Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

U.S.S. John F. Kennedy repair cost 3 times higher that planned(Clinton Era Military Alert)
GlobalSecurity.org ^ | 13 June 2003 | trueblackman

Posted on 06/13/2003 6:46:34 AM PDT by Trueblackman

Kennedy overhaul price tag balloons Years of neglect have added millions to the cost of upgrading ship

By Rachel Davis

Halfway through an extensive nine-month overhaul, the cost to refurbish the Jacksonville-based USS John F. Kennedy has risen significantly over the Navy's initial report.

With millions added since work began in January, the maintenance cost for the Kennedy has climbed to about $ 300 million. The Navy says it can easily absorb the price tag, but U.S. Rep. Ander Crenshaw's office said it is beyond the usual estimated 15 percent for an aircraft carrier's repairs.

Officials at the Navy's Air Force Atlantic Fleet in Norfolk, Va., said the carrier is not over budget and was only compensating for additional work found after the project began. The initial cost estimate is based on maintenance and repairs that the Navy was aware of at the onset of the maintenance work, said spokesman Cmdr. Hal Pittman.

This is the first extended maintenance program since 1993 for the Kennedy, a 35-year-old aircraft carrier, said Kennedy Capt. Ronald H. Henderson, adding, '. . . as maintenance personnel begin previously scheduled repairs, they usually find additional items that require work. We anticipated growth work would emerge when we started . . . and we have discovered growth work tied to existing repairs.'

Some examples include:

-- Replacing rusted deck around an air ejector.

-- Additional repair work for the catapult systems.

-- Additional fuel and steam pipe work discovered after other piping was removed.

Funding for the Kennedy's newfound system repairs lies in an ample defense budget -- $ 3.5 billion for ship maintenance in 2003 plus an additional $ 940 million from a wartime supplemental budget passed by Congress this year. Thus far for the Kennedy, $ 61 million in new work has been added, according to Air Force Atlantic Fleet.

'No one planned for that kind of [cost] growth, they've been plagued by that kind of growth in every area of the ship,' said a high-ranking Navy official familiar with Kennedy repairs, who wished to remain anonymous for fear of retribution. 'This ship is in significantly worse shape than what they estimated.' In December 2002, at the onset of the work, the Navy released a statement that said the work would be 'valued at more than $ 200 million,' but Friday Navy officials said the initial estimated budget was $ 244 million.

The $ 200 million figure released by Kennedy public affairs officials was discounted by Pittman, who on Friday said, 'it was at the beginning so maybe they didn't have all the figures.'

John Pike, director of GlobalSecurity.org, a Washington-based defense watch group, said the figures on the Kennedy should be characterized as a cost underestimate rather than a cost overrun.

'That's been the problem with this ship for quite some time. People have been overoptimistic on what was needed to keep the thing in top operating condition,' Pike said. 'I think they just basically need to get some realistic cost estimating and get on with the job.'

MAINTENANCE CUT SHORT It is not clear if the Kennedy's additional costs will affect the amount of money another ship might receive for its repairs, but officials said the fleet would get the necessary maintenance 'to operate safely and reliably.'

The Navy did not address the question of whether any of its other ships' maintenance packages would be reduced for 2003 or 2004.

The Kennedy, the third-oldest carrier in the Navy's fleet, also is scheduled to go to Norfolk, Va., for the second phase of its maintenance in 2005. Commissioned in 1968, it is scheduled to stay in the active fleet until 2018.

Crenshaw, R-Fla., said the Navy expected exceptional cost growth from the Kennedy because of its lack of funding in the past.

'As we know, the Kennedy is anything but typical. She is a unique ship with a history of neglect,' Crenshaw said. 'The workload growth was expected and it's an example of what happens when the Navy neglects its assets. The Kennedy went through an extended period of lean maintenance years and this is the result.'

Over the past decade the Navy has shorted the Kennedy an estimated $ 300 million in maintenance, beginning when a three-year maintenance program designed to extend the life of an aging carrier was cut short in 1995.

