2015-10-22



USA’s Nimitz Class &
UK’s Invincible Class
(click to view full)

Some nations have aircraft carriers. The USA has super-carriers. The French Charles De Gaulle Class nuclear carriers displace about 43,000t. India’s new Vikramaditya/ Admiral Gorshkov Class will have a similar displacement. The future British CVF Queen Elizabeth Class and related French PA2 Project are expected to displace about 65,000t, while the British Invincible Class carriers that participated in the Falklands War weigh in at just 22,000t. Invincible actually compares well to Italy’s excellent new Cavour Class (27,000t), and Spain’s Principe de Asturias Class (17,000t). The USA’s Nimitz Class and CVN-21 Gerald R. Ford Class, in contrast, fall in the 90,000+ tonne range. Hence their unofficial designation: “super-carriers”. Just one of these ships packs a more potent air force than many nations.



Nimitz Class cutaway
(click to view full)

As the successor to the 102,000 ton Nimitz Class super-carriers, the CVN-21 program aimed to increase aircraft sortie generation rates by 20%, increase survivability to better handle future threats, require fewer sailors, and have depot maintenance requirements that could support an increase of up to 25% in operational availability. The combination of a new design nuclear propulsion plant and an improved electric plant are expected to provide 2-3 times the electrical generation capacity of previous carriers, which in turn enables systems like an Electromagnetic Aircraft Launching System (EMALS, replacing steam-driven catapults), Advanced Arresting Gear, and integrated combat electronics that will leverage advances in open systems architecture. Other CVN-21 features include an enhanced flight deck, improved weapons handling and aircraft servicing efficiency, and a flexible island arrangement allowing for future technology insertion. This graphic points out many of the key improvements.

DID’s CVN-21 FOCUS Article offers a detailed look at a number of the program’s key innovations, as well as a list of relevant contract awards and events.

The New Gerald R. Ford Class



CVN-21: Improvements and Innovations

CV 1: USS Langley
(click to enlarge)

The Nimitz Class was designed in the 1950s and 1960s, and despite a number of equipment changes since then, the basic design remains. Rear Adm. Dennis M. Dwyer, the Navy’s program executive officer for aircraft carriers, put it this way in a May 2003 National Defense Magazine article: “If you take the time period between Nimitz and CVN-21 [design], it’s the same time period between [the USS] Langley (CV 1) – the first carrier – and Nimitz.” The Langley was commissioned in 1922.

The technological jump is much shorter. Aircraft carriers are a mature technology, and CVN-21’s refinements are more about marginal improvements to effectiveness, cost-efficiency, and future upgradeability than any revolution in carrier design.

Even so, creating a new ship class isn’t cheap. According to NAVSEA, the cost of the initial design work to create the CVN-21 ship class and develop its new technologies is projected at $5.6 billion. By 2005, as advance construction began, the estimate for building the CVN 78 Gerald R Ford was $8.1 billion, plus about $5.4 billion in ancillary work related to the class as a whole. Newport News worked to test the design-build strategy before overall construction kick-off in 2007.

DID investigated the CVN-21’s exact build cost, and the future operating cost savings expected as a result of its design innovations. Essentially, CVN-21 carriers are expected to generate savings in 2 major ways.

One is through an array of design and automation changes to various areas of the ship that reduce the required number of sailors aboard.

The other is through reduction in the number of major maintenance overhauls required. NAVSEA expects these changes to save $5 billion per ship over the ships’ projected 50-year lifetime.

Meanwhile, measures are being taken aimed at improving the carriers’ effectiveness and survivability.

Ford Class: New Technologies

CVN-21 Enhancements
(click to view full)

An electromagnetic aircraft launching system (EMALS) will replace the steam-powered system used on current ships. The current steam catapults are large, heavy, and operate without feedback control. They impart large loads to the airframe via sudden shock, and are difficult and time consuming to maintain. Additionally, the trend towards heavier, faster aircraft will soon result in energy requirements that exceed the capacity of steam catapults.

EMALS Components
(click to view full)

EMALS offers a 30% increase in launch energy potential, as well as substantial improvements via reduced weight, smaller volume, and more flexibility; plus increased control, availability, reliability, and efficiency. Self-diagnostics can be embedded in it, simplifying maintenance. The other thing that simplifies maintenance is the removal of the 614 kg of steam required for each aircraft launch, plus hydraulics and oils, water for braking, and associated pumps, motors, and control systems. A corresponding Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) system will replace existing Mk7 hydraulic motors with a system based on electric motors, in order to handle the arresting wires used to catch aircraft tailhooks on landing.

The EMALS-based system will take up far less space, providing design flexibility. EMALS launchers can be moved far more easily, downsized and incorporated into a ramp to provide additional launchers for short take-off aircraft, etc. Finally, its steadier acceleration is expected to reduce launch strains on naval aircraft, which helps extend their airframe life. That isn’t calculated as part of cost savings for the ship, but it definitely adds up over time.

The bad news? EMALS is such a big change from existing steam-driven catapult systems that it’s a critical technology for the CVN-21 Class. Its progress and performance will have a substantial effect on the ships’ on-time delivery, and on their ability to fulfill their cost promises.

Advanced arresting gear. The Naval Air Systems Command, headquartered at Patuxent River Naval Air Station, is working on an improved system for trapping aircraft as they land and hook the arresting cables. This electrical-hydraulic combination will be designed to be able to handle emerging platforms, such as the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and F-35C Joint Strike Fighter, which are heavier and able to return to the ship with more unexpended munitions than their predecessors.

A redesigned nuclear reactor is expected to supply 25% more power for propulsion, but require only 50% the maintenance costs and a 50% reduction in sailors required to operate it. Removing the steam catapults in favor of EMALS is synergistic, reducing work on the maintenance-heavy steam conduits and allowing the steam from the nuclear reactor to do other things – like make electricity. The CVN-21 Class is expected to have 3 times the electricity generating capacity of the Nimitz Class. If our personal experiences with power hungry electronics over the last 20 years are anything to go by, they may need it.

NAVSEA says that the Ford Class is planned to have a long-lived reactor, but an expensive mid-life refueling and complex overhaul (RCOH) is still planned after about 25 years of operation.

Rear Adm. Dwyer has estimated that these and other technical changes involving increased automation will enable the size of the CVN-21 ships’ crews to be reduced from about 3,000 – 2,500, and possibly as low as 2,100. Note that some 2,500 personnel are also carried in the air wing, and will not be subject to reductions from any of the methods described here.

DBR on CVN-21
(click to view full)

Dual-Band Radar. This was pioneered on the Zumwalt class DDG-1000 destroyers. Most warships carry 2 radars with very different functions. The volume search radar performs wide area scans over a large footprint, while the targeting and fire control radar guides missiles and other weapons fired by the ship. They are integrated at the combat system level, but each is a separate sub-system, operating in different bands with different detection strengths. The DBR approach integrates both a SPY-3 active-array X-band radar for excellent fire control against saturation attacks, and an active array S-band radar for wide area search and performance in clutter, in order to provide a single combat picture with fewer coverage gaps and better response. All in less space than existing systems, allowing designers to shrink the “island” tower on deck.

The use of active-array, digital beamforming radar technology will help DBR-equipped ships survive saturation attacks, since they can allocate emitters to track and guide against tens of incoming missiles simultaneously. Active array radars also feature better reliability than mechanically-scanned radars, and recent experiments suggest that they could have uses as very high-power electronic jammers, and/or high-bandwidth secure communications relays. Read “The US Navy’s Dual Band Radars” for full coverage.

Ford Class: Design Improvements

CVN 79 Concept, 2009
(click for alternate view)

Electronic upgradeability. CVN 21 will also employ an integrated warfare system that allows its electronics to slot into a single, open-architecture, scalable weapons system, based on commercial, off-the-shelf technologies. Dwyer noted that the US Navy would like everything to “plug and play.” While technology never works quite that way, the process can be made easier – and doing so would improve long-term performance. As Rear Adm. Dwyer pointed out:

“Right now, the way we build aircraft carriers is to buy all the electronic equipment up front, then take seven years to build a ship and deliver it with obsolete electronics. It’s kind of crazy now that you think about it. We don’t want to do that any more… What we’d like to do is put the electronic equipment in separately from the actual shipbuilding process.”

Along similar lines, CVN-21 will feature a so-called smart deck, equipped with redundant and flexible fiber-optic cable that is easier to move and repair than hard copper wiring. It can be blown through the ship for installation – and more easily reeled out for replacement. Its capacity is also easier to upgrade, by clipping on terminating devices that allow for richer exploitation of different electromagnetic bandwidths of light.

A NASCAR flight deck philosophy. The “island” tower on the flight deck is being redesigned, reduced, and moved. As Rear Adm. Dwyer noted: “The people who actually handle aircraft said, ‘The island’s in the wrong place. It makes the aircraft all jam up. Why don’t you move it?'” So the island has shifted 100 feet aft, and the carrier’s elevators, deck et. al. are being shifted to a racetrack-like pattern of operations, complete with “pit stop” parking et. al.

It is this system that accounts for the expected 33% improvements in operational flights per day – a key measure of the carrier’s ability to both project power and defend itself. The US Navy’s goal is 160 sorties per day for the Ford Class, vs. the Nimitz Class’ 120 in a 12-hour fly day. Surge goal is 270 sorties on 24-hour fly days, vs. 240 sorties for the previous Nimitz Class.

Survivability also received attention. While the bridge and flight deck operations will remain on the island, the carrier’s command and decision centers are being moved from the island, to a “smart deck” down lower in the ship. This places them somewhere that’s both safer, and less in the way of aircraft operations. Meanwhile, the fuel tanks and bomb/ missile/ ammunition magazines are getting more armor, and the hull is being reinforced.

Transitional Carrier: CV 77, USS George H.W. Bush

CVN 77: Men at work
(click to view full)

The improvements described above are large leaps. To help with this transition, the USS George H.W. Bush was designed as a transitional ship between the Nimitz Class and the Ford Class. As such, CVN 77 has been a candidate for development, evaluation, and incorporation of a range of advanced technologies and acquisition reform initiatives. The hope is that these initiatives would result in lower life cycle costs, and also set the standard by which further improvements in the CVN-21 Class will be measured.

