Gerald R. Ford Aircraft Carrier Suffers New Failure at Sea - Ships Nostalgia
09:04

Welcome
Welcome!Welcome to Ships Nostalgia, the world's greatest online community for people worldwide with an interest in ships and shipping. Whether you are crew, ex-crew, ship enthusiasts or cruisers, this is the forum for you. And what's more, it's completely FREE.

Click here to go to the forums home page and find out more.
Click here to join.
Log in
User Name Password

Gerald R. Ford Aircraft Carrier Suffers New Failure at Sea

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 9th May 2018, 17:48
surveychile surveychile is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 13,611
Gerald R. Ford Aircraft Carrier Suffers New Failure at Sea

The Gerald R. Ford, the U.S. Navy’s costliest warship, suffered a new failure at sea that forced it back to port and raised fresh questions about the new class of aircraft carriers.

The previously undisclosed problem with a propulsion system bearing, which occurred in January but has yet to be remedied, comes as the Navy is poised to request approval from a supportive Congress to expedite a contract for a fourth carrier in what was to have been a three-ship class. It’s part of a push to expand the Navy’s 284-ship fleet to 355 as soon as the mid-2030s.

It was the second failure in less than a year with a “main thrust bearing” that’s part of the $12.9 billion carrier’s propulsion system. The first occurred in April 2017, during sea trials a month before the vessel’s delivery. The ship, built by Huntington Ingalls Industries Inc., has been sailing in a shakedown period to test systems and work out bugs. It’s now scheduled to be ready for initial combat duty in 2022.
‘Manufacturing Defect’

The Naval Sea Systems Command said the Ford experienced “an out of specification condition” with a propulsion system component. Huntington Ingalls determined it was due to a “manufacturing defect,” the command said, and “not improper operation” by sailors. The defect “affects the same component” located in other parts of the propulsion system, the Navy added.

Navy officials didn’t disclose the problem during budget hearings before Congress in recent weeks, and House and Senate lawmakers didn’t ask about it.

Shelby Oakley, a director with the U.S. Government Accountability Office who monitors Navy shipbuilding, said the latest part failure was “unfortunate, but this and other ship quality issues are not surprising. The Navy has had issues with the extent of its inspections prior to delivery from the shipbuilder.”

The Navy is seeking approval in the fiscal 2019 defense request to accelerate purchase of the fourth Ford-class carrier by bundling it in a contract with the third. It expects to request congressional support over the next month or two for what’s now an estimated $58 billion program.
Trump’s Promise

President Donald Trump promised the “12-carrier Navy we need,” up from 11 today, when he stood on the Ford’s vast deck during a visit in March 2017 to Newport News, Virginia, where Huntington Ingalls built the ship and is headquartered.

The Ford’s propulsion system flaws are separate from reliability issues on its troubled aircraft launch and recovery system and less publicized delays with its 11 advanced weapons elevators for moving munitions, which are not yet operational.

In the January incident, the bearing overheated to what a March 8 Navy memo described as “92 degrees Fahrenheit above the bearing temperature setpoint” and “after securing the equipment to prevent damage, the ship safely returned to port.”

A failure review board is identifying “modifications required to preclude recurrence,” it said. The bearing is one of four that transfers thrust from the ship’s four propeller shafts.

The Navy and Huntington Ingalls “are evaluating the case for a claim against the manufacturer,” so the amount of repair costs to be paid by “the manufacturer has not yet been determined,” William Couch, a spokesman for the Sea Systems Command, said in the statement.

It’s “encouraging that the Navy wants to hold the manufacturer accountable, however, it is unclear what warranty provisions the Navy has,” Oakley said. “The Navy has a cost-reimbursement contract with the shipbuilder, where the Navy pays the shipbuilder’s costs in exchange for its best efforts to build the ship, and also did not have a warranty with the shipbuilder.”
GE’s Role

Couch and Huntington Ingalls spokesman Beci Brenton declined to say who made the bearing that failed.

But General Electric Co. is responsible for the propulsion system part, and the Navy program office said in an assessment that an inspection of the carrier’s four main thrust bearings after the January failure revealed “machining errors” by GE workers at a Lynn, Massachusetts, facility “during the original manufacturing” as “the actual root cause.”

Deborah Case, a GE spokeswoman, said in an email that “GE did produce the gears for the CVN-78. However, we are no longer producing gears for CVN-78” and “we cannot comment on the investigation.”

The CVN-78 is the official name of the Gerald R. Ford.

Couch said defects “will be fully corrected” during the ship’s upcoming “post-shakedown availability” phase. All vessels go through the phase intended for correcting deficiencies discovered during the post-delivery sea trial conducted by sailors.

The post-shakedown availability was supposed to start last month and end in December. Its start is now delayed until this summer in part because of the failure, with completion about a year later, according to Couch.

Regards

Tomi.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg USS-Gerald-R-Ford-at-Sea-800x533.jpg (244.6 KB, 68 views)
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10th May 2018, 00:57
RHP RHP is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,372
The yanks will sort it out, don't worry. A six month delay at the start of her career is nothing considering a 40 year operational life.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10th May 2018, 19:38
Burntisland Ship Yard's Avatar
Burntisland Ship Yard Burntisland Ship Yard is offline  
Senior Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Engineering
Active: 1974 - 1982
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 391
Main thrust bearing, sounds familiar, w.r.t the Q.E carrier......
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11th May 2018, 02:53
RHP RHP is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,372
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burntisland Ship Yard View Post
Main thrust bearing, sounds familiar, w.r.t the Q.E carrier......
Don't the yanks have WD40?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 21st July 2018, 03:01
oceanmariner oceanmariner is offline  
Member
Organisation: Coasters
Department: Deck
Active: 1963 - Present
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 41
I remember the Zumwalt breaking down in the Panama Canal with a stern bearing problem on her voyage to her first home port.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 22nd July 2018, 02:13
oceanmariner oceanmariner is offline  
Member
Organisation: Coasters
Department: Deck
Active: 1963 - Present
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 41
Now the Zumwalt's sister ship has to go back to the builder for new RR turbines.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 13th September 2018, 08:40
oceanmariner oceanmariner is offline  
Member
Organisation: Coasters
Department: Deck
Active: 1963 - Present
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 41
You gotta remember USN engineering is run by people than never had a real job. They always need to have new, untried designs. So far all the Zumwalts have had propulsion problems. But the USN has 30 year old cruisers still running. Same with the carrier before the Ford.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Watch failure behind Baltic Carrier grounding non descript News and Views from the Shipping World 1 20th May 2008 11:37
USS Gerald Ford Hawkeye United States Navy 8 5th January 2007 00:06



Support SN


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.1.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.