The aircraft carrier was placed into the Navy's reserve fleet and never received the required upgrades.

In December 2001 the Kennedy performed poorly on a material inspection and its commanding officer was relieved of his command. The Navy said the carrier was in poor shape because of gross underfunding.

Some of the systems cited during the inspection were degraded aircraft catapult systems and elevators, flight deck firefighting equipment and an 'unreliable' propulsion system.

To get the Kennedy ready for a six-month deployment overseas, the crew worked extended shifts last winter alongside contractors, forgoing extended holiday and vacation leave.

DRY DOCK STILL AHEAD A $ 29 million upgrade before deployment last year, coupled with the Kennedy's current maintenance project and its scheduled dry dock in 2005 in Norfolk -- when the ship is pulled from the water for work on its exterior systems -- should put the carrier back on track, according to Navy officials.

The dry-dock period in 2005 is still being scheduled, Pittman said, and the logistics and exactly where all the required maintenance will take place has not yet been finalized.

Thus far in the maintenance period, contractors and sailors have worked on such vital components as aircraft catapults and arresting wires, propulsion systems and much of the ship's worn-out carbon-steel piping, which will be replaced with a tougher more durable copper nickel. Through these pipes flow aircraft fuel, oils and steam for the ship's propulsion and catapult systems.

'We've repaired some decks and foundations for pumps and machinery,' said Capt. Richard Burna, supervisor of the Navy's ship-contract work in Jacksonville. 'We thought they were sound and could wait until 2005, but once the pumps were removed we saw that they were deteriorated and it was the smart thing to repair them now.'

Burna also said repairs that were initially scheduled for the Kennedy's dry-dock period in 2005 are being done now because of system availability and adequate funding.

The ship's four catapult systems, which launch aircraft off the flight deck, will also undergo an overhaul, including three jet blast deflectors, or large 'shields' that protect flight deck personnel from jet engine exhaust.

'With the catapults, we took the catapults apart. It was the first time they had been taken apart since Philadelphia,' Burna said referring to the time the Kennedy spent in a Philadelphia shipyard from 1993 to 1995. 'It was smart to do it now that all the other parts and components were out of the way to give us access.' MORE FOR ECONOMY

The additional growth money may or may not have an impact on the local economy, according to two economists who differ on the issue.

According to Paul Mason, a University of North Florida economics professor, an extra $ 50 million spent to refurbish the Kennedy will in effect double to $ 100 million as the dollars trickle down to hotels, restaurants and companies that supply material to the Kennedy.

But with so many variables, forecasting an economic impact is an inexact science. Mark Vitner, a senior economist with Wachovia bank in Charlotte, N.C., said a more accurate figure would be $ 70 million. That's because much of the extra spending will be for equipment, which typically is so specialized that it needs to be brought in from elsewhere. That means less money spent in Jacksonville. Staff writer Gregory Richards contributed to this report. Staff writer Rachel Davis can be reached at (904) 359-4614 or at racheldavis@jacksonville.com.

NOT SHIP-SHAPE: THE KENNEDY'S REPAIRS Here is a look at what has happened to the 35-year-old Jacksonville-based USS John F. Kennedy since maintenance problems were exposed two years ago: -- Dec. 2-7, 2001: Performs poorly on a maintenance evaluation by the Navy's Board of Inspection and Survey. -- Dec. 13, 2001: Navy strips captain of command. -- Dec. 14, 2001: Navy pushes Kennedy's deployment up two months to mid-January to relieve the USS Theodore Roosevelt in launching fighter jet missions on Afghanistan. -- Dec. 17, 2001: Holiday leave for the Kennedy's 3,000-plus crew members is shortened to get the ship seaworthy. About another $ 30 million in repairs are planned. -- Dec. 19, 2001: Navy names Capt. Ronald Henderson to take over command. -- Jan. 15, 2002: Navy announces deployment delay for further repair work. -- Jan. 16, 2002: Congressional delegates meet with Navy officials who acknowledge inadequate defense funding throughout the 1990s for the Kennedy. -- March 6, 2002: Relieves the USS Theodore Roosevelt in the north Arabian Sea in the war on terrorism. -- Aug. 17, 2002: Arrives back at Mayport. -- Jan. 6, 2003: Begins nine-month overhaul, reported at more than $ 200 million. -- April 9, 2003: Overhaul is about one-third of the way through, on schedule and now up to $ 250 million. -- May 27, 2003: U.S. Rep. Ander Crenshaw visits Mayport as the Kennedy completes 50 percent of its now roughly $ 300 million overhaul.

