Shipbuilding strategy makes sure bet on uncertain future.

• Author: Erwin, Sandra I.
• Position: DEFENSE WATCH

Amidst a boisterous storm of criticism from lawmakers and shipbuilding industry advocates, Navy officials confirmed in recent weeks what had become increasingly obvious: The nation's naval force is drifting towards an unknown future.

War-strained Pentagon budgets, rising shipbuilding costs and inconsistent messages by the Navy's leadership are conspiring to bring about what could be a dramatic downsizing in the Navy, a turn of events that would force yet more consolidation and shrinkage in the U.S. shipbuilding industry.

The Navy's 2006-2011 budget, which calls for cutbacks in various ship programs, sparked a heated debate in Washington about the future of a Navy that already has seen its size drop by more than half since the end of the Cold War. The official explanation from senior leaders is that the number of ships is not what really counts, but rather the "capabilities" of each ship. But lawmakers, industry insiders and even many Navy officers are not buying that rhetoric.

Numbers clearly matter to shipbuilders. Phillip Dur, president of Northrop Grumman Ship Systems, for many months, has called for the Navy and the Coast Guard to determine how many ships they need to meet national security requirements. Once that number is set, the industry can "right-size" itself, says Dur. With only two major private shipbuilding firms remaining--Northrop Grumman and General Dynamics--any form of right-sizing would lead to politically unpalatable shipyard closings and layoffs.

Only a year ago, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Vernon Clark said the Navy needed 375 ships to meet its required missions. Later, he backed away from that number when it became clear that the Pentagon leadership would not support an expansion of the fleet.

Last month, Navy Secretary Gordon England sent to Congress an "interim" long-range shipbuilding plan. The proposal has lots of numbers, but they are far from reassuring to shipbuilders. The blueprint shows a Navy that could, during the next three decades, be as small as 260 ships (compared to 290 ships today) and as large as 325.

Ideally, that range should be much narrower, but that is the best the Navy can do right now, says Vice Adm. Joseph A. Sestak Jr., deputy chief of naval operations for warfare requirements and programs.

"What I can't do, or I don't think anybody can, is predict with pinpoint accuracy how many ships we'll need in 35 years," he tells reporters. These decisions, he adds, are "driven by the vagaries of...