Aircraft Carriers III

money for the CVN 79 ...
... more on it:
Navy: CVN-79 Contract Has Lowest Ceiling Price Ever; R&D Investment Will Take Out Further Cost
The Navy’s recently awarded contract for the construction of the next aircraft carrier has the lowest price of any nuclear carrier (CVN) fixed-price contract, and for a ship that is much more complex and capable than its Nimitz-class predecessor, the program executive officer for aircraft carriers told reporters Monday morning.

Rear Adm. Tom Moore said the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
– a contract modification and a new contract totaling $4.29 billion – for remaining design and construction for the future John F. Kennedy (CVN-79) is “probably the best CVN fixed-price contract we’ve ever had with [Newport News Shipbuilding] in terms of the target fee in the contract, the steepness of the share lines, the ceiling price in the contract – all reflective of the fact that the shipbuilder and us have a very solid understanding of where we are in the ship and the cost we’re able to take out.”

The Navy expects Kennedy will cost $11.35 billion compared to the $12.9 for the future Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78).

Moore said the program would save a billion dollars by decreasing the man hours needed to construct the ship by 18 percent from CVN-78 to 79 – down to about 44 million man hours. He said this reduction is only a first step in taking cost out of the carrier program. The future Enterprise (CVN-80) will take about 4 million man hours out, or another 10 percent reduction, for a savings of about $500 million.

But beyond seeking ways to take cost out, the contract itself reduces the risk to the government, Moore said.

“The main construction of the ship is now in a fixed-price environment, so that switchover really limits the government’s liability,” he said.

Without getting into specific dollar amounts due to business sensitivities, Moore explained that “this is the lowest target fee we’ve ever had on any CVN new construction. Look at the shape of the share lines, because the share lines at the end of the day are a measure of risk. So where we’d like to get quickly to 50/50, in past carrier contracts we’ve been out at 85/15, 90/10 – which basically means for every dollar over, the government picks up 85 cents on the dollar. And this contract very quickly gets to 50/50. The other thing is ceiling price – on a fixed-price contract, the ceiling price is the government’s maximum liability. And on this particular contract, again, it is the lowest ceiling price we’ve ever had. So when I look at this particular contract for CVN-79.

“Now, from the producer’s standpoint, these are bilateral contracts, both sides have agreed to this,” Moore said.
“I think Newport News has done a great job of recognizing that we’ve got to get cost out of the ship. So I think they’ve signed a fair contract that clearly, from a business standpoint, they can make the return they need to make for their investors.”

Moore said the contract includes incentives for Newport News Shipbuilding to make yard upgrades that will reduce cost for the shipbuilding program.

In addition to these incentives, Moore said that beginning in Fiscal Year (FY) 2017 the Navy would create a Design for Affordability (DFA) funding line in the research and development budget. Based off a similar R&D account for the Virginia-class attack submarines (SSN-774), the fund will provide Moore with about $25 million a year to find new materials, new processes and other “game changers” to cut time and cost out of the program.

Moore said he’s spent the past several years seeking and implementing these kinds of ideas, but this will be the first time there is a dedicated line of funding for him to do so. Previously, he created as close to an assembly line as is possible in carrier construction – engineers identified “unit families” that were similar sections that required similar work and could be tackled all in a row. The team also found ways to bring work from the drydock to the pier and from the pier to indoor workshops, both of which bring down the cost per man hour several times over.

With the upcoming DFA account, Moore said he believes he can achieve a two-to-one return on investment and persuade the Navy to provide even more funding in the future.

The Navy also released a $737 million contract to General Atomics on Friday for procurement of long lead materials for the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) and Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG).

“Everyone knows we had some significant cost overruns on EMALS and AAG,” Moore said.
“I think what you’ll find on CVN-79 is we’ve gotten that cost under control.”

