Fórum Defesa Brasil

mais "barraca"....

Weld inspector’s lies may affect 9 ships


Welds on the Virginia-class submarine North Carolina and seven other subs will be reinspected.

By Christopher P. Cavas - Staff writer
Posted : Monday Jun 1, 2009 16:48:42 EDT

More than 10,000 welded joints on at least eight submarines and a new aircraft carrier might need to be reinspected after the discovery by Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding that one of its inspectors had falsified inspection reports.

According to an internal report obtained by Navy Times, the issue came to light May 14, when a welding inspector at the company’s Newport News, Va., shipyard told a supervisor that a fellow inspector was initialing welds as “OK” without performing the inspections. Confronted by the supervisor, the offending inspector admitted to falsifying three weld inspections, all that same day.

Company officials rapidly began an internal investigation and notified the Navy’s supervisor of shipbuilding of the situation, according to the report. On May 20, the Naval Criminal Investigative Service began its own investigation.

Northrop Grumman declined to reveal the employee’s name, citing the ongoing personnel investigation. A company official did say May 28 that the employee initially had been suspended, then fired.

According to the report, a quick company review of the inspector’s work showed that 12 other joints inspected by the employee that evening were satisfactory. But the ramifications of the falsified inspections rapidly grew beyond a single night’s work.

“We have to go back and check everything this guy has ever touched,” said one industrial source.

The employee had been certified to perform inspections in June 2005 and, according to the report, a review of the shipyard’s welding database showed that in the ensuing four years he inspected and signed off on more than 10,000 structural welding joints on at least nine ships.

Company officials said May 27 that the investigation of the employee’s work could mean that all the joints would need reinspection or re-evaluation.
3 ships in service

According to the report, the ships worked on by the inspector included the Virginia-class nuclear attack submarines North Carolina, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Missouri, California, Mississippi, Minnesota and John Warner, and the aircraft carrier George H.W. Bush. Bush, North Carolina and New Hampshire are in service; the other subs are in various states of construction at Newport News and at the General Dynamics shipyards in Groton, Conn., and Quonset, R.I.

The two shipbuilders share equally in building the submarines. Each shipyard builds specific sections of the submarines and transports the sections to the other yard. The shipbuilders alternate in assembling the hulls.

The inspector performed most of his work on the New Mexico (2,133 welds inspected), Missouri (3,169), California (2,002) and Mississippi (2,177). The employee inspected only 23 welds on New Hampshire and two on North Carolina.

A little more than 10 percent of the submarine welds were hull integrity, or SUBSAFE, joints involving critical parts.

The inspector also performed 229 piping joint inspections on submarines.

There are many thousands of welds on each 7,800-ton submarine — more then 300,000, according to an Electric Boat Best Manufacturing Practices Web site.

But making sure that welding work is done correctly can be a matter of life and death.

“People take this really, really seriously,” said one industry source. “Why? Because people don’t want another Thresher. Nobody takes a chance.”

The submarine Thresher sank in April 1963 when it was forced to dive below its crush depth and the hull imploded. All 129 men aboard the sub perished.

“The quality of our work is something we take very seriously,” Northrop spokeswoman Margaret Mitchell-Jones said in a May 28 statement to Navy Times.
Previous problems

Newport News is still smarting from a welding filler issue that arose in fall 2007. Shipyard workers had used the wrong type of welding filler material on many pipe welds, and the company and the Navy were forced to re-examine a number of submarines, aircraft carriers and surface ships built or repaired at the shipyard. Northrop changed a number of workshop practices as a result.

Both the Navy and Northrop Grumman emphasize that there is no relation between the weld filler issue and the latest problem with the inspector.

Northrop Grumman has developed an inspection plan of the offending inspector’s work that will focus on hull integrity and SUBSAFE joints as a priority, followed by non-SUBSAFE joints, according to the internal report.

The nature of the NCIS investigation is unclear.

“I can confirm that NCIS is investigating allegations made against a weld inspector, but I cannot get into case specifics,” NCIS spokesman Ed Buice wrote in a May 28 e-mail to Navy Times. “NCIS does not comment on the details of ongoing investigations.”

http://www.navytimes.com/news/2009/06/n ... s_060109w/

Raios!!, mas porquê cargas d'água o inspetor mentiu???

Negligencia? Preguiça?

