kzt wrote:Rincewind wrote:None, but what about an America class Assault ship? Or, if you are wanting to go for something a smaller navy might operate, how about a Mistral class LPD equipped with attack helicopters? Even smaller navies are getting in on the act with aviation capable ships. They may not be big flat tops but they would still be functional. I believe a Honorverse variant of this is what was being proposed.
So , sutting the chase, you are in favor of putting 25% of the US navy off of Somalia to deal with the threat of 4 guys in 20 foot speed boat?
Oddly enough, the US Navy's deployment plans don't include a spare 25% free to suppress the deadly threat of 4 guys with AKs in a 20 foot speed boat, so are you planning on surrendering the Pacific to China or the Persian Gulf to Iran in exchange for suppressing the threat of 4 guys with AKs in a 20 foot speedboat?
The point is none of this is cost-free. There are always a lot more missions you would like to accomplish than you have hulls to assign. So assigning hulls to low value missions means that missions of national importance, the missions that people fund the navy to accomplish, don't get done. Or you get to spend a whole lot more money to build the navy that can do both at the same time.
YOU might not but there are plenty of examples of navies that WOULD! I rechecked to confirm my memory but both the Royal Navy's HMS Albion, (which at the time was the Fleet Flagship) AND one of the Italian Navy's San Giorgio class LPDs acted as flagship of Operation Atalante, the European Union's anti-piracy operation off the coast of Somalia during the period 2011 to 2012. Also, Albion's sister ship, Bulwark has acted as flagship of the EU Task Force dealing with the Mediterranean refugee crisis as has another of the San Giorgio's. I chose the example of an America class Assault Carrier as the closest to the type of ship that he was referring to although I would agree with you that it probably is too much ship. But then again they were saying THAT about the use of the latest Guided Missile Destroyers in anti-piracy operations.
I also reread Weird Harold's original post. In it he referred to a type of reduced size CLAC, an Escort Carrier variant built up a smaller mercantile hull perhaps. That was why I used the example of a Mistral-class LPD. Another would be the San Giorgio class LPD built for the Algerian Navy. The USN MIGHT consider chasing a bunch of guys waving AK47s in a speed boat as not worthy of them & not cost effective but, when faced with the disruption caused by such piracy, regional navies would not. Given the large areas to be covered it is the surveillance & tracking as well as intelligence capabilities if not the combat capabilities of a larger combatant that would be needed. Plus, if they were carrying Troops they could conduct ground assaults on the pirates' home bases.
Finally, on August 31st/September 1st 1945 Japanese suicide boats conducted attacks on the British Task Force sent to reoccupy Hong Kong. In turn they, and their bases were destroyed by airstrikes launched by HMS Indomitable & HMS Venerable because it was the safest, if not the most cost effective way of dealing with the threat. Sometimes a bit of overkill goes a long, long way & an added benefit would be that the ships & crews would get a work up on actual operations which would be invaluable for their readiness posture.