If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
The Navy Obfuscates On Shock Testing The $13 Billion USS Ford - The 13 Billion Dollar 'Berthing Barge' USS Gerald R. Ford, sitting in a shipyard.jpg ...
more at
https://www.forbes.com/sites/craigho.../#4aa0834467bf In a normally quiet House Armed Services Subcommittee on Readiness hearing yesterday, a prepared Congressional Representative Elaine Luria held two Navy shipbuilding and vessel sustainment leaders to account, demanding–and often not getting–answers about the Navy’s Optimized Fleet Response Plan surface ship deployment scheme, the Navy’s carrier maintenance infrastructure, and the Navy’s brand-new $13 billion super-carrier, the troubled USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78). It was a masterful performance by the first-term Congressional Representative from Virginia’s Second District, and it earned accolades from her peers on the Committee. The Representative was relentless. After calling the USS Ford little more than a multi-billion dollar “berthing barge” and pointedly reminding the Naval Sea Systems Command’s Vice Admiral Thomas Moore that he was, before being promoted to his current command, in charge of the USS Ford debacle between 2011 and 2016, Representative Luria pushed the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development and Acquisition, James Geurts, to cough up data for future Congressional accountability. She noted, “I have asked several times from the Navy to have a specific schedule that takes into account the shock trials, the eventual deployment, and all the other pieces that need to go into place” for the troubled USS Ford to become an effective part of the U.S. Fleet. When Luria’s questioning began, Geurts was at his amiable best, saying that he had a schedule for the USS Ford, “I’ve got it here,” he said, patting a purple folder, “I’m happy to share it with you.” Then, as Representative Luria continued her cross-examination, he reversed course, saying, “we are re-looking at that full schedule in lieu of shock trials and working with the CNO to make sure we’ve got alignment between the CNO, the fleet, and myself in delivering all the elements of the ship for deployment. We should have that available to you when it’s available.” Geurts didn’t offer much. But “in lieu” is a very interesting word to employ in Congressional testimony about the USS Ford shock trial. It means “to replace or substitute.” So why did Geurts use that particular term? Is the Navy substituting shock trials in an effort to get the USS Ford out to the fleet in a hurry? The only certain tasks that the Navy mentioned about the USS Ford schedule were that flight ops were set to start in early 2020, and that the Navy was trying to work in repairs for the ships nine non-functional lower deck ammunition elevators–which get ammunition to and from weapons magazines–sometime during the next 18 months of at-sea testing, where they want to put in thousands of aircraft launches and recoveries, shaking the ship out. Unfortunately, it did not sound as if the Navy was setting aside time to fit in a Full Ship Shock Trial (FSST), a vigorous test where explosives are detonated near a new Navy vessel to simulate near-misses in a battlefield environment. The USS Ford Needs To Be Shocked: If the USS Ford is not shocked–and the validity of the design is not tested–the shock trials will supposedly be shunted to to the future USS John F. Kennedy (CVN 79), the next Ford Class carrier, when most of the remaining Ford class aircraft carriers (CVNs 80, 81 and 82) will be too far along in their production cycle to incorporate many fixes. The Navy does not appear to be confident that the USS Ford will absorb a shock trial without major damage. The organization has not hidden it’s desire to push shunt shock trials upon a later Ford variant, shocking the next Ford class carrier sometime in the 2024 to 2026 time-frame. ------- Shock trials are important. The USS Ford may be little more than a glorified berthing barge right now, but it is home for thousands of sailors who deserve a full round of platform testing. Their safety in battle depends upon rigorous pre-deployment testing. It should be done. If the Navy intends to put off the shock trial, the Navy must come out and say it, in public. And then, Department of Defense leaders must demand that the Navy show it’s work, demonstrating that sufficient modeling has been done at a systems level to provide a sufficient margin of safety for the crew and the systems aboard this new-and very troubled-aircraft carrier. Cutting a deal behind the scenes makes the Navy appear