[Bull Snipe]

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.

[mkjessup]

NavSea anD NavAir have a very long history of issuing change orders to ship construction contracts

Don't I know it. I worked at NAVSEA in the late 70's when the first Trident boat was built (keel laid for the USS Ohio on 10 April '76, launched on 7 April '79) and while I did not work directly on the Trident team (my area was scheduling and tracking funding for submarine overhauls, upkeep and maintenance), I remember the howling about change orders on the Ohio, you didn't need an intercom to hear them bellowing.

But look at the contrast: 3 days short of 3 years to lay down the keel and launch the first Trident, compared to 14 years (for the Ford class carriers).

[Mr. Blond]

Thanks. I read about this mostly in regards to aircraft, which should be a simpler proposition.