John Lehman's Solution

Hornet-catapult.jpg

John Lehman, Secretary of the Navy from 1981 to 1987, has addressed "What the Navy Should Look Like" in response to the service's current array of problems. Under Lehman's guidance in the 1980s, the Navy almost reached his goal of 600 active ships, including 15 aircraft carriers and four battleships. He rejuvenated Marine aviation with both the F/A-18 Hornet and AV-8B Harrier, and provided modern aircraft and ships for the Naval Reserve.

Speaking at a Hudson Institute conference in Washington, D.C. that addressed Navy shipbuilding problems, Secretary Lehman called for a three-phase program to rebuild the Navy, maximize its capabilities, and boost its image.

First, the Navy "should look the same to everyone," according to Lehman. He explained that everyone should realize that the U.S. Navy "can visit unacceptable violence from the seas." That image should comfort actual and potential friends, and should intimidate and restrain actual and potential enemies.

As Lehman has indicated in the past, naval forces provide persistent presence, for sustained periods, without the need for overflight rights or foreign bases. This is in sharp contrast to those who propose "virtual presence" by long-range aircraft or missiles based in the United States.

Rating the Navy's capabilities, Lehman gives the service high marks for strategic deterrence (i.e., Trident missile submarines). But at lower levels of warfighting, there are "lots of holes," and "this is inviting potential enemies to move into the vacuum."

Second, the former Secretary of the Navy called for "competence" in U.S. military and naval, strategy, and in developing and building ships, aircraft, and weapons. Problems in Navy hardware programs, he contends, are due to a lack of competence among program managers and engineers. "The Navy looks incompetent managing (its) resources," he said. Lehman, however, is quick to point out that the other military services are worse.

The Navy should return to "simple line management and accountability," cutting out layers of bureaucracy. And, he said, the service should concentrate on cost analysis and engineering, not sexual harassment counseling.

Third, Secretary Lehman believes that the Navy must (again) become an "elite organization." It must be viewed as a glamorous service -- "a calling," and not simply a trade. The Navy must attract interesting and creative people.

In discussing the reasons this is not now being done, he cited the many uniform issues that have brought criticism from Navy enlisted personnel. Lehman was stronger in his criticism of the Goldwater-Nichols legislation that forces officers to have "joint" duty before they can screen for command. This takes them away from important assignments and experience, and it adds to "the constant bureaucratic growth" by increasing shore staffs.

In addressing fleet size -- the principal subject of the Hudson conference -- Lehman said, "Numbers do count," and called for a fleet of 350 ships. This, he said, is the minimum needed to carry out the current and predicted Navy missions. But he believes that there will be continuing fleet reductions unless the Navy can develop a realistic shipbuilding strategy as a starting point.

-- Norman Polmar
June 4, 2009 08:04 AM

Refueling tops list of LCS crew challenges

By Philip Ewing - Staff writer
Posted : Tuesday May 19, 2009 12:49:30 EDT

ABOARD THE LITTORAL COMBAT SHIP FREEDOM — The Navy’s first littoral combat ship, Freedom, is so different from other surface ships that even mundane tasks require a whole new way of thinking.

Take, for example, refueling at sea. A regular warship matches speed with an oiler by syncing up the revolutions per minute of the ships’ propellers. The problem? Freedom doesn’t have propellers.

And that’s just the beginning.
VIDEO

“This is a revolution, not an evolution, for the Navy,” said Cmdr. Mike Doran, captain of Freedom’s Gold Crew, which rotated onto the ship in March. “The normal way the Navy does things today doesn’t work for my ship.”

After about six months since it was commissioned in Milwaukee, Freedom’s two crews have had to reinvent just about everything involved with serving aboard a modern surface warship. Blue Crew sailors tackled some of them immediately as they sailed the ship through the Great Lakes, but other jobs had to wait until Freedom entered the saltwater domain for which it was built.

For its first refueling at sea in late April, no one was quite sure how the 3,000-ton LCS would ride when it pulled alongside a 40,000-ton fleet oiler. Even though it’s the fastest ship in the Navy, the flat-bottomed Freedom has a decided roll at slow speed.

To prepare, crew members trained in a simulator and later practiced with the oiler pierside.

