Why did the United States need two reserve fleets at once?

6

Everyone knows very well that the American navy is the most numerous and powerful, almost completely owning the world's oceans. It is based on 11 aircraft carrier strike groups (AUG), but not everyone knows that in reality the US Navy is much more numerous and can quickly increase its numerical strength at the expense of the reserve.

World War II at sea against the Third Reich and Japan was largely won because the relatively safe and industrial United States could build warships and transport ships very quickly and in large numbers. But when the war ended with the defeat of the Axis countries, the question arose of what to do with all this fleet, the size of which turned out to be excessive for peacetime. The zealous Americans preferred not to sell the ships or let them go on pins and needles, but to keep them for future use. A reserve fleet was created, and not one, but two: the National Defense Reserve Fleet (NDRF) and the United States Navy reserve fleets. It soon became clear that they had not done so in vain.



Already during the Korean War, the Pentagon was able to immediately use 540 ships from its national reserve for the rapid transfer of a large number of troops and equipment to the peninsula. In 1951-1953, a global crisis erupted, and more than 600 ships from the United States transported grain to India and coal to Europe. Subsequently, these transport ships were used by the USDA as floating bases for storing grain stocks. In 1956, the reserve fleet was used after the closure of the Suez Canal and in 1961 during the Berlin crisis. Transport ships were widely used by the Americans during the Vietnam War and the Persian Gulf. Recent events in which the reserve fleet has proven useful are the recovery from hurricanes Katrina and Rita in the United States in 2005 and the earthquake in Haiti in 2010.

In general, it turns out to be useful to have such an additional resource that can be used in wartime or during an emergency. But what exactly are these two US reserve fleets?

National Defense Reserve Fleet (NDRF)


It was created under the Ships Sales Act of 1946 to meet the needs of the United States in the event of emergencies, as well as for the delivery of military and civilian cargo. The NDRF is administered by the United States Maritime Administration (MARAD). After the end of World War II by 1950, this reserve fleet of national defense numbered an incredible 2277 ships, but their number naturally declined. It was based on high-speed Liberty-class transports, built by the United States to provide over 2500 convoys across the Atlantic to Great Britain and the USSR. The spare ships were based at eight locations in California, Virginia, Texas, Alabama, New York, Oregon, Washington, and North Carolina.

To this day, only three NDRF sites remain - James River, Virginia, Sesun Bay, California, and Beaumont, Texas. Most of the ships have been decommissioned, but the rest can be returned to service within 20-120 days after receiving the appropriate order.

United States Navy reserve fleets


This is the second "reserve" US fleet, which is also called "naphthalene". We have already addressed this topic, telling about the remaining four Iowa-class battleships, which were actively used by the US Navy in Korea, Vietnam, Lebanon and Iraq. Now the American battleships have been turned into museums, but they can be returned to service within 3-4 months. All spare ships are based at the same anchorages as the NDRF: in James River, Sesun Bay, Beaumont and elsewhere, so they are often confused with each other. The naphthalene fleet is operated by the Marine Systems Command (NAVSEA).

As for the composition, everything is much more interesting than that of NDRF. For example, in the parking lot in Bremerton, the aircraft carrier USS Kitty Hawk (CV-63) is waiting for its turn for disposal, but it will not wait. Since 2017, the USS John F. Kennedy (CV-67) aircraft carrier has been suspended in Pennsylvania, and they have tried to raise money to turn it into a museum ship, but have so far been unsuccessful. Also in the reserve of the US Navy are 2 UDC USS Tarawa LHA-1 and USS Nassau LHA-4, 5 landing transports (LKA-113 - 117), 5 landing dock ships (LPD-7 - 13) and 1 rescue tug (USS Mohawk ATF -170). If necessary, they can be returned to service. In addition, the Marine Corps can count on an additional 72 cargo and 6 crane ships, 6 tankers and 3 gasoline tankers, 2 sea ferries and 1 military transport.

A very lean approach to resources that inspires respect. Unfortunately, this cannot be said about the domestic fleet. How many warships of the Soviet era were sold abroad or sawn for scrap, which could, under the condition of a budget deficit, be withdrawn to the reserve and restored later as needed!

