Contact Us   |    Join   |    Donate


Good morning, you all.It is great to be up here.Admiral Padgett, sir, thank you very much for the introduction.Well I’m smiling just a little bit, right, because one, I was thinking about getting a lapel mic and trying to do what Joe Tofalo did.They made me a bunch of cards up here, and it kind of all comes back to the really sharp staff at N97, Martin Sprague back there that did a lot of work putting this together. You saw Joe start off with just kind of a couple of off-script comments.Well my staff came to me long before this thing and said, Admiral, in your case that’s a really bad idea.

We need you to stick to the script.Martin’s already blowing in a paper bag back there in terms of –God, he’s doing it again.But this is all just part of the –I think this is a fabulous time to be a submariner.I’ve stood up here before and said that to you in the past, and it’s not like there ever was a bad time to be a submariner, or not a good time.

But I think Admiral Donald hit it last night when he said we’re at an inflection point of sorts as we look into the future.Some of the speakers have already talked about the changed world order that we see.And the Submarine Force is well positioned based on the inherent physics of the domain that we operate in, the capabilities that we provide, the hard work of those that have gone before us.

And so you’re going to see us do things. Stealth is always going to be the cover charge to get into our domain to go do our missions, right?But there are other missions that are coming on the table.There are other capabilities that we’re building in.

I’m going to give you some examples of where we’re headed in the future, but that’s part of why I say this is a great time to be a submariner.I think when we get the slides up I’ll go ahead and give you some more examples of exactly what I’m talking about.

First, let me start off –remember future capabilities, requirements and resources.That’s what we do in N97.So I’m going to give you a quick portfolio update.

I do this with some humility, right?You just got a prime standard alignment from Admiral Mulloy, so I’m just going to attempt to pass the alignment check here.But what I’ve got them binned in is in the priority order, the sort of Submarine Force priorities.

I want to display to you the PB17 enhancements referenced against our priorities.Know that those priorities should look very familiar to you.They’re the same ones I put up last fall and that you’ve seen the force put up over time.

There’s power in that.There’s consistency.There’s alignment.Admiral Tofalo was talking about that earlier.

Those priorities come from the Integrated Undersea Future Investment Strategy.That strategy comes from Commander’s Intent.That goes back to The Design for Maritime Superiority.

Know that that alignment continues down.If you were to see Admiral Del Toro’s science and technology objectives, they’re lined up with what we have in the IUFIS.If you see what Admiral Trussler is doing, you’re going to see that alignment.I submit that we’re one of the best communities in terms of maintaining that alignment between all elements of what we’re trying to do, and I’m going to demonstrate to you how that all played out for us in PB17.

To start, you remember strategic deterrence is job one.It’s our highest priority.It’s why it’s first on the slide.In terms of sustaining the OHIO Class, we maintained it.It was about $2.2 billion in FY16 adds that came out of the NER, and we were able to add a little bit more to that coming through in PB17.

You saw Admiral Mulloy talk about the OHIO Replacement.That is funded in PB17, including $2.3 billion of additional SCN in ’21, so we’re beginning to see the beginnings of the relief that will be necessary.And remember, this is not a question of whether or not we’re going to pay for OHIO Replacement.That is our number one priority.This is about minimizing the impact to the remainder of the Navy, and that’s important as well.

We have Virginia-class at two per year as the goal, at least through FY ’21.In PB17 we have one per year in the OR years.I’ll show you a little bit more about that in a future slide and the opportunity that we have to potentially do better than that and do a significant step in addressing the shortfall in attack submarines that we face in the future.

There’s great news on the Virginia Payload Module (VPM).We came into this POM cycle at one per year.We walked out at two per year starting in ’20.So basically, with the exception of the first one, all Block 5 and all follow-on Virginias are VPM.I’d ask you to start thinking about it, that’s just what a Block 5 Virginia is going to be.We’ll almost stop talking about VPM as a separate thing.That’s just a characteristic of a Block 5 Virginia.

So after we went after strategic deterrence, after we went after force structure, then it’s a class of things that enhance our asymmetric advantage.Again, in most of these I’m going to go into a little bit more detail, but once you have access, what do you do with it?We can do plenty today.Here’s how we’re going to expand the capabilities that we provide back to the force, and that includes acoustic superiority.

The bottom line is acoustic superiority is funded on just about everything, Ohio back-fit, Ohio Replacement and new construction, Virginia-class new construction, and Virginia-class back-fit on most Blocks 3 and 4.I’ll have the numbers later on.

