that I commanded But there's a guy back there standing against the wall and there's a guy sitting right here Vice-Arabile Phil Quast retired rear Abel Tom Marfiak who taught me these very characteristics Now I owe a debt of gratitude to these guys because they imbued in me at a young age when I was an apartment head How to think independently and operate independently? And it served me well, not only in Milius when I was an independent deployer but also when I was in Deseron 60 and I got sent over to to oversee the maritime aspect of the evacuation 11 on back in 2006 I Remember well port in it reporting in and and the mission orders. I was given was evacuate Lebanon and don't get anyone killed That was the sum total of the assignment And because I had had the tutelage of these guys I Saluted smartly and said I got it 15,000 I think was a put the number that we took out in about about 10 days and Unfortunately, no one got So something that I think we need to continue to talk and foster in our wardrooms and Probably would be the subject of a good article for our for our new and improved surface warfare magazine