Technology innovations fielded in CVN 77 are targeted to achieve a 15% reduction in Operation and Support Costs, and they will also be backfit as feasible in the other nine ships of the Nimitz Class through the Carrier Improvement Plan. The carriers’ mid-life refueling overhauls and refit are the most likely time, given the scale of effort required. Some cost-saving transitional features and improvements designated for this last ship of the Nimitz Class included:

A new automated JP-5 jet fuel system with programmable consoles and an improved filtration system (for significant reduction in operational/maintenance workload)

A new vacuum collection sewage system that utilizes fresh water instead of sea water for flushing. This creates fewer long term corrosion problems, and reduces the quantity of sewage from water closets and urinals by ratio of 10 to 1.

Enhanced radio center automation, which involves integrating communications apertures and C4I systems within the radio room to enable an automated full service integrated network that operates at greater effectiveness and efficiency.

A composite mast made from a lighter, composite material instead of steel that reduces topside weight (up to 20 tons) and reduces electromagnetic blockage. It also includes accelerated introduction of new antenna technology: mast clamp current probe antennas will eliminate numerous HF antennas.

Some propulsion plant changes to reduce manpower and maintenance requirements, though this will not represent a full conversion to the new CVN-21 nuclear power plant.

The George H.W. Bush was originally scheduled to be finish construction in April 2008, but delays pushed the timeline back to about March 2009, and increased costs from $5.9 billion to $6.2 billion in appropriation-year dollars. The Newport News Daily Press reports that CVN 77 was commissioned on Jan 10/09 at NAS Norfolk, despite being approximately 3-4 months away from the point at which it would normally be considered ready. The ship was towed into place for the ceremony, whose date was set in order to commission the ship while its namesake’s son was still President. In practice, however, this meant that the Navy accepted the ship even though it had never tested its major operating systems or nuclear reactors at sea.

The carrier is now in service. She was officially delivered to the US Navy on May 11/09, and departed on her first mission on May 11/11.

The CVN-21 Carrier Replacement Program

(click to view full)

The USA’s carrier replacement project has been underway at some level for many years now. Activity can easily trace back to 1994, and really kicked off in 1997 when the Naval Research Advisory Committee (NRAC) was asked to study technology opportunities that might be useful in “CVX.” From that moniker, the effort evolved to become the “CVN-21 Carrier Replacement Program.” As the ships are built and fielded, however, more and more references will be made to the CVN-78 Gerald R. Ford Class instead.

Long-lead appropriations for the Gerald R. Ford [CVN-78] began in 2001, and long-lead appropriations for the unnamed CVN 79 are already underway. Beyond that, construction of additional carriers becomes less certain. Current Pentagon plans call for a “drumbeat” of one new carrier every 5 years, which slows planned construction, raises per-ship costs by adding more fixed costs, and also imposes additional costs by requiring more re-designs for new electronics etc. with each new ship. The USA’s rapidly-deteriorating fiscal situation are throwing even that plan into difficulty, however, even as advances in ship-killing missiles are calling the large aircraft carrier’s pre-eminence into question.

Purchases of something as expensive as a super-carrier take time, and are spread over many annual budgets. First, finished items like engines, which must be present at early stages of construction, are bought as “long-lead” materials, along with some advance sub-assembly work. Then full construction funding is appropriated over several years. Recent budgets include:

(click to view full)

3-D Pump Room model
(click to view full)

The target date for CVN 78 commissioning was 2014, but current plans say it won’t be delivered before September 2015. Initial Operational Capability isn’t expected until FY 2017, with Full Operational Capability in FY 2018. When it does enter service, it will replace America’s first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier – the 50+ year old USS Enterprise (CVN 65), which retired in 2012. CVN 78 is also expected to serve for 50 years, from 2014-2064.

Newport News is designing the new ships using a 3-D product model tool called CATIA (Computer-Aided Three-Dimensional Interactive Application), a widespread standard for advanced design in the shipbuilding industry that is also in widespread use by the global auto industry. They’re also using CAVE, (Computer-Aided Virtual Environment), a 3D immersive environment tool used for viewing certain areas of the CATIA product model, and refining the construction strategy.

CVN-21 Class: Contract Awards & Key Events

Unless otherwise specified, the US Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) in Washington Navy Yard, DC manages the contracts. Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc., formerly Northrop-Grumman’s Newport News Shipbuilding and Drydock Co. in Newport News, VA, is the project lead and contract recipient.

FY 2013 – FY 2015

CVN 78 structural erection done. Cost inflation.

CVN-21 Concept
(click for alternate view)

September 24/15: Delivery of the first Ford-class carrier to the Navy will be delayed owing to the need for additional testing before sea trials can begin. The Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78) will now be delivered in May 2016, six to eight weeks after the scheduled March 2016 delivery date. With the carrier currently 93% complete, the cost of the test will be absorbed below the $12.9 billion cost cap mandated by Congress. The ship’s schedule took a hit in August when Pentagon procurement chief Frank Kendall ordered the Navy to conduct full-scale shock tests on the Ford, rather than the second carrier in class, the Kennedy. That decision will likely push back the carrier’s Initial Operating Capability by several months.