Heavy weight torpedo restart, put that one in the done pile.The line is coming back up.The RFPs are on the street and after many years of hard work we’re back in the business of making heavyweight torpedoes.I’ve got some other exciting news in terms of both heavyweight torpedo prototyping that’s going on, and I want to dive into our missile portfolio, all of that added inside of PB ’17.

A big effort inside of unmanned vehicles that I’ll talk some more about.Again, you saw Admiral Mulloy point to SWFTS.So the bottom line, as Admiral Tofalo mentioned, the Department of Defense is endorsing with resources the capabilities that are provided to the combatant commanders by the Submarine Force.I’m kind of fond of saying that this goes beyond speeches.They are providing resources to endorse the capabilities that we provide.

That said, we’re in the middle of POM18.Of course, I’m not allowed to talk about where we are with POM18 because that’s pre-decisional.That’s kind of a Pentagon way of saying anything I was to say about POM18 now I’d just be wrong.So it’s better that I just don’t tell you anything about it yet.It is a very challenging environment.

Let me start first with an OHIO Replacement update.When I go to this slide, I have two lists that I keep, among several, one of which is things that make me proud to be an American, and things that I worry the nation takes for granted.There are plenty of both on this slide.

It has been a great year for the OHIO Replacement Program.The vice chairman validated the CDD, a major accomplishment inside the JROC process.The CNO and Secretary Stackley personally chaired the Gate 4 Review.

On that list, by the way, of things that make me proud to be an American is most of the things that PEO Submarines does.When you watch those guys in action—that was a very challenging Gate Review and they did a very phenomenal job.I don’t want to get into too much of Admiral Jabaley’s knickers, but when you see how that Virginia program executes across the board, it makes me proud to be an American and gives me great confidence when we’re able to go off and do things like this.Another big one on that list is the request for proposal DAB that was completed with Secretary Kendall.So a great amount of accomplishments in Ohio Replacement in FY15.

But at this point, it’s like, stop the music, right?It’s a very good news story but we have a lot of challenges ahead of us.We’re going to show you a glimpse of them here for this year.

I’m constantly reminded of what Admiral Richardson told us about a year and a half ago in a speech to the Submarine League.I keep that speech on my desk.I’m jumping ahead a little bit.

We say things like coordinated and integrated approach.Those are kind of Pentagonish buzz words for the very hard work that is required and remains to be done to continue to get OHIO Replacement in on time.I captured some of the highlights.

Remember, we’ve got six lines of effort, two nations, two executive departments, multiple major budget lines to fund.We have to keep all of this in coordination.All the pieces have to come together.Whatever your role is inside of this, to borrow Admiral Richardson’s words,you’ve got to have your shoulder to the blocking sled.You’ve got to keep your legs pumping, and we have to continue to move forward.

Finally, we’re in the process—I show some cost numbers up here.Those are in the process of being updated in Milestone B,which is the major event, among several, that are coming up later this year.

Here’s the eye chart.I couldn’t be a nuke without putting up a whole bunch of detail.But again, this goes back to one of the reasons that we have such success.And I don’t even want to describe it as winners and losers.It’s when we go make a case for resources we can present compelling arguments why we’re a valuable investment because of the rigor of the work that we do to set it up.

So this is your attack and guided missile Submarine Force structure.This is the shortfall that we’re talking about.It begins in ’25 and bottoms out in ’29.Right now that is 41 boats under a requirement of 48.Then we show you the total number of SSN years here at 51.

Just a couple of things I want to highlight on this. I’ll start with, the requirement is 48.That number has been around for a long time.That was actually last validated by OSD in 2005.It builds on work that had been done years up to that.

Admiral Tofalo just gave us a very good overview of the number of assumptions that went into that force structure of 48 that just aren’t valid anymore, right?And so, we’ve done a lot of work inside of N97 to capture with analytic rigor what has changed about those assumptions.We’re feeding those into the force structure assessment that is underway inside of OSD.I think that there is a very good case to be made that 48 is insufficient and that the number will be higher.We’ll know when that force structure assessment is complete.

Another key point that we work through is the fact that when you see the ramp in here—two Virginia per year as Ohio Replacement comes in—these are the actual new construction ships and their building block approach.As we ramp up with VPM, OHIO Replacement, and continue with two Virginias, we’re not limited by industrial capacity.That was a key conclusion that came out of a sub study, and it opens up an opportunity here in FY21.

So yes, Admiral Mulloy said that there are a number of priorities inside the Department of the Navy, but we have a tremendous opportunity here to continue a two per year build rate.I think some of you may have heard Secretary Stackley talk about this up on the Hill.We can show a very good case as to, if we were to have a second Virginia in ’21, the effect that it has on the trough as being pretty significant.We want to make the case that we don’t want to miss this opportunity of a very large thing that we can do to address this shortfall.And we also show the Virginia Payload Module starting here on all Block 5 and follow-on ships.

