Ship capabilities in shallow waters will be critical, Navy chief says

In November, Government Executive Editor at Large Timothy B. Clark and Senior Correspondent Katherine McIntire Peters sat down with Chief of Naval Operations Adm.Gary Roughead to talk about the Navy's future. The following is an edited transcript of the discussion, part of Government Executive's ongoing leadership briefing series.

On the importance of Littoral Combat Ships:

From the very beginning, I've been an unabashed advocate for that ship. It gives us great capability in the areas of surface warfare, anti-submarine warfare and mine warfare, but it also really allows us to operate in the littoral zone in ways that we have never been able to before. Of the 10 megacities, all but two are in littoral areas. Those are places where I think we're going to be, and Littoral Combat Ships will allow us to do that.

On launching a design-and-build contest to drive down the cost of Littoral Combat Ships:

Instead of the strategy that we had in place to buy 15 [ships], we will now move to [buy] 20. And rather than down-select to one builder and one design, we'll go with both [designs], simply because the prices have gotten to the point where we can do that. There is a great opportunity for the shipbuilding industry in the United States to compete for that, and it's great for the Navy because I get more ships faster.

On Defense Secretary Robert Gates' efficiency initiative:

Once we started looking at our processes and at some of our overhead, we continued to see other areas that were worthy of examination and adjustment. Our going-in number for the Navy was [to save] about $24 billion [over five years], and we ended up [saving] around $28 billion.

On streamlining personnel costs:

One of the things we had to do as a Navy during the past few years [was] we made some manning reductions, particularly in the fleet. We had also done some things that affected the maintenance of our ships that, individually, were good decisions. But as we looked at how hard the fleet is being pushed today, and as we looked at those changes in the aggregate, we needed to go back and adjust. So some of the personnel savings are now [being moved to put] more sailors on ships. It's really been a movement of resources, as opposed to a taking out of resources.

On the pressure rising personnel costs have placed on the Navy:

I think many would agree that health care costs are one of the significant drivers of manpower costs because we have not really seen any adjustment to that since the program was conceived. In addition to the active reserve and civilian force, we carry about 500,000 Navy retirees, and that is a cost that continues to be incurred.

On retention:

We are seeing extraordinary retention and interest in the Navy, to the point where we are [telling] very good sailors who want to stay in the Navy that that's not an option for them, and that's tough. If you've been doing something for 12 or 13 years, and you now check into another work center and there's a sailor who's been in the Navy for two years who knows the job better than you, that's a hard thing to be able to absorb. I'm very, very mindful of that, but I think that's the environment that we're in because we don't see the retention environment in the Navy changing until we get [down] to about 7.5 percent unemployment in the country. That's where we think the breaking point is.

On putting civil service mariners aboard amphibious ships:

I was comfortable with doing a pilot to see how it could work because I think that we can very easily become tradition-bound. I'm willing to give this a try to see how an amphibious ship would run with a mixed crew.

On the Navy relieving more than a dozen commanding officers this year:

Most of the cases are not a lack of professional or technical competence. It really is for what I would call personal shortcomings. I think the divide between our personal and our professional lives is evaporating because of some of the available mediums and the way that people can communicate. Our personal lives potentially are no longer as private as we once thought they were. I think that could be a factor. The idea of the geographic bachelor -- is that a factor? We're looking at it to address what some of the underlying issues may be.

On the necessity of F-35s:

As I look to the future and at the anti-access area of denial capabilities that are being developed, we have to move into that generation of airplane. There is no question that it is going to be the premier fighter that will exist in the world, and we have to get there.

On the growing cyber threat:

I believe that cyberspace is a battle space. It's very easy to become captured by the technical dimension of defense and attack and exploitation, but I think the biggest area -- and one that will likely lag without focus on it -- will be policy and the legislative authorizations. When we created the [Cyber Fleet], we created a cyber shop to begin to develop some of our [judge advocates general] in cyber law, which I think is going to be a rapidly developing and very dynamic aspect of law. We want to make sure we have people who can advise future commanders on where the lines are and what the rules of engagement are, because it's going to be extraordinarily complex.

On China's growing naval clout:

It's important that we work toward a cooperative relationship with [China's navy], but it has to be transparent. The work we do in the Somali Basin should be replicated in the South China Sea and in other places. I seek to do that, and that's why I believe military-to-military relationships are so important. That said, when you talk about aircraft carriers, having a ship that can have airplanes on it is one thing. Masterfully operating it is very different. I've told my Chinese counterpart that it only took us 75 years to get good at it. So I think that our position as a carrier-capable navy is quite secure for quite some time.

On developing the Navy's riverine capabilities and operations:

One of the things that I think has been quite successful has been the evolution of the Navy Expeditionary Combat Command, and the riverine force is part of that. In our recent budget we have added a fourth riverine squadron. When we initially stood up the Navy Expeditionary Combat Command, it was almost all funded with supplemental money. During the last couple of years, we've been working to get that in the base, to actually make it a part of the enduring Navy.