![]() Even if repaired, the USS Connecticut may emerge with numerous operational restrictions and only enough formal service life to offer America a mere handful of patrols. The same will be true with the USS Connecticut. The USS San Francisco ultimately retired after 40 years while the submarine’s undamaged but similarly-aged peers left the service at 38 years. In the case of the USS San Francisco, the years spent inactive in the repair yard didn’t translate into extra service life. Presently 23 years old, and with an expected service life of about 40 years, a pricey, four to five-year availability may not be worth the total cost-not just in repair dollars necessary for the USS Connecticut itself, but in the toll deferred maintenance on other platforms will inflict upon the rest of the Navy. The USS Connecticut is a unique “Cold War” fighter, endowed with enviable capabilities, but it is-to put it bluntly-also a middle-aged representative of a boutique and hard-to-maintain three-submarine class. Is the Juice Worth The Squeeze?ĭepending upon the damage, retiring the USS Connecticut early and turning it into a “parts barn” for the USS Seawolf (SSN-21) and USS Jimmy Carter (SSN-23) may well be the only sensible path. But with few spares and no prior hulls to cannibalize, repairing the USS Connecticut risks becoming a complex, sprawling affair that the Navy simply cannot afford to endure. There are no good options. For the Navy, the political cost of losing the USS Connecticut will be enormous, and, frankly, Congress may expect naval leadership-from the Chief of Naval Operations on down-to pay for it with their careers. But again, the bias will be towards saving the sub. Neither option is available today-the choice is either to retire the sub or try to fix it. But the Navy’s initial repair estimate was inaccurate, and the fix became a relative “wash,” with the final bill for the USS San Francisco clocking in at $134 million-barely a 20% difference. To support the decision the Navy estimated that the repairs would cost $79 million, about half the $170 million needed to refuel the Honolulu. In the USS San Francisco’s case, the Navy had two obvious options-either repair the newly-refueled USS San Francisco or retire the USS San Francisco and refuel a similarly-aged submarine, USS Honolulu. In these situations, the Navy’s instinctual bias is almost always slanted towards saving the damaged craft-regardless of whether it makes fiscal or operational sense. As the Navy has little in the way of spare Seawolf Class parts sitting around-and no older boats to cannibalize-rehabilitating and re-certifying the USS Connecticut may be a far more time-consuming and expensive engineering challenge than either the U.S. Working from scratch is what the Navy will likely need to do if it wants to repair the USS Connecticut. ![]() The “nose job” was complex enough, requiring 285,000 worker days to complete, but the task of appropriating the old bow and aligning and mating internal systems was a whole lot easier than repairing and restoring damaged external hull structures from scratch. ![]() To get the USS San Francisco’s back in a timely fashion, the Navy resorted to cannibalism, taking a bow from the retiring USS Honolulu (SSN-718)-a similarly-aged sub that, due to budget cuts, was being prematurely retired. The USS San Francisco was stuck at Guam for seven months and needed four years of work before returning to service. While nobody is saying that the USS Connecticut suffered as extensive damage in the current incident, the USS Connecticut likely won’t be returning to service anytime soon. The last time the Navy publicly reported a submarine had damaged their forward ballast tanks was in 2005, when the USS San Francisco (SSN-711) suffered a catastrophic collision with a seamount. Two defense officials told USNI that the impact “damaged the submarine’s forward ballast tanks.” Others told USNI News that the submarine had hit and grounded upon an uncharted seamount in the South China Sea. Naval Institute (USNI), the indefatigable Sam LaGrone is hearing whispers of damage. While the “silent service” is living up to its name, information on the submarine’s condition is gradually leaking out. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |