Military Review

The report of the US Congress on the program for the construction of three new heavy nuclear-powered aircraft carriers such as the "Gerald R. Ford"

23



The Congressional Research Service has published a new report on the construction of three new heavy nuclear aircraft carriers (AVT) of the Gerald R. Ford type (Gerald R.Ford) - CVN-78, CVN-79, CVN-80.

The report of the US Congress on the program for the construction of three new heavy nuclear-powered aircraft carriers such as the "Gerald R. Ford"


The US Navy has issued a purchase of AVT CVN-78 in 2008 f.g. According to the calculations of the US Navy, within the budget of the 2014 f.g. AVT cost was 12,8 billion dollars (12,829.3 billion dollars) at current prices. All advance payments for the construction of the ship were fully carried out in FN 2001-2007, and in FN XX NUMX budgets. the ship was fully funded. In 2008 f.d. and 2011 f.g. The Navy did not receive any additional allocations for the CVN-2012 construction program and requested FN 2013. 78 million, and in 2014 f.d. plan to make a request for another 588,1 million dollars to offset the rising cost of building a ship.

The second AVT CVN-79 is scheduled to be purchased in 2013 FG. Advance payments for the construction of this ship were made in FG 2007-2012. and Naval Forces plan to fully fund the construction of the AVT in f. 2013-2018.

According to the calculations of the Navy, within the budget of the 2014 f. the cost of purchasing a second AVT CVN-79 will be 11,3 billion (11,338.4 billion) in current prices. In 2014 f.d. for the construction of an aircraft carrier will be requested 944,9 million dollars.

The purchase of the third ABC CVN-80 is scheduled for 2018 FG. and according to calculations of the Navy, its value in f. 2014. is 13,9 billion dollars (13,874.2 billion dollars) at current prices.

Within the budget of the Navy on the 2016-2017 f.yy. advance payments will be received for the construction of the ship, and the ship will be fully financed in FN 2018-2023.
Originator:
http://flotprom.ru/news/?ELEMENT_ID=152337
23 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. 31231
    31231 16 September 2013 07: 06 New
    +5
    Yes, with the financing of the state defense order, problems are not only with us. America also scratches turnips.
    1. SPACE
      SPACE 16 September 2013 10: 36 New
      0
      Now, if they were building the Ohio nuclear submarine, that would be bad news, but the fact that they are building aircraft carriers is good, some people in the American military-industrial complex will earn good money and even temporarily support the state economy and even reduce unemployment a bit, so long as the cities go bankrupt, unemployment is growing, the sun is reducing, state. health and education programs are cutting, think of a couple more trillions of debt printed. But then these same aircraft carriers will drag them to the bottom of the financial abyss. If only in Russia this escapade was not led. The more aircraft carriers, Xs and Fs, the faster it will allow them to bend, a paradox, but this is so, they cannot violate international law anyway.
      1. Joker
        16 September 2013 21: 11 New
        +1
        Now, if they built the submarine Ohio

        Don't worry, the other day one was already launched. wink
  2. svp67
    svp67 16 September 2013 07: 09 New
    +7
    Three - new aircraft carriers and even nuclear ones, a serious bid to maintain their status as the first sea power ... is our answer interesting? And the answer of China ...
    1. Quiet
      Quiet 16 September 2013 07: 15 New
      +2
      Can inflatable ?? laughing In debt as in silk ... fool
      1. Nukem999
        Nukem999 16 September 2013 07: 22 New
        +6
        ..................
        1. Vashestambid3
          Vashestambid3 16 September 2013 08: 00 New
          -7
          Within the budget of the Navy on the 2016-2017 f.yy. advance payments will be received for the construction of the ship, and the ship will be fully financed in FN 2018-2023.

          This gets the 3 newest Nuclear Aircraft Carriers by the year 25, considering that by this year the first Nimitz will leave the fleet, then the Navy Command will get 13 AB !! smile LOL Medal to the studio !!
    2. tronin.maxim
      tronin.maxim 16 September 2013 07: 17 New
      -1
      Quote: svp67
      Three - new aircraft carriers and even nuclear ones, a serious bid to maintain their status as the first sea power ... is our answer interesting? And the answer of China ...

      Many, many ATLANT Project ships. Correspondingly supplemented and updated under modern rapidly changing requirements.
      1. Nukem999
        Nukem999 16 September 2013 07: 24 New
        0
        ................
      2. Per se.
        Per se. 16 September 2013 07: 42 New
        +5
        Quote: tronin.maxim
        Many, many ATLANT Project ships.
        Or maybe, instead of endlessly thinking about how to "pierce the wheels" of others, it's time for us to have a normal "car" and steer in this world?
      3. Civil
        Civil 16 September 2013 09: 22 New
        +1
        Quote: tronin.maxim
        Quote: svp67
        Three - new aircraft carriers and even nuclear ones, a serious bid to maintain their status as the first sea power ... is our answer interesting? And the answer of China ...

