Doug - I listened with great interest and was immediately thrust back to recall our days on Camden as soon as Logistics was identified as the "Achilles' heel" of any battle group's ability to fight. Perhaps even then the truth was known but Auxiliaries have always been the "step-children" of our USN which was never more brought home when so many ships and crews were turned over to the USNS, at the close of the VN conflict, with the expectation that they could / should / would do as well as USN ships and crews. Perhaps still tacit acknowledgement of importance is all auxiliaries will ever get but I suspect that as many battles have been lost or delayed as won based on the presence and effectiveness of Logistics. Like many Podcasts the comments were educated, impassioned, and voluminous - each causing considerations. My thoughts going in and throughout the discussion were largely unanswered with much more than concern for their continued "open" status. Perhaps we need a stronger SecDef/War or another separate Wartime Production Board (akin to FDR's WWII panel that got us ready) or ... but following are my thoughts, still "open": Logistics past - present - future Reloading / Refitting / Refueling any ships at sea MARAD organizational size & political vulnerability #s and Distribution of All Classes Ships in port and deployed Weapons suites Varied opponents Multiple Fronts to co-Process Concentration of large targets vs. dispersed and varied smaller offensive platforms Varied new defensive systems & platforms still under development Costs now and expected growth over multiple FYDPs R&D of many diverse offensive weapons & defensive systems Political support now vs. next & next ... Administrations over multiple FYDPs And then I thought of some questions: How will concentrated firepower (e.g. BBGN) oppose multiple / diverse / concomitant / coordinated acts of Terrorism? If "showing the flag" is paramount is it best done by BBGNs / SAGs / CAGs or many varied platforms? Can a currently devastated U.S. Ship Building Industry answer any build / support calls? If a 3rd rate country (e.g. Iran) can bring the world to its "energy deprived knees" how will a BBGN safely get there? We still USN / MARAD / Congress all tend to re-fight now our last war's experiences but it seems that we are now way past that possibility, not only for the futility of re-solving old problems but for want of realizing that the once upon a time solutions will not answer today's or tomorrow's new problems without new offensive and defensive weapons systems. This interview highlighted the ongoing concern that we do not only lack answers but we are awash in conflicting questions from many perspectives. Thank you for the reference. *Lou* On Wed, May 20, 2026 at 12:33 PM <douglasburnett1972@gmail.com> wrote:
The Great Battleship Debate: gCaptain’s Konrad Takes On AEI’s Zack Cooper <https://gcaptain.com/250713-2/?subscriber=true&goal=0_f50174ef03-04110ac452-170322998&mc_cid=04110ac452&mc_eid=c68cbbc416>
The Defiant Class battleship proposed by the administration is now proposed to be nuclear powered. The cost is $17B before added nuclear power costs are considered. There are pros and cons about this new class of ship which may be multiple vessels. The Navy has been petty reserved in its comments other than artist conceptions of what it looks like.
If you open the link you will see an article but more important there is a video to a hourlong debate by a proponent for the battleship and by a critic of the battleship. I recommend that you listen to it because it brings out a lot of interesting points in terms of choke points, merchant ships, distributive fires, submarines, aircraft carriers and damage control. I have not seen anything like this debate and it is fun to watch. The moderator is one of the nation’s top merchant marine experts. Enjoy.
Doug