New nuke carrier will arrive late, incomplete |

New nuke carrier will arrive late, incomplete

WASHINGTON — The Navy’s new multibillion-dollar aircraft carrier, already beset by delays and cost overruns, is likely going to be delivered incomplete and will require even more money to finish, according to a government watchdog report.

The spending on the Gerald R. Ford carrier after it is delivered could run nearly as high as $1 billion, according to the Government Accountability Office , and push the total cost well above the $12.9 billion cap set by Congress.

The additional money would “not be captured in the total end cost of the ship, thereby obscuring the true costs of the ship,” the report said.

The bottom line, the GAO said, is that “the Navy will have a ship that is less complete than initially planned at ship delivery, but at a greater cost.”

The Gerald R. Ford is one of three nuclear-powered aircraft carriers that will serve as successors to the Nimitz-class carriers designed in the 1960s.

The Navy plans to spend $43 billion developing and building the ships, which are designed to be far superior.

Built by Huntington Ingalls Industries, they’ll be able to increase the rate of aircraft taking off, require less manpower and have new technologies such as an electrically generated magnetic field to propel aircraft off the ship.

To keep the Navy on budget with such a premium project, Congress imposed a $10.5 billion cost cap in 2007 for the Gerald R. Ford, and a cap of $8.1 billion for subsequent carriers. Since then, the Navy sought, and was granted, adjustments that now cap the costs at $12.9 billion for the Ford and $11.5 billion for the additional carriers.

The Gerald R. Ford is scheduled to be delivered in March 2016. But the GAO says that some key requirements, including showing that it can increase the rate of aircraft launches, won’t be completed by that delivery date.

The carrier also may not meet a requirement that would allow the Navy to increase the size of the crew over the ship’s life.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.