Refueling underway will be critical for all the Navy’s littoral combat ships, which achieve their high sprint speed by gulping fuel like Kool-Aid. A deployed LCS could need to refuel as often as every three days, according to some estimates, making its ability to gas up at sea that much more important. Freedom will need to get supplies via helicopter in vertical replenishments, because it isn’t equipped to accept pallets of supplies zipped over from a Military Sealift Command ship in a traditional unrep.

When it was finally time for the refueling at sea, Doran stood on the port bridge wing with a laser rangefinder, measuring distance to Kanawha. With visual cues and constant minor adjustments, Freedom maintained a steady course alongside Kanawha.

“I won’t say that I wasn’t a little white-knuckled for part of the time, but it went very smoothly, it was great,” Doran said.

Another issue: Marine life. Doran said running at 40 knots or more means there is little reaction time if a whale near the surface crosses Freedom’s path, so he keeps lookouts on alert and won’t run the ship at high speed if poor visibility means they might hit a whale.

“If the weather is so bad we have lots of whitecaps, so it’s not as easy to see the blowholes, I’m probably not going to do it … because it’s just not worth it,” Doran said. “Will it hurt the ship? It may hurt the ship, but it’ll certainly hurt the whale.”

Luckily for the ship and crew, Freedom has not hit any animals during its high-speed runs on the ocean. But there are other things the ship also still hasn’t done.

Although it has been qualified to handle aircraft on its flight deck, Doran said Freedom still hasn’t launched and recovered the H-60 Seahawk helicopter it will use on its deployments. And the ship has struggled with side-door launches of the remotely operated vehicle that LCS will use to hunt for enemy submarines.

More than that, sailors still don’t know how fast Freedom can go. The ship’s Blue Crew, under the command of Cmdr. Don Gabrielson, holds the current top speed record of 47 knots, but Doran said he thinks Freedom can beat that.

“The engineering plant is still in a shakedown period,” he said. “And I think that, once we get it all finely tuned, the ship will go faster.”

U.S. Navy: Nuclear Cruiser Could Be Cheaper Than Non-Nukes

A U.S. Navy draft study has concluded that operating a nuclear-powered cruiser could be cheaper than operating a non-nuclear ship, but the Government Accountability Office (GAO) is disputing that assessment.


The U.S. Navy is mulling a new cruiser propelled by nuclear power, as was the USS South Carolina.

In an Aug. 7 letter sent to Sens. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., and Mel Martinez, R-Fla., GAO analyst Paul Francis said a yet-to-be-approved Navy draft cost analysis showed that nuclear cruisers would be cheaper if oil-price patterns of the past 35 years continue to hold.

But Francis wrote that the Navy didn't include several factors in its calculations - factors that would change the results to show that non-nuclear ships would be cheaper.

They include "present value analysis," a way to calculate the future value of money; alternative scenarios for the future price of oil; and an examination of how a less efficient conventional propulsion system would affect cost estimates.

By including those factors in its calculations and coming up with a different result, Francis wrote, his analysis "demonstrates the sensitivity of the cost estimates to different assumptions, underscoring the need for more rigorous analysis before reaching conclusions."

Francis wrote that although the Navy disagreed with several of GAO's underlying analyses, it agreed with the need to include the new factors in its calculations.

The Navy is considering nuclear power for the new CGX cruiser, which it could buy in 2017. Congress has directed that the ships be nuclear-propelled, but a 2007 Navy analysis reported a nuclear cruiser would cost $600 million to $800 million more than a non-nuke.

The Navy has not commissioned a nuclear-powered warship other than an aircraft carrier or submarine since 1980, and all its nuclear cruisers were taken out of service in the 1990s.

The GAO letter also provided rare confirmation of some of the broad details of the never-released Analysis of Alternatives (AoA) report for the CGX cruiser. The report, begun in 2005, was to have been completed in late 2007, but has been withheld for a variety of reasons as the Navy reviewed its plans for the ship.

Francis reports that the Navy identified six ship design concepts in the CGX AoA: two based on modified DDG 1000 Zumwalt-class destroyers; one on a modified DDG 51 Arleigh Burke-class destroyer; one new conventionally powered cruiser; and one nuclear-powered cruiser. The sixth concept wasn't identified in the letter.

The designs vary in capability, Francis wrote, including the sensitivity of the primary radar, the number of missile cells, and the propulsion system.

