April 21, 2025 • 29 mins
Many frustrated by the perceived lack of understanding of our nation’s maritime heritage requirements want new leaders with fresh ideas, unburdened by legacy entanglements. It is hoped that a younger cohort with military experience, preferably naval, in the House of Representatives and the Senate who bring to the job an additional background in business and industry will emerge to promote constructive change.
Today’s guest fits the bill perfectly: the new Senator from Montana, Senator Tim Sheehy.
Tim Sheehy is a father, husband, combat veteran, patriot, and an entrepreneur. A graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy class of 2008 with a B.S. in History, Tim completed several deployments and hundreds of missions as a US Navy SEAL Officer and Team Leader, deploying to Iraq, Afghanistan, South America, and the Pacific region. Tim was honored to serve alongside many American heroes and was involved in dozens of engagements with enemy forces, earning him multiple combat decorations. Additionally, Tim completed a joint tour with Army Special Operations forces where he was privileged to complete US Army Ranger School and serve alongside the 5th Special Forces Group, 75th Ranger Regiment and other units within US Army Special Operations Command.
Tim completed his active duty service as a mini submarine pilot and navigator specializing in sensitive undersea operations. After his active duty service, Tim fulfilled reserve duty as a recruiter and assessor for future naval officers. Tim was honorably discharged from the Naval Reserve in 2019.In 2014, Tim founded Belgrade-based Bridger Aerospace with all of his savings and an all-veteran team. Under his leadership, Bridger Aerospace and its sister company, Ascent Vision Technologies experienced rapid growth and created hundreds of Montana jobs. Ascent Vision Technologies was acquired by CACI in 2020, and Bridger Aerospace went public on the NASDAQ in 2023.
Tim sits on the Senate Armed Services, Veterans’ Affairs, and Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee.
Summary
In this conversation, Senator Tim Sheehy discusses his journey from Naval Academy graduate to U.S. Senator, emphasizing the need for a new generation of leaders in the maritime domain. He highlights the importance of revitalizing the Navy, addressing challenges in shipbuilding, and fostering bipartisan support for maritime strength. The discussion also touches on the need for innovation in naval strategy and acquisition processes, advocating for a shift in mindset towards risk-taking and adaptability in the face of modern challenges.
Show LinksTakeaways
00:00: Introduction to Maritime Challenges and New Perspectives
12:47: Senator Tim Sheehy's Journey: From Navy to Politics
18:44: Revitalizing the Navy: Challenges and Opportunities
24:37: Acquisition Paradigms and the Future of Naval Strategy
Today’s guest fits the bill perfectly: the new Senator from Montana, Senator Tim Sheehy.
Tim Sheehy is a father, husband, combat veteran, patriot, and an entrepreneur. A graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy class of 2008 with a B.S. in History, Tim completed several deployments and hundreds of missions as a US Navy SEAL Officer and Team Leader, deploying to Iraq, Afghanistan, South America, and the Pacific region. Tim was honored to serve alongside many American heroes and was involved in dozens of engagements with enemy forces, earning him multiple combat decorations. Additionally, Tim completed a joint tour with Army Special Operations forces where he was privileged to complete US Army Ranger School and serve alongside the 5th Special Forces Group, 75th Ranger Regiment and other units within US Army Special Operations Command.
Tim completed his active duty service as a mini submarine pilot and navigator specializing in sensitive undersea operations. After his active duty service, Tim fulfilled reserve duty as a recruiter and assessor for future naval officers. Tim was honorably discharged from the Naval Reserve in 2019.In 2014, Tim founded Belgrade-based Bridger Aerospace with all of his savings and an all-veteran team. Under his leadership, Bridger Aerospace and its sister company, Ascent Vision Technologies experienced rapid growth and created hundreds of Montana jobs. Ascent Vision Technologies was acquired by CACI in 2020, and Bridger Aerospace went public on the NASDAQ in 2023.
Tim sits on the Senate Armed Services, Veterans’ Affairs, and Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee.
Summary
In this conversation, Senator Tim Sheehy discusses his journey from Naval Academy graduate to U.S. Senator, emphasizing the need for a new generation of leaders in the maritime domain. He highlights the importance of revitalizing the Navy, addressing challenges in shipbuilding, and fostering bipartisan support for maritime strength. The discussion also touches on the need for innovation in naval strategy and acquisition processes, advocating for a shift in mindset towards risk-taking and adaptability in the face of modern challenges.
Show LinksTakeaways
- Tim shares his journey from the Naval Academy to the Senate.
- The importance of revitalizing the Navy is highlighted.
- Challenges in shipbuilding and acquisition processes are discussed.
- Bipartisan support for maritime strength is crucial.
- Innovation in naval strategy is necessary for future readiness.
- Quantity in naval assets is as important as quality.
- A new shipbuilding paradigm is needed to meet modern demands.
- Risk-taking should be encouraged in military leadership.
- The Navy's historical context is essential for understanding current challenges.
00:00: Introduction to Maritime Challenges and New Perspectives
12:47: Senator Tim Sheehy's Journey: From Navy to Politics
18:44: Revitalizing the Navy: Challenges and Opportunities
24:37: Acquisition Paradigms and the Future of Naval Strategy
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:29):
Welcome to mid Rats with sal from Commander Salamander an
Eagle one from Eagle Speak at Seer Shore your home
for a discussion of national security issues and all things maritime,
and welcome board everybody for another episode of mid Rats.
On today's show, we're going to look at a common
desire of those, mostly speaking for myself and others, who
have been frustrated what they see as a lack of
(00:51):
understanding and focus on the requirement today for our nation's
maritime inheritance to see new people with new ideas, open
to posse disabilities, not hindered by legacy entanglements that they've
accrued over years in politics, and they've wanted to see
in order to achieve those things, a younger cohort in
the House of Representatives in the Senate, with military experience,
(01:13):
preferably naval, matched with an understanding of business and industry.
And today's guest is straight out of Central Casting looking
for that. And that's the new Senator from the Great
State of mynd Tenator Senator Tim Sheehey, who after has
graduated from the Naval Academy in two thousand and eight,
served as a seal officer for the next eleven years
active reserve duty before building two companies in the civilian
(01:35):
sector prior to defeating in a cumvent in the two
thousand and four election. Senator She Welcome to Miterrets.
Speaker 2 (01:41):
Thanks for having me on. I've been a longtime reader
of your newsletters out there since I was in uniform,
and you know, it's always interesting as life makes full circle,
you start to run into people later on, so it's
really fun to be able to talk to you guys.
You know, your writings, especially you know when I was
in uniform, although they didn't really apply a whole lot
to the soft community any necessarily, but just as a
(02:01):
naval officer, it's great to see that they just the
conversations that you guys open up amongst the naval community.
And you know, the publication Proceedings is one I've read
since high school, actually performed at the Academy and still
read to this day. And obviously that's a bit more
of a formal, uh you know, conduit for that. But
thanks for what you guys have been doing to increase
the discourse around naval strategy and make sure that that
(02:22):
fresh ideas are brought to the fore.
Speaker 1 (02:24):
I really appreciate that senator for your group. Two thousand
and eight officer senator is a pretty good billet. Oh yeah,
not bad. You pretty good for an O eight guy.
But for listeners who may not be real familiar with
your background going from the academy, through the Navy, the
private sector, and then coming into the Senate, you know,
(02:46):
outline for a little bit about those those decisive points
in that path that got you to where you are today,
the second youngest senator in the US Senate.
Speaker 2 (02:55):
Well, it's as you probably know as well as you know,
we all set out as young adults with our plan
for our life and mind, and usually God has other
things in mind for us and for me. You know,
if you'd asked me when I was sixteen, twenty four,
twenty eight, thirty two, thirty four where I was going
to be in five years, I would have been wrong
every single time. And as someone who's reasonably intelligent and capable,
(03:20):
you know, even I couldn't come close to predicting the
path of my life. Award, you know. So yeah, I
went to the Naval canon read out of high school.
