Aircraft Carriers III

Jul 27, 2016
I'm sorry to say this: it's been the US Navy which tried to amuse us with "revolutionary" carrier(s) for years, despite numerous warnings/recommendations coming from various sources for years, and it seems to me the US Navy tried to ignore those "nuisances" as much as it could for years (instead of requesting changes to the design); soon the US Navy will reap the benefits of this attitude, and, for now, I'll leave it at that.
time for an update:
Pentagon Conducting New Review of Gerald R. Ford Carrier Program
The Pentagon’s chief weapons buyer is kicking off an independent review into the Navy’s Gerald Ford-class next-generation carrier program citing questions of performance of key systems aboard, according to an Aug. 23 memo obtained by USNI News.

The review – outlined in the memo to Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus from Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics Frank Kendall – calls for the Office of the Secretary of Defense to take a closer look at key subsystems of the carrier that Kendall said could hamper the “schedule and performance” of Ford (CVN-78) and follow on ships.

The memo was
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.

“What we have to determine now is whether it is best to ‘stay the course’ or adjust our plans, particularly for future ships of the class,” Kendall wrote
“The first step in that process has to be a completely objective and technically deep review of the current situation.”

Kendall placed the blame on the so-called “transformation” doctrine of then Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld’s Pentagon that directed the services to develop weapon systems at the edge of technological possibility. Several weapon systems were developed in the early 2000s under the transformation mandate and very few survived – including the Ford class

“With the benefit of hindsight, it was clearly premature to include so many unproven technologies in the Gerald R, Ford. That decision was made long ago as part of a DoD level initiative called ‘Transformation’,” Kendall wrote.
“What we have to determine now is whether it is best to ‘stay the course’ or adjust our plans, particularly for future ships of the class. The first step in that process has to be a completely objective and technically deep review of the current situation.”

The memo identified five areas the 60-day review will cover: propulsion and electrical system components, Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS), Advanced Arresting Gear, Dual Band Radar and Advanced Weapon Elevators.

From the memo:
Power Generation – Propulsion and electrical system components that could be associated with the recent issues discovered with the Main Turbine Generators.

Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System – The lack of sufficient reliability growth demonstrated to date and the ability to support both surge and sustained aircraft operations.

Advanced Arresting Gear – The technical challenges identified in system hardware and software, achievement of design performance criteria for the operational envelope, reliability growth, and the ability to support both surge and sustained aircraft operations.

Dual Band Radar – Ship integration issues discovered on C VN 78 that need to be avoided with the Enterprise Air Surveillance Radar on CVN 79 and later.

Advanced Weapon Elevators – System reliability and anticipated growth affecting the ability of installed systems to support requirements for both surge and sustained aircraft operations.

Those new technologies, “compounded the inherent challenges of a first in class design,” Navy spokeswoman Capt. Thurraya Kent said in a Tuesday statement to USNI News.
“Consequently, a comprehensive test program, the most integrated and complex shipbuilding test program to date, was developed to address the integration of these technologies. This test program has proven to be highly effective at resolving many first-of-class ship issues through the testing of developmental systems onboard CVN-78 and proving the performance of these systems.”

The $12.9 billion first-in-class ship is being built at the Huntington Ingalls Industries yard in Newport News, Va. and set to deliver to the service by the end of the year.
source is USNI News
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Jul 27, 2016

time for an update:
Pentagon Conducting New Review of Gerald R. Ford Carrier Program

source is USNI News
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Put her to sea and let her show off her sea legs.

As I have said many times about this ship and her entire class...even though they are pushing the envelope hrd, and there are always issues when you do that.

This class of carriers is going to be the most powerful and awesome carriers ever built...and they will provide the US with unmatchable maritime power projection capabilities particularly as they get the F-35C on board, and then ten years after that, bring a 6th gen aircraft aboard.
 
Last edited:

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
refurbished for tens of millions of pounds, so it's time to scrap her
HMS Ocean to be decommissioned in 2018, MoD announces
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

so that a dozen of F-35Bs can be flaunted on a supercarrier
Unbelievable!

In 2014 they spent over 65 million pounds to refurbish her...and now hey are going to scrap her in 2018?

