US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Air Force Brat

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
Brumby said:
The problem is when you examine the details, there is a different story. The original budget for CVN-78 is $10.5 Billion (in 2008 dollars). The latest estimate is $12.9 Billion which is $2.4 Billion over budget. In reality, the cost overrun is much more because some work is being shifted out as post completion activities to mask the true cost. That is a separate story in itself which we will not get into. The cost overrun is known and anticipated but sadly not seriously managed because GAO reported in August 2007 that:
Costs for CVN 78 will likely exceed the budget for several reasons. First, the Navy’s cost estimate which underpins the budget is optimistic. For example, the Navy assumes that CVN 78 will be built with fewer labor hours than were needed for the previous two carriers. Second, theNavy’s target cost for ship construction may not be achievable as the shipbuilder's initial cost estimate for construction was 22 % higher than the Navy's cost target which was based on the budget. (In effect, the Navy fudged the numbers which in reality would not be achievable). Finally, the Navy’s ability to manage issues that affect cost suffers from insufficient cost surveillance.

This is not withstanding the fact that the build approach was in attempting to implement some technologies that were not matured during the design and build phase such as EMALS, AAG, and DBR. This was a recipe for cost growth. The breakdown of the $12.9 Billion cost attributes $3.3 Billion to one time R&D with $9.6 Billion as a recurring build cost. If we contrast the latest appropriation of $11.3 Billion for CVN-79 (vs. original budget of $9.2 Billion) it represent a cost growth of $2.1 Billion. Given that CVN-79 would be a more stable design plus the efficiencies identified from the CVN-78 build, it is difficulty to reconcile against the latest estimate of $11.3 Billion to build CVN-79.

I blame it on Congress for giving the Navy a free pass back in 2007 when it was obvious that the Navy was fudging numbers that it could not deliver. In a commercial enterprise this would not have passage.
Click to expand...

Well don't have children bruda, and don't figure out what they have actually cost if you do? Seriously, it cost money to maintain a military and equipment, not to mention personel, every dollar spent on the national defense puts us one step further ahead of the really bad people. I would think you would be happy the USA spends out the wazoo to defend not only ourselves but our friends, and really, the military manages their budgets much more close than the Govt giv-aways to many folks who are to sorry to work??? I have NO problem with helping people, I love children and will take care of them at ANY cost, the defense of what is left of this "beautiful land" falls to many brave men and women who lay it all on the line.

Let me say that the BHO team has blown several lifetimes worth of GNP, the US congress and Senate are incompetent to manage the defense of this great nation, Go Navy!
 
Brumby

Brumby

Major
Air Force Brat said:
Well don't have children bruda, and don't figure out what they have actually cost if you do? Seriously, it cost money to maintain a military and equipment, not to mention personel, every dollar spent on the national defense puts us one step further ahead of the really bad people. I would think you would be happy the USA spends out the wazoo to defend not only ourselves but our friends, and really, the military manages their budgets much more close than the Govt giv-aways to many folks who are to sorry to work??? I have NO problem with helping people, I love children and will take care of them at ANY cost, the defense of what is left of this "beautiful land" falls to many brave men and women who lay it all on the line.

Let me say that the BHO team has blown several lifetimes worth of GNP, the US congress and Senate are incompetent to manage the defense of this great nation, Go Navy!
Click to expand...

I understand your sentiment and where you are coming from. The issue being discussed is not whether the money should be spent but rather whether the program was derelictly managed. In an age of sequestration and CBR; competing strategic programs like the Ohio replacement and LSRB, it will come back to bite the Navy in some shape or form. There just isn't enough money to go round and constant overrun leaves a bad taste. Ignoring it in my view is never a good solution.
 
Jura The idiot

Jura The idiot

General
Air Force Brat said:
guys, you're boring me to death??? ...
Click to expand...
sorry, bro, you and Brumby made great posts here lately (I mean it!), spoken right from your Hearts!
and also sorry to inform you I tend to agree with Brumby on the importance of "bean counting", and you can check this:
“The culture here is to say there is no risk, that we can do it for low cost,” Francis said. “If you come in and say it’s going to cost $13 billion, maybe you’ll get told no.”
Click to expand...
Francis is GAO (an axe to grind LOL), the source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
TerraN_EmpirE

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
Considering that the intended life span of this carrier is double that of the existing Nimitz class, so long as the ship enters service and survives till 2113 it will more then make up the cost. Yes short term it is a massive blow to the budget but look bad at your own figures with each new carrier of the Nimitz the price tag was on the curve to reach the same point. The only change here is that the final product will have a few more widgets then the last ones.
 