The power of the new radar, to be developed from a new Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR), is a key factor in the new ship's ability to meet its mission requirements. Final power needs for the new radar, which is in the earliest stages of development, are as yet unknown, but numerous Navy sources report that the power needs will best be met by providing the cruiser with a nuclear power plant.

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i= ... =AME&s=TOP

upsssss

New Sub Construction Problem Found at Northrop Grumman


Weapons-handling gear aboard four Virginia-class attack submarines was improperly assembled by workers at Northrop Grumman's Newport News shipyard - the latest manufacturing problem at the Virginia facility.

The problem affects the North Carolina (SSN 777), New Mexico (SSN 779), Missouri (SSN 780) and California (SSN 781), Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) confirmed for Defense News. Uncorrected, the problems could disable the weapons room, according to the Navy.

At issue are fasteners: the nuts and bolts that hold together the tracks for the sophisticated handling system in each submarine's weapons, or torpedo, room.

Yard workers at General Dynamics Electric Boat in Groton, Conn., discovered the mechanical quality issue in early August while working on the Missouri. After notifying Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding - which shares equally in building the Virginia-class submarines - GD, as the prime contractor for the program, notified the Navy on Aug. 6.

Of the four affected submarines, only one, the North Carolina, is in service, having been accepted by the Navy in February 2008 and commissioned in May of last year. The New Mexico's crew moved aboard for the first time July 28 and the submarine is in the final stages of completion at Newport News. The Missouri is set to be launched later this year at Electric Boat, and Newport News held a keel-laying ceremony for the California this past May.

According to the Navy and Northrop Grumman, no problems were found on another submarine, New Hampshire (SSN 778), which was delivered by Electric Boat in August 2008.

Under the 50/50 work share agreement between Electric Boat and Newport News, each shipyard is responsible for building certain portions of each submarine. The sections are barged between the yards, and EB and Newport News alternate in assembling, launching and completing each sub.

Newport News shipbuilders are responsible for building the torpedo rooms of all the submarines.

The system in the Virginia class for handling weapons is different than on other submarines. Rather than moving each weapon individually, cradles are used to more easily accommodate differently shaped torpedoes, mines, missiles, underwater vehicles or other items, and a track system is designed to enable sailors to smoothly shift weapons between the submarine's four torpedo tubes.

According to a written statement from NAVSEA, "during the final alignment of the forward and aft weapon cradle tracks aboard the Missouri, several bolts, bolt holes and fasteners were found that did not meet specifications. Specifically, the shipbuilders have found improperly drilled and machined bolt holes, bolts that had been improperly machined, and fasteners that were not installed and tightened properly."

The shipbuilders are continuing to investigate the problem, and are to provide "a combined assessment of the issue to the Navy within two weeks," according to the NAVSEA statement.


Could Prevent Weapons' Movement

"The application of nonspecification bolts, bolt holes and fasteners could result in a misalignment of the weapons-handling equipment that could prevent the movement of weapon cradles within the torpedo room, and could compromise the integrity of the weapons handling system in a shock event," NAVSEA wrote.

Inappropriate use of Loctite, an adhesive product used to fix in place nuts and bolts, also is an issue. Northrop Grumman, in an e-mail to Defense News, described the problem as including "use of the incorrect grade of Loctite; close tolerance bolts that were modified without the proper use of appropriate technical direction (certain shanks tapered, thread ends cut short); close tolerance bolts that did not meet the diametrical clearance requirements for the respective hole; truss tapped holes that were damaged and nonconforming threads."

Asked what problems the improper work could lead to, Northrop Grumman wrote, "These fastener issues might, under certain conditions or circumstances, result in a misalignment of the weapons handling equipment that could prevent the movement of weapon cradles or the proper operation of the weapons handling system in a shock event."

The problems are another embarrassment for Northrop Grumman's submarine builders. In May, the Navy revealed that a welding inspector falsified records. He was dismissed by the company, which was forced to re-inspect thousands of welds. Another problem came to light in December 2007, when inspectors found that improper welding filler had been used on a number of welds. The company has made a number of changes in light of those issues.

Northrop insists there is no connection between the three problems.

"It's important to note that the inspector issue was not one of process and therefore is totally separate," the company said Thursday in an e-mail to Defense News. "That being said, the quality of our work and our product quality is something we take very seriously. We have instituted improvements in our engineering, production and quality systems across Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding. The changes we are making begin with an absolute commitment to the quality of ships we are delivering from all of our shipyards. We have instituted process changes and improvements for the short-term, mid-term and long-term. These cover inspecting and evaluating our work to ensure it adheres to the Navy's strict requirements. When issues arise, it's something we address in an immediate and methodical way."

