Back to news

January 7, 2019 | International, Naval

Pentagon Approves Two-Carrier Buy As Fixes Continue to Navy’s Most Expensive Ship

By

Congress is evaluating the proposal to issue a $24 billion contract for the Navy's next two carriers, as the service looks at months of work to fix ongoing problems with the Ford-class's first ship.

WASHINGTON: The Navy's coming request for the 2020 fiscal year is still under wraps, but one important piece of the Navy's future plans appears increasingly certain: the service will commit billions to buy two new Ford-class aircraft carriers under the same contract. While most of that money won't be spent in '20, it's still a tremendous long-term commitment that, advocates say, should save 5 to 10 percentover buying each carrier separately.

The Navy says that the long-troubled Ford program has turned a corner, and it is pushing ahead with remaining fixes while planning to save up to $4 billion by buying the next two flattops on a single massive contract. That mega-deal would remove uncertainty for the builder, HII's Newport News Shipbuilding, and help keep production lines humming with no expensive stop-and-start in construction or ramping up and down of supply chains, which spreads across dozens of states.

Congress first has to review the plan over the next 30 days before Navy can award the contract.

News of the potential buy — which was expected by the end of the year — camefrom Virginia Senator Tim Kaine, who put out a statement on New Year's Eve saying he was “thrilled the Navy has decided to pursue a block buy for aircraft carriers, something I've been advocating to save billions in taxpayer dollars and offer more certainty to the Hampton Roads defense community.”

Kaine, a longtime proponent of the block buy, also represents the state where the work will be done. “This smart move will save taxpayer dollars and help ensure the shipyards can maintain a skilled workforce to get the job done,” he said.

Virginia Congressman Rob Wittman, outgoing chairman of the Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee, said he's “thrilled” about the notification which will allow the Navy “to build to a fleet of 12 aircraft carriers and 355 ships.” Wittman attached an amendment to the FY 2019 DoD appropriations bill calling for the dual buy, which he says “will not only save the taxpayers $4 billion, it provides important certainty to our defense industrial base that build and maintain these ships.”

Wittman was the author of the “Securing the Homeland by Increasing our Power on the Seas Act,” which transformed the Navy's goal of 355 ships into official government policy. President Trump signed the bill into law in 2017.

Both senators said the contract will keep the ships at or under the construction cap set by Congress of $12.9 billion each.

Last May, however, the first ship of the class, USS Gerald R. Ford, blew past that cap by $120 million thanks to a litany of fixes identified by shipbuilder Huntington Ingalls Industries., including replacing propulsion components damaged in a previous failure, extending the repair schedule to 12 months from the original eight, and correcting problems with the ship's eleven Advanced Weapons Elevators.

The elevators, used to bring munitions from below deck up top for installation on aircraft, are powered by magnets as opposed to cables, and were supposed to be installed by the ship's delivery date in May 2017, but issues have delayed their completion.

Navy spokesman Capt. Danny Hernandez told me that the eleven elevators remain “in varying levels of construction, testing and operations,” and the first one was turned over to the crew in December. The plan is to complete installation and testing of the elevators before the ship's scheduled “sail away date” in July.

Hernandez added that “there will be some remaining certification documentation that will be performed for 5 of the 11 elevators after” July, and “a dedicated team is engaged on these efforts and will accelerate this certification work and schedule where feasible.”

James Geurts, assistant secretary of the Navy for research, development and acquisition, promised a Congressional panel in November that the Ford would leave HII's Newport News shipyard with all systems in working order.

“I would say of all of the technologies on the CVN 78, of which there were many we proved out on this lead ship, the weapons elevator is the last one that we need to get tied up and work our way through,” Geurts said. “We are making progress,” he said.

The second ship of the class, CVN 79, USS John F. Kennedy, is currently under construction.

Huntington spokesperson Beci Brenton said in a statement the company is “pleased to have come to an agreement with the Navy regarding a two-ship acquisition approach for CVN 80 and 81, a significant step toward building these ships more affordably. Although there is more work to be done it is important to note that the multi-ship purchase of aircraft carriers helps stabilize the Newport News Shipbuilding workforce, enables the purchase of material in quantity, and permits a fragile supplier base of more than 2,000 in 46 states to phase work more efficiently.”

After decades of dominance however, the Ford-class carriers might be the last of the line for US nuclear-powered supercarriers, given the increasing threat being presented by land-based “ship-killer” standoff weapons being fielded by China and Russia.