GRAPHIC: Photo: 01met_KennedyRefit060603 01me Bruce Lipsky/staff Patrick Schram of Lakehurst, N.J., works in Catapult 4 on the flight deck of the aircraft carrier. The catapult systems were noted for poor performance in a 2001 Navy inspection. Photo: 08met_KennedyRefit060603 08me Bruce Lipsky/staff Construction crews and equipment fill the hangar deck of the USS John F. Kennedy on Friday at Mayport Naval Station. The 'Big John' is halfway through a nine-month overhaul. Photo: met_JFKcatapaultPipe 0577835 John Pemberton/staff DeShaun Myers adjusts a valve in a catapult room. The valve is a small part of the system that shoots the jets off the carrier. Photo: all_kennedy-fundraiser041702 Associated Press A full moon illuminates the horizon above as the USS John F. Kennedy prepares for Operation Enduring Freedom. Photo: met_JFKupdate3 040803 met_JFK Don Burk/staff Capt. Ronald Henderson said he expected to find additional areas that would need repairs when the overhaul began in January. Photo: met_JKFRehab052703 met577837 Bruce Lipsky/staff The USS John F. Kennedy is at the halfway point of a major overhaul that has reached $ 300 million. The aircraft carrier is 35 years old.


TOPICS: Announcements; Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Editorial; Extended News; Free Republic; Front Page News; Government; Political Humor/Cartoons; War on Terror; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: slander; ussamerica; ussjohnkennedy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-75 last
To: RipSawyer
My familiarity with N6 is from bunkering boats on the Great Lakes. Black oil is still popular in the iron ore, coal and stone trade, even in the newer 1000 footers, which used French-made Pielstick V-16 medium-speed diesels, burning 320 and 280 Centistoke fuel (yes, they are piston engines that burn this tar). Bethlehem Steel and Columbia Steamship built their 1000 footers with EMD (railroad locomotive) V-16s. But these boats feature four of these motors running two screws, versus just two Pielsticks in US Steel and Interlake Steamship "footers."
61 posted on 06/14/2003 7:33:48 PM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Trueblackman
After the work is done, ~this should be the last heavy check accomplished on the old JFK before retirement. We could donate it to the French, who would go broke fixing it again.
62 posted on 06/14/2003 8:54:03 PM PDT by illumini (AMERICA. Love her or leave her!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: illumini
What a great idea !
63 posted on 06/15/2003 11:41:53 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Ford Fairlane
Interesting history. Was the JFK supposed to burn N6FO or N2FO ?
64 posted on 06/15/2003 11:45:01 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Trueblackman
$200-$300 million?

Our sailors are among our best and we put them at unneccessary risk serving in "battle worthy" rust buckets.