Air Force Brat

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
Jura said:
sorry, bro, you and Brumby made great posts here lately (I mean it!), spoken right from your Hearts!
and also sorry to inform you I tend to agree with Brumby on the importance of "bean counting", and you can check this:

Francis is GAO (an axe to grind LOL), the source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...
John McCain loves the camera, hates the F-22 and the F-35??? is a "bloviator", my Dad had nothing but abject contempt for John McCain after receiving a couple of doo-da responses from Senator McCain on veterans/military issues after writing him some very to the point and heartfelt letters, my Dad very seldom had a bad word for anybody, but Sen McCain was a notable exception.

GAO and the Senate/Congress/Pres are the problem, far more than the Navy/Air Force, and certainly far more than LockMart, Electric Boat, or whomever is building, too many doo-dads and PORK, for the politicians, the F-22 had just begun to "amortize" the expenses and was beginning to come down in price as the numbers went up, the cost was so high because the looney tune congress continued to roll back production and production numbers, who's ever going to achieve efficiency when the numb-nogs keep changing the goal posts?

I don't disagree with either of you, on the issue, its with our congress and acquisition system, it has always and will always be a fact of life? but you guys are sound like the Honey-Badger, she's a banker??? no fun from the "bean counters", and no new weapons or capabilities? LOL

besides, I'd buy a big Ham Hock, and throw that pot of "beans" on the stove for an all day cookdown, and I'd buy a stick of real butter and make us a big pan of corn-bread, you've had bean and corn-bread in the South? Jura UUuuuuuuuMMMMHHHH Uuummmhh!
 
Last edited:
Brumby

Brumby

Major
TerraN_EmpirE said:
Considering that the intended life span of this carrier is double that of the existing Nimitz class, so long as the ship enters service and survives till 2113 it will more then make up the cost.
Click to expand...

I don't think that is factually correct. The Ford class as I understand it will not require mid-life refuelling but nevertheless will only have an operationally life span of 50 years, just like the Nimitz class. The pay back from the Ford class is the savings from being able to operate with several hundred less personnel due to greater automation (in theory).
 
Brumby

Brumby

Major
Air Force Brat said:
GAO and the Senate/Congress/Pres are the problem, far more than the Navy/Air Force, and certainly far more than LockMart, Electric Boat, or whomever is building, too many doo-dads and PORK, for the politicians, the F-22 had just begun to "amortize" the expenses and was beginning to come down in price as the numbers went up, the cost was so high because the looney tune congress continued to roll back production and production numbers, who's ever going to achieve efficiency when the numb-nogs keep changing the goal posts?

I don't disagree with either of you, on the issue, its with our congress and acquisition system, it has always and will always be a fact of life? but you guys are sound like the Honey-Badger, she's a banker??? no fun from the "bean counters", and no new weapons or capabilities? LOL
Click to expand...

I am a bean counter by training and so I think like one. The point that I am attempting to make which may not be appreciated is that any basic management duty requires delivery. When a program or project continues to constantly under-deliver or over-blow in cost, senior leadership needs to take action (be it Congress or some form of oversight) and that comes when credibility of the program management is lost. So when senior management takes action they just pull the rug because the figures and promises from the program manager can no longer be relied upon. This in effect is the story of the F-22 program. There are always consequences. The F-22 program was rolled back because cost continue to blow out with no end in sight. Once credibility is lost, leadership will second guess and take action to cut the pain. I have seen so many instances of this in my personal life time.
 
Jura The idiot

Jura The idiot

General
Air Force Brat said:
... no fun from the "bean counters", and no new weapons or capabilities? LOL

...
Click to expand...
... also LOL but I think there's no point in blaming "bean counters" (now I don't mean Brumby LOL) for unfulfilled promises made by any Weapons Program ... what I noticed is American Weapons Programs often make so many soooo optimistic headlines ... until they're threatened by
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


EDIT
I remember I posted about what the Acquisitions Chief said about optimism; it's here:
https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/us-military-news-reports-data-etc.t1547/page-419#post-348019
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top