Military Review

The American press stated that often the exercises of the US Navy in recent years were of a "parquet character"

11
The American press stated that often the exercises of the US Navy in recent years were of a "parquet character"

The US Navy must radically rethink its attitude to possible military threats during tactical exercises in order to maximize the preparation of available forces. This was stated in an interview by the former commander of the 131 squadron EA-18G Growler, based at the Whidbey Island Naval Air Station, Captain Tom Clarity.


At a basic tactical level, military risks are quantified in two broad terms: risks to the armed forces and risks to the training mission itself. Usually these categories are considered exclusively at the local level and only in the near future.

These levels of war risk were logical enough when the US Navy operated in a post-Cold War unipolar world. However, in today's world with a growing number of poles, the risk must be considered against the backdrop of major military operations against an equal fleet.

It is noteworthy that the US military itself is beginning to recognize the fact of multipolarity, although the US political leadership prefers to brush aside this.

As PACFLT director of intelligence, Capt. Dale Rilage described how the Chinese Navy approaches risk in combat training:

It is noteworthy that where official media sources mention the level of military training during training, they always praise the commander, who deliberately chose to increase the risk associated with the training event ... There is a clear impression that the Chinese fleet is more ready for a much higher level of military confrontation, than its American counterparts.

Many of the tools and methods currently used in US Navy training can be adapted for use in more complex large-scale exercises. Ships should be constantly improved with innovations in order to learn lessons that will be useful in the confrontation with the same or stronger enemy. The profile press of the USA also writes about this.

It is noted that in recent years, the exercises of the US Navy often had a "parquet character". In the sense that no serious opposition was expected, and the military themselves perceived them as something on duty, ordinary, ordinary. It got to the point that during training patrols they could close the minimum area of ​​\uXNUMXb\uXNUMXbthe water area, without even considering the possibility of attacking an American warship with the help of high-precision weapons the adversary.

According to the US press, it is easy to take safety measures to prevent a deckhand from slipping and falling, or to limit the minimum lateral distance between two aircraft when deployed on a warship. But it is much more difficult to consider what risks are added to the overall combat readiness of the Navy, if one really considers conducting exercises with a high probability of strikes from an enemy of equal strength.
Author:
11 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Doccor18
    Doccor18 3 November 2022 07: 13
    +4
    ... if we really consider conducting exercises with a high probability of strikes from an enemy of equal strength.

    This is a problem of all exercises, all kinds and types of troops of each country. Suvorov's "hard to learn, easy to fight" are forgotten. Often, training and exercises are precisely "parquet" and are ...
    1. ABC-schutze
      ABC-schutze 3 November 2022 10: 55
      0
      And here, I hardly agree with you ...

      so-called. the "American press" is simply banal, stereotyped and traditionally lying. After all, ALL American so-called. "peacekeeping" operations (in fact - aggression) with the participation of the US Navy were exercises for them, with the development of new methods and means of warfare and the assessment of the effectiveness of the combat use of new types and systems of weapons. This has been the case since the spring aggression, April 1999, by the US and NATO against Yugoslavia. Where the US Navy massively applied the WTO. So it was during the US aggression against Iraq in the spring of 2003 ... So it was during the US aggression against Libya, when Florida was "transformed" from SSBNs into SSBNs (one of the 4 Ohios modernized by the United States for platforms "special operations", with the possibility of placing on board up to 154 Tomahawks and SOF formations and the corresponding equipment) "successfully shipped" up to 90 CMRFs in Libya ...

      All these were, in fact, quite a TEACHING, in which the enemy, in technological terms, was an order of magnitude weaker and politically isolated in advance. But in these exercises, in reality and MASSIVELY, and not at all "dummy-parquet", the US Navy used new types and systems of weapons ...
      1. Doccor18
        Doccor18 3 November 2022 11: 39
        +1
        Quote: ABC-schütze
        After all, ALL American so-called. "peacekeeping" operations (in fact - aggression) with the participation of the US Navy, were exercises for them, with the development of new methods ...

        Well, if you talk like you do, then any war, big or small, is a kind of "exercises and development of new techniques." The Germans began WWII by practicing a massive throw of tank forces in Western Europe, before skillfully applying this in the East ...
        Yes, and the Iraqi operation, where, according to various sources, only the Americans lost several hundred killed, one cannot call the language "exercises".
        Still, the exercises are just exercises, without real hostilities with a large number of dead and wounded.
        And the fact that in every war they learn and work out, who will argue here. And the fact that the one who fights often is more skilled in this craft than the one who fights rarely is also indisputable.
        1. ABC-schutze
          ABC-schutze 3 November 2022 13: 13
          +1
          Let me clarify again...

          I spoke specifically about the actions of the US Navy during all the aggressions I mentioned above (or the so-called "conflicts"). Indeed, everywhere, freely and freely, they acted in "polygon" conditions. Those. "in response" to them, from the side of the "defenders" nothing, REALLY, "flew". And they actually had no losses, neither in the ship, nor in the personnel ...

          As for the "combined arms", MTR and Air Force, there, indeed, there were some minimal losses. Incl. and from "friendly" fire, by the way ...

          Well, the Wehrmacht during the French campaign, simply, "outright outplayed" the command of the "allies" in staff planning. namely, due to the fact that his, the Wehrmacht, the High Command, having forces and means comparable to the defenders, acted decisively and unconventionally ...

          The French had no less tanks. But German tanks appeared exactly then and where no one "was expecting" them ...
    2. ABC-schutze
      ABC-schutze 3 November 2022 11: 02
      +1
      I will clarify...

      I opposed you precisely in the context of the thesis of the so-called. "American press" about a certain "parquet" of the US Navy exercises. But, in general, you are undoubtedly right. Only this is not a problem of "teachings", but the problem of the inertia of the brains (thinking) of the command staff, the teachings of planning and organizing. Nobody wants "unnecessary questions" on the "results" ...

      Behind this, any real "non-standard" (the possibility of sudden and unpredictable changes) in the environment is minimized, or, in general, not allowed ...
  2. kor1vet1974
    kor1vet1974 3 November 2022 07: 50
    +2
    It turns out that "parquet" exercises around the world ..
    1. huntsman650
      huntsman650 3 November 2022 08: 41
      0
      That's for sure. We have since the mid-zero (((
  3. Two
    Two 3 November 2022 07: 58
    +2
    hi Well, what are you going to do with these striped ones! As soon as he acquires the prefix "ex-", so immediately the third eye opens and thoughts begin to swarm in the skull!
  4. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 3 November 2022 08: 02
    +1
    The Americans were seriously concerned about the state and combat readiness of their fleet, as opposed to the Chinese. Previously, indeed, the United States considered itself the most powerful maritime power, which there was no one to resist. But times are changing.
    the military themselves perceived them as something on duty, ordinary, ordinary.
    So this is really on duty and ordinary in peacetime, tk. carried out according to the developed plan and within the previously established deadlines. In addition, if we take the ground forces as an example, mainly at training grounds that are familiar to every bush. In recent years, we have begun to practice the withdrawal of troops to foreign training grounds, with long marches or airlift.
    1. Egoza
      Egoza 3 November 2022 09: 11
      0
      Quote: rotmistr60
      In recent years, we have begun to practice the withdrawal of troops to foreign training grounds, with long marches or airlift.

      This is what the "partners" care about. Do not look at the prefix -ex. He acts in the interests of his native department. In short, "give money before it's too late"
  5. MS260
    MS260 3 November 2022 08: 45
    -3
    NWO showed where parquet exercises were really held with the destruction of a mock enemy