The Democrats only started with "Tail Hook".
65 posted on 06/15/2003 11:54:24 AM PDT by SevenDaysInMay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Trueblackman
Bookmarked and Bumped.
66 posted on 06/15/2003 6:55:54 PM PDT by gwmoore (As the Russian manual for the Nagant Revolver states: "Target Practice: "at the deserter, FIRE")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: e_engineer
The Constitution's guns were replaced with plastic guns because the originals weighed more than 2,000 lbs each and were causing her to hog (sag at the stern).
67 posted on 06/15/2003 7:17:00 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (Even if the government took all your earnings, you wouldn’t be, in its eyes, a slave.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants
US Navy history is really fascinating. One of the battleship books I have discusses the two Iowa class BBs planned after the Missouri was built. They were the Illinois and the Kentucky. The Illinois' keel was laid, then broken up in place. A piece of the Kentucky survives as the bow of the Wisconsin, after she was involved in a collision in 1956.
Five more larger BBs were proposed, known as the Montana class. These were wider and heavier battleships with 12 guns. Plans were drawn up in 1940 but they were never built.
68 posted on 06/16/2003 7:09:29 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks
I'm not sure the designation of the fuel, as far as I know the only fuel the JFK ever used was standard navy jet fuel (now NATO standard jet fuel)

Standardising fuel is a really good idea if you can do it, but I've had some real problems on some land based (Army & Marine) vehicles I've had to help design. Switching fuels isn't so much of a problem in boilers or turbines, but piston engines can be real finnicky about fuel

69 posted on 06/16/2003 9:42:07 PM PDT by Ford Fairlane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks
It was technically probaly #1, as jet fuel is about the same as kerosene - I worked for a grain processing plant for a while when the design business was slow, the boilers all ran on natural gas, every winter UE would cut off our gas & we would have to burn oil from the storage tanks. Corporate told the EPA it was # 2, in reality one tank was a mix of diesel & kerosene (# 1 1/2?), ALL of the others were # 6 that they had bought cheap somewhere.

You couldnt light those boilers on #6, we had steam heaters just to get it hot enough to burn, we had to light it on the diesel/kerosene mix & then switch over if the plant was down when the gas was shut off

The neighbors always bitched because the 200' stack had been lowered to 50' when they switched to gas, in that cold winter weather the black smoke would just blanket the ground for miles

70 posted on 06/16/2003 9:57:03 PM PDT by Ford Fairlane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Ford Fairlane
I am still peddling N6 in rail cars and I know all about how gummy this stuff can be. The pour point on some of this can be 75 F, which really means about 180 before you can pump it and 250 to light it off. The old Navy girls, like the Arizona, ran on US Navy spec N6, which was 10 API gravity and 100 SSF viscosity, or about 400 Centistokes. Great Lakes steamers like a 380 cSt and the Pielstick V-16 piston engines use 320 or 280. This light N6 is becomming hard to find as refineries pull harder on the residual oil. Many refineries are producing negative gravity black oil, which can weigh 9.2 pounds/gallon. 10 gravity N6 is about 8.5 pounds/gallon.
71 posted on 06/17/2003 7:24:41 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants
As a current JFK sailor, I can say this. Yes our ship has ALOT of work that needs to be done to it, yes it probably should be decommisioned first before some of the other carriers, but the truth of the matter is, money talks. I am in agreement that the main reason they're holding on to it for so long is because of the namesake. The truth is, lots of people and places LOVE the JFK. I know the city of Jacksonville loves us, they do NOT want to get rid of us. Yeah there's a rumor about us taking over the Kittyhawks homeport of Japan when they get decommissioned. The only reason for that rumor was because at the time, Japan did not want ANY nuclear powered vessels in their country. However, now Japan has reconsidered and it's very well possible that a Nuclear carrier will go there. The other place that LOVES our ship is New York. For some reason, there's a really big love between our ship and New York. I'm sure because of the namesake. As well as on Sept. 11th, the Big John was the first ship to arrive in the general area of New York launching aircraft and protecting New York after the towers fell. We have a long relationship with that city and it's one that just can't be broken. For proof, just wait for Fleet Week 2004. The Big John will more than likely be there. Now, as a sailor, I can honestly say that aside from all the political bull crap, I still love my ship. Yes it's old, yes it's rusty, dirty, and has it's problems. However, it still keeps ticking and we are literally busting our butts to keep her running. During this current ESRA, Ship force is doing WAYYY more than any other carriers ships force does during a normal ESRA. We do not get off early everyday, we work 0600-1500 every weekday, come july, it may be Monday - Saturday. We want to prove to the world that our ship is still a good ship and that we can get the job done in the time given. We are also under alot of pressure with this. It's the biggest ever ESRA performed in a ships homeport. You would be amazed at all the work that is going on. All I can say is watch out. Because come the end of September, you will see how well the JFK really is. We've done so much that it's just going to be unbelievable. We are aiming for the Battle E, we are aiming for Meritorious Unit, we are aiming for any type of award we can. Why? Because for once, there's alot of hard working SAILORS onboard one ship.
72 posted on 06/30/2003 6:11:45 PM PDT by jfksailor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Light Speed; belmont_mark; Alamo-Girl
Ping. It probably would be smarter to just deploy a new nuclear carrier. This one sounds like it has been neglected to death...probably from the Brass's expectation it would be retired due to continued Navy shrinkage under Clinton.
73 posted on 09/04/2003 8:07:01 AM PDT by Paul Ross (A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master, and deserves one!-A. Hamilton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross
This could actually turn out to be a great success story....so too..the possible progenitor for taking other ships in MARADS[Reserve..or Mothballed]..gutting them..and going automated.

