Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The Future of Carriers Threatened?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Veterans Donate to DU
 
unhappycamper Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-30-07 05:44 AM
Original message
The Future of Carriers Threatened?



The Future of Carriers Threatened?


Comments made in the halls of the Pentagon and the halls of Congress indicate that there is a new threat to future U.S. Navy aircraft carriers. The "threat" to carriers is not enemy weapons or even the U.S. Air Force, but the increasing cost of the nuclear-propelled carriers now being constructed and planned.

The Navy currently operates 11 large-deck carriers -- ten nuclear-propelled ships and the oil-burning USS Kitty Hawk (CV 63). The latter ship, which is forward based in Japan, will be decommissioned next year, when another nuclear ship, the George H.W. Bush (CVN 77), will be placed in commission. The next carrier to be decommissioned will be the USS Enterprise (CVN 65), which was completed in 1961. She will go out of service in 2013 at which time carrier levels will drop to ten ships.

The next carrier will be the Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78), which is now being started. But that ship will not be ready for service until 2015 -- if the ship is completed on schedule. The Navy officially estimates that the Ford -- the first of a new design -- will cost about $8 billion plus about $6 billion for research, development, test and evaluation for the new design. But unofficial estimates have placed the eventual cost of the ship at some $12 billion plus another $12 billion for one-time RDT&E. (In comparison, the last ship of the previous Nimitz class -- the Bush -- will cost almost $7 billion.)

The higher costs are also predicted in a recent study by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), released in late September that says three key systems face problems that could greatly affect the cost of the Ford: the electromagnetic aircraft launch system (catapults), the dual-band radar, and the advanced arresting gear. While current radars and arresting gear could be fitted in the ship, the ship's new reactor plant will not produce sufficient steam nor will the design permit the use of existing steam catapults. Without the launch system the ship would not be able to launch conventional fix-wing aircraft.

While aircraft carriers have proved to be invaluable for U.S. military operations, from the Korean War through the current conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, today many of their traditional missions can be carried out as effectively and possibly more so in some scenarios by other "systems." These mission areas include strike, reconnaissance, and anti-submarine warfare.


Rest of article at: http://www.defensetech.org/archives/003816.html?wh=wh
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Historic NY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-30-07 05:49 AM
Response to Original message
1. Good maybe we will never see the USS Shrub...........
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-30-07 05:54 AM
Response to Original message
2. Have China build them using the steel we gave them from the WTC
That should cut the costs by a few billion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-30-07 06:31 AM
Response to Original message
3. There was no compelling reason for a new design.
I did a survey of former USN and Navy Dept. senior officials about aircraft carrier design and procurement.

Then there's this problem:

http://www.usstorsk.net/photoalbum/63_65edwards/edwards02.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BridgeTheGap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-30-07 06:32 AM
Response to Original message
4. I guess if the shit hits the fan in Iran, we'll find out how effective
Silk worm missles are against carriers. I'm sure the military has some sort of contingency for these missles but it could be devastating, if they work as billed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 04:27 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Veterans Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC