Aircraft Carriers III

got another pic , this is the only shot of the Akula with the Vikramaditya
and it's not everyday you get to see pictures of INS Chakra

Click to expand...

FORBIN said:

Amazing ! a big and beautiful TF in action !


Very rare look it with a TF black boats always hidden and without names... submarines are solitary combattants in general for surface ships the opposite is the unity is strength, in TG/TF.

Click to expand...

The nominee for the Navy’s number two civilian post told the Senate Armed Services Committee on Tuesday that she shares its concerns with the cost overruns and delays in the delivery of the Ford–class nuclear aircraft carrier and was “open to all options” in considering alternatives.

In answer to a question about problems with the General Atomics Advanced Arresting Gear on the Ford–class carrier at her confirmation hearing, Janine Davidson said that it was critically important in “making sure your advanced technology . . . is ready to go.”

Sen. John McCain, (R-Ariz.) and chairman, said, “To be honest we have not seen any progress” in controlling costs and speeding delivery of these ships.

The Fiscal Year 2016 National Defense Authorization Act calls for the Navy to study the Ford class and possible alternatives to contain costs and deliver vessels more quickly.

With a year left in the Obama administration’s term in office, Davidson said the Ohio–class ballistic missile submarine was her top priority, as well as the Navy’s, and she would work with the panel in looking for ways to pay for it outside of the Navy’s regular shipbuilding budget.

In addition, she said she was committed to the Navy’s plan to build two Virginia-class submarines annually.

As to priorities, she said, “We have to reset and think about modernizing for the future” at the same time as the Navy and Marine Corps need to improve its readiness—starting with necessary maintenance.

Davidson said the nation was at risk of losing military dominance if the tight fiscal constraints on defense spending continue. She said she was “trying to determine what we mean when we say we’re accepting more risk” under those fiscal conditions.

In her opening statement, she said her goal, if confirmed, is “was to restore readiness across the Fleet” and sustain the United States’ military edge.

Davidson said the lack of a proper audit “exacerbates our problems” in gaining a true picture on program costs. She said that while the Navy department is making some progress in this area it has a long way to go.

Looking at personnel issues and streamlining, she said would “take a data driven approach” when looking at reducing staff sizes. Later, Davidson answered a related question by saying, “all our processes should be looked at” in terms of how they affect the warfighter.

She called suicides in the military “an absolute tragedy” and said the focus on prevention needs to come through continuing education of commanders, peers and chaplains.

Citing her own experience—being the first woman in the Air Force to fly C-17s in a combat role—Davidson said she would “absolutely NOT . . . lower standards” in opening all positions to women in the military even if only a few initially qualified.

As to whether women should be required to register for the Selective Service, she and the other nominees for service undersecretary posts said, “I look forward to engaging with you in that discussion.”

McCain said, while chuckling, “You all three have successfully dodged the question,” referring to Davidson and the two other nominees at the hearing.

Click to expand...

Jeff Head said:

The Ford class is going to be built.

Whenever you bring a lot of new, advanced technology to the fore, it is going to cost. That's just the nature of the business. And on a new class, where you have no experience with those technologies being designed into a ship, there are inevitably going to be cost and schedule overruns.

You should try and control it, and minimize where you can...but not, IMHO, to the point of turning away from the advancements.

Click to expand...

The Ford-class aircraft carrier program offers several lessons on how to build a new ship class while designing the combat system as late as possible to incorporate new technologies, the CVN-78 program manager said at the American Society of Naval Engineers’ annual Combat Systems Symposium.

Capt. Chris Meyer said at the Dec. 2 event at Washington Navy Yard that the first carrier in the class, Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78), would have a 12-year lag between reaching milestone B and delivering to the fleet. Because of that, his challenge was, “how do you insert into that 12-year timeline the most up-to-date warfare system that you can, and how do you do that in a way that you can actually afford to do that into the shipbuilder’s plan and stay within your shipbuilding budget?”

He said that overall the plan worked in that a highly capable warfare system with relevant hardware and software will be delivered to the fleet. But he said there was a great deal of friction caused by developing both the ship design and the combat system designs at the same time, and the lack of defined interfaces between the two caused delays that he is still dealing with today at Newport News Shipbuilding.

Click to expand...

Brumby said:

The issue of the Ford class as part of the USN procurement is not in question (at least not yet) but the significant cost overrun is. It is not business as usual when the cost overrun is so significant and in a commercial world, heads will roll. The US is not in a good fiscal shape and cannot afford to treat such issues as normal.
...

Click to expand...

Brumby said:

A recent article basically outlined the problem during the build process of defining interfaces between the ship design and combat systems design when both were still WIP.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Jura said:

this is very interesting, related to "concurrency":
Ford Carrier Program Manager Reflects On Strategy To Deliver Modern Combat System

source:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...