Welcome to the CavasShips Podcast with Christopher P. Cavas and Chris Servello…a weekly podcast looking at naval and maritime events and issues of the day – in the US, across the seas and around the world. This week…Lockheed Martin’s Integrated Warfare Systems and Sensors business produces ships, radars, launch systems and much more. Vice President & General Manager Paul Lemmo of IWSS is with us to bring us up to speed on updates and progress across his portfolio.
Please send us feedback by DM’ing @CavasShips or @CSSProvision or you can email chriscavas@gmail.com or cservello@defaeroreport.com.
This Week’s Naval News:
Two destroyers from the HARRY S TRUMAN Carrier Strike Group carried out operations in the Barents Sea on October 21, operating in international waters above the Arctic Circle. The destroyers USS STOUT and USS JASON DUNHAM, with the carrier and Carrier Air Wing 1, earlier took part in exercises north of Scotland with the British carrier HMS PRINCE OF WALES.
In the Mideast, the carrier USS ABRAHAM LINCOLN and Italian carrier CAVOUR operated together October 18 during what was termed a Multi-Large Deck Event. The carriers took part in a similar event with each other in August in the western Pacific. CAVOUR, along with two escort ships, is returning to Italy following a ground-breaking deployment to the Indo-Pacific region.
The destroyer USS HIGGINS and Canadian frigate VANCOUVER carried out a dual transit of the Taiwan Strait on October 20. The passage was the 8th transit of 2024 by a US or partner nation warship and followed by about three weeks the three-ship transit of a Japanese, Australian and New Zealand naval group.
The Sidewinders of Strike Fighter Squadron 86 passed another milestone in October in its transition to the F-35C Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter. The squadron was certified as Safe for Flight to fly the 35C after meeting certifications aboard the carrier USS NIMITZ during the summer. VFA-86 is the third US Navy squadron to operate the F-35C, the carrier-capable variant of the multi-service JSF and is expected to deploy during 2025.
After a multi-day search, the Navy released the names of two naval aviators killed October 15 when their EA-18G Growler electronic attack aircraft crashed near Mount Rainier, Washington. Lieutenant Serena Wileman, the pilot, and Naval Flight Officer Lieutenant Commander Lyndsay Evans, both 31, had recently returned from a deployment with the Zappers of Electronic Attack Squadron 130 aboard the carrier USS DWIGHT D EISENHOWER. The cause of the crash remains under investigation.
The head of General Dynamics, the primary submarine builder for the US Navy, told investors October 23rd the company is slowing the rate of production on both Columbia-class missile submarines and Atlanta-class attack submarines due to continued problems with major equipment suppliers. CEO Phebe Novakovic, in a third-quarter 2024 earnings call, said “there is no point hurrying portions of the boat only to have to stop and wait increasingly extended periods of time for major components to arrive. It is neither good for the boat over time nor cost.” In her statements, Novakovic did not cite a particular supplier or part that was a chronic problem; USNI News, however, has earlier reported on problems at HII Newport News with producing bow sections, and North Grumman has been cited by Navy Secretary Carlos Del Toro for late delivery of turbine generators, which he said in April was a major cause of delays on the Columbia program.
In new ship news, the future submarine SSN 813 will be named USS ATLANTA, Navy Secretary Del Toro announced October 23rd. The previous USS ATLANTA, a Los Angeles-class submarine designated SSN 712, was decommissioned in December 1999.
And the Coast Guard cutter FLORENCE FINCH WPC-1157 was commissioned October 24 at Seattle, Washington. The 57th Fast Response Cutter becomes the second of three FRCs to be based at Astoria, Oregon. Ten more FRCs are under construction or on order with Bollinger Shipyards in Lockport, Louisiana.
Cavas Squawk:
When I was but a wee lad one of my favorite places on earth was the Navy Museum at the Washington Navy Yard, in those days more widely known as the Naval Gun Factory. The museum was filled with fabulous models and guns and planes and artifacts that never failed to excite me, along with small submarines and big guns displayed in the park between the museum and the Potomac River. In those days as well, the Navy Yard still hosted real ships tying up at its piers, including my father’s naval reserve training ships. It was certainly one of the factors that helped ignite my life-long passions for ships and the Navy.
But over the years the museum took on an overall sense, for me, of stagnation. Yes, the displays were still there, but over the decades little was really changing. The most significant addition was the creation of the Cold War Museum in an adjacent building which certainly updated the items on display.
But the Cold War Museum now has been closed. Many of the artifacts there and in the main museum building have been removed and placed in storage awaiting a new building.
Even the ships are gone. A new bridge was built over the Anacostia River that does not allow large vessels to pass through and visit the Yard. The 1950s destroyer BARRY that for many years was on display was towed away in 2016 and has been scrapped and there will be no replacement.
Not that much of this has really mattered to the public at large. Non-military entry to the Navy Yard has been severely restricted since the events of 9/11 in 2001. Before that infamous date, if you didn’t have a military ID, a simple drivers license would grant you access. Since then, good luck with that – a lengthy and somewhat painful entry process drastically cut attendance numbers. The Navy uses the museum for in-house ceremonies, but the building’s function as the Museum of the United States Navy has barely continued.
A few years ago an effort sort of began that would see an entirely new, modern and larger facility built outside the security perimeter on former Navy land. The Marines, Army and Air Force all have their official museums outside security perimeters where the public can easily visit, so one might think the Navy would be eager to follow suit. Yeah, well, sort of.
On October 18 Navy Secretary Carlos Del Toro hosted a so-called site selection ceremony in Washington at the spot already chosen and announced for the future museum. I’m not sure what the impetus was for this non-news event, but at least it gave the impression something is happening with the effort. I’m not holding my breath.
While the site has been chosen, the money to build something on it has yet to be raised. No worry – there’s no design that’s been selected either. For that matter, the Naval History and Heritage Command, who will stock the museum, hasn’t yet chosen what will be on display. The Navy Museum Development Foundation is supposed to raise at least $475 million – and likely much more – to build the museum, but one doesn’t hear much about an active fund-raising campaign. Even if everything began to move ahead, it’s not likely a new building will be open until the 2030s.
This is all kind of pathetic. The Air Force has a fabulous museum filled with aircraft at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio that is a must-see destination. The Army in late 2019 opened a large, new museum in public areas on Fort Belvoir in northern Virginia. And the National Museum of the Marine Corps, which opened in 2006 prominently visible from Interstate 95 and easily accessible, is one of Virginia’s top tourist attractions, each year attracting more than a half million visitors.
In terms of meeting its intended needs and functions, the Marine Corps Museum is one of the best museums of any kind I’ve ever been to – and I’ve been to a lot of museums worldwide. The Lore of the Corps is on full display – the building is full of features and artifacts displayed in creative and effective ways. It does not shy away from the realities and gore of warfare. It is staffed by active Marines from nearby Quantico Marine Corps Base who are quite willing to engage with visitors. And running through the entire operation is a subtle but quite palpable appeal to young people. “If you like what you see here, if you think this is something you are interested in, talk to us.” It is essentially one big recruiting tool, and a highly successful one at that.
The Marine Corps Museum took seven years from concept to fund-raising to site selection to design to opening. That’s more than the Navy already has spent on its supposed new museum, which is nowhere in sight. The whole thing seems like a farce.
Just as I was inspired at a young age by the long line of naval history, I would hope today’s generations would have that same opportunity. At the moment, they do not. I do not know why.