He added that the contract released last week only covers long lead time parts, and that the actual production contract will be timed so the systems deliver exactly when Moore needs them to install them in the ship most efficiently. Delays in AAG delivery for Ford forced Newport News Shipbuilding to install the flight deck first, meaning the AAG parts had to be pulled up through the hangar bay instead of just dropped in while the ship was still open. Timely delivery of AAG for Kennedy will save time and money for the Navy.
source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
this article looks to "about 2040" -- hope I'll be retired at that time LOL! (this week I was told in the pub the current law here would mean I should work until 2038)

The new class of Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78) aircraft carriers, with its software-driven Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) and Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS), will put so much less stress on aircraft that Navy engineers will be able to think about future aircraft design in a whole new way, the Navy’s director of air warfare told reporters Monday.

Rear Adm. Michael Manazir said the current Mk 7 arresting gear and Mk 13 steam catapults on the Nimitz-class (CVN-68) aircraft carriers function via pure mechanics – hydrolics, cables, pulleys and more can very crudely adapt to the weight of the aircraft, but the planes have to be designed to withstand severe physical forces during launch and recovery – and that durability tends to equate to added weight.

The new EMALS system, on the other hand, uses electromagnetic fields to create a smoother acceleration – and without subjecting the flight deck to steam. The AAG software senses the weight of the aircraft that’s landing and can fine-tune the arresting gear’s reaction to put less stress on the planes, Program Executive Officer for Aircraft Carrier Rear Adm. Tom Moore said in the same media roundtable.

While many people are excited about the benefits this will have for heavier aircraft – F/A-18 Super Hornets and F-35C Lightning II Joint Strike Fighters, for example — “what it also does is open up … the envelop for lower-weight aircraft. So as we start exploring where we’re heading with unmanned aircraft, it gives us a lot of flexibility from a warfighting standpoint that the Mk 7 Mod 4 doesn’t,” Moore said.

Manazir said this is an important factor for him as he considers early ideas of what the future carrier airwing might look like.

“Typically in our manned aircraft designs, you have to build an airplane that fits within the operating envelops of the Mk 7 arresting gear and the Mk 13 catapults. So you kind of start with an operating envelop that gets you sort of a design of aircraft like we have now – F-18 Super Hornet, Growler, Joint Strike Fighter,” he said.
“The aircraft are structured that way, they’re strengthened … you build weight and structure into the airplanes to accommodate the violence of the arrested landing. With the Advanced Arresting Gear and the ability to land an airplane – it’s still a controlled crash, but relatively more softly, and to launch it relatively more softly, and so a graduated kind of force as the airplane goes up – you can now start to do things with aircraft design that you couldn’t do before. It might allow us some more margin in weight, in size, and in structure and capability.”

Manazir said industry often wants to marinize existing designs for aircraft, weapons and more so they can operate at sea. But he said adapting aircraft designs for carrier use goes beyond typical marine concerns, and reinforcing the frame to survive catapult launches and trap landings can add so much weight that the payload capacity shrinks, or can rule out design concepts altogether.

“Some of the concepts that are out there with structure and with outer mold line and size, the advanced technology of our AAG and EMALS is going to allow us to kind of open the envelope,” he said.

Ultimately, this new freedom of design may make the most difference with unmanned vehicles that may not take on the same shape and weight as manned aircraft. Manazir said the Navy’s carrier airwing of 2025 will include Super Hornets, Growlers, F-35s and the Unmanned Carrier-Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike (UCLASS) aircraft. But in 2040, the flight deck will look drastically different.

“As I look to about 2040, when I think about what we generically call strike fighters – which are the F-18 E and F and the F-35C off the carrier, covered by the EA-18G Growler – when I think about strike fighters operating in a heavy electromagnetic spectrum and I look forward to those airframes, what I see in 2040 is F-35C as the legacy airplane, a UCLASS airframe which is probably up to Increment 2 or 3 by then, and then a FA-XX, which could be manned, unmanned or optionally manned.”

He said the Navy started initial analytical work on FA-XX in conjunction with the Air Force’s early work on their F-X future fighter. But he believes FA-XX will be a family of systems with at least some unmanned capability, and the relative freedom AAG and EMALS bring to engineers may allow for more innovation than would be possible with the legacy launch and recovery systems.
source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


and sorry for nitpicking, but the article misspelled "hydraulics"; I better checked :)
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Excellent High Def video of USS Gerald R. Ford, CVN-78, being outfitted in high def. Short but sweet. You will see the Phalanx CIWS, RAM missile launchers and ESSM launchers all installed, among other things.

 
EMALS "oops"
First Public EMALS Test Delayed Due to ‘Communication-Type Issues’ Among Components
he Navy’s Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) encountered problems Tuesday morning prior to a round of testing in front of media, but Navy and industry officials say the problem is minor and part of the testing process.

With media and VIPs aboard the future Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78), EMALS dead load testing – where the launch system would shoot car-sized metal slugs off the carrier deck to simulate aircraft – had to be postponed after the system experienced what the ship’s commanding officer called communications problems.

“It’s generally communication-type issues of components talking together,” Capt. John Meier told reporters on the ship, though other officials onboard referred to more generic “circuitry” problems.
“Power distribution is good, the components are extremely well designed and very robust, so we do not have material failures. The challenges we have that I’ve seen have been communication-related issues.”

On Monday, the ship’s crew, along with shipbuilder Newport News Shipbuilding and EMALS manufacturer General Atomics, conducted 10 dead load tests on Catapult 2, with 15 launches in total since June 5. Today was supposed to mark the start of testing on Catapult 1, which experienced the failure.

Newport News Shipbuilding President Matt Mulherin told reporters that EMALS would perform 20 more tests over at least 20 more days, and he said he was confident the system would perform well.

“I think the real key that everybody’s got to understand is, this is why we do this,” he said.
“This is new technology, this is why we’re out here doing this testing program is to prove the reliability and to prove that the system works as designed and as required by specs. I have no doubt that we’ll get it there, but today at this time, at 10:00 on Tuesday morning, isn’t going to be the day when this happens.”

Mulherin added that some of the equipment installed on the ship was not part of the EMALS land-based testing at Naval Air Warfare Center Air Division Lakehurst, N.J. He said it was too early to say whether those new “prototype” pieces were working or would need to be fixed.

Scott Forney, president of General Atomics’ Electromagnetic Systems Group, said he was confident the system would be up and running shortly and able to successfully complete the test program this month.

“We’ve already successfully tested 452 airplanes and 3,400 dead loads at the Lakehurst land-based facility, which is the same as this system,” he said.
“So it’s unfortunate timing.”

EMALS testing resumed on Ford later Tuesday.

Meier, the ship’s CO, said his crew had already taken operational control of the EMALS system and were writing the schoolhouse curriculum as they learned more about the system. He said installing and learning the EMALS system had been a positive experience for the crew.

“The system is designed around reducing the workload, reducing the wear and tear and increasing the reliability of the system,” he said.
“It’s demonstrated all of that in little bits, but we’re still early in the test program with it right now. I’m confident that we’ll get there, so I think it’s going to be a huge improvement for wear and tear on the aircraft.

He said the Navy doesn’t have thorough data yet, but the service has a “pretty strong theoretical belief” that the service life of aircraft will be extended by using EMALS instead of the legacy Mk 13 steam catapult. EMALS has a linear acceleration curve – whereas the steam catapult has a front-loaded acceleration that thrusts the aircraft forward under great pressure, the EMALS starts off a bit slower but still reaches the same end speed with less stress on the airframes.

“It can reduce the stress on the aircraft. It can launch aircraft that aren’t even on the drawing books today that are lighter or heavier,” he said, echoing
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
on Monday.
“And it can also launch them under different or varying wind conditions, so it’s going to give us more operational flexibility than we have today with the current steam catapult system.”

Currently, aircraft carriers have to adjust course to ensure the planes can launch into the right wind conditions, meaning a carrier in a combat area may need to stop or turn around rather than proceeding on course to accommodate the needs of the launch system.