And, alas, we are witnessing an example of such an irresponsible and short-sighted approach right now. One of our TARKR "Admiral Lazarev", a ship unique in its potential, did not wait for a decision on modernization. Instead, the authorities did not spare 5 billion rubles for its disposal. And this despite the fact that a ship of this size in modern Russia is extremely problematic to build. On the Military Review some time ago, an open letter was published with предложением turn the "Admiral Lazarev" into a training ship. For our part, I would like to support this initiative. Perhaps this is the most optimal solution - to use the cruiser for the good of the cause now and at the same time keep the TARKR until better times, when it may still be useful to someone.
6 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +1
    17 August 2021 14: 16
    And how many wagons, passenger and freight, are disposed of instead of being sold to the population for summer cottages, where you can grow your own vegetables and fruits, and not eat expensive overseas stuffed with chemistry?
  2. 123
    +2
    17 August 2021 14: 52
    On the Military Review some time ago, an open letter was published with a proposal to turn the "Admiral Lazarev" into a training ship. For our part, I would like to support this initiative. Perhaps this is the most optimal solution - to use the cruiser for the good of the cause now and at the same time keep the TARKR until better times when it may still be useful to someone.

    Are you sure this is the best solution? The ship is of course a pity, but it looks like it will not be restored due to its poor technical condition, and it is difficult and expensive to tow to the north.
    And you propose to do the amount of work that is recognized as inappropriate for commissioning a cruiser, just turn it into a floating lyceum.
    The amount of work to be done is almost the same, only minus the deployment of weapons. Probably if all this can be done, then it would be wiser to just make another cruiser. After all, they refuse to modernize it not because of the lack of weapons. The problem is in the "first stage". Towing, hull, reactor repair and so on.
    Do you understand what I mean? Relatively speaking, the mechanic explained to you that Kamaz is rotten and cannot be restored, it is expensive, costly, it makes no sense. And you say sorry, let's restore it, but instead of a dump truck body, we will install a booth for transporting people.
    1. 0
      17 August 2021 15: 34
      Quote: 123
      Probably if all this can be done, then it would be wiser to just make another cruiser.

      Well, do it if it's easier. smile smile How many destroyers, cruisers and aircraft carriers have we laid down and are under construction?

      And you propose to do the amount of work that is recognized as inappropriate for commissioning a cruiser, just turn it into a floating lyceum.

      Everything is planned and chewed for you at VO. Undertook to comment, read the link.
      1. 123
        +2
        17 August 2021 16: 05
        Well, do it if it's easier. How many destroyers, cruisers and aircraft carriers have we laid down and are under construction?

        Don't you get it? Repair is impractical, neither a cruiser nor a casino will turn out. NOTHING,
        It's not about what to place on it, there is nothing to place on it.
        Go better a scientific article, write, what is your citation rating in scientific circles? smile


        Everything is planned and chewed for you at VO. Undertook to comment, read the link.

        Why did I forget there? I don't need to chew, I can do it myself. If you need it, go re-read it. Without looking, I will say that there is the same "Kremlin dreamer", "captain obviousness", probably wringing his hands, drooling that we have few ships in the ocean zone, so let's repair it anyway. Although the cruiser will not work, let's get the money in anyway. The ships of the ocean zone will not become any more from this, but that is.
        Why would you need a training ship of this size with a nuclear reactor? Do you want to collect all the cadets and send them to sea for 5 years? Will they come back as graduates? Or just what boo?
  3. -2
    18 August 2021 09: 36
    Quote: 123
    Well, do it if it's easier. How many destroyers, cruisers and aircraft carriers have we laid down and are under construction?

    Don't you get it? Repair is impractical, neither a cruiser nor a casino will turn out. NOTHING,
    It's not about what to place on it, there is nothing to place on it.
    Go better a scientific article, write, what is your citation rating in scientific circles? smile


    Everything is planned and chewed for you at VO. Undertook to comment, read the link.

    Why did I forget there? I don't need to chew, I can do it myself. If you need it, go re-read it. Without looking, I will say that there is the same "Kremlin dreamer", "captain obviousness", probably wringing his hands, drooling that we have few ships in the ocean zone, so let's repair it anyway. Although the cruiser will not work, let's get the money in anyway. The ships of the ocean zone will not become any more from this, but that is.
    Why would you need a training ship of this size with a nuclear reactor? Do you want to collect all the cadets and send them to sea for 5 years? Will they come back as graduates? Or just what boo?

    Who are you to judge the inappropriateness of the repair? And the VO, where I sent you, was not talking about a training ship with a nuclear reactor. Read it before you get smart. The article was written by people who know, unlike you. As for what topics to write to me, I will figure it out without your advice. Personally, I am now working on a teaching manual for universities as the lead author of the work, if that.
  4. 0
    18 August 2021 12: 42
    How many warships of the Soviet era were sold abroad or sawn for scrap, which could be withdrawn into the reserve under the condition of a budget deficit and restored later as needed!

    This is true, but on the other hand, how many ships that were put into reserve in the 90s were plundered .. In the best case, they went for spare parts. For example, PSKR "Orel" (project 1135.1, 1986) was withdrawn in 2019 to the reserve, then it was planned to transfer it to the Navy. Probably. as a "donor".