Military Review

US intends to accelerate the pace of construction of new aircraft carriers

42
On the website of the Naval Institute of the US Navy appeared information that the military command sent the company Newport News Shipbuilding a request for calculating the cost of simultaneously building two aircraft carriers, reports "Warspot"


US intends to accelerate the pace of construction of new aircraft carriers


The US Navy indicates that they expect to save from $ 1 to $ 2,5 billion, and also significantly speed up the construction by ordering two ships at once. The US Department of Defense announced that it had requested the Newport News Shipbuilding to miscalculate the costs in case the shipyard received a contract for the simultaneous construction of the aircraft carriers Enterprise (CVN-80) and CVN-81.

If the potential savings confirm the expectations of the US Department of Defense, by the end of the year it will make the necessary adjustments to the budget and be able to sign a contract for the construction of new ships. Thus, the pace of construction will accelerate, and the fleet will be able to receive aircraft carriers at intervals of 3 – 4 of the year, and not 5 of years, as it is now.

In the 80s, the US Department of Defense already ordered the pairing of aircraft carriers. So ships of the Nimitz type CVN-72 and CVN-73, as well as CVN-74 and CVN-75, were built. Then the fleet managed to save about 10% of the cost of materials, as well as reduce the time of construction of aircraft carriers.
Photos used:
usni.org
42 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Zoldat_A
    Zoldat_A 20 March 2018 14: 23
    +9
    The most interesting thing is that in an attempt to save 2 lard, 50 overruns will result. A purely American tradition.
    Let them build new targets for our missiles ...
    1. Friday
      Friday 20 March 2018 14: 50
      +14
      Quote: Zoldat_A

      Let them build new targets for our missiles ...

      Envy of sin.
      1. Zoldat_A
        Zoldat_A 20 March 2018 15: 05
        +19
        Quote: Friday
        Quote: Zoldat_A

        Let them build new targets for our missiles ...

        Envy of sin.

        In an operational-tactical plan, an aircraft carrier is a means of attack at a great distance from its shores. Fits fully with the American military doctrine ..
        We are not going to attack anyone, all the more, for thousands of kilometers from our shores - and this is recorded in OUR doctrine. And as a defensive means - an aircraft carrier is useless.
        So what are we jealous of? That the American hawks want to be able to strike airstrike anywhere in the world? For defensive purposes anywhere in the world we can hit with missiles, but we are not going to attack.
        First, figure out who needs aircraft carriers and why, and then make a conclusion - should we be jealous of someone ... And with the German flag, I would not even talk about missiles or aircraft carriers. Get rid of occupation and external governance first ...
        1. gig334
          gig334 20 March 2018 20: 04
          0
          Quote: Zoldat_A
          Quote: Friday
          Quote: Zoldat_A

          Let them build new targets for our missiles ...

          Envy of sin.

          In an operational-tactical plan, an aircraft carrier is a means of attack at a great distance from its shores. Fits fully with the American military doctrine ..
          We are not going to attack anyone, all the more, for thousands of kilometers from our shores - and this is recorded in OUR doctrine. And as a defensive means - an aircraft carrier is useless.
          So what are we jealous of? That the American hawks want to be able to strike airstrike anywhere in the world? For defensive purposes anywhere in the world we can hit with missiles, but we are not going to attack.
          First, figure out who needs aircraft carriers and why, and then make a conclusion - should we be jealous of someone ... And with the German flag, I would not even talk about missiles or aircraft carriers. Get rid of occupation and external governance first ...


          1 Defense is not only defense off its shores, but also killing an attacker in his den, which can be very far from Russia. This is me about the fact that Russia needs not only diesel ships and boats, but also nuclear cruisers, etc., which can sail for months away from the coast.
          2. everyone needs aircraft carriers if you want to conduct not only domestic but also foreign policy, as well as protect your allies. It’s more profitable to bring an aircraft carrier to a certain country with airplanes, and bomb terrorists or someone else from it. Simply put, for local wars, an aircraft carrier is necessary, necessary to protect its interests and allies.
          So Russia needs to have at least 4 modern aircraft carriers, so there is no need to sculpt excuses that we do not need them. Aircraft carriers are useless in the war between the major Powers, which possess cruise, ballistic, hypersonic missiles, as well as high-speed torpedoes, etc.
          1. Zoldat_A
            Zoldat_A 20 March 2018 20: 37
            +5
            Quote: gig334
            no need to sculpt excuses that we do not need them. Aircraft carriers are useless in the war between the major Powers, which have cruise, ballistic, hypersonic missiles, as well as high-speed torpedoes, etc.
            And in our doctrine, the war with Cote d'Ivoire is not spelled out. In general, an offensive war with anyone is not spelled out. But there are "probable friends" whose aircraft carriers will have to be drowned near our shores. And therefore, you quite rightly noticed that
            Quote: gig334
            Aircraft carriers are useless in a war between major Powers