No cost or repair time estimates for the fastener problem are as yet available, NAVSEA spokeswoman Pat Dolan said Thursday. Navy officials stressed that the ships remain safe and that the issue was identified by the overall attention to quality.

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i= ... =AME&s=TOP

Qualquer outra marinha com tanta asneirada junta já tinha "fechado a loja", mas como eles têm navios para dar e vender...vão-se safando.

até parece que fazem os navios nos ENVC

continuando as barracadas submarinas....

US Sub’s commissioning delayed by bad bolts
Commissioning ceremonies for the new nuclear-powered attack submarine New Mexico have been delayed until next year while Northrop Grumman shipbuilders work to fix construction problems in the vessel’s torpedo room, the U.S. Navy said Thursday.

Capt. Michael Jabaley, the Navy’s Virginia-class submarine program manager, said Northrop Grumman’s Newport News, Va., shipyard and the Naval Sea Systems Command continue to investigate the problem, which so far has been found on four submarines. One of the submarines, the North Carolina, already is in service, but is undergoing a shipyard period at the General Dynamics Electric Boat shipyard in Groton, Conn. Two other submarines with the problem, the Missouri and California, are in various stages of construction.

Another in-service submarine, the New Hampshire, apparently escaped the problem.

“The most immediate concern based on schedule was the New Mexico,” Jabaley said. The ship is about 99 percent complete, he said, and had been scheduled to be delivered to the Navy on Sept. 30. The commissioning ceremony had been scheduled for Nov. 21 at Norfolk, Va.

But Northrop Grumman and the Navy estimate about five weeks of work will be required to fix the problems on the New Mexico, and the new target delivery date of Nov. 13 didn’t provide enough margin to ensure the ship would be ready by the 21st.

“We thought it would be prudent to delay the ceremony,” Jabaley said. “Typically, we like two to three months between delivery and commissioning to give the crew time to become proficient at operating at sea.”

The holiday period beginning with Thanksgiving was also a factor in the delay, Jabaley said. A new date hasn’t yet been set, but it will “probably be in January or February,” he said.

Even so, Newport News still has a shot to beat the contract delivery date of April 30, 2010. Beating the delivery date has become an important factor in keeping down costs, and Electric Boat, which shares equally with Newport News in building the submarines and alternates with the Virginia yard in completing the ships, has delivered its last two submarines ahead of schedule.

The New Mexico is the third Virginia-class submarine to be completed at Newport News, and the company hopes it’s the first one delivered ahead of schedule.

“Northrop Grumman understands and supports the U.S. Navy's decision to delay the commissioning ceremony for the New Mexico until early 2010, to allow for completion of construction and repair work,” said company spokeswoman Margaret Mitchell-Jones. “We take the quality of our work and product quality very seriously and we have instituted improvements in our engineering, production and quality systems across Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding. We are focused on completing the construction of New Mexico, and we look forward to delivering a great ship to the Navy.”

The bolt problem came to light in early August when Electric Boat workers had trouble ensuring a proper fit in the tracks of the weapon handling system aboard the submarine Missouri. Newport News builds the weapons room section of all Virginia-class submarines, and GD, as prime contractor on the Virginia-class program, reported the problem to the Navy on Aug. 6.
‘No Safety Issues’

Jabaley took pains to say there were no safety issues with the bolt problem.

“This would cause a problem in operation only in the most strenuous situations — high forces due to shock, such as when a mine or torpedo detonates near you. For normal operations it’s not a concern at all,” he said.

The bolts, or “fasteners” in engineering parlance, hold together sections of track in the large weapons room of the submarines. The Virginia-class submarines employ a unique system to handle their weapons, which are placed in trays or cradles to be moved around the room and guided by the tracks.

Some of the tracks didn’t line up properly, and EB engineers traced the problem to the bolts. The Navy, in a written statement issued Aug. 19, said, “shipbuilders have found improperly drilled and machined bolt holes, bolts that had been improperly machined, and fasteners that were not installed and tightened properly.”