        Many, many ATLANT Project ships. Correspondingly supplemented and updated under modern rapidly changing requirements.

        You yourself believe in what they wrote :-)
    3. xetai9977
      xetai9977 16 September 2013 08: 13 New
      +4
      The Americans have always given high priority to the naval component of their army. Naturally, aircraft carriers are insanely expensive. But they can afford it. Although the US economy has stalled, it remains the first economy in the world.
      1. UVB
        UVB 16 September 2013 10: 02 New
        +3
        As long as their Tugriks remain the main currency, they will have no problems with financing. Print as needed. But the whole world will be really paying, including And we.
    4. military
      military 16 September 2013 09: 23 New
      +3
      Quote: svp67
      Three - new aircraft carriers and even nuclear ones, a serious bid to maintain their status as the first sea power ... is our answer interesting?

      our answer is a deeply modernized "Admiral Kuznetsov" ... a very "deeply modernized" ... recourse
      1. xetai9977
        xetai9977 16 September 2013 13: 26 New
        +1
        In my opinion, "Admiral Kuznetsov" is much inferior to the American ones in displacement and in the number of aircraft (90 for American versus 50 for Kuznetsov)
        1. Tektor
          Tektor 16 September 2013 22: 49 New
          +1
          In my opinion, "Admiral Kuznetsov" is much inferior to the American ones in displacement and in the number of aircraft (90 for American versus 50 for Kuznetsov)
          But inferior in size a little. In the displacement - because of the YaSU, which, together with protection, etc., weighs a lot. And on planes, we can assume that it is not inferior, because they cannot lift all the Amersa planes into the air: they have a calculation to replace those who have left for technical or military reasons. Nimitsa can lift an air wing from about 36 multipurpose sides so that they have enough fuel to fly to the radius of combat use and vice versa, and even then with refueling. Conclusion, knowing that Kuzya also has strike weapons, we can say that he has an advantage with the regular number of air wings.
          1. jasper
            jasper 17 September 2013 21: 01 New
            0
            Usa is practically an island, Russia is a continental power, different priorities
    5. Serg 122
      Serg 122 16 September 2013 17: 12 New
      +1
      And why should we answer? Well, let them wipe their first place! We fight not by number, but by skill
  3. Nukem999
    Nukem999 16 September 2013 07: 30 New
    +3
    ......................
  4. The comment was deleted.
  5. lotar
    lotar 16 September 2013 07: 31 New
    0
    Each carrier needs a corresponding fleet of escorts, I’m interested in these three aircraft carriers to complement existing strike carrier groups or to join their ranks. If the first one is still nothing, although it’s not enough good.
  6. mirag2
    mirag2 16 September 2013 07: 44 New
    +6
    These are the ships! Yes, directly the monsters. Of course, envy takes what to say.
  7. Sirs
    Sirs 16 September 2013 08: 43 New
    0
    It is necessary to build, but what sin we have no capacities to conceal. That's only in the Far East if you make a super shipyard for super tankers and at these capacities and make the 1st bird. and pull up the cooperation. IMHO

    in the video above, there is such a crane, nowhere in the world has such a crane seen its lifting capacity?
  8. rugor
    rugor 16 September 2013 08: 45 New
    +4
    Can inflatable ?? laughing Debt like silk ... fool


    They are building money with us !!! That's what offends the most.
  9. nsws3
    nsws3 16 September 2013 08: 47 New
    +2
    I wish we had built 2025 Atlantes (or similar new projects) with escort ships by the 5 year !!!
  10. Trailer
    Trailer 16 September 2013 08: 49 New
    +2
    Meanwhile, another Antey class nuclear submarine "Tomsk" is on fire.