            hi
            1. gig334
              gig334 20 March 2018 22: 47
              0
              Quote: Zoldat_A
              Quote: gig334
              no need to sculpt excuses that we do not need them. Aircraft carriers are useless in the war between the major Powers, which have cruise, ballistic, hypersonic missiles, as well as high-speed torpedoes, etc.
              And in our doctrine, the war with Côte d'Ivoire is not spelled out. In general, an offensive war is not registered with anyone. But there are "probable friends" whose aircraft carriers near our shores have to be drowned. And so you rightly noticed that
              Quote: gig334
              Aircraft carriers are useless in a war between major Powers

              hi


              re-read my comment, read carefully, and then answer.
          2. Voyager
            Voyager 20 March 2018 21: 52
            0
            In addition, the working aircraft carrier is also a school of pilots ..
        2. Clumsy
          Clumsy 21 March 2018 07: 56
          +1
          Quote: Zoldat_A
          And with the German flag I wouldn’t talk about missiles or aircraft carriers at all

          Well, a person can and should argue regardless of the flag, but for the rest I agree with you, they are useless in a war between major powers.
      2. Alex-a832
        Alex-a832 20 March 2018 16: 22
        +3
        Quote: Friday
        Quote: Zoldat_A

        Let them build new targets for our missiles ...

        Envy of sin.

        Envy targets? Or envy the US desire to catch up with yesterday? Or envy the fact that they can litter with exorbitant money, obtained for the most part in a criminal way? Something none of the options for envy does not cause.
        1. krot
          krot 20 March 2018 19: 25
          0
          Build aircraft carriers now, anyway, that lenkors in 70 years))) Not relevant in the light of known events) And for us the news is positive! Dough they spend non-aging weapons a lot)
          1. mvg
            mvg 21 March 2018 01: 48
            0
            You would at least learn Russian .. Then you would have formed thoughts into sentences.
      3. NEXUS
        NEXUS 20 March 2018 16: 27
        +6
        Quote: Friday
        Envy of sin.

        Read our doctrine and calm down. It’s too early for us to build aircraft carriers, as there is no decent NEW escort for them, and there are no basing places and shipyards for construction. It is clear that we need them in order for sailors to provide air cover in the open ocean, but ... until we begin to build destroyer-class ships, it’s too early to say support ships for aircraft carriers for the Russian Federation.
        And about the envy ... well, so far the mattresses and the Europeans do not have a card that would kill Status-6, the KR with a nuclear engine, Kanzhal and ICBM Sarmat ... so for now I envy us, not us.
      4. Safevi
        Safevi 20 March 2018 18: 19
        +1
        "Let them build new targets for our missiles .."
        When the cat does not reach the meat, it says "it is rotten." envy, see in the eyes laughing
    2. antivirus
      antivirus 20 March 2018 17: 51
      0
      no - you have to wait and in 15-20 years take av \ nosy like China on the outskirts
  2. novel66
    novel66 20 March 2018 14: 24
    +5
    build, build. "daggers" enough for everyone
    1. milling machine
      milling machine 20 March 2018 14: 29
      +11
      If they build it, it means they’re not very afraid of our “daggers”. Maybe they know more than they showed us in the cartoon?
      1. chingachguc
        chingachguc 20 March 2018 14: 33
        +3
        Yes, on an aircraft carrier and without Daggers there is any deadly iron ... what a darling goal it is to slam both the ship and the air group at once ... mmmm ...
      2. Galaxy
        Galaxy 20 March 2018 14: 35
        +13
        Cartoons (a new campaign tool) worked, the electorate shawl and in a single impulse voted as it should! What else does the leader need for complete happiness, if only congratulations from Trump's friend?
        1. Galleon
          Galleon 20 March 2018 14: 47
          +19
          Some people don’t even know what is steeper than an aircraft carrier, only Fort Knox and the residence of the US president are guarded. They already drowned him in dreams several times - both along and across, and from right to left. Aw, people, he has 20 to 50 ships in guard! Near and far protection zone. Of these, with Aegis, at least a quarter, or even more! Constantly flies its own aircraft AWACS - one of 4 on board, and several links of fighter guards with a combat radius of 850 km, 1-2 nuclear submarines provide underwater protection, except for aircraft PLO. Do you write with your own letters? Have grown up?
          1. Viktor.12.71
            Viktor.12.71 20 March 2018 15: 20
            +10
            Quote: Galleon
            Do you write with your own letters? Have grown up?

            Well, why are you ruining the wet dreams of sofa warriors, they just need to shout like Eun laughing
            1. Galleon
              Galleon 20 March 2018 16: 52
              +5
              Oh! Pah-pah, piss on my tongue - blurted out someone's secret repeat
    2. mvg
      mvg 21 March 2018 01: 49
      +1
      Do you like cartoons? At your age?
  3. chingachguc
    chingachguc 20 March 2018 14: 30
    +2
    The United States is preparing hard for the last war))) build, build))
  4. 76SSSR
    76SSSR 20 March 2018 14: 33
    0
    In his message to the Federal Assembly, Putin is already hinting to them in plain text, and these all swell in and out grandmas in floating cemeteries.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 20 March 2018 14: 41
      +8
      Quote: 76SSSR
      and these all swell and swell grandmas in the floating cemeteries.