Such a problem, the Navy statement said, “could result in a misalignment of the weapons handling equipment that could prevent the movement of weapon cradles within the torpedo room, and could compromise the integrity of the weapons handling system in a shock event.”

Jabaley noted that about 340 bolts or fasteners were initially being inspected in each submarine’s weapons room.

“We’ve now expanded the inspections to similar applications, to ‘close-tolerance, bolted fit-up.’ That’s where you’re bolting two things together that require a very finely-machined bolt goes through a very finely-machined bolt hole,” Jabaley said. “We’ve ended up with a total of a little over 900 fasteners ship-wide.”

While the New Mexico’s delivery will be delayed, the work to fix the other submarines is not expected to delay their completion.

“On other ships that can be done in parallel with other work,” Jabaley said.

The New Mexico’s crew officially moved aboard July 28 and will not be required to leave the ship during the repairs, Jabaley said, noting that much of the crew still lives ashore. “The duty section spends the night aboard when they’re on duty,” he noted. “The repairs required are primarily in the torpedo room. It’s not an impact to habitability, and the galley is still fully operational.”

Northrop Grumman and the Navy continue to investigate the extent of the problem, Jabaley said, and are inspecting the other four Virginia-class submarines already in service.

“This is a process we expect to take a couple more weeks [before we] understand the impact on the ships we’ve delivered,” he said.

http://www.navytimes.com/news/2009/09/d ... o_090309w/

No outro dia mesmo eu estava em uma discussão com o Bender lá na aéreas, e por MP levantamos um ponto que também é pertinente aqui.

Este tipo de equipamento (submarinos, aviões, carros esporte, e até vestidos de noiva) é produzido em volumes tão pequenos e tem uma quantidade de detalhes tão grande que não é viável aplicar as técnicas mais avançadas de manufatura, como o uso de robôs, máquinas CNC, etc... . Por isso grande parte do trabalho é feito por manualmente e, como todo trabalho manual, está sujeito à falhas e enganos. E só depois, quando é realizada a inspeção, é que se descobrem os problemas, e aí é muito mais complicado para corrigir, e um pequeno defeito vira um grande problema.

Por isso tantas notícias de problemas na construção destes navios e submarinos. Não é que os EUA sejam particularmente ruins neste metier, é que lá o assunto defesa é tão popular quanto as novelas aqui no Brasil, e a mídia cai em cima de cada caso que aparece. E as leis de liberdade de imprensa deles não permitem que o assunto seja classificado como secreto.


Leandro G. Card

lá o assunto defesa é tão popular quanto as novelas aqui no Brasil, e a mídia cai em cima de cada caso que aparece. E as leis de liberdade de imprensa deles não permitem que o assunto seja classificado como secreto.

Isso é uma grande verdade! Lá (e através da net) é possivel acompanhar as fases de construção de um navio de guerra p. ex., por meio de galerias fotográficas, explicações detalhadas, etc.

Quando olho para Portugal e vejo o nosso caso dos NPOs em que parece que estamos a construir DD(X), até fico arrepiado

US Navy 5-year plan to cut littoral ships, other weapons

17:58 24-09-2009


The U.S. Navy has proposed a new five-year budget that cuts by almost half its purchases of a new warship that operates close to shore, a potential blow to Lockheed Martin Corp. and General Dynamics Corp, Bloomberg reported.

The Navy would buy 15 of these ships through 2015, down from 29 in its plan of a year ago, and trim spending overall by 4.5 percent, according to an unreleased budget document. That’s the goal set by top Defense Department officials.

Lockheed and General Dynamics are the prime contractors for the new Littoral Combat Ship. Each has a contract to build two and would have to compete for contracts for the next 15.

The Navy’s proposal is being reviewed, along with those of the other services, in keeping with the Pentagon’s intent to submit in January its long-range budget to the White House in conjunction with its detailed fiscal 2011 budget.

The Navy’s proposed cuts reflect the pressure on the military services to meet spending targets that allow little growth beyond inflation. Top Navy officials say they still plan ultimately to increase the fleet to 313 ships, up from 286 now, and to buy the initially planned total of 55 littoral ships.

The ships are designed for mine clearance, submarine hunting, humanitarian relief, and other missions in shallow coastal waters called littorals. They have a draft of no more than 20 feet, enabling them to operate close to coasts in the Persian Gulf, Korean peninsula and elsewhere.