I wanted to be a Navy pilot, grew up flying
my neighbor as a child was a Korean War Navy pilot,
so he started teaching me how to fly when I
was about eight years old, and I sold a plane
for I drove a car and my pilots license in
high school and got accepted to Annapolis and went there
(03:40):
with the mission, like most children of the eighties, to
be Maverick, you know, we all wanted to fly tom Kats.
And of course I got to the academy, and you know,
once you're immersed in something, as you know, the view
from inside a ship is very different than the you
outside of ship, and Naval academy is no different. I
get there and realize pretty quickly that, you know, the
perception I had of being a Navy pilot was very
(04:02):
different than what the reality of a nation at war
was in a nation at war two, massive ground wars
to insurgencies, and you know, being there, getting there in
fall of four, pretty quickly realized that, you know, as
you all probably remember better than I, you know that
they were even service warfare officers were being pulled off ships,
given desert cammis and rifles and sent to Iraq and
(04:22):
Afghanistan to say, hey, you're going to man a operations
center you're going to be a provincial reconstruction team or
you name it. It was really an all hands on
deck effort to where warfare officers of any service, of
any specially were being sent over there because frankly, that's
where the need was. We didn't really need fighter pilots.
We needed guys on the ground fighting an insurgency. So,
you know, once I got to the Academy, it pretty
(04:44):
quickly dawned on me that flying jets was a selfish
desire I had, but the country really needed was was
fighters on the ground. So, you know, coming up at
the end of my first semester there at the Academy,
I made the wise decision that I was going to quit.
I was gonna lead the academy. I was going to
resign from the Academy and go be a marine and
fight on the ground because I felt, like most nineteen
(05:04):
year old kids, the war is going to be over
before I have a chance to do my part. You know,
I'm better get out there and fight the war while
I still can. Otherwise, you know, I'm going to miss
my chance to do what we all want to do
when we're you know, teenage young men, and you know,
submitted my letter resignation to my company officer and commander,
and they kind of said, all right, kid, you want
to quit, fine, we're not going to stop you, but
(05:25):
go talk to this guy. I think we think you
should talk to him. And so I went down to
Dahlgren Hall that night and then there was a guy
waiting there, and you know, I'm a plead walking around,
pleading my cover, and they say, you're going to be
a guy named McDonald have a conversation with him. And
I get there, I'm looking at name tags and I
see that McDonald is a full Bird Army Special Forces
colonel who's on the Naval Academy campus. And I'm like, well,
what the hell is this guy doing here? And why
(05:46):
am I talking to him? I said, sir, you must
be Tim. I said, yeah, yes, sir, I am. We'll
have a seat. And turns out he was the officer
rep for the hockey team and was currently attending National
Defense University in DC, which is why an Army six
was sitting on the Navy yard and Dalgren Hall, which
is you guys probably remember, used to be the skating rink.
I'm not sure if it still is. And you know,
(06:06):
proceeded to kind of say, hey, I hear you're quitting
the academy. You're you know, at the time, I was
number one ranked in my company and pretty high up
in my class. So it was like, your company officer
is pretty surprised you've decided to quit and go to
the fleet and the list. I said, well, sir, you know,
I'm here to fight the war and do my part,
and I just don't feel like three more years of
calculus and thermodynamics are what I need, uh more more
(06:27):
directly what the country needs. H He said, well, listen,
I've just done my third deployment in the War on Terror.
And he's the guy who fought the first golf for War
Panama and you know all these and he's like, this
war is not going to be over in you know,
anytime soon. We're going to be fighting this war for
the next generation. Obviously, Boy was he right. And this
is fall of before December of before he's telling me this.
He says, but you know, one thing we're working on
is inner service operability, especially in the special ops world,
(06:50):
and a lot of people don't really realize is you know,
prior to the War on Terror, our special operations units
were very segregated. You know, rangers, Grain, berets, seals, air Force,
special ops, marine recom They all existed, but they didn't
really combine and work together very much. And for the
first time ever, we were seeing these combined special joint
special operation task forces where all different elements Army and
(07:12):
Navy special missione units you know, rangers, SF, seals, nice talkers,
everyone was getting mashed together with even you know, agencies,
intel agencies mixed in I kind of create these joint
task forces where everyone was just working together and kind
of the the old school lines were really being blurred
in a way that had never been done before. And
one of the issues that was emerging was seals were
the smallest and most unique of soft the soft principal elements,
(07:35):
and they just weren't meshing well with the Army because
everything we did was different, you know, I mean, our
radios are different, our fregency are different, our guns were different.
Even the words we'd use our ranks for these weird
ass ranks, you know, like what a sergeant, what's a
petty officer, what's a sonarman? Second class? You know, you
sergeant or corporal, you know, and just simple things like
that was making it hard for Army Soft and Navy
Soft to intermix and work seamlessly together. And unfortunately, were
(07:57):
a couple of disasters relatively early in the war that
kind of increased that resentments. It was a roberts Ridge
Battle and there was Red Wing's Operation Red Wing as well.
So anyways, the intent was, Hey, that there's a program
that we're looking at standing up, where're take midshipmen who
are going to go into the NSW community and send
them through some cross training with the Army, go to
Airborne School, range of school, recon school, and get some
(08:19):
exposure there so when they go become seals, they understand
Army Soft speak the language and so on and so forth.
And he said, you know, based on your scores, you're
like you'd be the perfect candidate. Do you want to
do it? And of course, as a nine year old kid,
is it hard? Is it dangerous? Yes, I'll go. So
I went ahead and did that. And the deal was
they had to graduate though, and that man had to
miss a lot of school and over the next three
years and initiative, going through the Naval Academy, became an
(08:41):
Army ranger, firstman shipment over the Range of School, went
to the seventh the Ranger Regiment, Airborne School, fifth Special
Forces Group Exchange, and a couple of other couple of
other specialized courses, and it was a great experience. Graduated
the academy, drove across country, started buds five days later, graduated,
you know, seal training, but might tried it a week later.
I'm on the ground in Iraq on my first mission
and had a very high op tempo career, as all
(09:03):
of us did those years, and that Army Exchange training
I did, it could have been more valued in my
first deployment. I walked in the door first day in
Baghdad in two thousand and nine and boom, you know,
there's two guys that went to Range School with on
the Army Special Operations Unit there that I was working with.
And then every deployment after that, I mean, not a
single deployment. I did five total, several different trips around
the world, but really, you know, five deployments that I
(09:24):
would call directly, and every single one I'd run into
a guy that that you know, I had met and
worked with during my Army Special Operations Exchange and made great,
great friends in that world. And actually, you know Colonel
General Career, I said, Colonel General Corilla, now I run
said coom. You know, he was my task force commander
in Afghanistan back when he was running range regiment. And
now of course I see him regularly on the hill
as he brisas on saidcom issues. So it's fun to
(09:46):
see everything come full circle. But love the teams was
great exposure there my wife. I met my wife at
the academy. She was a Marine Corps officer, so we
both commissioned in we were some of those mashipment who
broke the rules and David in company, but we both graduated.
She went into the Marine Corps also after in war VET.
And then yeah, eventually I got wounded in Afghanistan, got
injured on dive action as well during a sub mini
(10:08):
submarine operations, got put on the medical hold list, and
you know, with the future uncertain, I kind of decided, well,
you know, if I can't be on the teams anymore,
I think I'll go find a new path in life.