The Navy and industry team will finish the Catapult 1 and 2 dead load testing in the next few weeks. Catapults 3 and 4 are still under construction and will begin testing once complete. Live load testing – launching actual aircraft – will take place next summer.
source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

delft

Brigadier
Those are called camels.(don't know why).they are used so persons may paint and perform other maintenance on the ships hull.
A bit of history. In the 17th and 18th century Amsterdam was one of the prime ports in Europe but its access to the sea was obstructed with by dry places, i.e. places with to little water to float the ships wanting to enter or leave. That problem was eventually solved first by a long canal going North from Amsterdam to Den Helder and eventually by a canal going West. Until that time ships loaded and unloaded much of their cargo into and out of lighters near the island Texel. When they were still too deep they were lifted up by constructions called camels. Each camel was a pair of floats connected by beams at the bottom and shaped to fit approximately around the hull of the ship. After being placed in position they were pumped dry and so lifted the ship several feet. Their sailing capability was of course impaired and they were then pulled by a large number, up to about a dozen, fishing vessels called "waterschepen". These, together with the sails of the ship itself, were able to plough the ship with the camel through a not inconsiderable depth of sand between the city and the sea.
I suspect the US camels got their name, in a roundabout way, from these Amsterdam camels.
 
"EMALS testing resumed on Ford later Tuesday."

Ridiculous (IMHO) for them to make a big deal out of essentially nothing.

from what I figured, the problem was there was plenty of VIPs and journalists on board at the time the glitch occurred ... navytimes.com article from yesterday:
EMALS fizzles in first public launch aboard the Ford
The failure of what was to be the first public shot of the electromagnetic aircraft launch system aboard the carrier Gerald R. Ford did little to help the embattled catapult's reputation.

Officials were quick to call this a "minor setback" and express confidence that EMALS will be operational as scheduled.

On Tuesday morning, officials placed a weighted sled at the end of Ford's Catapult 1. After a successful dry run, the Navy crew set up for one more test. The catapult officer gave the command, the shooter pressed the launch button inside the cab and … nothing.

The exact problem was not immediately clear. Matt Mulherin, president of Newport News Shipbuilding, said some of the circuitry was showing faults. The carrier's skipper categorized it as a "communication-type issue of components talking together."

"We would have liked to have seen this shoot today," Capt. John Meier, Ford's commanding officer, said. "I'm certainly not disappointed in where we are in the test program. … I think that what we have today is a minor setback to the test program. We will get back on track [and] our team knows that. As a matter of fact, you don't see them around right now because they are getting after it."

After media left, the system was fixed and successfully launched two dead loads around 1 p.m. The first weighed 15,000 pounds and traveled at 140 knots. The second dead load weighed 8,000 pounds and traveled at 180 knots. Another 20 testing days with weighted sleds remain aboard Ford. The planned operational launch of aircraft is set for 2017.

Shipbuilders and the crew have launched 15 sleds of varying weights and speeds from Catapult 2 in three days. Similar issues were seen amid those successful launches, Meier said.

"As you go through the testing program, it is not uncommon to have hiccups, if you will, or minor discrepancies," he said. "We have seen nothing that I would consider a major test interruption whatsoever."

The team netted 10 consecutive shots once the issues on Cat 2 were corrected.

"This is why you run a test program. You find the faults, you fix them," Mulherin said. "Some of this is new hardware that wasn't fully tested at the site in Lakehurst [in New Jersey]. At the end of the day we will deliver a product that is fully spec compliant, that meets all the captain's demands and that is reliable.

"But today isn't going to be the day that we can demonstrate that."

The EMALS catapult replaced the steam-powered catapult system, and has had its share of problems. By the time aircraft compatibility tests ended in April 2014, and more than 3,000 dead-load launches were added to the mix, EMALS had a reliability rate of 240 launches without failure. That was far short of the 1,250 launches the system should have been hitting at that point.

EMALS is expected to reduce stress on aircraft during takeoff, thus expanding their service lives. It is designed to increase the sortie generation rate by as much as 25 percent and can launch a wider variety of weights in varying wind conditions. This includes lightweight, unmanned aerial vehicles that cannot be launched with a steam catapult.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


you can check also this:
Susan Ford Bales, the daughter of former President Gerald Ford and the sponsor of his namesake ship, was among scores of shipbuilders, ship's crew, Navy officers and contracting officials
in:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Top