Speaking at a Heritage Foundation event last month, Bryan Clark, senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, said that optimistically, a carrier strike group could likely knock down 450 incoming missiles, but “that is not enough. You are looking at a threat that is at least 600, and maybe more weapons” that the Chinese can launch from their coast on short notice.

Jerry Hendrix, vice president of the Telemus Group, added that the threat could be somewhat mitigated by keeping ships father from shore and putting more drones in the air both as scouts and attack aircraft. The “carrier air wing must increase its range by investing in an unmanned, air combat strike platform,” Hendrix said.

Any moves to increase range must first fight for primacy with the navy's other massive investment in hulls, from new aircraft carriers to Columbia-class submarinesto a new frigate. When the 2020 budget comes out next month, we'll likely have a better idea of what the Navy is planning.

https://breakingdefense.com/2019/01/navy-going-for-two-carrier-buy-as-value-of-flattops-debated

On the same subject

  • Le choix du remplaçant des F-16 belges va tomber

    October 21, 2018 | International, Aerospace

    Le choix du remplaçant des F-16 belges va tomber

    Le gouvernement fédéral est désormais en mesure de formaliser sa décision sur le choix du prochain avion de combat de l'aviation belge. Un appareil qui devrait voler à partir de 2023 et durant au moins quatre décennies sous les cocardes tricolores rouges, jaunes et noires, qu'il soit américain ou européen. Les principaux ministres de l'équipe Michel ont été «briefés» mercredi par des experts sur le «retour sociétal» (les retombées économiques et les autres formes de coopération offertes à la Belgique) proposé par les promoteurs des deux candidats officiellement en lice pour le remplacement des F-16 vieillissants: le F-35 Lightning II du groupe américain Lockheed Martin et l'Eurofighter – alias Typhoon – du consortium européen éponyme promu par le Royaume-Uni, dans le cadre d'un marché d'État à État. Le 4 octobre, le conseil ministériel restreint (»kern») avait déjà entendu le rapport des militaires qui ont conduit l'évaluation exhaustive des deux candidats, sous l'égide d'une cellule de l'état-major de la Défense, l' «Air Combat Capability Program» (ACCaP), dirigée par le colonel Harold Van Pee. Un troisième candidat potentiel est le Rafale de l'avionneur français Dassault Aviation, pour lequel peu de données chiffrées sont disponibles. Car Paris n'a pas répondu à l'appel d'offres officiel, préférant proposer à la Belgique un «partenariat approfondi et structurant» fondé sur le Rafale et une implication belge dans le développement d'un avion de combat de nouvelle génération, envisagé par la France et l'Allemagne à l'horizon 2040 dans le contexte d'une relance de la défense européenne. Avant le départ de Vandeput? Le gouvernement dispose de toutes les informations pour faire son choix, dans un climat de lobbying intense et alors que les États-Unis ont accepté de prolonger pour une courte période – apparemment jusqu'à la fin du mois – leur offre pour le F-35 qui expirait formellement le 14 octobre, date des élections communales et provinciales. Le ministre de la Défense, Steven Vandeput (N-VA), qui quittera cette fonction d'ici le 1er janvier pour devenir bourgmestre de Hasselt, a dit lundi espérer encore pouvoir boucler cet épineux dossier avant son départ. «Ce serait beau si je pouvais conclure les gros investissements. Nous avons mis beaucoup de choses sur les rails qui sont aujourd'hui mûres pour être tranchées», a-t-il déclaré. Le Premier ministre Charles Michel (MR) a lui aussi cité, dans sa déclaration de politique générale à la Chambre le 8 octobre, les chantiers à boucler par le gouvernement – dont les décisions à prendre pour plusieurs programmes militaires, comme le remplacement des F-16 – mais en se montrant plus prudent sur l'échéance. «Nous prendrons très vite, et en tout cas avant la fin de la législature (en mai prochain, NDLR), les décisions qui s'imposent pour chacun de ces programmes», a assuré M. Michel. Car, comme souvent en Belgique, le dossier ACCaP s'est retrouvé mêlé à au moins deux autres programmes militaires: l'achat de nouveaux drones, potentiellement armés, et de nouveaux blindés pour la composante Terre, un programme baptisé «CaMo» portant sur 477 engins et à mener en coopération avec la France. L'approche de la dernière ligne droite avant une décision sur le nouveau chasseur-bombardier a accentué les efforts de lobbying dans ce marché d'un montant initial de 3,6 milliards d'euros – et une quinzaine de milliards sur la durée de vie attendue de l'appareil, soit une quarantaine d'années – même si les offres américaine et britanniques semblent «en dessous» de ce cadre financier, selon des sources concordantes. Les Britanniques, qui promeuvent le Typhoon au nom du consortium Eurofighter (rassemblant également l'Allemagne, l'Espagne et l'Italie), craignent une décision (trop) h'tive en faveur du F-35 prise en dépit de nombreuses incertitudes sur le coût du chasseur furtif américain, tant à l'achat – la version proposée à la Belgique est le Block 4, dont le développement n'a pas encore été financé – qu'à l'utilisation. Plusieurs ministres britanniques, dont ceux des Affaires étrangères et du Commerce international, Jeremy Hunt et Liam Fox, viennent ainsi d'écrire à leurs homologues belges pour, selon une source informée, leur rappeler l'intérêt pour la Belgique d'une solution européenne, l'Eurofighter étant produit à 75% sur le continent. https://www.lavenir.net/cnt/dmf20181018_01244354/le-choix-du-remplacant-des-f-16-belges-va-tomber