So that's when I started my company, and all that
started with another Naval officer. Whole leadership team early on
was all Academy grads West Point and Navy, and yeah,
(10:30):
all veteran founding team. We grew to you know, created
about five hundred jobs over the course of ten years,
all veteran management team all over the world. It was
a great, great time and loved those companies and it
was a great camaraderie had that really came from the military,
with the culture of excellence that came from the academies.
And then I got into poll this completely by acident
iby Aram for Student Council before. This is my first
(10:50):
time ever. But it was Afghanistan. It was a collapse
in cobble. You know. As I saw that happen, I
was getting refugees out, spending around money trying to get
people out, as our own government basically was sitting there
watching this lapse. And you guys know, I mean for
so many of us, that defined our life. I mean
we all spent our twenties there. I lost friends there,
my wife lost friends there. So to see us just
walk away from that in such a disgusting manner and
abandoned over eight harded American citizens and project weakness to
(11:13):
the entire world, which we're now still feeling the effects
of that kind of jolted me out of my political
apathy and got me involved in politics for the first
time in my life. It originally I got involved more
as a speaker and a donor, and then eventually a
couple of guys corner me said, hey, we've got a
really important center race kinding up, and frankly, we think
we need a fresh face, a young guy to go
out there and do this. And here I am. So
it's an honor to be here to represent Montana. I'm
(11:34):
on Armed Services of course, Seatpower Committee, Emerging Threats as
well for Special Operations, and just joined the board of
the Naval Academy. So I'm interested in supporting the revitalization
of our navy and all forms undersea, on the sea,
in the air. As we all know that the conventional
Navy has really been in a state of decay for
some time. Decades of focus on insurgency warfare have left
the Navy in a position where we are not ready
(11:57):
to fight a near pure conflict on the oceans. And
I think it's as the only constitutionally mandated branch of
the military to build and maintain a navy, it's time
we get this thing rebooted and refocused. So that's where
we're here. Thanks for having me, Well, it's great to
have you.
Speaker 3 (12:10):
And I think since you've come into the Senate, you've
planted on, as you've just pointed out, a couple of
really key committees for the maritime, not just the Navy,
but the Merchant Marine group too, because you're you're on
the Armed Services Committee, which is obviously seapower and all that,
but also on the Commerce Science whatever I can't remoin
right and transportation. I mean, you're dealing with a coast Guard,
(12:31):
maritime and fisheries. Has Has it happens you've fallen right
in when the people are proposing this Ships Act? Can
you kind of talk about what you know about that
and what looks like to you if that is at
a very positive step in your view of waiting to
get our maritime supremacy back.
Speaker 2 (12:48):
Well, listen, I'm obviously my experience of the Navy was
even though I'm a Naval Academy grad. To be honest,
I mean, the grand total amount of time I've spent
on ships and submarines is probably less than most kids
eive summer camp. You know. My time was in the
desert care and a gun but the truth is, you know,
I'm a history I'm a history obsessed person and being
a Naval Academy grad, and my favorite era of history
(13:10):
is the Age of Sale, and the book Six Frigates
is one of my favorite books ever. And Ian told
all of his work, I've read multiple times, and I
recommend Six Frigates every sending member of Congress. I see
because the arguments that our very first Congress had around
having a navy are almost the same ones we're having today.
And it's fascinating to just getting the time machine and
(13:31):
go back and listen to our founding fathers wrangle about
cost of money and whether you know, having a navy's
imperialist and et cetera, et cetera. But you know, really
what the consensus ended up being was we had to
have a navy. You know, we were a mercantile republic,
but we weren't. We weren't an empire. We were in
and we depended on global trade. We were the first
country that was founded as a business, and our business
needed trade, it needed access to global shipping routes. And
(13:55):
very wisely, our framers understood that we have to have
a viable native to exist as a nation, and I
think that awareness is now re emerging when quite frankly,
just to be honest, you know, we all know the
importance of the Navy. I mean we're preaching the choir
here that you know, freedom of navigation of the world's
oceans underpins our twenty first century economy and our ability
(14:16):
to project power all over the world. Yes, our army
bases and air force are important, but it really comes
because of our navy. But not everyone understands and appreciates that.
And I think, you know, the Navy hasn't had a
commanding role as far as the force of decision and
a conflict since lay take golf. So I think most
people have just kind of said, don't well, the Navy
will always be there, right, we don't have to focus
on it. But now as we're coming to grips with
(14:37):
the d industrialization of America and the shifting of these
industries overseas, we're having to grapple with the fact that
you know, this is a very in depth complex issues
and to quote unquote fix the Navy. As I've said
with all the service chiefs and everyone I've met and said, listen,
you know, every branch has its challenges and to fix
the problems of the army. In my opinion is, you know,
it's a one year problem, all right. I mean, some
could be already as larger, but really the key issues,
(14:59):
you know, it's a year problem. Fix the Air Force,
it's a five year problem. We can still build planes,
we can build guns and bullets and bombs. To fix
the Navy is a ten year plus problem. I mean,
to build ships at scale, to engineer these systems, to
acquire them. It's really I mean, it's a whole new paradigm.
So I think the good news is bipartisan focus understands
that in an era of hyper partisanship, when you've shut
on Fox News, AROUNSSNBC, you feel hopeless for the future
(15:22):
of America. When the cameras are off and you get
behind closed doors, both parties really do treasure in the
Navy and realize it's time to reinvest. So I feel
good about it. I mean, of course, the devil's in
the details with anything that goes through Congress, but I
think what we're going to see is the President's make
clear he wants a ship building off, he wants to
focus on this. The Senate Armed Service Committee and Seatpower
(15:42):
Committee has been very clear and a lined across the
aisle that this needs to happen. So I think I
think it's going to be. It's gonna be an unprecedented
era of support for the Navy, probably likes which we
haven't seen as a Secretary Layman in the Reagan years. Now.
What I'll say to that, though, is what Secretary Layman
and thegear the Reagan Navy build up did was essentially
(16:03):
an extension of the you know, World War two era
kind of shipbuilding paradigm that was very twentieth century industrial
era focused. We can't do that again. And what I've
been telling everyone is we can't just cut and paste
Layman's plan from the eighties. We can't cut and paste
Henry Kaiser's plan for World War Two. We are a
fundamentally different nation today, and therefore we can't just tell
(16:23):
the Navy, here's more money, go build ships, because quite honestly,
the Navy doesn't know how to build ship the scale
either anymore. So this is going to take a new
shipbuilding paradigm that may involve certain classes of vessels are
least you know, it may involve accepting that, you know,
a baseline commercial level of vessel. You know, build is acceptable,
and then you know certain upfitting can happen later with
(16:43):
classified systems, you know, we may have to accept that
we may not own the fleet out right. Navies throughout
history at least fleets are borrowed fleets, you know, capturing
other nations ships and using them as their own. Obviously
no one does that anymore. But I think we have
to think more broadly and be more limber in our
in our kind of structure that we're willing to adopt
because we need to revitalize in avy. It has to
happen fast. China's building ships two hundred and thirty times
(17:06):
faster than we are, so we can't wait for American
shipyards to magically reappear. We're going to find other ways
to do this. And I think, you know, the ships
ACKed and many others between executive ors and legislation, and
we try to solve that.
Speaker 1 (17:18):
And I think kind of building all Mark's question, it
is really a very opportune time for somebody with your
background to show up, because you join depending on how
you measure it. There's about a half dozen other senators
who have combat deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan. They have
a younger, younger perspective, a more updated perspective. In the
(17:39):
real world, seniority has its advantages and great knowledge. But
you know, being in the real world, as you know,
outside of a community d C, it's a very different
place with different priorities and different perspectives. And you also have,
you know, looking at the near game. Something that you
share in common with the second of the Navy Fialan
(18:02):
is y'all both come from successful business backgrounds, which is
in tune with you know, like you said out Eern
twenty first century solutions to problems, and there's a lot
of commonality you can't you know, not like McNamara who thinks,
you know, building a navy is like building a ford,
Not like that at all. A lot of it has
to do with mindset in time frames, and I think
(18:25):
one of the things that's kind of spot welded on
to that that there are things in the important executive
branch legislative branch connection. The one thing that I continue
to look to the Senate in the House as ultimate resolutions.
