- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
http://hamptonroads.com/2008/03/congressional-panel-navy-should-stick-what-works
Congressional panel: Navy should stick to what works
By Dale Eisman
The Virginian-Pilot
© March 7, 2008
WASHINGTON
The Navy should delay plans to build a series of expensive and unproven new ships and instead buy more destroyers, amphibious ships and airplanes from production lines now open, lawmakers told top service leaders on Thursday.
Key members on the House Armed Services Committee voiced bipartisan alarm over a Navy shipbuilding program they said is unlikely to produce the 313-ship fleet service leaders want.
The Navy has about 280 ships; it has set 2019 as the target date for reaching 313.
Rep. Duncan Hunter of California, the panel's ranking Republican, complained that despite direction from Congress that it maintain a fleet of at least 11 aircraft carriers, the Navy will be left with just 10 flattops when the Norfolk-based Enterprise is retired in 2012.
The one-carrier "gap" could continue for nearly four years, Hunter said, citing delays in the development of new technologies for the Enterprise's successor ship, the Gerald Ford.
The Enterprise, launched in 1960, could stay in service until the Ford is available only with a $2 billion investment in maintenance and repairs, the Navy estimates. But that would produce only about seven months of actual additional service, Adm. Gary Roughead, chief of naval operations, said Thursday.
The Navy also is in danger of a serious aircraft shortage, lawmakers warned, as the demands of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are wearing out today's F/A-18 Hornets and Super Hornets and as production of the new F-35 strike fighter is falling behind schedule.
"We are using up the life span of the F/A-18 Hornet at a significantly faster pace than anticipated," said Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., chairman of the Armed Services Committee.
"It certainly does no good to have 11 aircraft carriers if you only have eight air wings to man them by the middle of next decade," he added.
Roughead acknowledged that the Navy is anticipating a shortage of up to 69 F/A-18s by the middle of the next decade, before the F-35 will be available. The service may buy more F/A-18s to close the gap, he said.
Roughead appeared less open to suggestions that the Navy tinker with its plans to continue development of the DD-21 destroyer and instead move to a new guided-missile cruiser that would be nuclear-powered and use the same basic hull design as today's Arleigh Burke-class destroyers.
Pressed by Rep. Gene Taylor, D-Miss., whose district includes a Northrop Grumman shipyard where the Burke-class ships are built, Roughead said he's not sure the Burke hull can be modified to accommodate a nuclear reactor. He agreed to provide a cost estimate for redesigning the hull, however.
The Armed Services panel, heavy with lawmakers whose districts include military bases and major defense contractors, is perhaps the most defense-friendly forum on Capitol Hill. Still, Thursday's pressure for more shipbuilding and aircraft purchases seemed particularly intense.
"This really is a crossroads year for the Navy," said Hunter, who suggested that the service "needs to regroup... and perhaps make some dramatic changes" in its long-term acquisition plans.
Skelton said he was particularly troubled by spiraling costs of the new Littoral Combat Ship, a relatively small, fast and maneuverable ship the Navy wants for close-to-shore duties such as port security and mine hunting. The ships were originally projected to cost about $220 million each but "will now cost upwards of $450 million, if not more," he said.
Against that backdrop, "I find it almost inexplicable that we would choose to close or slow down the shipbuilding programs that are working," Skelton said.
Dale Eisman, (703) 913-9872, dale.eisman@pilotonline.com
So I guess then are not big on innovation anymore?
Congressional panel: Navy should stick to what works
By Dale Eisman
The Virginian-Pilot
© March 7, 2008
WASHINGTON
The Navy should delay plans to build a series of expensive and unproven new ships and instead buy more destroyers, amphibious ships and airplanes from production lines now open, lawmakers told top service leaders on Thursday.
Key members on the House Armed Services Committee voiced bipartisan alarm over a Navy shipbuilding program they said is unlikely to produce the 313-ship fleet service leaders want.
The Navy has about 280 ships; it has set 2019 as the target date for reaching 313.
Rep. Duncan Hunter of California, the panel's ranking Republican, complained that despite direction from Congress that it maintain a fleet of at least 11 aircraft carriers, the Navy will be left with just 10 flattops when the Norfolk-based Enterprise is retired in 2012.
The one-carrier "gap" could continue for nearly four years, Hunter said, citing delays in the development of new technologies for the Enterprise's successor ship, the Gerald Ford.
The Enterprise, launched in 1960, could stay in service until the Ford is available only with a $2 billion investment in maintenance and repairs, the Navy estimates. But that would produce only about seven months of actual additional service, Adm. Gary Roughead, chief of naval operations, said Thursday.
The Navy also is in danger of a serious aircraft shortage, lawmakers warned, as the demands of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are wearing out today's F/A-18 Hornets and Super Hornets and as production of the new F-35 strike fighter is falling behind schedule.
"We are using up the life span of the F/A-18 Hornet at a significantly faster pace than anticipated," said Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., chairman of the Armed Services Committee.
"It certainly does no good to have 11 aircraft carriers if you only have eight air wings to man them by the middle of next decade," he added.
Roughead acknowledged that the Navy is anticipating a shortage of up to 69 F/A-18s by the middle of the next decade, before the F-35 will be available. The service may buy more F/A-18s to close the gap, he said.
Roughead appeared less open to suggestions that the Navy tinker with its plans to continue development of the DD-21 destroyer and instead move to a new guided-missile cruiser that would be nuclear-powered and use the same basic hull design as today's Arleigh Burke-class destroyers.
Pressed by Rep. Gene Taylor, D-Miss., whose district includes a Northrop Grumman shipyard where the Burke-class ships are built, Roughead said he's not sure the Burke hull can be modified to accommodate a nuclear reactor. He agreed to provide a cost estimate for redesigning the hull, however.
The Armed Services panel, heavy with lawmakers whose districts include military bases and major defense contractors, is perhaps the most defense-friendly forum on Capitol Hill. Still, Thursday's pressure for more shipbuilding and aircraft purchases seemed particularly intense.
"This really is a crossroads year for the Navy," said Hunter, who suggested that the service "needs to regroup... and perhaps make some dramatic changes" in its long-term acquisition plans.
Skelton said he was particularly troubled by spiraling costs of the new Littoral Combat Ship, a relatively small, fast and maneuverable ship the Navy wants for close-to-shore duties such as port security and mine hunting. The ships were originally projected to cost about $220 million each but "will now cost upwards of $450 million, if not more," he said.
Against that backdrop, "I find it almost inexplicable that we would choose to close or slow down the shipbuilding programs that are working," Skelton said.
Dale Eisman, (703) 913-9872, dale.eisman@pilotonline.com
So I guess then are not big on innovation anymore?
