They should have built more Nimitz' class because I think the shipyards had the process down to a science.
Posted on 10/14/2015 10:28:12 PM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) on Wednesday blasted the Navy’s Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier program, saying its $4.7 billion cost overrun threatens to undermine the Navy’s aircraft carrier legacy.
“We simply cannot afford to pay $12.9 billion for a single ship,” McCain wrote in an 18-page report. “The combined $4.7 billion in cost growth on these first two ships has already not only eroded the buying power for remaining ships in the Ford-class, as it leaves less available for well as other critical military capabilities.”
The criticism comes in the form of McCain’s latest “America’s Most Wasted” report, a series where he details what he sees as government waste. The Ford-class carrier program has become a go-to criticism of McCain’s, who says it’s evidence of the overall flawed defense acquisition system. At a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing earlier this month, he called the program “one of the most spectacular acquisition debacles in recent memory.”
The program was first conceived in 2002 as a way to replace the Navy’s existing fleet of 1970s Nimitz-class carriers. When Congress approved the first ship in 2007, it was expected to be ready in 2015 and cost $10.5 billion.
Fast-forward to 2015, and the first ship is expected to be ready in May 2016 and cost $12.9 billion.
The second ship was originally expected to be ready in 2019 and cost $9.2 billion. It’s now slated to be done in 2024 and cost $11.4 billion.
The Navy has said time and cost increases are a result of technology and design issues when the contract was awarded, according to McCain’s report.
McCain reiterated his belief that the overrun is symptomatic of a larger problem.
“A decade of oversight reporting show that CVN 78 has been plagued by the same problems found throughout Navy shipbuilding and, indeed, most major defense acquisition programs,” he wrote, using another name for the first ship. “Unrealistic business cases, poor cost estimates, new systems rushed to production, concurrent design and construction, and problems testing systems to demonstrate promised capability. All of these problems have been made worse by the absence of competition in aircraft carrier construction.”
In his conclusion, McCain called for the Defense Department to test to make sure the first ship will have its promised capabilities and to commit to keeping the second ship within cost caps.
“Finally,” he wrote, “the department must study alternatives to the aircraft carrier to ensure we are getting the best capability while most effectively allocating our scarce resources.”
McCain, sit down and zip it. You are quite knowledgeable about waste. You you managed to waste the votes of millions who might have voted for you. Any man in a fight who gives up and surrenders has come to terms with waste- up close and personal. This is on the backs of you and your congress critter friends for without you, it would have never occurred.
For example, when my parents were first married, the Navy was producing steel at the Brooklyn Navy Yard (and, I assume, at other shipbuilding locations around the country). This is the steel that built the USS Iowa and USS Missouri, among others.
Suppose the first two Ford class aircraft carriers are sunk on the first day of the upcoming war with China? Where is the steel produced to replace them?
In 1942-43, from a standing start, we launched over 50 aircraft carriers. They didn't take 14 years each to build.
Hard to separate contractor waste from loss due to EVER-CHANGING DoD specs/requirements.
The problem is two-fold:
1) Too many Gubmint DoD workers are ROADies (Retitred On Active Duty) and have no idea what they are doing or the ramifications of what they are requesting.
2) Too many contractor upper-management-types came out of that same system and know how to game it.
(2a - people are basically selfish and greedy and unable to police themselves)
Depends on who is responsible for the cost over run. NavSea an NavAir have a very long history of issuing change orders to ship construction contracts. These may be necessary but they increase the cost of construction and delay delivery of the ship. The Navy is responsible for the cost overrun and has to pay for it. In some cases the contractor is responsible through poor workmanship, incorrect materials, missed deadlines etc. If that is the case, you are correct, the yard should eat the cost overrun.
It’s more like ordering a stick shift sedan and then deciding you really wanted a convertible with an automatic while the car’s being built. No government program ever produces what was originally specified.
During WWII there were 3 Navy Shipyards and two civilian ship yards capable of building 100 or so large aircraft carriers, battleships and heavy cruisers. Today only one civilian yard has that capability. During WWII probably a dozen different shipyards built hundreds of light cruisers, destroyers and destroyer escorts. Today there are two or three yards that can do that. During WWII there were dozens of shipyards building thousands of cargo ships. Today only two or three build cargo ships in this country. To answer your question, we really do not have much ship construction capability anymore.
Interesting thing about shipbuilding is that the 3 biggest commercial shipbuilding nations (S.Korea, Japan and China) have a huge lead over their nearest rivals. The US is nowhere near them.
No, it is more like ordering a new car, and then telling them to design a new transmission from scratch instead of using a proven design.
The larger problem is cost-effectiveness - How many virtually invulnerable subs and cruise missiles can we build for this cost? What are the additional long-term costs for defending carriers from their vulnerabilities, and for maintenance?
You may never hear this question: Can we do without them?
No, it's like contracting a company to build a one of a kind car, with virtually no common components to anything else they make, just for you from scratch for $300k, with engine, powertrain, suspension, and other components that exist only in the minds of teams of engineers with novel technologies. As they progress from design to turning metal, there are technology and integration issues. You had a "sequester" that caused them to shut down the line for two months during peak production. You changed your mind numerous times, which led to changes in the requirements which impacted their design. So they have a cost overrun of $20k. Since you buy these cars often, do you want to destroy goodwill with this company and dump the unfinished car on them (which they will then potentially sell to one of your rivals), or eat the loss and get your car?
Probably pure fantasy but I like to think if Trump got elected he’d take a look at cost issues in Fed. contracts and expose through public evisceration the worst offenders along the lines of $1000 screwdrivers, $2000 hammers, etc.
Can you imagine asking for permits to operate a steel foundry in Brooklyn today?
BTW, where does the steel used for the Ford class CVNs come from?
That’s OK.
Take $4.7 Billion from AFDC. That’s a complete waste of money, and unconstitutional.
He’s running for re-election. This is his standard MO. He takes a hard right turn until he gets re-elected. Then, he scampers back to the D side of the aisle.
They should have built more Nimitz' class because I think the shipyards had the process down to a science.
I did some quick Google searching and to be honest I can’t find any info as to where the steel comes from, I hope like hell it isn’t Red China!
what??????
so WE CAN AFFORD TO RELEASE 5 TALIBAN MURDERERS FROM GITMO AND PAY QATAR $5 BILLION TO TAKE THEM???
WE can afford to give bergdahl the TRAITOR $350000 in back pay and promotions
how does this retard get reelected???????
He must be running for re-election...
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.