If you if you to try to modernize things, you
also have to look at the macro things that are
our Navy are in. Our military is structured around nineteen
(18:47):
eighty six was a great year. I was a sophomore
in college having a blast, But it's not what we
need in twenty twenty five to run our military course.
I'm talking about Goldwater Nichols has been around since nineteen
eighty six. We around the edges of CoCom reforms that
initially was structured with a Cold War mindset. And of
course you've seen the very positive aspect as you described
(19:08):
when your first deployment, the way joint was supposed to
work in the ideal way that you work in a
joint environment, but that whole requirements and processes on the
side that don't really make sense, they're just there because
they're there. Requires a form as well, besides addressing those immediately.
Reindustrialization and ship building and repair capability that is going
(19:30):
to take more than one generation to go, more than
one Palm cycle to go through. It's going to require
bipartisan support. Are there other things you think you might
have a critical mass of people that you can work
with in the House and the Senate to look at
these larger things that really are are archaic and need
to be If not replaced, significantly reformed to bring it
(19:53):
more in line with what we need now vice forty
years ago.
Speaker 2 (19:58):
Yeah, I mean, wow, that's a I think, as you know,
that's probably in our conversation on us. I'll try to
be quick with it just so we can cover more
topical ayers. I think number one, you know, we can't
let perfect be the enemy good enough. And I think
quantity has a quality all its own. And I think
the Navy, you know, rightfully so, but has become so
(20:22):
obsessed with the most advanced systems, the highest quality, the
most over engineered systems possible, that we've essentially settled the
fact that we're going to have a small, extremely advanced navy.
And you know that briefs well, and that sounds great
on powerpoints lies, but the reality is, you know, when
we enter into sustained naval combat, our ability to replace vessels,
(20:42):
not not refit, not repair, not repaint the rust I
mean holes on the bottom of the ocean, and we
have to replace that hole with another hull, and it
has to happen as fast as humidly possible, and preferably
when one holes sunk, we send three to replace the
one that's gone. We have. We're not even that universe anymore.
And that was our We had many advantages of the
(21:03):
World War Two, but that was really our core advantage
in Westpac of World War two against the Japanese was
as we sank those ships, they weren't replaced. As they
sank ours that were replaced immediately, and frankly, each one
that was sunk spawned three more. And we have absolutely
no concept of how to conceive of doing that again
because we've become so focused on we're going to engineer
(21:24):
this ship, We're going to change it this, We're going
to add this lazoo system here. It's like, you know what,
just build a ship that can go fast the floats,
that's survivable, and let's get to work. And I think
you know that's something that this acquisition paradigm. It's not
just the Navy's the entire military has become so defect free.
They're so obsessed with never making a mistake, with never
making anything that's not perfect, that we have these over engineered, underutilized,
(21:47):
irreplaceable weapons systems that were built to fight the last war,
and then when those systems hit in reality, we realize,
oh great, like we built this thing, and guess what,
you know, nobody wants it or needs it. Instead of
having one of these, I'd rather have five one of those.
We built them a great Ferrari. But guess what they
want f one fifties and instead of one, they want
fifty of them. So I'm not saying we need to
stop investing in technology and making good ships, not at all.
(22:09):
But what I am saying is, you know, we should
be able to walk at you gop at the same time,
That's what I mentioned earlier. I think the acquisition paradigm
has to shift. We have to find a way for
the Navy to innovate new ships. But at the same time,
in parallel, have people, you know, and probably some of
the structure of the Department of Navy is you know,
it's just a secretary offense, you know for RNA. You know,
we've got all the engineering experiment, everything's jammed into one
office and it's really there should be an Office of
(22:31):
ship Building that like, all they do is build ships.
They're not worried about the latest stealth technology, and they're
not worried about you know, electromagnetic catapults. Their job is
to get holes in the water and do it fast,
and I think we have to have to figure out
how to iterate again and build quantity. And that's going
to come from industry. It's not going to come to
the government. That knowledge does not exist in our government.
So instead of trying to create it there, let's go
(22:52):
to who already knows how to do it. And there
are a lot of people out there, like the Koreans
that build a lot of ships. They know how to
do it. Let's incentivize joint ventures with them in America,
and let's also use commercial basis for ships. At the
end of the day, some of the best technology in
the world, In fact, this and this era, most of
the best technology in the world is in the civilian sector,
not the government sector. So let's let's leverage that and
(23:13):
create a little more flexibilit in or acquisition scheme. And
I think you know, a lot of the requirements you mentioned,
they're there because they're there. That's exactly right. They're there
because they are there, They've always been there in the
and the contract officers are not incentivized to take risk,
they're incentivized to take no risks. So therefore incentives matter.
If we encourage our acquisition professionals to take no risks,
(23:34):
then they won't take any risks. And the truth is
to do a paradigm shift at a fundamental level is
inherently risky, and we have to make it okay to
take risks. We have to make it okay to fail.
I mean, nowhere, I think is there a better illustration
of this than NASA and SpaceX next to each other
for the last twenty years. You know, NASA really became
a heavily centralized, highly bureaucratic, zero defect culture with all
(23:55):
the right intentions but all the worst outcomes. And essentially
they never wanted to see a rock explode period ever,
and then every wanted to make a mistake. That's very noble,
but mistakes is how we learn to get better. And
SpaceX meanwhile blows up a rocket a week, but guess what,
they're also now landing giant rockets backwards, catching them in
mid air with chopsticks. I mean, it's crazy, and that
(24:15):
comes from iteration and quantity. So I think we need
to reinject that culture back into the Navy acquisition system.
And I think that's going to come from private sectors,
the only place it can come from, because it does
not exist in the Navy. And as you know, we're
talking ship building mainly, that also applies to our culture
and our officer training promotions too, where we've encouraged this
no mistake is ever allowed, and if you make one
(24:36):
mistake in your career, Boom you're out. One bad fit rep.
Boom you're out. You know, guy, sexual assault, sexual harassment
issue within your command, boom black eye for the rest
of your career. And it's encouraged a very risk averse
mindset in our commanders, which is really the complete opposite
of what the history of naval commanders were. I mean,
they were the risky risk takers ever ages sale. I
know that's a long time ago, but I mean that's
(24:58):
what you expected out of a ship manner, the swashbuckling
guy that's going to make the daring decision and is
going to is going to make those those risky calls
in the heat of battle. And that's not the type
of leaders the Navy encourages anymore. As you and I all.
Speaker 3 (25:13):
Know, as it's said before the Battle of Midway, fact
that his leaders to engage in calculated risk, which I
think is the way it should be. But just just
a couple of minutes. I know we don't have much time,
but talk a little bit. How your office is staff
so you can keep track of all these programs that
you're involved in. Have you got a naval shipbuilding expert
on your staff or or how does that work exactly?
Speaker 2 (25:35):
I'm still building my staff. You know, we're still early,
and you know, we've really taken the view of we're
going to be deliberate and try to you know, higher slow,
fire fast kind of mindset. Let's figure out the right
staff so, you know, to be quite honest as you
can tell, I'm a military guy and military nerd, so
I'm kind of my own uh, you know, I wouldn't
call it expert, but but guy, right now, hiring people
(25:57):
onto staff isn't always the right path. In the Senate
per se, you have staff on sask that are subject
matter experts that you can that you can you can
draw on. And then luckily as a senator when you call,
normally people answer the phone and there's lots of talent
out there that I've been able to take advantage of that. Really,
they don't expect to be paid, they don't want to
be paid. They're just like I want America to have
(26:17):
a strong navy, and I'm happy to help. So been
able to really get access to all kinds of folks
out there from current deformer naval I'm sorry, a shipbuilding
industry experts, current former you know, senior naval officers across
the board. So although I of course have you know,
armed services a specialist on my staff, you know, it's uh,
it's hard to be able to have an expert in
(26:39):
every realm you need. It's just it's one of those
things where can't boil the ocean. You got to focus
in this career. So eventually I probably will bring on
a staff for dedicated just to enable a kind of reindustrialization.
But right now it's it's it's kind of a I
pick up the phone and talk to any expert I
need to whenever I need to.
Speaker 1 (26:55):
Well, Senator, you're just a few months into a six
year term, so we got time to grow and we
we really appreciate you taking some time here today to
talk with us. Really appreciate it and look forward to
next time.
Speaker 2 (27:08):
Yeah, let's do it again for sure. Thank you for
making the time again. Love what your newsletter puts out
and you know, but perhaps you know as we progress
through some of this pretty historic legislation coming down the pike.
You know, I'll send you a notes sometimes so you'd
include your newsletter just for what's going on in the
halls of the Senate about this, because I can tell
you again, people turn on Fox News around the SMBC
and they and they feel like Congress is totally dysfunctional.
(27:30):
And maybe it is most of the time, but I
can tell you right now there's a lot of biparison
focus on getting our Navy ready for a potential confrontation
that hopefully never comes, but we have to be ready for,
you know, in the Pacific, and it's going to take
some serious reorientation of our industrial base and leadership to
make that happen. So I would love to you guys
are our trusted voice within the naval community. It'd be
(27:51):
great to have you guys alongside us as we as
we walk along this journey.
Speaker 3 (27:56):
Well, thanks again for joining us. Has been great talking
to you.
Speaker 1 (27:59):
Thanks guys, Thank you very much everybody for join us
for another edition of mid Rats And until next time,
hope you have a great Navy day. Cheers Molly to.
Speaker 4 (28:13):
Need replies, Worry Paddy.
Speaker 5 (28:17):
Mike, my lonely one, to marry me and all leave
a friend of becondily for you being to blame for
lo e love me, silly flding your tame. It's a
long way to differ.
Speaker 4 (28:40):
It's a long way. It's a long way to differ.
Reny with me, gor b becdi Well listenwell, it's a
(29:01):
long long way to differy. But by life, my
Welcome to mid Rats with sal from Commander Salamander an
Eagle one from Eagle Speak at Seer Shore your home
for a discussion of national security issues and all things maritime,
and welcome board everybody for another episode of mid Rats.
On today's show, we're going to look at a common
desire of those, mostly speaking for myself and others, who
have been frustrated what they see as a lack of
(00:51):
understanding and focus on the requirement today for our nation's
maritime inheritance to see new people with new ideas, open
to posse disabilities, not hindered by legacy entanglements that they've
accrued over years in politics, and they've wanted to see
in order to achieve those things, a younger cohort in
the House of Representatives in the Senate, with military experience,
(01:13):
preferably naval, matched with an understanding of business and industry.
And today's guest is straight out of Central Casting looking
for that. And that's the new Senator from the Great
State of mynd Tenator Senator Tim Sheehey, who after has
graduated from the Naval Academy in two thousand and eight,
served as a seal officer for the next eleven years
active reserve duty before building two companies in the civilian
(01:35):
sector prior to defeating in a cumvent in the two
thousand and four election. Senator She Welcome to Miterrets.
Speaker 2 (01:41):
Thanks for having me on. I've been a longtime reader
of your newsletters out there since I was in uniform,
and you know, it's always interesting as life makes full circle,
you start to run into people later on, so it's
really fun to be able to talk to you guys.
You know, your writings, especially you know when I was
in uniform, although they didn't really apply a whole lot
to the soft community any necessarily, but just as a
(02:01):
naval officer, it's great to see that they just the
conversations that you guys open up amongst the naval community.
And you know, the publication Proceedings is one I've read
since high school, actually performed at the Academy and still
read to this day. And obviously that's a bit more
of a formal, uh you know, conduit for that. But
thanks for what you guys have been doing to increase
the discourse around naval strategy and make sure that that
(02:22):
fresh ideas are brought to the fore.
Speaker 1 (02:24):
I really appreciate that senator for your group. Two thousand
and eight officer senator is a pretty good billet. Oh yeah,
not bad. You pretty good for an O eight guy.
But for listeners who may not be real familiar with
your background going from the academy, through the Navy, the
private sector, and then coming into the Senate, you know,
(02:46):
outline for a little bit about those those decisive points
in that path that got you to where you are today,
the second youngest senator in the US Senate.
Speaker 2 (02:55):
Well, it's as you probably know as well as you know,
we all set out as young adults with our plan
for our life and mind, and usually God has other
things in mind for us and for me. You know,
if you'd asked me when I was sixteen, twenty four,
twenty eight, thirty two, thirty four where I was going
to be in five years, I would have been wrong
every single time. And as someone who's reasonably intelligent and capable,
(03:20):
you know, even I couldn't come close to predicting the
path of my life. Award, you know. So yeah, I
went to the Naval canon read out of high school.
I wanted to be a Navy pilot, grew up flying
my neighbor as a child was a Korean War Navy pilot,
so he started teaching me how to fly when I
was about eight years old, and I sold a plane
for I drove a car and my pilots license in
high school and got accepted to Annapolis and went there
(03:40):
with the mission, like most children of the eighties, to
be Maverick, you know, we all wanted to fly tom Kats.
And of course I got to the academy, and you know,
once you're immersed in something, as you know, the view
from inside a ship is very different than the you
outside of ship, and Naval academy is no different. I
get there and realize pretty quickly that, you know, the
perception I had of being a Navy pilot was very
(04:02):
different than what the reality of a nation at war
was in a nation at war two, massive ground wars
to insurgencies, and you know, being there, getting there in
fall of four, pretty quickly realized that, you know, as
you all probably remember better than I, you know that
they were even service warfare officers were being pulled off ships,
given desert cammis and rifles and sent to Iraq and
(04:22):
Afghanistan to say, hey, you're going to man a operations
center you're going to be a provincial reconstruction team or
you name it. It was really an all hands on
deck effort to where warfare officers of any service, of
any specially were being sent over there because frankly, that's
where the need was. We didn't really need fighter pilots.
We needed guys on the ground fighting an insurgency. So,
you know, once I got to the Academy, it pretty
(04:44):
quickly dawned on me that flying jets was a selfish
desire I had, but the country really needed was was
fighters on the ground. So, you know, coming up at
the end of my first semester there at the Academy,
I made the wise decision that I was going to quit.
I was gonna lead the academy. I was going to
resign from the Academy and go be a marine and
fight on the ground because I felt, like most nineteen
(05:04):
year old kids, the war is going to be over
before I have a chance to do my part. You know,
I'm better get out there and fight the war while
I still can. Otherwise, you know, I'm going to miss
my chance to do what we all want to do
when we're you know, teenage young men, and you know,
submitted my letter resignation to my company officer and commander,
and they kind of said, all right, kid, you want
to quit, fine, we're not going to stop you, but
(05:25):
go talk to this guy. I think we think you
should talk to him. And so I went down to
Dahlgren Hall that night and then there was a guy
waiting there, and you know, I'm a plead walking around,
pleading my cover, and they say, you're going to be
a guy named McDonald have a conversation with him. And
I get there, I'm looking at name tags and I
see that McDonald is a full Bird Army Special Forces
colonel who's on the Naval Academy campus. And I'm like, well,
what the hell is this guy doing here? And why
(05:46):
am I talking to him? I said, sir, you must
be Tim. I said, yeah, yes, sir, I am. We'll
have a seat. And turns out he was the officer
rep for the hockey team and was currently attending National
Defense University in DC, which is why an Army six
was sitting on the Navy yard and Dalgren Hall, which
is you guys probably remember, used to be the skating rink.