August 20/15: Newport News Shipyard will lay down the hull of the future USS John F. Kennedy (CVN-79) on Saturday, following the awarding of $4.3 billion in contracts in June to accelerate construction of the second Ford-class carrier. The ceremony will mark the official start of the ship’s construction, with first work on the hull having begun in 2011.

August 13/15: The Navy’s new Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78) carrier will undergo shock testing, despite this likely causing schedule delays of up to six months. Previously, Navy officials planned to carry out the tests – designed to replicate extreme combat stress – on the second carrier in class, the John F. Kennedy, due to enter service in the early 2020s, in order to accelerate the Gerald R. Ford’s entry into service. Pentagon procurement chief Frank Kendall reportedly ordered the Navy to conduct the tests, despite the inevitable delay such testing would produce.

June 8/15: Huntington Ingalls was awarded $4.3 billion through two contracts on Friday, with the shipyard handed a $3.35 billion detail design and construction contract for CVN-79, a member of the Navy’s new class of super-carriers. The subsidiary of Newport News Shipyard also received a $941.2 million modification to a previously awarded contract in support of CVN-79, also known as the USS John F. Kennedy. The new class of carriers was recently criticized for being too expensive, with Huntington Ingalls the sole manufacturer of nuclear-powered aircraft carriers. The John F. Kennedy is the second ship in the class, under construction with a cost-cap of $11.5 billion.

Mar 11/15: McCain complains about Ford-class costs.Former carrier pilot Sen. John McCain told Navy officials that the new Ford class of carriers is too expensive, coming in between $11 and $13 billion per copy. The first is being tested now before being delivered to the Navy. The second (JFK) and third (Enterprise) are in various states of construction. The Enterprise will be the ninth ship to take on the name. The eighth, CVN-65, was a carrier McCain served on in the 1960s, flying A-1 Skyraiders in a ground support role.

Mar 2/15: CVN-79 work moved up, but schedule stays put. The Navy tells Congress that it will move up work on the JFK, but not to launch the ship any sooner. To do so would create an impractical overlap of an extra carrier for a couple year prior to the retirement of CVN-68. Instead, they will delay the completion of the ship, waiting until the last minute to purchase and install the electronics, which presumably will be somewhat improved by the period just before launch in the summer of 2022.

Mar 2/15: CVN-73 will get its Refueling and Complex Overhaul in 2017, with preparation work moved up. The USS George Washington will come back to port in July 2017 for its RCOH. Work has been awarded to Newport News Shipbuilding for planning, design and procurement – a 30-month project leading up to the actual work.

May 8/13: Hearings. The US Senate Armed Forces Seapower subcommittee hears testimony from US Navy officials covering US Navy shipbuilding programs. The prepared statement says that a 2012 affordability review has led to noticeable changes in CVN 79, and lessons learned will lead to higher ship completion percentages at each build stage. An excerpt:

“Inarguably, this new class of aircraft carrier brings forward tremendous capability and life-cycle cost advantages compared to the NIMITZ-class it will replace. However, the design, development and construction efforts required to overcome the technical challenges…. have significantly impacted cost performance on the lead ship. [The detailed review and revised build plan for CVN 78]… will not recover costs to original targets… but should improve performance on the lead ship while fully benefitting CVN 79 and following ships of the class.”

See April 10/13 entry for expected costs per ship, which do decline in real terms for CVN 79-80. The question is whether practice will meet predictions. SASC prepared statement.

May 7/13: CVN 78. HII Newport News hoists the last of 162 primary structure “superlifts” onto CVN 78 Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78), a 75 foot long, 66 ton ship catapult forward section.

The lift ends 3 years of structural erection work, and 3 1/2 years since construction began in November 2009. There’s still a lot of work left before the ship is even floated out to begin finishing: hull painting, shafting work, completion of electrical systems, mooring equipment, and installation of radar arrays. HII.

May 6/13: CVN 79. A $60.8 million long lead-time material contract for CVN 79, which began attracting funding in 2009. HII has been working with their suppliers, and HII VP for CVN 79 Mike Shawcross says that this award will help them implement some of those buying initiatives for air conditioning systems, controllers and pumps, etc. Announced CVN 79 construction preparation contracts now stand at $1.865 billion, with the main construction contract expected later in 2013.

Work will be performed in Newport News, VA, and is expected to be complete by October 2015 (N00024-09-C-2116). See also HII.

April 10/13: FY 2014 Budget. The President releases a proposed budget at last, the latest in modern memory. The Senate and House were already working on budgets in his absence, but the Pentagon’s submission is actually important to proceedings going forward. See ongoing DID coverage. The program remains steady, with $1.68 billion requested to fund the 2nd year of construction for CVN 79 John F. Kennedy, and completion costs for CVN 78 Gerald R. Ford.

The FY 2014 budget submission places the $FY13 cost of CVN 78 at $12.829 billion, and the expected cost of CVN 79 at $11.338 billion. CVN 80 is pegged at $13.874 billion (+22.4% vs. CVN 79), but that’s in 2018. Math reminder: just 4.2% inflation, compounded over 2014-2018, is 22.8%.

Per ship costs

April 1/13: CVN 78. HII in Newport News, VA receives an $18.2 million contract modification for for CVN 78 special tooling, special test equipment, and supplier related vendor support services.

Work will be performed in Newport News, VA, and is expected to be complete in September 2015. All funds are committed immediately, using the FY 2011 Shipbuilding and Conversion budget (N00024-08-C-2110).

March 28/13: GAO Report. The US GAO tables its “Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs“. Which is actually a review for 2012, plus time to compile and publish. As of August 2012, CVN 78 was 51% complete, but its build costs have grown by 17% since the 2008 construction contract was issued. There’s enough blame to go around. A build contract awarded when the 3D model was incomplete and only 5/13 critical technologies were mature. Government-furnished equipment arriving late. Construction problems like warping and flexing of new steel decking, a shortage of new valves, and welding complications. The DBR radar decision that forced the CVN-21 program to take on a new immature technology, instead of receiving a mature technology from the DDG 1000 program.

The 3D model is complete now, and either 6 or 12 of the 13 critical technologies are mature, depending on whether you ask GAO (6) or OSD (12). Now the challenge is to have all of the required sub-components arrive in configurations that fit the design, and don’t reveal a need for constraint-breaking changes during testing. CVN 79 John F. Kennedy and CVN 80 Enterprise will change in response to all of the construction and testing issues found in CVN 78 Gerald R. Ford, which is normal. The hope is that required changes won’t be too difficult to fit into CVN 79. Meanwhile, retrofits of CVN 78 could be costly, driving its build price higher.

The US Navy plans to award the CVN 79 main contract in September 2013, take delivery of the USS Gerald R. Ford in September 2015, have the Ford ready for deployment by March 2017, and award CVN 80’s main build contract by the end of 2017.

March 21/13: CVN 79. A $407.4 million contract modification can be drawn on in order to extend construction preparation efforts, and provide the ability to procure additional long-lead material and advance construction activities for CVN 79 if required. If the funds aren’t needed, fine. If budget issues or political gridlock create a problem, this funding can help preserve the construction schedule.

This may be an expansion of the March 7/13 contract. Either way, DID’s records show that the total for all announced contracts involving CVN 79 is around $1.8 billion so far. Work will be performed in Newport News, VA and is expected to complete by October 2015 (N00024-09-C-2116).

March 11/13: CNAS – Carrier eclipse? The center-left CNAS think-tank publishes a new example of their “disruptive defense papers,” with USN Capt. Henry J. Hendrix’s “At What Cost a Carrier?” [PDF] He proposes slowly divesting from aircraft carriers, while canceling the F-35C and building a transition bridge of UCAVs to lengthen carrier strike range and lower operating costs. Precision strike would also shift toward undersea platforms. On the surface, fewer carrier battlegroups would enable investment in more “influence squadrons” of amphibious ships, patrol corvettes, riverines squadrons, etc., in order to make up the “presence deficit” complained of by the Navy. The core of his argument is summed up in these excerpts:

“Nimitz-class carriers can generate approximately 120 sorties a day. Ford-class carriers, with the new… EMALS… launch around 160 sorties per day, a 33 percent increase in launch capacity. This seems very impressive until one realizes that the USS George H.W. Bush, the last Nimitz carrier, cost $7 billion and the USS Gerald R. Ford is coming in at $13.5 billion. In the end, the nation is paying nearly 94 percent more for a carrier that can only do 33 percent more work. 13 Even factoring in projected savings from reduced manning and lower maintenance costs, this investment is still not a good use of U.S. taxpayer money…. The inefficiency of manned aviation, with its massive fiscal overhead of training, pilot currency and maintenance, is rapidly outpacing its utility. The idea that the United States needs a large sortie capability inexorably drives decisionmakers to large carriers. These maritime juggernauts are expensive and hence need to be defended by an ever-larger ring of exquisite technologies in order to launch a historically shrinking number of very expensive aircraft from ever-increasing distances that may or may not drop their bombs. This raises the question of who is shaping whom within the current strategic environment.

To continue to invest in aircraft carriers at this stage, to believe that the USS Ford, with a service life of 50 years, can see the carrier through to a 150-year life unchallenged upon the high seas smells of hubris. Advancements in surveillance, reconnaissance, global positioning, missiles and precision strike all signal a sea change in not only naval warfare, but all forms of warfare.”

See also Information Dissemination, which responds that the carrier isn’t becoming obsolete – its air wing is.

March 7/13: CVN 79. A $65 million contract will provide the ability to order additional long lead material and advance construction activities if required. Work will be performed in Newport News, VA, and is expected to be complete by October 2015. Additional funding is not being committed yet (N00024-09-C-2116).

Dec 1/12: CVN 80. Nearly 12,000 past and current crew members, family and friends attend the formal inactivation of the first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, USS Enterprise, at Naval Station Norfolk, VA. It’s the last public ceremony, but there’s still a lot of work to do, and significant contracts to issue, before the ship is deactivated and safe.

US Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus doesn’t attend, but he plays a video message to announce that the 3rd Ford Class carrier, CVN-80, will become the next USS Enterprise when and if she is built. US Navy | USN CVN 65 site.