Another challenge we face, strike capacity, right?This drop is when the guided missile submarines come off line.What I wanted to show you with this—I think you’re familiar with it—this is the strike capability, really number of launchers, which come back as the Virginia Payload Module SSNs come online.

This is what the add in PB17 did for us.That was a pretty significant chunk of attempting to address that shortfall.The bottom line with that additional investment is we’ll eventually recover to within 10 percent of our strike volume.

So across the board, investment providing capabilities that are providing us with enhanced asymmetric advantage is part of why I stay so excited.More traditional, towed arrays.We’re in a fleet now where they’re all green, right?So we have improved them and addressed what had been a reliability issue for us.

Rapid prototyping of—nextgen telemetry is one of the best ways to go and improve an array.We’re in the business now of bringing in the TB-29Xs.You’ll get the first ones in there in FY17.

We’ve alluded to the Acoustic Superiority Program.Admiral Mulloy talked about the investment that we have made there.The bottom line is I’m proud to be in a force that still has the rigor to know its physics, go look at something, analyze it, find an opportunity, do the rigorous engineering, do the rigorous analysis, and then make a case inside the Department of Defense that results in about a billion dollar investment in this to sustain our acoustic advantage and take advantage of the opportunity.

So that’s your Large Vertical Array, advanced coating, some quieting.We say at-sea testing will begin in 2020.That will build on the good work that is already underway on USS DALLAS and now USS MARYLAND.We have it funded for all the OHIOs, all the OHIO Replacements, and then the Virginias, as I talked about, including the back-fit boats here.

Weapons.Again, exciting times for the work that we’re doing on our weapons.As I go through and talk about each of these, remember that we are looking at end-to-end, how you employ them, right?We had been fond of using the term kill chains. You may now hear us start talking about kill webs, to try to capture—a kill chain is kind of a linear two-dimensional simplification of the way the actual fleet works.

So not only are we doing heavy weight torpedo restart, we’re in the business of addressing our 30 percent shortfall.We’re continuing to upgrade our weapons, and working hard to now add capacity on top of the ability to provide new weapons.That’s a part of the broader integrated submarine torpedo plan.

In a very exciting investment by OSD, they put in almost $300 million for us to go off and build a small number of prototype torpedoes with radically advanced capability than the ones that we have in the fleet today, to go after some of the things that you saw Admiral Tofalo talk about.So this isnot PowerPoint.We’re getting rapidly to the point that we’re bending metal, putting things in the water so that we can go start testing exciting new developments.

The same thing with the Tomahawks.We’re working with the surface warfare N96 crowd as we get back in the anti-ship cruise missile business.The Submarine Force will be a player in that as well, and other exciting missile work.

And again, beyond that we’re beginning the work to go figure out what follows Tomahawk.What is the next generation land attack weapon capability?All of this with investments in targeting, communications—remember, we’re the penetrating portion of the kill web.We’re the force that has access.How do we better leverage that both as a part of a broader fleet or independently if necessary to be that key that unlocks the A2AD door?

UUVs.I think some of you all may remember Admiral Cald-well mentioning a challenge that he had given me and the force more broadly to move out on UUVs.Frankly, that’s kind of closer to putting a defibulator paddle to the process.We are really going to move out in terms of what we’re doing.

Look, we have a vision for UUVs.We’ve had one for a while. It’s like Admiral Mulloy talked about this morning, it is a vision of a family of unmanned undersea vehicles.

We don’t have one aircraft sitting on a carrier air wing.They have a family of aircraft that go off and do the missions.We see something like that undersea: a family of small, medium, some that are too big to come off a submarine.They’ll come off a pier, they’ll come off a surface ship.This is about getting missions accomplished, so multi-mission payloads, various platforms, reconfigurable sensors and mission packages.

Our challenge at this point is to move beyond the prototyping and the small numbers and get this up to fleet scale, and we’re taking the first steps on that.OSD helped us, so in addition to –Joe Mulloy showed you the bigger picture.Those are the two off North Dakota on the real world mission that AdmiralTofalo talked about.Sixteen more are coming inside the ’17 budget.We show you the buy plan here.The five that he referred to are in this XL-UUV prototype in experimentation, as well as the work that is going on withLD-UUV.

Some have asked about ourrelationship with N99, who is the resource sponsor in this portion of the development for these things.I won’t say that Admiral Girrier and I complete each other’s sentences, but we’re kind of close to that.We’re working very well and we think we’re setting the model for what was intended by the creation of N99 in terms of our relationship with them working it early, us taking it post-milestone B.LDUUV will be the first test of that.