I'm not sure if it still is. And you know,
(06:06):
proceeded to kind of say, hey, I hear you're quitting
the academy. You're you know, at the time, I was
number one ranked in my company and pretty high up
in my class. So it was like, your company officer
is pretty surprised you've decided to quit and go to
the fleet and the list. I said, well, sir, you know,
I'm here to fight the war and do my part,
and I just don't feel like three more years of
calculus and thermodynamics are what I need, uh more more
(06:27):
directly what the country needs. H He said, well, listen,
I've just done my third deployment in the War on Terror.
And he's the guy who fought the first golf for War
Panama and you know all these and he's like, this
war is not going to be over in you know,
anytime soon. We're going to be fighting this war for
the next generation. Obviously, Boy was he right. And this
is fall of before December of before he's telling me this.
He says, but you know, one thing we're working on
is inner service operability, especially in the special ops world,
(06:50):
and a lot of people don't really realize is you know,
prior to the War on Terror, our special operations units
were very segregated. You know, rangers, Grain, berets, seals, air Force,
special ops, marine recom They all existed, but they didn't
really combine and work together very much. And for the
first time ever, we were seeing these combined special joint
special operation task forces where all different elements Army and
(07:12):
Navy special missione units you know, rangers, SF, seals, nice talkers,
everyone was getting mashed together with even you know, agencies,
intel agencies mixed in I kind of create these joint
task forces where everyone was just working together and kind
of the the old school lines were really being blurred
in a way that had never been done before. And
one of the issues that was emerging was seals were
the smallest and most unique of soft the soft principal elements,
(07:35):
and they just weren't meshing well with the Army because
everything we did was different, you know, I mean, our
radios are different, our fregency are different, our guns were different.
Even the words we'd use our ranks for these weird
ass ranks, you know, like what a sergeant, what's a
petty officer, what's a sonarman? Second class? You know, you
sergeant or corporal, you know, and just simple things like
that was making it hard for Army Soft and Navy
Soft to intermix and work seamlessly together. And unfortunately, were
(07:57):
a couple of disasters relatively early in the war that
kind of increased that resentments. It was a roberts Ridge
Battle and there was Red Wing's Operation Red Wing as well.
So anyways, the intent was, Hey, that there's a program
that we're looking at standing up, where're take midshipmen who
are going to go into the NSW community and send
them through some cross training with the Army, go to
Airborne School, range of school, recon school, and get some
(08:19):
exposure there so when they go become seals, they understand
Army Soft speak the language and so on and so forth.
And he said, you know, based on your scores, you're
like you'd be the perfect candidate. Do you want to
do it? And of course, as a nine year old kid,
is it hard? Is it dangerous? Yes, I'll go. So
I went ahead and did that. And the deal was
they had to graduate though, and that man had to
miss a lot of school and over the next three
years and initiative, going through the Naval Academy, became an
(08:41):
Army ranger, firstman shipment over the Range of School, went
to the seventh the Ranger Regiment, Airborne School, fifth Special
Forces Group Exchange, and a couple of other couple of
other specialized courses, and it was a great experience. Graduated
the academy, drove across country, started buds five days later, graduated,
you know, seal training, but might tried it a week later.
I'm on the ground in Iraq on my first mission
and had a very high op tempo career, as all
(09:03):
of us did those years, and that Army Exchange training
I did, it could have been more valued in my
first deployment. I walked in the door first day in
Baghdad in two thousand and nine and boom, you know,
there's two guys that went to Range School with on
the Army Special Operations Unit there that I was working with.
And then every deployment after that, I mean, not a
single deployment. I did five total, several different trips around
the world, but really, you know, five deployments that I
(09:24):
would call directly, and every single one I'd run into
a guy that that you know, I had met and
worked with during my Army Special Operations Exchange and made great,
great friends in that world. And actually, you know Colonel
General Career, I said, Colonel General Corilla, now I run
said coom. You know, he was my task force commander
in Afghanistan back when he was running range regiment. And
now of course I see him regularly on the hill
as he brisas on saidcom issues. So it's fun to
(09:46):
see everything come full circle. But love the teams was
great exposure there my wife. I met my wife at
the academy. She was a Marine Corps officer, so we
both commissioned in we were some of those mashipment who
broke the rules and David in company, but we both graduated.
She went into the Marine Corps also after in war VET.
And then yeah, eventually I got wounded in Afghanistan, got
injured on dive action as well during a sub mini
(10:08):
submarine operations, got put on the medical hold list, and
you know, with the future uncertain, I kind of decided, well,
you know, if I can't be on the teams anymore,
I think I'll go find a new path in life.
So that's when I started my company, and all that
started with another Naval officer. Whole leadership team early on
was all Academy grads West Point and Navy, and yeah,
(10:30):
all veteran founding team. We grew to you know, created
about five hundred jobs over the course of ten years,
all veteran management team all over the world. It was
a great, great time and loved those companies and it
was a great camaraderie had that really came from the military,
with the culture of excellence that came from the academies.
And then I got into poll this completely by acident
iby Aram for Student Council before. This is my first
(10:50):
time ever. But it was Afghanistan. It was a collapse
in cobble. You know. As I saw that happen, I
was getting refugees out, spending around money trying to get
people out, as our own government basically was sitting there
watching this lapse. And you guys know, I mean for
so many of us, that defined our life. I mean
we all spent our twenties there. I lost friends there,
my wife lost friends there. So to see us just
walk away from that in such a disgusting manner and
abandoned over eight harded American citizens and project weakness to
(11:13):
the entire world, which we're now still feeling the effects
of that kind of jolted me out of my political
apathy and got me involved in politics for the first
time in my life. It originally I got involved more
as a speaker and a donor, and then eventually a
couple of guys corner me said, hey, we've got a
really important center race kinding up, and frankly, we think
we need a fresh face, a young guy to go
out there and do this. And here I am. So
it's an honor to be here to represent Montana. I'm
(11:34):
on Armed Services of course, Seatpower Committee, Emerging Threats as
well for Special Operations, and just joined the board of
the Naval Academy. So I'm interested in supporting the revitalization
of our navy and all forms undersea, on the sea,
in the air. As we all know that the conventional
Navy has really been in a state of decay for
some time. Decades of focus on insurgency warfare have left
the Navy in a position where we are not ready
(11:57):
to fight a near pure conflict on the oceans. And
I think it's as the only constitutionally mandated branch of
the military to build and maintain a navy, it's time
we get this thing rebooted and refocused. So that's where
we're here. Thanks for having me, Well, it's great to
have you.
Speaker 3 (12:10):
And I think since you've come into the Senate, you've
planted on, as you've just pointed out, a couple of
really key committees for the maritime, not just the Navy,
but the Merchant Marine group too, because you're you're on
the Armed Services Committee, which is obviously seapower and all that,
but also on the Commerce Science whatever I can't remoin
right and transportation. I mean, you're dealing with a coast Guard,
(12:31):
maritime and fisheries. Has Has it happens you've fallen right
in when the people are proposing this Ships Act? Can
you kind of talk about what you know about that
and what looks like to you if that is at
a very positive step in your view of waiting to
get our maritime supremacy back.
Speaker 2 (12:48):
Well, listen, I'm obviously my experience of the Navy was
even though I'm a Naval Academy grad. To be honest,
I mean, the grand total amount of time I've spent
on ships and submarines is probably less than most kids
eive summer camp. You know. My time was in the
desert care and a gun but the truth is, you know,
I'm a history I'm a history obsessed person and being
a Naval Academy grad, and my favorite era of history
(13:10):
is the Age of Sale, and the book Six Frigates
is one of my favorite books ever. And Ian told
all of his work, I've read multiple times, and I
recommend Six Frigates every sending member of Congress. I see
because the arguments that our very first Congress had around
having a navy are almost the same ones we're having today.
And it's fascinating to just getting the time machine and
(13:31):
go back and listen to our founding fathers wrangle about
cost of money and whether you know, having a navy's
imperialist and et cetera, et cetera. But you know, really
what the consensus ended up being was we had to
have a navy. You know, we were a mercantile republic,
but we weren't. We weren't an empire. We were in
and we depended on global trade. We were the first
country that was founded as a business, and our business
needed trade, it needed access to global shipping routes. And
(13:55):
very wisely, our framers understood that we have to have
a viable native to exist as a nation, and I
think that awareness is now re emerging when quite frankly,
just to be honest, you know, we all know the
importance of the Navy. I mean we're preaching the choir
here that you know, freedom of navigation of the world's
oceans underpins our twenty first century economy and our ability
(14:16):
to project power all over the world. Yes, our army
bases and air force are important, but it really comes
because of our navy. But not everyone understands and appreciates that.
And I think, you know, the Navy hasn't had a
commanding role as far as the force of decision and
a conflict since lay take golf. So I think most
people have just kind of said, don't well, the Navy
will always be there, right, we don't have to focus
on it. But now as we're coming to grips with
(14:37):
the d industrialization of America and the shifting of these
industries overseas, we're having to grapple with the fact that
you know, this is a very in depth complex issues
and to quote unquote fix the Navy. As I've said
with all the service chiefs and everyone I've met and said, listen,
you know, every branch has its challenges and to fix
the problems of the army. In my opinion is, you know,
it's a one year problem, all right. I mean, some
could be already as larger, but really the key issues,
(14:59):
you know, it's a year problem. Fix the Air Force,
it's a five year problem. We can still build planes,
we can build guns and bullets and bombs. To fix
the Navy is a ten year plus problem. I mean,
to build ships at scale, to engineer these systems, to
acquire them. It's really I mean, it's a whole new paradigm.
So I think the good news is bipartisan focus understands
that in an era of hyper partisanship, when you've shut
on Fox News, AROUNSSNBC, you feel hopeless for the future
(15:22):
of America. When the cameras are off and you get
behind closed doors, both parties really do treasure in the
Navy and realize it's time to reinvest. So I feel
good about it. I mean, of course, the devil's in
the details with anything that goes through Congress, but I
think what we're going to see is the President's make
clear he wants a ship building off, he wants to
focus on this. The Senate Armed Service Committee and Seatpower
(15:42):
Committee has been very clear and a lined across the
aisle that this needs to happen. So I think I
think it's going to be. It's gonna be an unprecedented
era of support for the Navy, probably likes which we
haven't seen as a Secretary Layman in the Reagan years. Now.
What I'll say to that, though, is what Secretary Layman
and thegear the Reagan Navy build up did was essentially
(16:03):
an extension of the you know, World War two era
kind of shipbuilding paradigm that was very twentieth century industrial
era focused. We can't do that again. And what I've
been telling everyone is we can't just cut and paste
Layman's plan from the eighties. We can't cut and paste
Henry Kaiser's plan for World War Two. We are a
fundamentally different nation today, and therefore we can't just tell
(16:23):
the Navy, here's more money, go build ships, because quite honestly,
the Navy doesn't know how to build ship the scale
either anymore. So this is going to take a new
shipbuilding paradigm that may involve certain classes of vessels are
least you know, it may involve accepting that, you know,
a baseline commercial level of vessel. You know, build is acceptable,
and then you know certain upfitting can happen later with
(16:43):
classified systems, you know, we may have to accept that
we may not own the fleet out right. Navies throughout
history at least fleets are borrowed fleets, you know, capturing
other nations ships and using them as their own. Obviously
no one does that anymore. But I think we have
to think more broadly and be more limber in our
in our kind of structure that we're willing to adopt
because we need to revitalize in avy. It has to
happen fast. China's building ships two hundred and thirty times
(17:06):
faster than we are, so we can't wait for American
shipyards to magically reappear. We're going to find other ways
to do this. And I think, you know, the ships
ACKed and many others between executive ors and legislation, and
we try to solve that.
Speaker 1 (17:18):
And I think kind of building all Mark's question, it
is really a very opportune time for somebody with your
background to show up, because you join depending on how
you measure it. There's about a half dozen other senators
who have combat deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan. They have
a younger, younger perspective, a more updated perspective. In the
(17:39):
real world, seniority has its advantages and great knowledge. But
you know, being in the real world, as you know,
outside of a community d C, it's a very different
place with different priorities and different perspectives. And you also have,
you know, looking at the near game. Something that you
share in common with the second of the Navy Fialan
(18:02):
is y'all both come from successful business backgrounds, which is
in tune with you know, like you said out Eern
twenty first century solutions to problems, and there's a lot
of commonality you can't you know, not like McNamara who thinks,
you know, building a navy is like building a ford,
Not like that at all. A lot of it has
to do with mindset in time frames, and I think
(18:25):
one of the things that's kind of spot welded on
to that that there are things in the important executive
branch legislative branch connection. The one thing that I continue
to look to the Senate in the House as ultimate resolutions.
If you if you to try to modernize things, you
also have to look at the macro things that are
our Navy are in. Our military is structured around nineteen
(18:47):
eighty six was a great year. I was a sophomore
in college having a blast, But it's not what we
need in twenty twenty five to run our military course.
I'm talking about Goldwater Nichols has been around since nineteen
eighty six. We around the edges of CoCom reforms that
initially was structured with a Cold War mindset. And of
course you've seen the very positive aspect as you described
(19:08):
when your first deployment, the way joint was supposed to
work in the ideal way that you work in a
joint environment, but that whole requirements and processes on the
side that don't really make sense, they're just there because
they're there. Requires a form as well, besides addressing those immediately.
Reindustrialization and ship building and repair capability that is going
(19:30):
to take more than one generation to go, more than
one Palm cycle to go through. It's going to require
bipartisan support. Are there other things you think you might
have a critical mass of people that you can work
with in the House and the Senate to look at
these larger things that really are are archaic and need
to be If not replaced, significantly reformed to bring it
(19:53):
more in line with what we need now vice forty
years ago.
Speaker 2 (19:58):
Yeah, I mean, wow, that's a I think, as you know,
that's probably in our conversation on us. I'll try to
be quick with it just so we can cover more
topical ayers. I think number one, you know, we can't
let perfect be the enemy good enough. And I think
quantity has a quality all its own. And I think
the Navy, you know, rightfully so, but has become so
(20:22):
obsessed with the most advanced systems, the highest quality, the
most over engineered systems possible, that we've essentially settled the
fact that we're going to have a small, extremely advanced navy.
And you know that briefs well, and that sounds great
on powerpoints lies, but the reality is, you know, when
we enter into sustained naval combat, our ability to replace vessels,
(20:42):
not not refit, not repair, not repaint the rust I
mean holes on the bottom of the ocean, and we
have to replace that hole with another hull, and it
has to happen as fast as humidly possible, and preferably
when one holes sunk, we send three to replace the
one that's gone. We have. We're not even that universe anymore.