  • NATO chief seeks to forge deeper ties in China’s neighborhood

    June 9, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

    NATO chief seeks to forge deeper ties in China’s neighborhood

    By: Sebastian Sprenger COLOGNE, Germany — NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg wants the alliance to take on a greater political role in world affairs and help nations in the Asia-Pacific region contend with China's rise. “Military strength is only part of the answer,” Stoltenberg said Monday in a speech during an online event organized by the Atlantic Council and the German Marshall Fund of the United States. “We also need to use NATO more politically.” He said alliance member should adopt a more global approach to security issues, unlike the Europe- and North America-centric tack that has often shaped the alliance's agenda. “This is not about a global presence, but a global approach,” he said. “As we look to 2030, we need to work even more closely with like-minded countries, like Australia, Japan, New Zealand and [South] Korea, to defend the global rules and institutions that have kept us safe for decades, to set norms and standards in space and cyberspace, on new technologies and global arms control, and ultimately to stand up for a world built on freedom and democracy, not on bullying and coercion.” Those words are a veiled description of what Western analysts believe is a policy of China blackmailing weaker nations in its orbit through economic and diplomatic pressure. As Stoltenberg put it, Beijing becoming militarily and economically stronger represents a “fundamental shifting" in the global balance of power in which the Western alliance should not be caught flat-footed. Stoltenberg repeatedly invoked NATO cohesion as an organizing principle for the alliance, imploring members to "resist the temptation of national solutions.” His comments came as the Trump administration is reportedly considering what critics have called just that: a partial U.S. troop reduction in Germany without consulting allies. The Pentagon previously portrayed its presence in Germany as a testament to America's commitment to Europe, especially following Russia's annexation of Crimea from Ukraine in 2014. The NATO chief dodged a question on the report, first made public by the Wall Street Journal, instead trumpeting the U.S. military's deepening involvement in Europe. Meanwhile, it is hard to evaluate the seriousness of the reported move, especially because U.S. lawmakers and leaders in Berlin were left in the dark. Some media outlets have speculated that a moment of anger by U.S. President Donald Trump about German Chancellor Angela Merkel prompted the idea, while Reuters cited an unnamed official saying that Gen. Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, had worked on the issue for months. Retired Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges, a former commander of U.S. Army troops in Europe, told Defense News he finds it unlikely that senior military officials were onboard. “I don't believe that at all,” he said. “No way such a significant decision could be kept under wraps in Washington, D.C., for that long. Based on the conversations I've had the last four days, there's no doubt in my mind that this was a shock to all military leadership in Europe.” Hodges also criticized Polish officials for being eager to fill a potential void. “I would prefer that our Polish allies focus on the importance of the cohesion of the alliance versus immediately signaling that they'd be happy to host U.S. troops that might move from Germany,” he wrote in an email. “Poland is a great ally. But their security is best when we have a strong, unified alliance that is built around a strong USA-Germany relationship.” https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2020/06/08/nato-chief-seeks-to-forge-deeper-ties-in-chinas-neighborhood/

  • Lockheed eyes 5G trials following delivery of test bed to Marine Corps

    August 31, 2023 | International, Naval

    Lockheed eyes 5G trials following delivery of test bed to Marine Corps

    The delivery to Camp Pendleton in California marks a step forward for the Open Systems Interoperable and Reconfigurable Infrastructure Solution, or OSIRIS.

All news