So here’s the slide I wanted to give you.I’ve been sort of working current, out.I’d like to go all the way out to commander’s intent in the vision and give you an idea of how we’re working.

What I think our task is, is to make Joe Tofalo’s vision real.So in each of the areas that he pointed to, we are working to provide better definition to the point that we can start heading towards requirements.This is a long way of telling you that we’re in the process of updating the Integrated Undersea Future Investment Strategy.

So the onethat you have, I want you to know is a document that is active.We think about it.I’m working on getting you the next one, so that’s not something that will wind up on a shelf never to be seen again, areas like: electromagnetic maneuver warfare, use of the seabed sea floor, unmanned undersea vehicles, and then where we’re going on the new SSN.All of those are actively being worked, processes inside the enterprise, and then ultimately I’ll continue the conversation with you in the executive summary of theIUFIS when we put out an update on that, probably later this year or early next year.

The other one I wanted to show you real quick is, I’ve shown you these bubbles off on the side.I don’t want to go into a whole lot of detail, but before they were organized in a sense: decide, act, and I put a domain of a seabed in there.That’s aligned with the N9 warfighting narrative that comes from the CNO’s design.

This uses the terms—this is another way of looking at it using third offset terminology.We are very fluent in that.And the piece I’d ask you to remember is when we talk third offset, we tend to get very focused on human-machine collaboration, autonomous learning, assisted human operations.It’s important to remember the derivation of all of that, and it comes back to we the Subma-rine Force are a key asymmetric advantage that become part of the third offset.

We’re the beginnings of where this came from.Remember, this is the third offset.There’s a second and a first offset.It’s sometimes easy to oversimplify those.

Second offset, Air-Land-Battle, was look deep, shoot deep.If you just camped on look deep, shoot deep, you missed the essence of what they were trying to do.My point here is that you have to understand the pedigree of where these came from toknow that we were the beginnings of the thinking of the third offset to begin with.

So this is what I had put up as the Submarine Force’s top priorities: OHIO Replacement, force structure, enhanced asymmetric advantage.

This is what happened in PB17 and how we’re going to update it: posture, to show more about we’re out there in the three point stance ready to deter conflict and engage if necessary; at least two Virginia peryear; showing the Block 5 now includes VPM; moved up increasing heavy weight torpedo inventory.

And then finally as these move up, the key one I wanted to show you is, what is next to come up here?What is the next thing as we take things off the list, aswe achieve success in the resources?What’s the next one to come on?

I’ll convince Admiral Tofalo what I think the next one ought to be, but I’ll tell you the early candidate right now is electromag-netic maneuver warfare. It’s LPI/LPD comms.It’s UAS comms.And the first step is down a broader vision down that path.

So with that, I thank you all and I’d be happy to take a few questions.

ADM. MARK KENNY:Admiral, Mark Kenny. I noted you added acoustics superiority there.We have heard that there is potentially some movement to move funding and focus from acoustic into EW and other areas, an attack that we’ve fended off for years from those outside the Submarine Force.So it’s somewhat surprising that we would want to tinker with or break that model where wehave the advantage.Maybe you can’t talk about it or maybe it’s ongoing, but it’s troubling to hear that, not so much as an industry member, but as a submariner.

ADM. RICHARD:Well, going all the way to we are moving funding might be a bit of a stretch inside that.We are always looking at the balance of capabilities that we provide to a submarine relative –acoustic relative to EW, relative to imaging, and all of the capabilities that SWFDS provides.I think we’d be remiss if we didn’t take a look at thetotal sum of capabilities we’re providing to our ships relative to the missions that we’re asking them to do.

No one is talking about squandering an acoustic advantage.I go back to, no matter what future you think about –I mean, there’s some very difficult questions. What competitive environment do you think you’re going to be in in 2040?It may not be the one that you grew up in.

But in any future that I see coming, stealth, acoustic superiori-ty, will be required to be there.That’s your cover charge.If you can’t pay the cover charge you’re not going to be on the field to get a chance to play.

So there’s plenty of rigor and acknowledgement of that’s a crown jewel to be guarded.But I do think it’s appropriate for us to look at the balance of capabilities that we’re providing to our ships given the missions that we’re asking them to do and the environ-ments they’re going to have to operate in.

ADM. KENNY:Thank you, sir.

ADM. RICHARD:Admiral, just one more thought on that.There’s a couple of things outhere where the force is going to have to potentially think radically differently than it has in the past.I think –for example on electromagnetic maneuver warfare we’re going to have to get out of a world where the only question we’re trying to answer is, has my periscope been detected, to one where I am domain-centric.I may be the only aperture here.I need to understand what’s happening in spectrum.I need to be able to exploit it.I might need to attack and I’m going to have to tell somebody else so they can take action on it at operational or theater scale.That’s just one example of it.It’s opportunity, but it’s a challenge that we have to think our way through.