From one USS Enterprise to the Next

Jan 26/13: CVN 78. HII lowers the 555t “island” onto Gerald R. Ford’s deck. The island hosts the bridge, air traffic command center, etc. It’s the 452nd of about 500 modular “lifts” involved in assembling the carrier, which is almost 90% structurally complete right now. HII.

Jan 17/13: DOT&E Report. The Pentagon releases the FY 2012 Annual Report from its Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E). The Gerald R. Ford is included, as the Navy plans for its service entry as the 1st ship of its class.

An operational assessment actually began in September 2012, trying to assess build progress and future test readiness. OT&E’s biggest concern is that the current Test and Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP) will test components, but doesn’t have enough testing involving all of the pieces working together. Their concern is that “platform-level” problems will start cropping up during Initial Operational Test & Evaluation, which can be hard to fix, and could delay either delivery or IOC.

The battle over Total Ship Survivability Trials (TSST) and the Full Ship Shock Trial (FSST) is still on. The Navy and OT&E are closer to agreement on TSST, but the budget isn’t there. They’re still at odds over moving FSST to CVN 79. The Navy wants to reduce the gap in available carriers. OT&E believes the 4-6 month delay is outweighed by having test data to affect the design of future carriers.

Other issues noted by the report involve various key technologies that will have a big say in whether the ship is ready on time, from the DBR radar (combat system integration an issue), to the EMALS (new armature, making progress), Advanced Arresting Gear (significant redesign of multiple components) and CANES onboard networking (testing in Q4 FY 2014). The Virtual Carrier model is a minor technology needed to test Sortie Generation Rate, which is supposed to represent a major improvement. It needs more refinement before it’s useful.

A final concern involves the F-35’s big engine, whose 10,000 “power module” is too heavy for current underway replenishment systems (the line and pulley system used with supply ships). The Ford Class carriers will have a system rated to 12,000 pounds, but plans to install that new system on the supply ships have slipped by 8 years.

Oct 4/12: Industrial. A 1,024-metric ton unit of CVN 78 is lifted into the drydock at the Huntington Ingalls Newport by the shipyard’s 1,050-metric ton crane. This superlift is their biggest to date, and contributed to assembling the gallery deck (i.e. O-3 level). HII | NAVSEA.

FY 2012

More work on CVN 78, 79.

CVN 78: May 2012
(click for alternate view)

Sept 27/12: CVN 79. A $296.1 million contract modification for more CVN 79 John F. Kennedy long-lead-time materials, and continuation of construction preparation efforts in FY 2013. This will include necessary research studies; engineering; design; related development efforts; advanced planning; advanced procurement for detail design and procurement of long lead material; advance construction; life cycle support; logistics data and other data.

Work will be performed in Newport News, VA, and is expected to be complete by October 2015 (N00024-09-C-2116).

Aug 30/12: CVN 78. A $9.7 million modification to the Gerald R. Ford’s cost-plus-incentive-fee detail, design and construction contract, covering one-time engineering efforts to configure the Gerald R. Ford’s decision centers. Work will be performed in Newport News, VA, and is expected to complete by September 2015. The USN Supervisor of Shipbuilding Conversion and Repair in Newport News, VA manages this contract (N00024-08-C-2110).

Including the main build contract in FY 2008, the total for announced contracts that are specific to CVN 78 is around $6.63 billion so far. Billions of dollars in contracts aimed at “CVN-21” also contributed to the ship’s design, and to early manufacturing experiments and efforts, but their benefits will be shared among all ships of class.

Aug 9/12: Testing tiff. The DOT&E disagrees with the Navy’s position that computer modeling is enough to evaluate the new carrier’s survivability, without using explosive underwater shock tests. In fact, they’ve revoked approval of the Navy’s test plan. BusinessWeek:

“The U.S. Navy is inappropriately delaying or scaling back $70 million in needed combat testing of the USS Gerald R. Ford, an aircraft carrier that may cost $14.2 billion, in the name of cutting costs, according to the Pentagon’s top weapons tester.

A test that would “rigorously evaluate the ship’s ability to withstand shock and survive in combat” would be postponed until a second carrier in the new Ford class is built and may not be completed for seven years, Michael Gilmore, the Defense Department’s director of operational test and evaluation, told Navy Secretary Ray Mabus in a July 12 memo obtained by Bloomberg News.”

July 18/12: CVN 79. A $43.4 million contract modification for more CVN 79 “long lead time material.” That category actually includes research studies, engineering, design, life cycle support, and advance planning; as well as long lead items and advance construction.

To date, announced long-lead contracts for CVN 79 have reached $1.0478 billion. Work will be performed in Newport News, VA, and is expected to be complete by October 2015 (N00024-09-C-2116).

July 16/12: CVN 78. A $7.6 million contract modification to buy previously planned materials to build CVN 78 Gerald R. Ford. This modification increases the effort under the existing cost-plus-fixed-fee provisioned items order. Work will be performed in Newport News, VA, and is expected to complete by September 2015. The Supervisor of Shipbuilding Conversion and Repair in Newport News, VA manages this contract (N00024-08-C-2110).

Dec 21/11: CVN 79. Huntington Ingalls, Inc. in Newport News, VA receives an $113.2 million contract modification, exercising options to continue construction preparation for CVN 79 John F. Kennedy, including engineering, detail design, and lead yard services. Work will be performed in Newport News, VA, and is expected to be complete by October 2012 (N00024-09-C-2116). See also HII release.

