By Emelie Rutherford and Geoff Fein
While the Navy currently plans to stick with the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) for the next-generation aircraft carrier, it is seeking input from industry on the cost and schedule impact of switching to a steam catapult, service officials told lawmakers yesterday.
House Appropriations Defense subcommittee Chairman John Murtha (D-Pa.) peppered Navy shipbuilding officials during a congressional hearing on the service’s examination of possibly reverting to a steam setup for CVN-78 because of cost growth with EMALS.
“We’re looking at all options,” said Allison Stiller, deputy assistant secretary of the Navy for ships. “There has been cost growth to the EMALS system. We’re looking at the total cost of acquisition and life cycle for EMALS and steam. We’re looking at the schedule and what does that do if we went back to steam…(and how that would impact) the CVN-78 (schedule).”
General Atomics Aeronautical Systems makes EMALS.
“(We’re) in the process of getting information from industry so that we can make an informed decision,” she added. “We’ve had independent technical looks at it within the department.”
The Navy is looking to EMALS to help reduce manning on carriers, increase aircraft sortie rates, and provide a system that will be capable of launching the variety of aircraft planned for the future (Defense Daily, Feb. 28, 2008).
Problems with EMALS began to arise toward the end of 2007 and beginning of 2008. The issues became so troublesome that by mid-2008 Navy Secretary Donald Winter had been briefed on whether EMALS should be terminated (Defense Daily, Aug. 8, 2008).
At yesterday’s hearing, Stiller said the cost-and-schedule comparison data is being prepared by Northrop Grumman [NOC] Shipbuilding Newport News, which last September was awarded a $5.1 billion contract to build the next-generation aircraft carrier CVN-78, the Gerald R. Ford.
Murtha asked if the EMALS issues will slow down work on the CVN-78. Stiller replied that the Navy does “not see that it will have an impact on the actual schedule of the carriers at this point.”
The EMALS development effort is working to apply the electromagnetic system, based on existing technology, to the carrier, she said.
“There’s a lot of rigor we want to go through for component testing, so that we understand the reliability of components, as well as system testing,” Stiller said. “We’re in the component-testing phase right now. We have seen minor issues in testing which we’ve been able to resolve. But there is some concern (regarding) schedule….One of the things we want to evaluate going forward is if the development (stage) is still ongoing, how do we mitigate the risk to this carrier schedule so that that doesn’t hurt it. Right now we don’t see it impacting the carrier schedule.”
Vice Adm. Barry McCullough, deputy chief of naval operations for integration of capabilities and resources, told Murtha that the Navy has determined cost growth with EMALS has not exceeded lifecycle savings the advanced system is expect to generate because of factors including reduced personnel requirements.
McCullough said the Navy’s current plan is to “continue with the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System.”
“That’s going to be briefed to the CNO (Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Gary Roughead) and the acting (Navy) secretary here in the next week to 10 days,” the admiral said.
“We need EMALS technology to support high-energy launches of our aircraft,” he added.
McCullough said the Navy needed to increase the number of high-energy carrier launches to support operations in Afghanistan. While such launches create excessive wear on the aircraft and the energy-absorption system on the carrier, he said using EMALS would reduce the impact on the airplane and ship.