By Kris Osborn, Warrior President, Center for Military Modernization
“Five acres of sovereign US territory,” were words used by Rep. Rob Wittman, R-Va. to describe the irreplaceable value of US Navy aircraft carriers, symbols of US power and force-projection capacity.
Virginia Democrat Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., echoed this sentiment andclosely aligned with Wittman’s sensibility by referring to the seriousness of the threat environment and a commensurate need to ensure stable funding for aircraft carrier construction. Kaine said the current funding impasse, which as pushed back funding for the next Ford-class carrier by at least two years, is in part due to spending caps put in place. During an event on Capital Hill, Kaine pledged to assure the Aircraft Carrier Industrial Base Coalition that he and other members will endeavor to secure consistent carrier funding.
“Challenges are growing by the day in every theater, and we need to send the right demand signal. I don’t like that we are sliding backward. We are not going to meet our own needs or the needs of our allies unless we find a fix to this,” Kaine told an audience on the Hill.
Wittman described the need for carriers in the context of what he argued was an extremely dangerous modern threat environment. As part of this, Wittman cited a number of key variables, such as the pace at which China continues to build and add carriers. The Congressman, who is the ranking member on the House Armed Services Committee, cited Iran, China, Russia and other countries as extremely credible threats to take seriously.
“This is different than the Cold War. All of these individuals not only want to destroy us strategically, they want to destroy us economically,” Wittman said. “What are one of the strongest measures of deterrence? United States Aircraft Carriers. We want to make sure we continue this production pace.”
Any air campaign to counter a Chinese attack upon Taiwan would have little chance of success without US Navy aircraft carriers, a key reason why the US Navy conducts “dual-carrier” war preparation drills in the Pacific. Each carrier is capable of carrying as many as 90-aircraft, and the Ford-class in particular has a larger deck space enabling a 33-percent increase in sortie rate compared with previous Nimitz-class carriers. Electric elevators for re-arming ordnance and an electromagnetic catapult can streamline launching, refueling, re-arming and mission return rates. Two carriers therefore, could operate a massive air-campaign involving dozens of 5th-generation F-35Cs and other attack assets, something which would be well-positioned to interrupt or destroy a PLA-Navy amphibious attack on Taiwan or defend the Philippines, South China Sea or Japan.
Are US Navy Carriers “Survivable” Against Chinese Anti-Ship Missiles?
CVN 82 Aircraft Carrier Delay – 2028 – to- 2030
CVN 82, the next Ford-class aircraft carrier destined to bring new generations of technologically-advanced maritime power to the US Navy, was slated to be funded by 2028 for the purpose of sustaining a key construction and developmental schedule. However, the current 2024 defense bill, (National Defense Authorization Act) is not funding advanced procurement purchases and placing the carrier on a formal production contract for several years beyond original plans. As a result, both industrial leaders and members of both parties in Congress are making a decided and specific push to ensure the requisite funding is added during the course of mark-ups and conference as lawmakers finalize appropriations and funding levels for items in the legislation. The delay, industry and Congressional leaders say, is damaging to national security.
“The aircraft carrier community was hoping to see funding for CVN 82 start in 2028,” Lisa Papini, Chairwoman of an industry group called the Aircraft Carrier Industrial Base Coalition and CEO of Dante Valve, told Warrior in an interview. “That will have a significant impact on companies that are suppliers to aircraft carrier programs. There are 2,000 companies across 44 states in the United States and they contribute parts and services to the aircraft carrier program.”
Papini further explained a key dynamic often discussed when it comes to building major military platforms, meaning that they rely on an extremely skilled and highly trained workforce capable of performing technologically advanced tasks such as welding, electronic integration, computer engineering and a countless amount of mechanical tasks. As a way to address the problem, Papini said, the ACIBC is requesting additional funding for “long-lead items” procurement in the 2025 budget.”
“When production lines go cold, we know companies will have to lay off workers. We’re trying to avoid that, so our specific request is $175 million in fiscal year 2025,” Papini explained. “The people who are part of this community (Aircraft Carrier Industrial Base Coalition) are some of the most proud and Patriotic I have met.”
When funding is not consistent, interrupted or derailed by Congressional indecision or partisan acrimony, the workforce can quickly dissipate in search of other high-paying work. In this case, critical workers quickly become unavailable and there is not an ability to quickly “resume” or “restart” production.
“The biggest challenge I see to what we are doing is not budgets. I think we can figure those out. The challenge I am worried about is workforce,” Kaine said.
This is particularly true in the case of aircraft carriers, as they require highly sophisticated construction techniques, and HII builders of the Ford-class carriers have implemented a number of key adjustments to its method of building carriers to streamline efficiency, expedite development and optimize production without compromising security, quality or eventual performance. Kaine’s comment about funding and workforce makes sense as there is much precedent in Congress involving circumstances where, following mark ups or budget submissions, money for programs can be added, moved or re-allocated to address deficits or pressing priorities. This however, often requires bipartisan consensus and strong input from the US military services. Delays with funding however, even if money does ultimately come through, can generate workforce turbulence and inconsistency which is difficult to recover from.
Specifically, after building the first-in-class USS Ford, HII made a series of changes to how they built the USS Kennedy by, for example, building individual “modules” or parts together on a dock before integrating them into the larger carrier “modules” under construction. This optimized construction, expedited timelines and lowered construction costs for HII and the Navy, a key reason why there was progress on CVN 79 (USS Kennedy) and CVN 80 (USS Enterprise). Part of this equation regarding a skilled workforce, Papini and members of Congress emphasize, is the use of “multiyear” buys putting several aircraft carriers on contract in a single deal. This enables industry to plan, prepare and retain the workforce needed to ensure efficient and timely construction.
Kris Osborn President of Warrior Maven – Center for Military Modernization. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a Highly Qualified Expert with the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at national TV networks. He has appeared as a guest military expert on Fox News, MSNBC, The Military Channel, and The History Channel. He also has a Masters Degree in Comparative Literature from Columbia University.&
nbsp;