Oct 26/11: CVN 79. A $16.9 million contract modification exercising priced CVN 79 research, development, test and evaluation options. HII will provide all services and material in preparation for final detail design and construction of the John F. Kennedy, including research studies; engineering; design; related development efforts; advanced planning; advanced procurement for detailed design and procurement of long lead material; advance construction; life cycle support; logistics data; etc.

Work will be performed in Newport News, VA. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12 (N00024-09-C-2116).

FY 2011

Work on CVN 78, 79.

CVN 78: Aug. 2011
(click to view full)

Sept 12/11: Industrial. HII’s Newport News Shipbuilding division places an 825-ton superlift section, completing the Gerald R. Ford’s stern. The final superlift of the ship’s aft end included the steering gear rooms, electrical power distribution room, store rooms and tanks. At 90 feet long, 120 feet wide and 30 feet deep, the superlift was among the largest of the 162 that comprise CVN 78, the future USS Gerald R. Ford. HII.

Sept 8/11: Future carrier options. James Hasik looks at future options for the American super-carrier fleet, and delivers a preliminary cost analysis for various scenarios – including a scenario that involves halting the new CVN-21s after the John F. Kennedy, mothballing 2 existing Nimitz Class boats, and dropping to 8 operational carriers.

July 29/11: CVN 78. A $504.1 million contract modification to complete one-time platform engineering support related to the CVN 78, the Gerald R. Ford. Work will be conducted in Newport News, VA, and ship delivery is expected to take place in September 2015. (N00024-08-C-2110).

July 14/11: Rumors are flying that the Navy is looking to delay further carrier build contracts, in order to save money. A WTKR Virginia report adds fuel:

“U.S. Rep. Randy Forbes asked two top-ranking Navy admirals about a rumor he’d heard: that the Navy was considering deferring the purchase of the Newport News-built John F. Kennedy aircraft carrier by two years. The answer he received in a subcommittee hearing Tuesday – a beat of silence followed by a deflection – left him and other members of Virginia’s congressional delegation unsettled.”

Some proposals would even cancel the Kennedy, and use the money to buy LHA/LHD amphibious ships instead. American LHA/LHDs can carry fighters, and the LHA-6 America Class is an escort carrier in all but name. See Aviation Week | The Hill | WTKR.

May 29/11: The US Navy announces that CVN 79, the 2nd ship of class, will be named the USS John F. Kennedy. It will continue the namesake legacy of the non-nuclear powered CV 67, which was retired in 2007.

CVN 79 named

May 21/11: Industrial. HII moves a 945-ton pre-assembled “superlift” section into place near the stern of the ship, using the shipyard’s 1050-metric ton crane. This is one of the heaviest of 162 superlift modules making up the Ford, and was itself assembled over 18 months from 18 smaller structural units. It contains a diesel generator room, a pump room, an oily water waste pump room, 16 complete tanks and 18 partial tanks that will be completed when the superlift is welded to the rest of the ship.

The Gerald R. Ford’s keel was laid Nov 14/09, and christening is planned for 2013, with delivery to the U.S. Navy in 2015.

Feb 25/11: Steel is cut to begin building CVN 79, the 2nd carrier in this class. If only budgets and funding could be as certain. The carrier isn’t due for delivery until 2020, and the yard has received almost $1 billion for the carrier, but more than $900 million is tied up in Congress, as it wrestles with the FY 2011 and FY 2012 budgets.

Funding for the CVN-79 and a planning contract for the mid-life nuclear refueling and overhaul of the Abraham Lincoln carrier are both in flux at the moment. Both are “long fuse, big bang” projects, where the ability to order materials and ramp up staffing in a timely manner are critical. If funding issues create schedule stoppages, they’ll make the program late, and raise overall costs. Northrop Grumman | Newport Daily Press

CVN 79 “steel cut”

Jan 21/11: CVN 78. Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding Inc. in Newport News, VA received an $11 million contract modification to previously awarded contract in support of the USS Gerald R. Ford’s [CVN 78] engineering detailed design work.

Work will be performed in Newport News, VA, and is expected to be complete in September 2015. The US Navy Supervisor of Shipbuilding Conversion and Repair in Newport News, VA (N00024-08-C-2110).

Dec 8/10: CVN 79. A $323.6 million contract modification to continue construction preparation efforts for CVN 79, the as-yet unnamed 2nd aircraft carrier of the Gerald R. Ford class. Work will include necessary research studies; engineering; design; related development efforts; advanced planning; advanced procurement for detailed design and procurement of long lead material; advance construction; life cycle support; logistics data, and other data to support the anticipated FY 2013 ship detail design and construction.

Work will be performed in Newport News, VA, and is expected to be complete by October 2012 (N00024-09-C-2116). This contract raises CVN 79’s specific announced advance contracts to $874.3 million over the last 4 years. See also Northrop Grumman release.

Nov 10/10: CVN 78. A $189.2 million contract modification is just part of the planned funding for detailed design engineering work supporting construction of the Gerald R. Ford [CVN 78].