MR. JOHN PADGETT: Thank you, sir.I’ve probably been watching too many debates, but canI have 30 seconds here to reply to that?I agree 100 percent, the missions that you’re talking about and the sensitivity of that and how that threatens our stealth as much as anything.And from our position, we can be a more capable platform to do those missions.Seeing the budget and the focus from the Navy back into capability, a little less so in LCS, in the numbers, why we would have to have that tradeoff between what you called our crown jewel and our kind of price of playing poker, why wouldn’t we maintain that and then make the –

ADM. RICHARD:Sir, I haven’t had to make that trade yet.

MR. PADGETT:Okay, thank you.

ADM. JAY DONNELLY:Admiral, Jay Donnelly.

ADM. RICHARD:Yes, sir.

ADM. DONNELLY:On your slide where you spoke to your UUV vision, you showed a four, three, three, three, three buy plan for UUVs.

ADM. RICHARD:Yes, sir.

ADM. DONNELLY:Could you say a few more words?That’s the first I’ve heard of that in any forum.

ADM. RICHARD:Okay, so I’m guilty of maybe making too many assumptions. That is the ’13 –’19, basically the Remus 600 vehicles.This is what was used on NORTH DAKOTA.It’s exciting, real world missions, CONUS operations and great acquisition strategy.

There’s already an existing program of record, the LBS-AUV, we simply came on with them.So it didn’t have the overhead of a new program start and able to pretty rapidly get capability out to the fleet.That is the buy program.DEVRON 5 does the operations.We’re looking at the manning piece of that.We’re looking across theboard at man, train and equip.

So I was excited to see an endorsement of that by OSD as a good place to go put some money.This morning at breakfast Admiral Mulloy talked about 16 smaller UUVs plus five bigger ones.The 16 are the 4-3-3-3-3, that is the 16 that he was referring to, and the five are the numbers related to the XL-UUV, which is still an S&T INP-type effort out of ONR.

ADM. DONNELLY: Great, that helps.Thank you.

MR.:Admiral, good morning, and thanks.Just a little bit of a follow-up on UUVs, represented here you’ve got industry that shares every bit your commitment for innovation and developing new capabilities.I wonder if you might be able to share your view of how the government labs, what the role of industry might be, particularly in UUV development here in the near-term?

ADM. RICHARD:Well, your question is almost better answered over on the acquisition side.But I’ll tell you one thing, I want to deliver capability to the fleet.I think I’m behind the curve in getting capability outthere so we can learn.One of the challenges here is we have so little operational experience.It makes it hard for someone like me to write requirements because we just haven’t operated.I need more data to be able to go do that.The fleet needs more experience.

So what’s the best way to go do that?A key piece here is we have done a lot of work over time, both in industry and the lab organizations.Let’s make sure as we go forward we don’t leave that on the table, that we harness the work that has already been done and done advertently or inadvertently go back to scratch in some areas and attempt to redesign a wheel after we’ve spent some money in other place, and we actually have good technology on the shelf, and we don’t let ourselves get in each other’s way in the process of getting that capability out to the fleet.

MR.:Thanks, I think I’ll ask the question again of the acquisition folks.

ADM. PADGETT:Thank you very much.

ADM. RICHARD:Thank you, sir.


THE SUBMARINEREVIEW is a quarterly publication of the Naval Submarine League. It is a forum for discussion of submarine matters. Not only are the ideas of its members to be reflected in the REVIEW, but those of others as well, who are interested in submarines and submarining.

Articles for this publication will be accepted on any subject closely related to submarine matters. Their length should be a maximum of about 2500 words. The League prepares REVIEWcopy for publication using Word. If possible to do so, accompanying a submission with a CD is of significant assistance in that process. Editing of articles for clarity may be necessary, since important ideas should be readily understood by the readers of the REVIEW.

A stipend of up to $200.00 will be paid for each majorarticle published. Articles accepted for publication in the REVIEW become the property of the Naval Submarine League. The views expressed by the authors are their own and are not to be construed to be those of the Naval Submarine League.

Comments on articles and brief discussion items are welcomed to make THE SUBMARINE REVIEWa dynamic reflection of the League’s interest in submarines.

Articles should be submitted to the Editor, SUBMARINE REVIEW, 5025D Backlick Road, Annandale, VA 22003-6044.

Naval Submarine League

© 2022 Naval Submarine League