Future of the USN Carrier Force
They're probably going to finish up with around 9 anyway - the build-time of the Fords is getting towards 8-10 years and the cost of refurbing a Nimitz to keep it service for another 10+ years is likely to be stupendous
IIRC the original out of service date for the CVN-68 Nimitz was 2025 which reduced numbers planned in service to 10 anyway until about 2030.
IIRC the original out of service date for the CVN-68 Nimitz was 2025 which reduced numbers planned in service to 10 anyway until about 2030.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
The Nimitz class has a service life of 50 years and they are refuelled and overhauled once at their midlife point if 25 years.
Nimitz is planned to be retired in 2022 and replaced by the first of the Ford class, U.S.S. Ford. Only 3 Ford class presently under contract. U.S.S. Ford, currently in sea trials; the U.S.S. JFK, just launched and crewed and being fitted out; and the U.S.S. Enterprise, under construction and due for delivery in 2025.
First carrier they are, currently, considering retiring at the midlife point is the USS Truman in 2024.
Nimitz is planned to be retired in 2022 and replaced by the first of the Ford class, U.S.S. Ford. Only 3 Ford class presently under contract. U.S.S. Ford, currently in sea trials; the U.S.S. JFK, just launched and crewed and being fitted out; and the U.S.S. Enterprise, under construction and due for delivery in 2025.
First carrier they are, currently, considering retiring at the midlife point is the USS Truman in 2024.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 1,057
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“I know that the future fleet has to include a mix of unmanned,” Gilday said. “We can’t continue to wrap $2 billion ships around 96 missile tubes in the numbers we need to fight in a distributed way, against a potential adversary that is producing capability and platforms at a very high rate of speed. We have to change the way we are thinking.”
Arc
ORAC - I thought they'd contracted CVN-81 "Doris Miller" earlier this year?
With a mid life RCOH costing around $ 5 bn and taking at least 40 months extending the life of a Nimitz beyond 50 years is probably not worthwhile - but they're going to have to up the tempo on the "Fords" to get back to 11 ships IMHO
The carriers are very definitely a "nice to have" (if you can afford them) - but if they aren't going to play such a front-line role against China then maybe a reduction over time isn't the end of the world.
With a mid life RCOH costing around $ 5 bn and taking at least 40 months extending the life of a Nimitz beyond 50 years is probably not worthwhile - but they're going to have to up the tempo on the "Fords" to get back to 11 ships IMHO
The carriers are very definitely a "nice to have" (if you can afford them) - but if they aren't going to play such a front-line role against China then maybe a reduction over time isn't the end of the world.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
Well with the U.S.S. America charging off into the South China Sea in support of the Malaysian West Capella drillship in a stand-off against the Chinese, maybe they’ve decided the large carriers are too big to risk and somewhat of an unusable asset to risk in combat against a peer opponent?
Brave men to take on a bunch of oil field trash................ 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Dundee
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe there was an exercise in last 15 years relying on a NATO convoy enforcement across the Atlantic which provided lots of learnings and none of them good.
But sitting on bottom completely silent waiting for convoy was what Wolfpacks did 75 years ago, irrespective of escorts that were ahead. Why would that strategy change ?
Add in underwater drones etc etc and it becomes a bit more of a difficult exercise to protect shipping.
What is airlift capacity required for transferring a complete division from US to Europe ?
Yes I know it woukld be substantial but aircraft would be doing 14 flights a week V shipping.
They still fixated on manned aircraft where as the unmanned are a fraction of the cost. Services will want mega budgets even when they are unsustainable.
But sitting on bottom completely silent waiting for convoy was what Wolfpacks did 75 years ago, irrespective of escorts that were ahead. Why would that strategy change ?
Add in underwater drones etc etc and it becomes a bit more of a difficult exercise to protect shipping.
What is airlift capacity required for transferring a complete division from US to Europe ?
Yes I know it woukld be substantial but aircraft would be doing 14 flights a week V shipping.
They still fixated on manned aircraft where as the unmanned are a fraction of the cost. Services will want mega budgets even when they are unsustainable.
Well with the U.S.S. America charging off into the South China Sea in support of the Malaysian West Capella drillship in a stand-off against the Chinese, maybe they’ve decided the large carriers are too big to risk and somewhat of an unusable asset to risk in combat against a peer opponent?
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
https://www.defensenews.com/naval/20...mains-in-flux/
US Navy upgrades more ships for the F-35 as the future of carriers remains in flux
US Navy upgrades more ships for the F-35 as the future of carriers remains in flux
Certainly makes sense - relatively small investment to multiply your options
An LHD with half a dozen F-35Bs would be powerful enough to intervene in a lot of places without sending an expensive CVN
An LHD with half a dozen F-35Bs would be powerful enough to intervene in a lot of places without sending an expensive CVN
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
https://www.defensenews.com/2020/06/...emands-a-plan/
With the future of the US Navy’s carrier air wing murky, Congress demands a plan
WASHINGTON – The US Navy will need to develop a roadmap for developing future fighter aircraft years after it became apparent that the Navy’s mainstay F/A-18 Super Hornet would struggle to keep the carrier outside of range to be effective against Chinese anti-ship missiles......
The SASC mark “requires the Navy to create a fighter aircraft force structure acquisition strategy and report on aircraft carrier air wing composition and carrier-based strike fighter squadrons to better prepare for potential conflicts envisioned by the National Defense Strategy,” according to a summary posted on the Committee’s website.
The Navy likely upset the congressional apple cart by zeroing out a planned buy of at least 36 Super Hornets that would have spanned FY22 through FY24. That move that should save $4.5 billion that the service plans to redirect to its sixth-generation fighter program, known as Next Generation Air Dominance or F/A-XX.........
With the future of the US Navy’s carrier air wing murky, Congress demands a plan
WASHINGTON – The US Navy will need to develop a roadmap for developing future fighter aircraft years after it became apparent that the Navy’s mainstay F/A-18 Super Hornet would struggle to keep the carrier outside of range to be effective against Chinese anti-ship missiles......
The SASC mark “requires the Navy to create a fighter aircraft force structure acquisition strategy and report on aircraft carrier air wing composition and carrier-based strike fighter squadrons to better prepare for potential conflicts envisioned by the National Defense Strategy,” according to a summary posted on the Committee’s website.
The Navy likely upset the congressional apple cart by zeroing out a planned buy of at least 36 Super Hornets that would have spanned FY22 through FY24. That move that should save $4.5 billion that the service plans to redirect to its sixth-generation fighter program, known as Next Generation Air Dominance or F/A-XX.........
" the service plans to redirect to its sixth-generation fighter program, known as Next Generation Air Dominance or F/A-XX"
ORAC - any idea when this next WonderPlane is scheduled for service?
ORAC - any idea when this next WonderPlane is scheduled for service?
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
The point is they're not - they want to cut the money for the F-18s without actually having a program in place to replace them - which is what Congress is complaining about. The last Naval Secretary said they wouldn't build a new manned fighter after the F-35.
https://news.usni.org/2020/02/10/nav...ration-fighter
https://news.usni.org/2020/02/10/nav...ration-fighter
The last Naval Secretary said they wouldn't build a new manned fighter after the F-35. https://news.usni.org/2020/02/10/nav...ration-fighter
The point is they're not - they want to cut the money for the F-18s without actually having a program in place to replace them - which is what Congress is complaining about. The last Naval Secretary said they wouldn't build a new manned fighter after the F-35.
https://news.usni.org/2020/02/10/nav...ration-fighter
https://news.usni.org/2020/02/10/nav...ration-fighter
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
F/A-XX Office......
https://news.usni.org/2020/08/18/nav...range-aircraft
Navy Quietly Starts Development of Next-Generation Carrier Fighter; Plans Call for Manned, Long-Range Aircraft
After nearly a decade of fits and starts, the Navy has quietly initiated work to develop its first new carrier-based fighter in almost 20 years, standing up a new program office and holding early discussions with industry, USNI News has learned.
The multi-billion-dollar effort to replace the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and electronic attack EA-18G Growlers beginning in the 2030s is taking early steps to quickly develop a new manned fighter to extend the reach of the carrier air wing and bring new relevance to the Navy’s fleet of nuclear-powered aircraft carriers......
To kick off the NGAD initiative, the Navy formally stood up the Next Generation Air Dominance program office, which the service is calling PMA-230, in May and tapped Capt. Al Mousseau to serve as the program manager. Mousseau officially started the job in May, after previously serving as the program manager for the Mission Integration and Special Programs Office, also known as PMA-298.
The Navy has already begun convening industry days for NGAD, according to a source familiar with the ongoing process. Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman are the three likely competitors for the manned fighter, USNI News understands......
https://news.usni.org/2020/08/18/nav...range-aircraft
Navy Quietly Starts Development of Next-Generation Carrier Fighter; Plans Call for Manned, Long-Range Aircraft
After nearly a decade of fits and starts, the Navy has quietly initiated work to develop its first new carrier-based fighter in almost 20 years, standing up a new program office and holding early discussions with industry, USNI News has learned.
The multi-billion-dollar effort to replace the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and electronic attack EA-18G Growlers beginning in the 2030s is taking early steps to quickly develop a new manned fighter to extend the reach of the carrier air wing and bring new relevance to the Navy’s fleet of nuclear-powered aircraft carriers......
To kick off the NGAD initiative, the Navy formally stood up the Next Generation Air Dominance program office, which the service is calling PMA-230, in May and tapped Capt. Al Mousseau to serve as the program manager. Mousseau officially started the job in May, after previously serving as the program manager for the Mission Integration and Special Programs Office, also known as PMA-298.
The Navy has already begun convening industry days for NGAD, according to a source familiar with the ongoing process. Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman are the three likely competitors for the manned fighter, USNI News understands......