Carrier Families

Comment

Comment by Dan Burch on January 23, 2010 at 10:05am

Thanks, I really appreciate the info as my son is serving on the CVN 77 and would love it if they moved to Mayport. We are planning on retiring in Florida and that would be so much closer.

Comment by Otto Mueller on January 23, 2010 at 8:52am

Politics is the only issue at this time, it is clear from DNO, and fleet command on down that a carrier strategically should be with SOCOM. I'm hoping Webb and his associates from the Hampton Roads area stay out of this military decision. As far as which carrier, yes I have heard CVN-77 may be the one, but who knows in the end. I liked it when the Kennedy was there. For those who have spent any time at Mayport, you know the whole dredging issue is eventually going to need done whether a CVN is there or not

Comment by NavyDads Admin (Paul) on January 22, 2010 at 10:12pm

NavyTimes:

Flattop in flux Navy’s plan for a Mayport carrier could be upset by QDR, lawmaker challenges

It’s been a year since the Navy announced a decision to homeport a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier in Florida.

But it remains unclear whether that will happen, as lawmakers — and lobbyists — continue to battle over the issue and the Navy concedes that its decision may be over­turned in 2010.

While senior Pentagon officials have agreed to review — and potentially overrule — the Navy’s January 2009 decision, Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., has stepped up pressure to keep all five East Coast carriers in his home state.

Webb sent a Dec. 23 letter to the Pentagon calling the move “fiscally irresponsible and strategically unjustified.” He also for the first time criticized the lobbying efforts of a key advocate for moving a car­rier to Florida, retired Navy Adm.

Robert Natter, who has received more than $1 million in lobbying fees from the state of Florida and city of Jack­sonville, which stand to benefit economically.

Natter, a former commander of the U.S.

Fleet Forces Command who now runs a lob­bying firm based outside of Washington, did not return a call for comment.

Webb also noted that the Navy’s estimated backlog for shore infrastructure restoration and modernization recently rose to $36.6 bil­lion, nearly 20 percent higher than its previ­ous estimate of about $28 billion.

Mayport would require hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of upgrades, including dredg­ing, before it could accommodate a nuclear flattop. Congress in October approved more than $40 million for dredging there.

In January, then-Navy Secretary Donald Winter said the Navy had formally decided to send a carrier to Naval Station Mayport in the interest of “strategic dispersal,” a security measure to keep all Atlantic capital ships from being at Naval Station Norfolk. The decision set off a war between the congres­sional delegations of Virginia and Florida, with lawmakers trading shots.

A Navy spokeswoman at the Pentagon, Lt. j.g. Laura Stegherr, said the Navy’s “record of decision” remains unchanged, but acknowledged Dec. 29 that Pentagon officials would be reviewing that decision during the Quadrennial Defense Review.

Florida Sen. Bill Nelson, a Democrat, said he believes a carrier will move to Florida and boost the economy in Jacksonville.

— Andrew Tilghman To read Sen. Jim Webb’s letter to Deputy Defense Secretary William Lynn, visit navy times.com/webb letter_mayport

Comment by Dan Burch on January 22, 2010 at 9:53pm

Otto, there is a rumor that the 77 could be moving to Mayport have you heard anything about it?

Comment by Otto Mueller on January 22, 2010 at 3:53pm

Based on the comments I read from the Surface Navy Association's annual symposium, it seemed pretty clear the QDR would not address the carrier numbers question ( a bigger issue is moving one to Mayport!)

Comment by NavyDads Admin (Paul) on January 22, 2010 at 11:16am

More NavyTimes news:

Despite rumors, QDR unlikely to shrink carrier fleet

No move to change 11-flattop mandate



By Lance M. Bacon

lbacon@navytimes.com

The 11-carrier Navy is very like­ly to survive the forthcoming Qua­drennial Defense Review, though the carrier fleet’s future is becom­ing a point of contention between the Pentagon and Congress, according to a key lawmaker.

“The [House Armed Services] Committee and senior military officials are committed to keeping an 11-carrier Navy,” said Rep. Rob Wittman, R-Va., member of the House Armed Services seapower and expeditionary forces subcommittee.

Wittman said he received a com­mitment for an 11-carrier Navy through 2039 from the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, secretary of defense and chief of naval opera­tions, adding that no one in Navy leadership gave him any indica­tion that a carrier cut was even considered in QDR preparations.

The QDR is expected to be released in early February, and there have been rumors that the carrier fleet will take a hit.

Any talk of cutting carriers would be unfounded, according to one con­gressional analyst who spoke on condition of anonymity. “The Navy is required by federal law [10 U.S.C. 5062(b)] to maintain no fewer than 11 operational aircraft carriers, and Congress has given no indication that it desires to change that law,” the analyst said.

In fact, lawmakers twice shot down Navy requests for a legisla­tive waiver in fiscal 2008 and 2009 — before relenting in the fiscal 2010 budget — to allow a tempo­rary drop to 10 carriers from the time Enterprise retires in 2012 and the carrier Gerald R. Ford enters service in 2015.

But some lawmakers were hesi­tant to issue the waiver because potential delays in completing Ford could extend the gap to 45 months.

In the long term, Defense Secre­tary Robert Gates in 2009 pro­posed carriers be bought every five years instead of every four and a half. This “fiscally sustainable path” would keep an 11-carrier force through 2039, when the force would decrease to 10 carriers.

The House Armed Service Com­mittee, voicing strong concerns for national defense and the industrial base, was not convinced. It includ­ed language in the 2010 Defense Authorization Act that emphasized that carrier force structure should remain in the context of the QDR and not part of a budgetary process.

In addition, a provision in that act requires the Navy to submit a report by Feb. 1 on the effects of funding a new carrier at the pro­posed slower rate of one ship every five years.

A Navy spokesman said it would be “inappropriate” to comment on the QDR before it is released. □

Comment by Ken Estrada on January 19, 2010 at 10:40pm

My daughter is currently aboard the USS Eisenhower CV69, I believe they are in the Mediteranean. Anybody have sailors on the Ike?

Comment by Kyle Cannon on January 17, 2010 at 10:23pm

For anyone interested there is a facebook page for the USS Carl Vinson.They have a daily update with photos and much needed info on what they are doing.God bless all our sailors abroad.....................

Comment by Otto Mueller on December 22, 2009 at 1:25pm

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to all our carrier families and especially to our sailors aboard. God Bless You All!

Comment by Brad on October 12, 2009 at 8:46pm

Hello, back from my trip to Japan and Hong Kong. Final pics are up, plus a video of the test drop of a torpedo from their Helo during the previous tour. What an awesome time! Plus getting to speak with the Chiefs, was inspirational while meeting all the AW's for a gathering to honor them from both squadrons stationed at Atsugi Airbase. They appreciated a father there showing support from back home to all of them. I can't tell you what an awesome night that was!

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• …
• 6
• Next ›
• Page