    http://news.rambler.ru/21132980/
  11. Wedmak
    Wedmak 16 September 2013 09: 02 New
    +1
    Strange ... And how does the financing of three aircraft carriers correspond to the Pentagon budget sequestration? Something muddied by the Yankees ...
  12. Sergeant
    Sergeant 16 September 2013 09: 10 New
    +1
    I doubt the profitability of the construction of these huge. It is believed that some countries are abandoning these floating airfields in favor of multipurpose and, not in an example, maneuverable ships.
    In the same USA, most of these "devices" are stuck for many reasons.
    Yes, for the owners of the military-industrial complex, this, of course, is extremely beneficial ...
  13. Yoshkin Kot
    Yoshkin Kot 16 September 2013 09: 41 New
    +2
    I don’t think that all three will be built, the collapse of the American budget is already a fait accompli, but I’m for them to build and as much as possible, the best way to ruin a small wealthy country is to give it an aircraft carrier bully
  14. Alikovo
    Alikovo 16 September 2013 09: 42 New
    +1
    next targets for yachts.
  15. NOBODY EXCEPT US
    NOBODY EXCEPT US 16 September 2013 10: 02 New
    +2
    Well, 13 pieces of them will not be built under the replacement of obsolete ones, which means that 10 will remain ,,, But in general it’s strange to hear the opinion of some on the site that this is all a waste of money, it's like saying that I don’t buy a good car because it’s no, I don’t buy it because there is NO MONEY ,,,, that's the whole reason, everything else is from the evil one ...
  16. darksoul
    darksoul 16 September 2013 10: 15 New
    +2
    Quote: Wedmak
    Strange ... And how does the financing of three aircraft carriers correspond to the Pentagon budget sequestration? Something muddled by the Yankees


    They cut the printing press for the whole thing, and all these conversations of the budget cutting sequestration are swagger ..... they stamp everything so mom don’t cry, and we need an asymmetric answer, submarines, cruisers ... we don’t have such imperial interests as striped means to destroy this floating gov..na should be
  17. Storm
    Storm 16 September 2013 10: 29 New
    0
    They will not pull thirteen aircraft carriers. Now we are talking about putting two aircraft carriers to the joke because of budget sequestration.
  18. krpmlws
    krpmlws 16 September 2013 10: 32 New
    +1
    We need to build our aircraft carriers, and we are only making plans for the long term. Only with an aircraft carrier component will the combat squadron represent a complete and balanced organism. Refusing to build aircraft carriers means putting an end to a full-fledged surface fleet. Surprised by the position of Rogozin, he considers aircraft carriers for Russian ships image.
  19. Storm
    Storm 16 September 2013 10: 36 New
    +2
    While we need to set up escort ships, an aircraft carrier without them is vulnerable and inferior.
  20. ALEXXX1983
    ALEXXX1983 16 September 2013 10: 53 New
    0
    Quote: svp67
    our answer is interesting? And the answer of China ...

    I don’t know how about China ... And we can only envy crying
    Although by 3030 the situation may change !? what
  21. MIKHAN
    MIKHAN 16 September 2013 11: 12 New
    +1
    The Anglo-Saxons became insolent .. (trillion debts) They are these things at our expense (or rather, they are building at the expense of the inhabitants of the planet ..) the printing machine works at their increased speeds .. Our reserve dollar funds will lose weight at times like all other countries .. That's right during the Soviet Union there was an iron curtain .. You need to get away from these green pieces of paper .. Until these crap will stand up on duty in the oceans ...
  22. HollyGremlin
    HollyGremlin 16 September 2013 11: 14 New
    +2
    Why do we need an aircraft carrier: for small victorious wars, if we are not going to wage them, then it is not needed.
    After all, 1 aircraft carrier costs the same as 15 main ships or 10 nuclear submarines (or 2000 ICBMs)!
    What 10 submarines with 1 aircraft carrier will do, together with his support group, is simply scary to imagine (there are not even so many missiles).
    But for an aircraft carrier, you also need to develop special aircraft, train pilots for landing on the deck. Plus, if you build not in a series but in a single copy, it is even more expensive.
    God forbid ours to think of building an aircraft carrier.
    1. jasper
      jasper 17 September 2013 21: 03 New
      +1
      Russia certainly needs aircraft carriers, but only 2 maximum 3, we have other tasks
  23. MIKHAN
    MIKHAN 16 September 2013 11: 30 New
    +1
    So think guys why they are building them .. (and they are building quickly) ...
    1. jasper
      jasper 17 September 2013 21: 04 New
      0
      sawing money love
  24. pilot-mk
    pilot-mk 16 September 2013 12: 14 New
    +1
    As the submariners say: there are two types of ships - submarines and targets. The US plans to build another 3 targets.
    1. scientist cat
      scientist cat 17 September 2013 17: 13 New
      0
      Quote: pilot-mk
      As the submariners say: there are two types of ships - submarines and targets. The US plans to build another 3 targets.



      Tell it to Doenitz, Admiral of the Third Reich Submarine Fleet
  25. moremansf
    moremansf 16 September 2013 13: 15 New
    0
    Time will tell who was right ... but for now we have one major overhaul ... yes fires ... It's a shame for the state !!!
    1. jasper
      jasper 17 September 2013 21: 04 New
      0
      Do you think it’s better not to do anything?