Work includes engineering; integration; related development efforts including drawing and work package development; advanced planning; design weight estimate; lifecycle support products and related logistics data; production planning; test and evaluation; further definition of initiatives to reduce CVN 78 class total ownership costs; and other data necessary to support construction of CVN 78. Northrop Grumman’s Mike Shawcross, VP of Gerald R. Ford-class engineering adds that: “Now that the design is in the three-dimensional product model, our engineering and planning effort is focused on the production of instructions for the shops and ship assembly.”

Work will be conducted in Newport News, VA, and is expected to complete by September 2015. This contract was not competitively procured; there wouldn’t be any point (N00024-08-C-2110). See also Northrop Grumman.

Nov 5/10: CVN 79. A $55.1 million contract for additional materials and assemblies, as the shipyard gets ready for an expected CVN 79 ship detail design and construction contract in FY 2013.

Work includes necessary research studies; engineering; design; related development efforts; advanced planning; advanced procurement for detailed design and procurement of long lead material; logistics data; and other data. It will be performed in Sunnyvale, CA, and is expected to be complete by Aug 25/14 (N00024-09-C-2116).

FY 2010

Cost increases.

CVN 78: July 2010
(click to view full)

Sept 30/10: CVN 79. A $37.8 million contract modification for additional long lead time materials as the shipyard prepares to start building CVN 79, the 2nd Ford class carrier. Work will be performed in Newport News, VA, and is expected to be complete by October 2016 (N00024-09-C-2116).

Sept 7/10: CVN 79. A $12 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification for procurement of additional long-lead-time materials in support of CVN 79 construction, the 2nd carrier of this class. Work may include research studies, engineering, design, related development efforts, advance planning, advance procurement, logistics data, and other data to support an expected FY 2013 ship detail design and construction date for CVN 79.

While aircraft carriers of the same class are broadly the same, the multi-year gap in construction generally means that each is fielded with slightly different technologies. Lessons from earlier ships also lead to minor design changes, which must be planned out and accounted for.

Work will be performed in Newport News, VA, and is expected to be complete by October 2011. This contract was not competitively procured, as the ship’s contractor is already determined (N00024-09-C-2116).

July 28/10: CVN 78. Northrop Grumman Corporation lifts 2 diesel generators weighing over 195,000 pounds each into the aft section of the Gerald R. Ford [CVN 78], at the company’s Shipbuilding sector in Newport News, VA. The ship is now about 11% complete.

When underway, the carrier will generate its electricity through its nuclear power plant. the diesel generators serve as emergency backups. Northrop Grumman.

May 12/10: CVN 78. Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding, Inc. in Newport News, VA receives an $186.6 million contract modification, as part of the planned increments of detailed design engineering work supporting Gerald R. Ford [CVN 78] construction. Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding will complete the detail design and construction of CVN 78 including engineering; integration; related development efforts including drawing and work package development; advanced planning; design weight estimate; lifecycle support products and related logistics data; production planning; test and evaluation; further definition of initiatives to reduce CVN 78 class total ownership costs; and other data necessary to support construction.

These design efforts will continue to be performed in Newport News, VA, and is expected to be complete by September 2015 (N00024-08-C-2110).

May 3/10: Gates’ speech. US Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates delivers a speech at the Navy League’s annual Sea-Air-Space Convention, in National Harbor, MD. It’s widely seen as casting doubt on the future of the USA’s Ford Class carriers. Excerpts:

“The U.S. operates 11 large carriers, all nuclear powered.  In terms of size and striking power, no other country has even one comparable ship… At the higher end of the access-denial spectrum, the virtual monopoly the U.S. has enjoyed with precision guided weapons is eroding – especially with long-range, accurate anti-ship cruise and ballistic missiles that can potentially strike from over the horizon.  This is a particular concern with aircraft carriers and other large, multi-billion-dollar blue-water surface combatants, where, for example, a Ford-class carrier plus its full complement of the latest aircraft would represent potentially a $15 to $20 billion set of hardware at risk. The U.S. will also face increasingly sophisticated underwater combat systems – including numbers of stealthy subs – all of which could end the operational sanctuary our Navy has enjoyed in the Western Pacific for the better part of six decades… Our current plan is to have eleven carrier strike groups through 2040 and it’s in the budget. And to be sure, the need to project power across the oceans will never go away. But, consider the massive over-match the U.S. already enjoys. Consider, too, the growing anti-ship capabilities of adversaries.  Do we really need eleven carrier strike groups for another 30 years when no other country has more than one?  Any future plans must address these realities.

And that bring me to the third and final issue:  the budget… Just a few years ago, the Congressional Budget Office projected that meeting the Navy’s shipbuilding plan would cost more than $20 billion a year – double the shipbuilding budget of recent years, and a projection that was underfunded by some 30 percent… I do not foresee any significant increases in top-line of the shipbuilding budget beyond current assumptions. At the end of the day, we have to ask whether the nation can really afford a Navy that relies on $3 to 6 billion destroyers, $7 billion submarines, and $11 billion carriers.”

April 20/10: CVN 79. Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding, Inc. in Newport News, VA received a $16.8 million modification to buy more long lead time materials, as part of construction preparation for CVN 79, the 2nd carrier of this class

Show more