Galrahn

Very nice find on the Nimitz CSG, I hadn't been able to find which ships were deploying. It would appear the CSG is scheduled to leave in February to relieve the Eisenhower CSG. That force is unquestionably designed for the Gulf with its 2 BMD AEGIS ships and the USS Pinckney (DDG 91) with its mine warfare UUVs. I think your assumption about the Chafee being for ASW duty is also right on, I remember seeing something from a FY05 budget spreadsheet about a high speed underwater communication system for the Chafee that allows it to communicate directly with submarines, to be used in its 2005 deployment with the Nimitz. I'll try to find that doc to identify the system.

I figured you caught it, but I didn't understand why you were talking about the Flight I/IIs in the Pacific when they are the only Flight I/IIs that appear to be put to good use with their BMD focus. To me it seems pretty clear the Stennis was going to the Gulf specifically for its BMD capability since Patriot deployment announcements came the same day. If it wasn't for the BMD integration, the Reagan or TR or Enterprise would have been better options.

For those AEGIS BMD, the shooters are the Patriots being deployed, shooters don't have to be other ships and in most cases wouldn't be anyway due to the difficulty of putting ships in position to engage a ballistic missile. The SM-3 lacks the range to make the engagement capability the focus of AEGIS BMD at this point, although it doesn't hurt it any!

Check out the DefenseNews article from 10/9/06 titled "U.S. Warships To Get Missile Defense Upgrades" which details all Flight I/II Pacific ships already with BMD, it will verify almost all of your assumptions and provide some details to fill in gaps in your information as of October 06. Mind this is before the late rush of activity that came in November and December, some of which was also reported.

In my observations of Pac Fleet deployments, ships deploying from the states operate alone but in the same area as allied forces, like Australia, Thailand, the Philippines, or Singapore. Only for exercises or in the region around Japan and South Korea, or when deploying into the Indian Ocean does it appear Pacific ships operate in groups, or at least via media reports that is what I am able to gather. This might be changing though, it does appear the rotation of DDGs to Japan and the addition of an extra DDG to the CSGs could have an effect, although it didn't stop last years deployments of the USS Halsey, USS Chung-Hoon, or USS Momsen which all deployed independently, attending multi-national exercises only to redeploy independently to their AOR in either the 7th or 3rd Fleet.

As of the end of 2006 the only two foreign ships officially reported to have AEGIS BMD was JDS Kirishima (DDG 174) or HNLMS Tromp (F 803), both of which have version 3.6.

After discussions and research this weekend I think the O'Kane and Hamilton are both running version 3.0, not 3.6 like I said. That would mean it is very unlikely they would operate independent the group as I implied, because 3.0 has the limitation of requiring an AEGIS system reboot to switch from normal AEGIS defense to BMD AEGIS defense.

From what I have read, it appears the USS Rentz is deploying to relieve the USS Taylor.

Question for Rick: What do you make of all this Pacific Fleet activity. The Lincoln pulled out of dry dock on Dec 26th ahead of schedule, but the Kitty Hawk is going into drydock. With the Reagan, Stennis, and Nimitz either deployed or deploying over the next 30 days it leaves little ready for surge, while the Atlantic Fleet has both the TR and Enterprise ready to go with the Truman beginning its workups for deployment this summer.

Do you still consider the FRP a success or is do you see it showing some limitations with the added strain surge deployments can add to the system?