      So it's worth considering why they do this.
      1. krops777
        krops777 20 March 2018 14: 57
        0
        So it's worth considering why they do this.


        The military lobby is very strong in Congress, especially those who oversee naval armaments, an aircraft carrier is a good way to earn money, this is one moment, and the other the USA is well aware that Russia does not plan to attack unless precedents are set, and I think it will not come to that.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk 20 March 2018 16: 57
          +7
          Quote: krops777
          The military lobby is very strong in Congress, especially those who oversee naval weapons, an aircraft carrier is a good way to earn

          And this lobby in Congress twisted the arms of the American Navy to order aircraft carriers? laughing
          You project it on the Russian Federation. How real is the situation in which the owners, say, USC, put pressure on Shoigu to order aircraft carriers?
    2. milling machine
      milling machine 20 March 2018 14: 42
      +4
      Quote: 76SSSR
      In his message to the Federal Assembly, Putin is already hinting to them in plain text, and these all swell in and out grandmas in floating cemeteries.

      What to take from them - they’re "well, dumb." Therefore, these "" have the most powerful economy and advanced development.
  5. Thunderbolt
    Thunderbolt 20 March 2018 14: 48
    +9
    Once the construction pace is doubled, we need to answer asymmetrically, take off twice as many cartoons. Just don’t say that aircraft carriers are useless trash ... it gives stability to the sea at sea and is very dangerous for the continent because of the lack of precise coordinates.
    1. Charik
      Charik 20 March 2018 16: 44
      +4
      so it is necessary --SoyuzMultFilm reanimate
  6. Altona
    Altona 20 March 2018 14: 57
    0
    Quote: Zoldat_A
    Let them build new targets for our missiles ...

    -----------------------------
    Most likely this is for China. After Putin threatened with hypersonic missiles, the mattress concept has changed a little in the sense that they decided to crush China by sea. The recently announced exercises with South Korea, supposedly to intimidate the DPRK, are actually intended to demonstrate China's military power.
  7. Altona
    Altona 20 March 2018 14: 58
    0
    Quote: frezer
    What to take from them - they’re "well, dumb." Therefore, these "" have the most powerful economy and advanced development.

    ------------------------------
    They are not stupid, but persistent and persistent. They just love to strengthen the frontal bone.
  8. Corsair0304
    Corsair0304 20 March 2018 14: 58
    0
    Well, they can afford such a construction. Let's hope that we have not only cartoons with rockets
  9. askme
    askme 20 March 2018 15: 05
    +2
    12-14 AUGs with a 100000-ton nuclear multipurpose flagship carrier in each of them since the 80s. Now at least 4 aircraft carriers do not reach this amount. They did not have an AUG third fleet. The fourth is naked. And these are precisely two fleets - the US "bodyguard", which directly provide US self-defense from the west and east coasts.

    There is nothing unusual in such actions.
  10. dojjdik
    dojjdik 20 March 2018 15: 19
    0
    build, build, while we will sell “daggers” to Iran; we’ll always earn some money, but alas, these floating coffins are very expensive, but they’re worthless with horseradish
  11. next322
    next322 20 March 2018 15: 26
    +5
    how sad it is, but in the Russian Federation 950t MRK 21631 build -5 years ........ and the frigate is already 12 years old ...... and here the aircraft carrier-4 years
  12. Jack O'Neill
    Jack O'Neill 20 March 2018 15: 41
    +3
    Nimits want to be replaced by Fords, not otherwise. It is quite logical.
  13. Palagecha
    Palagecha 20 March 2018 20: 06
    +2
    There is no fleet in the country, what kind of aircraft carriers can we talk about? How to saturate the AUG? And the fact that we do not need aircraft carriers is absolutely true! I, too, when I could not buy a car, said that it was needed, it only sucks money ... laughing
  14. dlekcat
    dlekcat 21 March 2018 01: 27
    0
    See cvn81 don't drown - it's mine laughing
  15. aszzz888
    aszzz888 21 March 2018 02: 17
    +1
    US intends to accelerate the pace of construction of new aircraft carriers
    This is how much more additional “Daggers" need to be put "at the service"? bully
    1. Clumsy
      Clumsy 21 March 2018 08: 10
      0
      Quote: aszzz888
      This is how much more additional “Daggers" need to be put "at the service"?

      One or two, damage the deck, no need to even sink soldier
  16. gippernano
    gippernano 21 March 2018 09: 56
    0
    They float like a ram for this money, and with the economy, the sailors will refuse, just like axes will float.