Increasing Aircraft Carrier Forward Presence: Changing the Length of the Maintenance Cycle
RAND Corporation, 2008 - History - 70 pages
The U.S. Navy's aircraft carrier fleet must meet the forward presence requirements of theater commanders. With a decreasing fleet size, planners must balance the timing of maintenance, training, and deployment with presence and surge demands. Evaluating multiple one- and two-deployment scenarios per cycle, RAND examines the feasibility of different cycle lengths, their effect on carrier forward presence, and their impact on shipyard workloads.
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
Recent Changes to the FRP Cycle Length
Hie Impact of Different Cycles on Operational Availability
19 other sections not shown
24 months 30 days 32 months 6-month deployment 6+1 fleet goal able to deploy aircraft carriers basic training Carrier Cycle—PSNSY carrier fleet carrier is deployed crew current 32-month cycle cycle length Cycle—NNSY deployable within 90 deployment cycles depot availabilities depot maintenance DPIA2 I I W/m/tz-class DPIA1 DPIA3 duration estimates extend past October Fleet Response Plan forward presence George H. W. Bush I I W/m/tz-class PIA1 increase longer cycles Maintenance Availabilities maintenance cycle maintenance period man-days MCO-S meet the 6+1 NAVSEA Nimitz-class carriers NNSY Norfolk Naval Shipyard Northrop Grumman Newport Notional Carrier nuclear Oct Oct Oct one-deployment cycle Operating interval operational availability packages past October 2016 percent PERSTEMPO PIA in San PIA2 PIA2 PIAs and DPIAs PSNSY RAND scheduled six months Supply data provided Total Workload two-deployment cycles U.S. Navy underway days USS Nimitz W/m/tz-class DPIA2 W/m/tz-class PIA2 I I W/m/tz-class WARR file Yokosuka