The Navy's Newest White Elephant.

[actaeon277]

So great, they want to scrap 9 of the 16.

Navy Risks Blowback in Bid to Scrap $5 Billion of Troubled Ships​

• Getting rid of ships years early would save $4.3 billion: Navy
• Vessels’ troubles have included propulsion system gear defect

Navy Risks Blowback in Bid to Scrap $5 Billion of Troubled Ships

www.bloomberg.com

 

[printcraft]

So great, they want to scrap 9 of the 16.

Navy Risks Blowback in Bid to Scrap $5 Billion of Troubled Ships​

• Getting rid of ships years early would save $4.3 billion: Navy
• Vessels’ troubles have included propulsion system gear defect

Navy Risks Blowback in Bid to Scrap $5 Billion of Troubled Ships

www.bloomberg.com

Weird, I watched a youtube vid on this earlier today...
They have gas turbines in addition to the regular engines that were supposed to push them to 50 knots but
the gear coupling units to connect the engines were failing under the load and they can only run them in dire need.
10-15 knots otherwise.
To replace them they have to hack the hull apart extensively in dry dock.
Easier to build new with the upgraded gearing I guess.

 

[churchmouse]

Weird, I watched a youtube vid on this earlier today...
They have gas turbines in addition to the regular engines that were supposed to push them to 50 knots but
the gear coupling units to connect the engines were failing under the load and they can only run them in dire need.
10-15 knots otherwise.
To replace them they have to hack the hull apart extensively in dry dock.
Easier to build new with the upgraded gearing I guess.

Big money spent so wisely. I wonder if the engineers/manf of those units are in deep Doo-Doo over this.

 

[churchmouse]

So great, they want to scrap 9 of the 16.

Navy Risks Blowback in Bid to Scrap $5 Billion of Troubled Ships​

• Getting rid of ships years early would save $4.3 billion: Navy
• Vessels’ troubles have included propulsion system gear defect

Navy Risks Blowback in Bid to Scrap $5 Billion of Troubled Ships

www.bloomberg.com

Just read the article. What a load of wasted money.

 

[actaeon277]

Yup.
Here's my take on how bad they are.
In the past, when ships were obsolete or unneeded, they were either retasked/repurposed, or mothballed.
The theory, ships are expensive to build and require permission.
Already built ships.. well.. they're already built.
My sub was built as a boomer. In Pres. Carter's day, the took the missiles out as part of SALT II (I think it was II).
So, the Navy took the missile off, and thought, what should we do with this.
Well, at the time there were only boomers and fast attacks, so by default that made us a fast attack.
But, we weren't fast, and kinda weak on attack.
But we had this big unused missile compartment.
So, extra bunks, add an armory, and a dry deck shelter or 2, and we could carry special mission personnel.

The point being, they didn't decom a ship.
They kept it and found a use.

But the LCS class, yup, so bad, get rid of it.

 

[actaeon277]

And, the Navy is FINALLY writing off the LCS concept.

Of course, it's because they are "old legacy".
Which of course fails the smell test.
The concept was flawed from the beginning.
The reasons it failed, was predicted from the beginning.

 

[jwamplerusa]

the Navy is FINALLY writing off the LCS concept

Our tax dollars at work...

 

[KellyinAvon]

And, the Navy is FINALLY writing off the LCS concept.

Of course, it's because they are "old legacy".
Which of course fails the smell test.
The concept was flawed from the beginning.
The reasons it failed, was predicted from the beginning.

Success has been redefined as a slowing of failure. (borrowed from Dilbert)

A slowing of failure pays better (pretty much every defense contractor on Earth. Have I mentioned that I really, really, REALLY hate Lockheed-Martin?)

 

[bgcatty]

Too bad that the idiots who run the armed forces don’t read their history books. None other than 5 star general and president of the USA Dwight D. Eisenhower warned the country to beware the Military Industrial Complex. Those that ignore history are doomed to repeat it!

 

[Cameramonkey]

When your darling ship is dead in the water because Windows crashed during sea trials, you know you have a boondoggle.

 

[Alamo]

I’m actually surprised that someone owned up to the fact that it didn’t work.

Hey, I hear the Ukrainian Navy needs some ships…

 

[DoggyDaddy]

I’m actually surprised that someone owned up to the fact that it didn’t work.

Hey, I hear the Ukrainian Navy needs some ships…

What, and put more money in Biden's pocket?

 

[actaeon277]

I’m actually surprised that someone owned up to the fact that it didn’t work.

Hey, I hear the Ukrainian Navy needs some ships…

No one owned up.
They stated it's become a legacy issue.

Meanwhile, there are ships 5 times older still in service.

So.. legacy.. bah!

 

[actaeon277]

 

[Haven]

When your darling ship is dead in the water because Windows crashed during sea trials, you know you have a boondoggle.

They should have run it on Linux instead.

 

[actaeon277]

So, not only was the LCS flawed, and kept tying up shipyard resources, we got rid of a bunch of navy shipyards.
What happens when you make something that keeps breaking, and then get rid of resources to fix stuff...

You double the amount of subs that can't go to sea.
There will always be around 20 percent (or so) that need work. It's a harsh environment, things break.
But now, we're up to 37 percent. Almost double.

 

[BJHay]

When I read the report of the destroyer Fitzgerald colliding with the ACX Crystal and thought about how long, serious, and systemic the problems were that lead to the wreck I lost all respect for senior Navy leadership. This looks to be another bad decision in a line of bad decisions.

 

[Creedmoor]

So, not only was the LCS flawed, and kept tying up shipyard resources, we got rid of a bunch of navy shipyards.
What happens when you make something that keeps breaking, and then get rid of resources to fix stuff...

You double the amount of subs that can't go to sea.
There will always be around 20 percent (or so) that need work. It's a harsh environment, things break.
But now, we're up to 37 percent. Almost double.

Arn't subs at the end of a rotation, still in port for 30-60 days for service and repairs?

 

[actaeon277]

Arn't subs at the end of a rotation, still in port for 30-60 days for service and repairs?

Depends what you mean.

Attack subs have 1 crew.
Boomers have 2 crews.
The boomers swap crews, with a maintenance period during the overlap.

Attack subs do maintenance between deployments.

But shipyard takes more than just maintenance.
It's a BIG deal.
Hull and structure are big items.
Major internal equipment upgrades that require cutting thru the pressure hull.
Propeller or shaft work.
Everybody's working hours to try to get EVERYTHING done while the yardbirds are there.

If I remember I went thru one scheduled shipyard period, and one emergency period (lost 2 main ballast tanks).
They sucked.

 

[Creedmoor]

Depends what you mean.

Attack subs have 1 crew.
Boomers have 2 crews.
The boomers swap crews, with a maintenance period during the overlap.

Attack subs do maintenance between deployments.

But shipyard takes more than just maintenance.
It's a BIG deal.
Hull and structure are big items.
Major internal equipment upgrades that require cutting thru the pressure hull.
Propeller or shaft work.
Everybody's working hours to try to get EVERYTHING done while the yardbirds are there.

If I remember I went thru one scheduled shipyard period, and one emergency period (lost 2 main ballast tanks).
They sucked.

Boomers is all I know about. Thanks