And that was our We had many advantages of the
(21:03):
World War Two, but that was really our core advantage
in Westpac of World War two against the Japanese was
as we sank those ships, they weren't replaced. As they
sank ours that were replaced immediately, and frankly, each one
that was sunk spawned three more. And we have absolutely
no concept of how to conceive of doing that again
because we've become so focused on we're going to engineer
(21:24):
this ship, We're going to change it this, We're going
to add this lazoo system here. It's like, you know what,
just build a ship that can go fast the floats,
that's survivable, and let's get to work. And I think
you know that's something that this acquisition paradigm. It's not
just the Navy's the entire military has become so defect free.
They're so obsessed with never making a mistake, with never
making anything that's not perfect, that we have these over engineered, underutilized,
(21:47):
irreplaceable weapons systems that were built to fight the last war,
and then when those systems hit in reality, we realize,
oh great, like we built this thing, and guess what,
you know, nobody wants it or needs it. Instead of
having one of these, I'd rather have five one of those.
We built them a great Ferrari. But guess what they
want f one fifties and instead of one, they want
fifty of them. So I'm not saying we need to
stop investing in technology and making good ships, not at all.
(22:09):
But what I am saying is, you know, we should
be able to walk at you gop at the same time,
That's what I mentioned earlier. I think the acquisition paradigm
has to shift. We have to find a way for
the Navy to innovate new ships. But at the same time,
in parallel, have people, you know, and probably some of
the structure of the Department of Navy is you know,
it's just a secretary offense, you know for RNA. You know,
we've got all the engineering experiment, everything's jammed into one
office and it's really there should be an Office of
(22:31):
ship Building that like, all they do is build ships.
They're not worried about the latest stealth technology, and they're
not worried about you know, electromagnetic catapults. Their job is
to get holes in the water and do it fast,
and I think we have to have to figure out
how to iterate again and build quantity. And that's going
to come from industry. It's not going to come to
the government. That knowledge does not exist in our government.
So instead of trying to create it there, let's go
(22:52):
to who already knows how to do it. And there
are a lot of people out there, like the Koreans
that build a lot of ships. They know how to
do it. Let's incentivize joint ventures with them in America,
and let's also use commercial basis for ships. At the
end of the day, some of the best technology in
the world, In fact, this and this era, most of
the best technology in the world is in the civilian sector,
not the government sector. So let's let's leverage that and
(23:13):
create a little more flexibilit in or acquisition scheme. And
I think you know, a lot of the requirements you mentioned,
they're there because they're there. That's exactly right. They're there
because they are there, They've always been there in the
and the contract officers are not incentivized to take risk,
they're incentivized to take no risks. So therefore incentives matter.
If we encourage our acquisition professionals to take no risks,
(23:34):
then they won't take any risks. And the truth is
to do a paradigm shift at a fundamental level is
inherently risky, and we have to make it okay to
take risks. We have to make it okay to fail.
I mean, nowhere, I think is there a better illustration
of this than NASA and SpaceX next to each other
for the last twenty years. You know, NASA really became
a heavily centralized, highly bureaucratic, zero defect culture with all
(23:55):
the right intentions but all the worst outcomes. And essentially
they never wanted to see a rock explode period ever,
and then every wanted to make a mistake. That's very noble,
but mistakes is how we learn to get better. And
SpaceX meanwhile blows up a rocket a week, but guess what,
they're also now landing giant rockets backwards, catching them in
mid air with chopsticks. I mean, it's crazy, and that
(24:15):
comes from iteration and quantity. So I think we need
to reinject that culture back into the Navy acquisition system.
And I think that's going to come from private sectors,
the only place it can come from, because it does
not exist in the Navy. And as you know, we're
talking ship building mainly, that also applies to our culture
and our officer training promotions too, where we've encouraged this
no mistake is ever allowed, and if you make one
(24:36):
mistake in your career, Boom you're out. One bad fit rep.
Boom you're out. You know, guy, sexual assault, sexual harassment
issue within your command, boom black eye for the rest
of your career. And it's encouraged a very risk averse
mindset in our commanders, which is really the complete opposite
of what the history of naval commanders were. I mean,
they were the risky risk takers ever ages sale. I
know that's a long time ago, but I mean that's
(24:58):
what you expected out of a ship manner, the swashbuckling
guy that's going to make the daring decision and is
going to is going to make those those risky calls
in the heat of battle. And that's not the type
of leaders the Navy encourages anymore. As you and I all.
Speaker 3 (25:13):
Know, as it's said before the Battle of Midway, fact
that his leaders to engage in calculated risk, which I
think is the way it should be. But just just
a couple of minutes. I know we don't have much time,
but talk a little bit. How your office is staff
so you can keep track of all these programs that
you're involved in. Have you got a naval shipbuilding expert
on your staff or or how does that work exactly?
Speaker 2 (25:35):
I'm still building my staff. You know, we're still early,
and you know, we've really taken the view of we're
going to be deliberate and try to you know, higher slow,
fire fast kind of mindset. Let's figure out the right
staff so, you know, to be quite honest as you
can tell, I'm a military guy and military nerd, so
I'm kind of my own uh, you know, I wouldn't
call it expert, but but guy, right now, hiring people
(25:57):
onto staff isn't always the right path. In the Senate
per se, you have staff on sask that are subject
matter experts that you can that you can you can
draw on. And then luckily as a senator when you call,
normally people answer the phone and there's lots of talent
out there that I've been able to take advantage of that. Really,
they don't expect to be paid, they don't want to
be paid. They're just like I want America to have
(26:17):
a strong navy, and I'm happy to help. So been
able to really get access to all kinds of folks
out there from current deformer naval I'm sorry, a shipbuilding
industry experts, current former you know, senior naval officers across
the board. So although I of course have you know,
armed services a specialist on my staff, you know, it's uh,
it's hard to be able to have an expert in
(26:39):
every realm you need. It's just it's one of those
things where can't boil the ocean. You got to focus
in this career. So eventually I probably will bring on
a staff for dedicated just to enable a kind of reindustrialization.
But right now it's it's it's kind of a I
pick up the phone and talk to any expert I
need to whenever I need to.
Speaker 1 (26:55):
Well, Senator, you're just a few months into a six
year term, so we got time to grow and we
we really appreciate you taking some time here today to
talk with us. Really appreciate it and look forward to
next time.
Speaker 2 (27:08):
Yeah, let's do it again for sure. Thank you for
making the time again. Love what your newsletter puts out
and you know, but perhaps you know as we progress
through some of this pretty historic legislation coming down the pike.
You know, I'll send you a notes sometimes so you'd
include your newsletter just for what's going on in the
halls of the Senate about this, because I can tell
you again, people turn on Fox News around the SMBC
and they and they feel like Congress is totally dysfunctional.
(27:30):
And maybe it is most of the time, but I
can tell you right now there's a lot of biparison
focus on getting our Navy ready for a potential confrontation
that hopefully never comes, but we have to be ready for,
you know, in the Pacific, and it's going to take
some serious reorientation of our industrial base and leadership to
make that happen. So I would love to you guys
are our trusted voice within the naval community. It'd be
(27:51):
great to have you guys alongside us as we as
we walk along this journey.
Speaker 3 (27:56):
Well, thanks again for joining us. Has been great talking
to you.
Speaker 1 (27:59):
Thanks guys, Thank you very much everybody for join us
for another edition of mid Rats And until next time,
hope you have a great Navy day. Cheers Molly to.
Speaker 4 (28:13):
Need replies, Worry Paddy.
Speaker 5 (28:17):
Mike, my lonely one, to marry me and all leave
a friend of becondily for you being to blame for
lo e love me, silly flding your tame. It's a
long way to differ.
Speaker 4 (28:40):
It's a long way. It's a long way to differ.
Reny with me, gor b becdi Well listenwell, it's a
(29:01):
long long way to differy. But by life, my
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!