We need auxiliary cruisers to get numbers in the fleet quickly. Let's recall my old Modularized Auxiliary Cruiser proposal to implement a more recent call for such ships.
If you take the threat west of the International Date Line seriously with one eye, and then ponder the absolute state of the American shipyard industrial capacity with the other, then you had to have at one point recently wondered - is it time to make Auxiliary Cruisers Great Again?
Our Navy defends our nation within the incompatible and unforgiving boundaries formed by the tyrannies of distance and numbers. We struggle to build enough ships both capable of deploying globally and powerful enough for fighting first-rate opponents. Operating within a network-centric Navy, auxiliary cruisers could once again play a valuable role in projecting naval power. Using modular systems installed on civilian hulls, auxiliary cruisers could handle many peacetime roles; free scarce warships for more demanding environments; add combat power within a networked force; and promote the global maritime partnership.
I wrote that over 15 years ago when the need was stretching our shrinking Navy across the globe for forward presence and power projection missions. I was inspired by the history of auxiliary cruisers and the new Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) that could be reconfigured with containerized systems installed in the hull for different missions.
In theory the LCS was a good idea. In practice it failed miserably.
But I sadly digress.
The idea was to have a Civil Reserve Air Fleet-type reserve of civilian container ships modified to be ready to have mission modules in standard shipping containers. These civilian ships would be on call around the world carrying out their usual business. We'd track these ships, ordering one or more to friendly ports able to carry out the conversion. Ideally the ship or ships selected would need no or minimal unloading. We'd fly in or unload prepositioned containerized mission module packages for different types of missions to rapidly equip Modularized Auxiliary Cruisers as needed.
The need is more urgent now that we face naval challenges for control of the seas, whether we're talking about China's growing navy and coast guard or anti-ship weapons used by sub-state actors like the Iran-backed Houthi.
I did finally get my proposal published in Military Review for a power projection role in 2016 (it was awarded third place in their annual contest), but the mechanics of the ship remain constant whether it is for mass, wartime sea control or peacetime power projection. And note that the illustration above is for the concept and not the design. I specifically noted that I wasn't calling for stacking the containerized mission modules like it was a merchant ship.
I've more recently brought up the American missile-in-a-box that CDR Salamander highlighted (quoting a Naval News article):
The MK 70 PDS is a launcher system for these missiles. The system has four strike-length MK.41 VLS cells housed in a 12 meter (40 ft) container.
But this is ground already traveled by Russia, Israel, and China.
And I added a mission module package—air defense lasers:
Could America put air defense auxiliary cruisers into service to support access through critical waterways or access to important ports? They would supplement warships and free some warships for offensive action.
Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Lisa Franchetti released a highly anticipated report this month that outlines seven strategies the Navy will follow to ensure the U.S. is prepared for a potential conflict with China by 2027.
If we're really preparing for a possible Chinese initiation of war by 2027, we don't have time to build more surface ships and subs than are already scheduled to be completed and made part of the battle force by then.
We can build auxiliary cruisers using existing hulls. But we need to make a lot more missiles and the containerized launch systems to equip enough Modularized Auxiliary Cruisers to make a difference; and to reload our surviving surface ships.