Guidance From Gates

The service’s proposal to trim planned spending from 2011 through 2015 to $666.3 billion from $698 billion reflects Defense Secretary Robert Gates’s guidance calling for modest growth with emphasis on improving the security of nuclear weapons and upgrading the capabilities to conduct irregular warfare and cyber defense.

The Air Force’s new five-year plan proposes cuts totaling $24.2 billion, or 3.8 percent, according to its unreleased budget.

President Barack Obama assigned Gates to rein in defense spending, which now consumes about 19 cents of every dollar of the federal budget. Adjusted for inflation, defense spending has grown about 43 percent since fiscal 2000. When war costs are included, the number increases to 72 percent.

‘Modest’ Growth

Gates, in an Aug. 31 interview with Bloomberg Television, said the long-range budget being crafted calls for growth that is “modest” when adjusted for inflation and “that allows us to sustain the programs that we have.”

“It’s the stability we need, and I don’t think the rates of growth need to be significantly” higher, Gates said.

Navy Assistant Secretary for Acquisition Sean Stackley told reporters last week the service remains committed to buying 55 littoral ships. Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Gary Roughead told reporters Sept. 15 the service remains committed to a fleet that totals 313 vessels.

The Navy, in its new plan, proposes “significant reductions” in planned purchases of Raytheon Co. missiles and other weapons.

Purchases of Waltham, Massachusetts-based Raytheon air-to- air missiles, Jsow-C cruise missiles, the latest version of the Standard Missile-6 and lightweight MK-54 torpedoes all are cut in the five-year plan.

The purchase of air-to-air missiles is cut to 849 from 1,033’ the Jsow-C is reduced to 1,879 from 2,663’ the Standard Missile-6 is cut to 637 from 688 and torpedo quantities drop to 770 from a planned 1,336.

On the other hand, purchases of Raytheon’s advanced Sea Sparrow weapon for intercepting anti-ship missiles, an international program involving nations including Australia, Denmark and Germany, will be boosted to 236 from 62.

Alliant Missile

Purchases of Alliant Techsystems Inc.’s air-launched advanced anti-radar missile scheduled to enter service in 2010 will be cut to 719 from a planned 954.

Like the Air Force, the Navy would cancel the Joint Tactical radio communications program for ships and planes that is managed by Bethesda, Maryland-based Lockheed Martin.

The Navy also proposes to delay purchase of the EP-X replacement for its Lockheed Martin EP-3 Orion surveillance aircraft, according to the document. The program is in a stage of early development, and no contractor has been chosen.

Altogether, $3.4 billion would be cut from research and development, including $1.6 billion for the EP-X program.

Programs Deferred

The Navy would trim about $25 billion through 2015 by deferring or canceling weapons programs, including a total of about $18 billion in its shipbuilding account, which includes the littoral ship.

The Navy also would cut to 132 from 150 its purchases of the V-22 tilt-rotor plane built by Textron Inc. and Boeing Co. and would buy 15 of 28 planned Lockheed KC-130J refueling tankers, according to the Aug. 19 budget document made available to Bloomberg News.

Navy spokesman Commander Cappy Surette said the service declined to discuss its budget request.

The Navy plan also would cut through 2015:

-- Six of seven planned amphibious warfare ships. These include one of two that would be capable of carrying the Marine Corps’ new Lockheed F-35 vertical takeoff plane and V-22 Ospreys and all five “mobile landing platform” vessels that would carry pre-positioned equipment. Northrop Grumman Corp. is building the first ship’ no construction contracts have been awarded for the other five vessels.

-- Two new ships intended to replace aging command ships such as the USS Mount Whitney. The first vessel was planned for 2012. General Dynamics and Northrop have received contracts for design studies but not for construction.

-- Two of 11 planned high-speed, shallow-draft troop and cargo vessels managed by the Navy to transport Army and Marine Corps units and helicopters. Austal USA is building the vessels in Mobile, Alabama.

-- One of 10 planned Virginia-class submarines made jointly by Northrop Grumman and General Dynamics.

In addition, the Navy would save as much as $825 million by retiring 20 ships one year ahead of schedule, including the USS Halyburton that in April helped free the American captain of a container ship hijacked by Somali pirates in the Gulf of Aden. The Halyburton would be decommissioned in 2013 instead of 2014. MILAZ

http://milaz.info/en/news.php?id=4264