The MoD should be renamed to be MAD, as in Madness!

@Obi Wan Russell What are these people smoking?

What are they injecting into their veins?
 
Put her to sea and let her show off her sea legs.
not sure what you mean, Jeff: I didn't notice anybody criticizing the hull or sea-going capabilities of the CVN-78/her class, the issue is called concurrency (and it's not just me hahahah
https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/aircraft-carriers-iii.t7304/page-85#post-395328
criticizing it) which requires something like a half of a dozen unproven (I mean in realistic conditions, now just for example on a lake during initial testing) technologies now being scrambled into a single ship (instead spreading them over the first three of the class), now I guess Engineers have to guess what's worth waiting for at a particular moment, what will work at what particular moment; of course Vendors bragging of the capabilities of what they're trying to sell, and Navy brass posting supposedly cool videos
(some of the above would be happening if the new technologies had been fielded more gradually, I know, just the risk would've been reduced)

so, if the class is to serve into 22nd Century (LOL that's the first time I've ever written that date), why rush with first of the class AND RISK THE CLASS IS CUT AFTER CVN-80 because of delays, cost overruns etc.??
(I guess the answer would be it's because 15 or ten years ago concurrency had to be incorporated into the design, as back than only so called transformational projects had a chance to get funded, revolutionary changes to the battlefield of the future transforming it into higher dimension, LCS, F-35, ...)

As I have said many times about this ship and her entire class...even though they are pushing the envelope hrd, and there are always issues when you do that.

This class of carriers is going to be the most powerful and awesome carriers ever built...and they will provide the US with unmatchable maritime power projection capabilities particularly as they get the F-35C on board, and then ten years after that, bring a 6th gen aircraft aboard.
 

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
I can definitely see the Dual-Band radar being cut.

What was the point of putting in an untested, expensive and long-range high-performance radar that will never be used?

The carrier only has short/medium-range anti-air systems and would be escorted by anti-air destroyers which would have long-range radars and missiles anyway.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
I can definitely see the Dual-Band radar being cut.

What was the point of putting in an untested, expensive and long-range high-performance radar that will never be used?

The carrier only has short/medium-range anti-air systems and would be escorted by anti-air destroyers which would have long-range radars and missiles anyway.
All of the US nuclear carriers have log n range radar systems.

This system was meant to be used on other vessels...and in time, as matures and is made operational, it will be use don the other carriers and will find its way to other vessels...like the CGX.

Time will tell.
 
"Truman’s planned seven-month deployment, the first that was slated to operate under the Navy’s 36 month Optimized Fleet Response Plan (O-FRP), was extended by an extra month ..." key words: 'Optimized' and 'Plan' (the third would be 'reality' :)
Carrier USS Harry S. Truman Enters Norfolk Yard for Overdue Repairs
The carrier USS Harry S. Truman (CVN-75) entered Norfolk Naval Shipyard for a ten-month repair and modernization period, the Navy announced on Thursday.

Truman’s planned seven-month deployment, the first that was slated to operate under the Navy’s 36 month Optimized Fleet Response Plan (O-FRP), was extended by an extra month at the behest of the Secretary of Defense to continue strikes against ISIS as part of Operation Inherent Resolve.

The additional month combined with a condensed availability that differed has made the effort, “a large and complex availability,” said Deputy Project Superintendent Bobby Leigh in a Navy statement.

“It’s a complex availability with a heavy contracting package,” said Truman Project Superintendent Mike Jennings.
“We’re partnering with Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII) in a way we’ve never done before.”

On Aug. 22, HII was awarded a $52 million contract that covers, “technical data, engineering and management support, design integration, support services, manpower, prefabrication, material procurement and planning. Work is expected to be completed by September 2017,” according to a release from the company.
“Truman’s PIA will total roughly 499,773 man-days, 51 percent of which will be completed by contractors, Alteration Installation Teams, and the ship’s force,” read the statement.
“In addition to NNSY’s and HII’s work, critical work during the availability includes a contractor-performed upgrade to the Consolidated Afloat Networks and Enterprise Services (CANES).”

The following is the Sept. 1, 2016 release from the service.
...
... skipped; source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Top