weak and raises real questions about the confidence the Navy has in the entire Ford class. It does not look promising. Too many new systems aboard the USS Ford have been built to over-exacting tolerances, and they may not respond well to battle damage. It is something sailors and maintainers should know about–and the only way to do that is to put a ship through a shock trial to see what breaks. Also, the Department of Defense needs to recognize that between 2024 and 2026, America will be in a full-fledged carrier crisis–and that a shock trial may not happen at all. In the 2024-26 time period, the Navy’s carrier fleet will be diminished. The USS Nimitz (CVN 68) will be decommissioned, the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN 69) will be approaching retirement, the USS Ronald Reagan (CVN 76) will be in a years-long refueling refit, the USS Ford will still be a partially-complete test-bed, leaving the newly-delivered USS John F. Kennedy (CVN 79) to be sidelined for testing. We can also expect that the remaining Navy carriers, if they are still stuck in the Optimized Fleet Response Plan deployment cycle, will be breaking down under the weight of years of increased demand. In short, if America thinks it has carrier readiness problems today, just wait. It will not get any better six years from now. Making things worse, by the 2024-2026 time period, China will likely have a number of aircraft carriers roaming the seas, and the short-handed U.S. Navy simply won’t have a strategy ready to manage independently-minded Chinese battle groups. The American public will panic, and the last thing they will want the U.S. Navy to do will be to go and try to break a precious new aircraft carrier. So let’s get to it. It is time for the Navy to publicly commit to shocking the USS Ford in the next year or so. The USS Ford can be more than just a nuclear-powered berthing barge and a procurement cautionary tale. The Nation has time to go and try and break the Ford class aircraft carriers and build the next ones better. Either that, or it is time for the Navy to go build something else. more at https://www.forbes.com/sites/craigho.../#4aa0834467bf * |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
The Navy Obfuscates On Shock Testing The $13 Billion USS Ford - The 13 Billion Dollar 'Berthing Barge' USS Gerald R. Ford, sitting in a shipyard.jpg ...
Miloch wrote in
: more at https://www.forbes.com/sites/craigho...avy-obfuscates -on-shock-testing-the-13-billion-dollar-uss-ford/#4aa0834467bf In a normally quiet House Armed Services Subcommittee on Readiness hearing yesterday, a prepared Congressional Representative Elaine Luria held two Navy shipbuilding and vessel sustainment leaders to account, demanding–and often not getting–answers about the Navy’s Optimized Fleet Response Plan surface ship deployment scheme, the Navy’s carrier maintenance infrastructure, and the Navy’s brand-new $13 billion super-carrier, the troubled USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78). It was a masterful performance by the first-term Congressional Representative from Virginia’s Second District, and it earned accolades from her peers on the Committee. In other news about the USS Ford...... USS Gerald R Ford will be the first of its kind to have gender neutral bathrooms. July 25 2017 Each sleeping quarter in the ship, which can hold more than 5,000 sailors, will not have urinals in their bathrooms, but instead have seated toilets that can be used by anyone. While seated toilets cost more, are less sanitary and take up more space than urinals, they do have their advantages. A Navy spokeswoman said that having seated toilets will make it easier to switch room assignments for each sleeping quarter - or berth - between genders. This is designed to give the ship flexibility because there aren't any berthing areas that are dedicated to one sex or the other,' Operations Specialist 1st Class Kaylea Motsenbocker told Navy Times. Women account for 18 per cent of sailors in the Navy. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ender-neutral- bathrooms.html |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Ford Flivver pics 2 [07/11] - Ford's 63rd birthday, July 30, 1926, he revealed to the public his Ford Flivver airplane.jpg (1/1) | Miloch | Aviation Photos | 0 | October 23rd 17 12:13 PM |
Ford Flivver pics 1 [02/11] - Fliver1-powered by a Ford-built two cylinder flat opposed.jpg (1/1) | Miloch | Aviation Photos | 0 | October 23rd 17 12:11 PM |
It's official: USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78) | Mike Weeks | Naval Aviation | 11 | January 18th 07 03:39 PM |