USS John F. Kennedy Comes to Life
Story Number: NNS030805-02
Release Date: 8/5/2003 11:12:00 AM

By Journalist 2nd Class Leah N. Smith, USS John F. Kennedy Public Affairs

ABOARD USS JOHN F. KENNEDY (NNS) -- USS John F. Kennedy (CV 67) reached a benchmark in its maintenance project Aug. 4, as the carrier’s combat systems department resurrected Kennedy’s pulse.

For the first time in eight months, radars came to life in front of a cheering crowd of contractors and Sailors. The team worked hand-in-hand during Kennedy’s extended selected restricted availability (ESRA) to ensure all systems were go.

“This light-off represents the culmination of work by ship’s force and contractor personnel that included numerous new installations, as well as the overhaul or refurbishment of virtually every piece of combat systems equipment aboard 'Big John,'” said Cmdr. Rich Soucie, combat systems officer.

According to Lt. j.g. Steven James of combat systems, the ESRA installations and refurbishments make Kennedy one of the most technologically advanced aircraft carriers in the fleet.

“This places us at the cutting edge of carrier improvements in the arena,” said James. “The repairs make us more capable in communications and surveillance.”

Some of the system’s upgrades include computer network defense-intrusion detection system, used to detect unauthorized personnel attempting to access shipboard computer systems; an integrated bridge, which facilitates digital navigation and integrates a new commercial radar, a voyage management computer and an electronic charting and display information system; and the Rolling Airframe Missile, or RAM, which adds new capabilities to the ship’s self defense suite. Kennedy is the first east coast aircraft carrier to receive the RAM upgrade.

Commanding Officer Capt. Ronald H. Henderson Jr. said the light-off puts "Big John" one step closer to wrapping up maintenance so “we can get back where we belong – underway.

“The important thing right now is that, in the end, JFK will be a better carrier – for Jacksonville, the Navy and the nation – and ready to serve where the president directs,” Henderson said.

Kennedy’s availability is the most extensive one ever conducted outside of a naval shipyard promoting the Navy’s one shipyard concept.

Edited by - rickusn on Aug 05 2003 4:15 PM

74 posted on 09/04/2003 11:02:33 AM PDT by Light Speed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Light Speed
Indeed, it does sound like she will be a restored, renewed and effective additional complement to the fleet, but still operating with the smoke-stack and jury-rig issues. This could be her last go-round for upgrades and rehab. I wasn't advocating that she be immediately mothballed, just that it be planned for now with the commencement of her replacement's planning...the new CV-X which Rummy has been sitting on.
75 posted on 09/05/2003 11:18:54 AM PDT by Paul Ross (A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master, and deserves one!-A. Hamilton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-75 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson