tv Forum Focuses on U.S. Navy Maintenance Challenges CSPAN June 6, 2017 11:30pm-12:51am EDT
>> you may think you know what happened but i am going to tell you how i thought and what i felt and what i thought, because you cannot make up what happened. >> the head of the systems command talked about how the navy maintained its complex weaponry and fleet and also discussed progress on plans for growing the navy to 355 active ships. from the center for strategic and international studies in washington, d.c., this is one hour and 15 minutes.
>> good morning, everyone. i'm a senior fellow at the international security program and i'm delighted to kick off this morning's maritime security dialogue. the security dialogue represents a host of serious between csi s. and the u.s. naval institute and seek to highlight both current thinking and future challenges t facing the navy, the marinee corps and coast guard. today represents the second dialog for 2017 and we look forward to welcoming you back a throughout the year. we would also like to thank lockheed martin further supportn in making this event possible.et
we would like to make a brief announcement we don't expect anf difficulties but should there be anything we want to make sure that you know it stares down the front and both myself and anthony in the back will be your officers to direct you in the wl right way in case anything should come up. for the introduction to get us started i've will turn things over to the vice admiral of the u.s. naval institute and we are happy to have him here so thank you. >> we are proud to bring you this dialogue continuation in the third year and we get a special recognition to the
sponsors for making thisn possible and now we will introduce the speaker for today, 1981 graduate of the academy also holds degrees from george washington university and a degree from mit after serving 13 years as a nuclear qualified officer he made a transfer to the community and their key served mostly focused on refueling the complex overhauls of aircraft carriers. the major command included in-service aircraft carriers and program executive officer. finally last year in june he assumed command.
there is over 75,000 uniformed civilian employees entirely responsible for the contracting and supervision of all navy ships and subs shipbuilding and responsible for the maintenance and systems that go on the ships directly. so, we welcome the admiral controls one quarter of the budget. [applause] i'm always reminded of that. one quarter of the budget is not necessarily a good thing. thank you for the invite this morning. last night was a big night for the navy. we played at the waterfront for
most of the past ten years accepted it last night. given the challenge how to reset the fleet, i would like to talk about this in the context of where it is headed with the size of the fleet and what we are giving on the new construction e side and the maintenance side of the equation how it fits in. we were talking before hand. it's not either.t
you've got to do both. sometimes we forget about that most of the last 15 years also having spent three years on the readiness i am well aware that you have to maintain and continue to build going forward. it has some pictures so it isuri great to not get tired when they read it. it talks about with the current security environment is and he makes three key points that are applicable whether you are talking the maintenance of keytn points are the time matters and there has to be a sense of urgency that we are getting after today. i think that applies across thee
board to figure out how you can get them built quicker. the second thing is the pace today is exponential. if you look at the world today and the threats that we are facing, the line that is going on and the pace is growing exponentially. we have to keep up with that face. it's like we went into halftime at a football game about 28-3 and said game is over we are ready to start the second half and they said we will get there when we get there and he kind of stroll out only to find that the score was 28 to 24 so capability gap between us and our competitors is close and something of keen interest to
us. so a lot of discussion going on today. we are trying to figure out what we need in the mid-20s and make some decisions based on that kind of need in the 2020s. it's done by independent groupsd they have varying ships but they came to the same conclusion and they are all around wit of the 0 to 350 so clearly it does mattee going forward and it's also going to matter importantly as
also how do we get there fromet here. i know i will get questions. we were never going to be able o to turn that around overnight and i will get into this a little bit more in my theater remarks. the budget holds what we have on the new construction side takes a significant investment on the side of the house which if youe listen to the testimony that is what you are seeing in the budget we spent a lot of time talking about the strategy and the design to maintain all goesw to whawith the navy's strategy s going forward. now from 1999 i tell people i'm on my 18th which is hard to
imagine. if i had a dollar every time someone said we need to build the strategy first and then it will drive the budget but the reality is you don't want to budget completely that we live in a fiscally constrained environment so what we would like to say is it is a resource implement strategy and that is where we are today. we are going to increase those that we have today and we think it could be over the next seven years in the original plan. we have to get more capability for that to get them to work onn this stuff and figured out how they innovate and what we are going to work on the new construction sit side of the hoe so we will continue building for
the ongoing discussion fo or ths congress later this summer on that you will see some things going in that particular area. as we head further out we will talk about this and that is going to be critically important as well.l. kind of a new buzzword is a space weight and power. i can't say but it's going to look like that one of the things important for us as we buildll t these platforms is to make sure they have enough space, weightey and power to modernize and adapt to the future threats. we are kind of at the age you heard me say before. it is a prime example of power
in the platforms that you can adapt and go forward.latform interestingly, the one class that is around today to build the flight we are going to provide a little bit more space and cover going forward and does ships are kind of unique in their ability to stay around. my first we got rid of them at the 25 year.we didn't do maintenance on them. maybe we ought to get rid of m these things. the reality is we got rid of a lot of the ships because they have become obsolete.
fast forward to today for the vertical launch now you have a platform that can stay around au lot more so you have to shift the thought process. if you want to get more service life out of the hole you have to do maintenance on it. we had kind of reached this epiphany where we didn't spend any money on those for about ten years. in hindsight they can't expect them to get to where they needv. to.
as we were consuming it caught up to us and we spent the better part of the last eight or nine years digging ourselves out of the hole particularly as it relates to the surface ships. one of the key components i think of getting out to the size of the fleet that we need is going to be looking at taking those we have today and extending the service life of the ships in the 30 to 35 year range so we are taking it pretty close look at what it would take for another five or ten years. and the reality is if you do the maintenance you can get the service life out much longer mae
periods to keep them longer than today. people said we haven't gone past 35 to 40 years and i will point out it would be taking it to 50 years. the reason we do that as they consistently do the maintenance you have to get to 50 years so we know how to do this and what you will see is we are going to take a serious look at the seris existing fleet. if you have seen some of the assessments that get around 2045 if you keep them at the current service life and build new we can accelerate that by about ten to 15 years. one of the things i have consistently pointed out when we look at the design and futureof
surface combatant is we should not design for the planned service life of 25 to 30 years. it doesn't make any sense. we ought to plan for all of the ships and then build a context thing forward. a i want to talk about the maintenance side of the house and resets the fleet. the first dollar i get needs to go to readiness. the budget has an unprecedentedo amount for readiness units of $9.7 billion in the maintenance account. that's good. we need to back. but we've got the resources we've asked for, now it is up to us to deliver and it's important to understand when you talk
about maintenance it is not just resources.t is not it's not just about money or adding more people. having more people. that cannot be the only part of the solution. we will grow to 36,100. that is where we need to be to lower on-time. today we are not doing a good job of todd we've had a bettermn year at 12 to 17 are either in maintenance overhauls or inactivation stand behind so we have to kind of turn that around. so, people held. the capacity is important but it's not the only piece going forward. that is the number one priority is the on-time. the reason is that hundred 35 that i have today about one third of them at any time are
under the control of the pierside availability. if we don't get them out on thing that causes the stress on the force. there was an article back in january, february when a reporter said they didn't have an aircraft carrier since worldi war i. the other part of that is because it took 13 months.ke eim the ability is important to get the size of the fleet we needed.
we have to have the capacity to do the work. the kids learn differently and the typical timeline to time it was about five years we've got to cut that back. five we have somebody that can turn around and do something useful in two to three years versus five years so we have to think about how we train the young men and women coming in today because they learn differently than we do. we have to make an investment in the shipyards both in the private to get the work done more productively than we areds getting it done today. many of the shipyards are several hundred-years-old and designed to build the ships and then in the early part of the century they are not set up to
handle maintenance the way it should be. maint we make investments in equipment every 20 to 25 years and i have buildings over 100-years-old i can't get work on. we have to be willing to make investments in the naval shipyards to get the work done more productively going forwardr we've got to take the entire base into the count and we have capacity with other places and the one we talked about probablp ten years ago is something we have to look at it again with some significant health.
we have a lot of challenges ahead of us but the good news is from the maintenance side of the house i am encouraged on where we are headed. we have a strategy going forward and we will start delivering on time and take a serious look into that will be a part of the maintenance strategy that when you combine them together, we have a viable path going forwa forward. i will conclude my remarks and be happy to take any questions you might have. >> thank you for the audience and guest speaker we will start with questions and get a discussion going and have plentw
ha interaction. you've mentioned there is a tension between readiness todayn and building for the future. that was probably there on theac first one and their today but one thing that sticks out is the gap may be at a high tempo.gh that made it more available fore tasking. o and you eluded to it but have we caught up enough. it's both from a maintenance standpoint and the need for modernization things are pretty tightly wrapped and it is a
pretty tough to catch up. how caught up are we and are you satisfied? maybe you do not agree on the premise that it is a challengind summary of. >> we have made major gains. we haven't dug ourselves out of the hole completely that we have some members sitting over here and they would tell you the h recent trends. >> i think we closed the gap. it's one of those things we saw before. if you do not consistently maintain the funding you can rapidly lose the edge that you have and i think that is particularly important because
it was built and they put maintenance at the front for a reason. it was the recognition you've got to get the maintenance done. , we are all doing that.t. but we are having these discussions to provide more force. so you will hear the admiral talk about the design to do a couple things. reset the force, provide more dg power forward. we haven't tapped into this piece of it and we are likely to see more use of the aircraft carrier in a 36 month cycle and then she works up for eight to ten months with a significant period of time.
i think we are going to go lookt at the maintenance and get the use of the platform but as you go use the platforms, that will circle back because the importance of your page in the beginning it's okay we are going to use it the way that it is meant to be used and make the forces available it makes it even more important to get the maintenance because there's a direct correlation between how you use them and how much maintenance you have to do and one of the things we found in the post-9/11 era even though it steami change dramatically with, it is like running your car across country, we were running the car across country a lot more so we had to do morear maintenance.unning >> thank you for the shipyards and the need to re- capitalize.u
to upgrade to the facilities and capacity. >> one of the things i've had serious discussion with and frankly the kennedys have been very open about having adiscussi discussion about providing more flexibility on the controls for the use of that money to make some of the events as we need at the same time the budget is always relative to the rest of the budget relatively small we need to compete for those dollars as well and we are laying out a long-term and isse strategy to ask me what's the
plan and this goes back to my original comment throwing more money and more people at the problem will not make us more productive., it's making the necessary investments into the welding machines etc., but also providing shops that if yo you n dedicate your work done it flows the material work into the ship better than we do today. while we do not make the investments we need to make today that is pretty clear that we meet the 6% threshold be invaded by congress. we have to see what it takes and particularly if we are going to grow the size of the fleet to handle the 235 ships and thendlt
throughput that will be aed different issue. >> to get back to the capacity issue, we have a lot of folks out here working in the industry. in your remarks you highlighted the next proposed budget came down on the near-term readiness but there were a lot of people that were expecting a little bit more on the same number of ships as there were in the previous administration's budget. are there things you are looking at and the industry should be looking at as you lay in before the ramp up to the 355? >> we lay out where we want to be headed and i would've told the industry the key is we want
to keep the lines going, we need to look at ways to streamline the process and it is designed in a way to kind of take options and get it through the early stages of what the design of the ship is going to look like i think the industry is parting very well in that particular o area but it's going to be a combination of continuing to in build and then innovating and figuring out how we can build for the next set into some of those are building the carriers. that is one of the things we were looking to do.at then we have ongoing effort that will yield dividends going'll ye
forward necessary to get that done and it is challenging in the environment that we are in today and i think that you will see the budget we are laying out a compelling case for what it is going to cost going forward. .. of people. and you also mentioned maybe the, you know, dusting off kevin mccoy's, you know, one shipyard concept. are we seeing strain in competing for the same people? a couple observations is that what we found with the sequester, the fiscal cliff, and some of the wild swings was that we were turning on and off veils and when >> you either went there or you
had to pay more. i had the latest and you're still a little short on the s government side of having to ship your workers, you had a goal through 16 of having 2000 more than you currently have on board. only beating ourselves on this and is there a better way to do this? >> there is some tension early on. the near-term we do compete for resources with other industrieso but your question, can we get the workforce necessary to build ships we need, the answer is yes. we've had that in the past. when i started working we had 27500 workers in the navalew shipyard was in the 30500 thousands. we have got to provide a package
of things that would interest young people to come work at the naval shipyard today. we do compete for some of those people. we grab people they would like to have and vice versa. but if there's a stable, predictable plan and we know will grow the size of the force. leaders are not worried that they can grow their workforce. frankly i'm not worried thator working have a problem with the shipyards as well.l. we have a good plan out there gd and will be able to press on going forth. >> the last question, you mention the good news is we have a big bump up in operation money to do maintenance near-term. what is the next big thing that you think past that you would like to see more investment from an organization standpoint where
do you need the most health. if they would spend the next dollar on shipmate what is the next other go to? >> in my lane, the next dollar goes into investing in the shipyards. making these investments necessary to make the workforcea more productive. there's an expectation from the fleet that will give you this money and we want you to deliver things on time, but once you get the workforce you need we expect you to get better. one of the challenges we face is we've added people the shipyardp and i have a young workforce. half of the people have been there less than five years. as we had 2000 people over the e next two years the trend is not
going to change significantly. we have to recognize the workforce and train the so we bc can make them more productive. the expectation is correct which is i will give you the people in the dollars but at the end of the day i need some of those to build ships and planes and weapons.se once you get the workforce trained i expect you to figure out how to do the availability for 200 30,000 for example. that is the challenge we face going forward. my next dollar we go into investments in the physicalld plant so we could ultimately start tip in that budget over a little and let the resources go where they're needed. >> okay let's open it up.
>> identify yourself and ask a question. >> it is good to see you both again. he said some interesting things about how if we invest in maintenance and extending the service lives of our current ships we can get to 355 faster. there's a big return on investment for that. ginny walked to the details and numbers on that? o what can we get out of what ships? can is it across blocks and classes? what are your best case, middle case scenario. scena >> the answer to the question is
i think it applies to all of th ships that launcher will not go back to some of the earlier ones. the study has looked at going b basically from 53 or 54, it essentially applies to all in the cg's with the exception of yorktown and gates.s. you can certainly get five more cears. i'm convinced with low risk,co frankly we have looked at it kid from i think you could get out to its next dry docking in many cases is more than five years with relatively low risk and costs. the key is to the maintenance they need to do and then have
baseline modernization capability. someone that is baseline nine we have an idea of what it looks like on the side of the house. it's a relatively low risk proposition i think you could shave ten or 15 years off of what it would take you to get to 355 if you want to consider the entire fleet. i'm not the decision-maker on that but from a technical side of the house and see anything technically that would prohibit us from extending this service life of the ships. do the maintenance of their combat relative going forward.o. i don't think this is something we are leaning that far forward on.
on the aluminum side of the house we do not have as much knowledge base and how they react over time. we have seen challenges on just the aluminum structures on the cruisers.it i'm not willing to go lean forward on how far we could get though ships. >> the nuclear side of the house, the carriers take 50 in the ssn's have a series of 50 separate issues i think we have sharpened our pencils and they are where they need to be today. i'm looking at the submarine force pretty well understood how long we can take those out based on issues with the hall from diving and safely operating
submerged. >> i want to ask you to talk about cyber for the foresight your building they have a huge'e challenge. could you talk about the special efforts required in that arena to become cyber compliant and secure? >> i should mention that some of my remarks. as part of this effort and talk about modernization, cyber is a key piece of that. when people hear cyber they look at the it system. i'm responsible for all the combat systems from the cyber perspective. we have to stay on front of that. number three is cyber for good
reason. cul in the recent ransom were stuff that gets our attention.n. quickly. the reality is, are ships andtty submarines there is not a system on that ship that does not have heavily invested in software and computers. there's a machine control system that allows you to take a thousand people off that ship a that operates the ship remotely not having security watch some of the things we did in the earlier days and that's greattdi stuff.t. but all that has computers associated with it. the cyber pieces not just don't hack into my e-mail or get into my credit card, it goes further on the ships today.
we have a big focus on how we will manage this going forth. >> have you had to set up new staff organization or bring on new folks to deal with the.>> >> we have a chief informatione officer now that we've grown the workforce there. a lot of the cyber effects and t cyber counsel we met with monthly. we work closely in standards. as we grow and we would have to grow it if we grow the size of force. were looking closely at the cyber pace. >> more questions. megan, you had your hand up. earlier. >> thank you. if
i want to ask about the public shipyards. imagine trying to get the same maintenance availability still with your man hours. with that, as a result of upgrading the artin infrastructe or would that take rethinking how you approach the processes and innovate? >> it's a combination of all. if you have ever been i use angles as an example. and the opportunity to rebuilding katrina was a terrible blow to the golf coast. then you look at how it's t performing today and they're knocking it out of the park.de f anybody who does industrial engineering which i could about how the shops are set up in the
material can go a long way to make it more productive. the second piece is the workersn there providing them with training facilities to get them up to speed quicker one of the things we intend to be a conservative organization a how we use technology. there's great opportunity out there to use technology including cell phones. there security issues that would allow us to be more productive. today's kids learn different, they are not used to a drawing on the table. they're well-versed on taking a nap on the phone were taken a picture and pushing a button and have in the material delivered to them.pportu there is opportunity for us to get more productive that goes beyond just adding people to the shipyards. >> will the government work
rules today allow you to take full advantage of the? >> it's another thing to put ont the pile.ative abo we're fairly conservative about her use of new technology. we get there eventually. when i started in 1981 the things that i would never have imagined we would allow ourselves to do. it's a recognition that you have ni embrace the technology comes with some risk. if you don't recognize this is way people are in the way we move information where missing a great opportunity to get better quicker. >> you have mentioned the long-term plans for the public shipyard. could you be more specific about what you are assessing in terms of investment.
is that study congressionally mandated or says something the navy is doing? >> we did a study in 2013 and we're sticking to that plan today. the naval shipyard got off and did this on their own a couple of years ago where they hired an industrial engineer to look aton the layout and they mapped out where people had to walk to between the shops. they put that on a plate and show that to me. we went out to do the same thing at the other three shipyards. get someone to look at the arts and map out where are the shops in existing shops today. where do people have to walk to to get the work done if you are
to optimize that what would you do? combination of that and capital improvements on the facilities. the last piece is the draw out. as we go to block five the submarines will not fit in a lot of the existing drive outs. a lot of the carriers use on the. have different pooling requirements. you have to upgrade the docs from those. we have a long-term investment plan that i have shown that includes both the dry docks and facility investments. it is not cheap. cheap you're talking over the next 30 years and it an investment of three or $4 billion to make the dry docks compatible. those are must haves if you want to have this submarines and
carriers you have to upgrade. the second piece is competing with everyone else for thewhichi dollars so that plan we have the basic outlines of, i think we'll finish up with full details in february of next year.ably feb i think we'll have it wrapped up. i'm having this conversation with the defense communities while they are supportive andct want to help. >> i mike stone from reuters. thank you for coming in.s.
you talked about delivery and keeping costs down. i wanted to understand how much time you would need with a to un foreign design in terms of survivability systems and breaking that down and if you can answer that been how it would compared to domestic design. tha >> i don't think it matterske where the design comes from in terms of how long it would take us to evaluate it. i think the thought is here on t going forward that it will be a competitive environment that will include a local aroad-spectrum to consider a foreign design as part of the competition. we have not gotten to that point yet. if we got to the point where considering those design it won't take any longer unless i
have to translate from german or something to do the analysis of survivability. there's no time difference of where the design comes from. >> the classes halfway through the cycles and i was wondering is the ford designed to have that in its life and would there be a gap going in for #. >> the ford class for midlife refueling as well. we have gone on submarine the life of ship cores. we looked at what it would take to get to a four class and i think we concluded that technologically feasible it didn't make sense from a cost
it'sdpoint. you have to bring it into a midlife overhaul in the refueling portion is only 10%. i think we concluded that it just makes sense to keep it in there. we will refuel the ford class. let me do the math. four delivers yesterday for 50 years. her first would be in 2040. the last last in its class andhe last in its class and from 2057 her midlife refueling will be in 2030.ub there will be a gap in the refueling program between when we refuel the last class and when we would do for. essentially the gap is going to
be delivered in 2008 or nine. there will be an eight year gap i will have to address that i suspect that will counterbalance the 2040 or 2050 timeframe. >> on the right. >> of money. a lot of what she spoke of this morning is a data problem particularly when it comes to two data sets. one said being stuff coming up from the equipment say rolls-royce turbine.e.
we have a huge amount of information that comes off the fly through the sky all around the world we provide an insightful wade to do predictive maintenance on the aviation side. that's commercial application. within the navy there's other data that can come off the ship that's worried about the custodian and you haveyo information coming off the equipment that's owned by the oem. if you're trying to bring the information together to gain busights how d.c. handling that? who owns the data? who protects it and who's able to interpret it in a way that anables you to gain efficiencies? >> i'm a believer that the navy should on the data goingcies? forward. we have data, and offer ships today. we don't make great use of it. he talks about roles royce
engines. the navy leadership has been up to general electric to see the digital age of making decisionsm that is the direction we need to head in. i have a system with an integrated system and we've had wee ability to collect data forr years. we don't do a lot to help us make decisions but as we go to the systems like they class machine we have the ability toto collect data and we have to take a step forward and become more mature in the use of that data. were trying to figure out how to make use of the data to make better decisions going forward. it's against it host of different applications.
what type of maintenance do you do? the commercial industry is light years ahead of us. we have to get better at it. to the data portion of an, the navy needs to on the data so we can make decisions about what we're going to do.o. >> thank you. as you grow the size of the fleet and extend service, how much do you dissipate the on m will increase as he could toward that ship number. our you concern that it will eat into the amount of money for procurement and new bill? >> like a car and in our experience we would say nimitz s is now 42 years old, they do take a bit more maintenance
towards the end of their life. if you're going to get to 355 ships you'll have to recognize that you'll have a higher on m costs. if you go into this thinking you will grow the size of the fleet and your costs will not go up you have a problem. we recognize the cost will go t up. they're a little bit highert toward the last later part of the stages. there are not astronomicallytags higher. of part of the way you can keep the cost under control is make it ad consistent investment and do maintenance through the life off the ship. when you do it consistentlyy accordance to the plan he don't get major anomalies. when you don't then you have problems. a classic example is theodore roosevelt and 71 and as we
transitioned years ago to aelt, maintenance structure to the incremental maintenance plan most carriers had a complex overhaul to reset them. tr missed out on that. when she got into midlife refueling if you looked at how many mandates should she have had a 23 years she had fewer mandates worked on the first years of life than the first four we had a challenging refuel overhaul. yes it will cost you more toward the end of life and we have to factor that into our plans but the key is consistent application of the maintenance plan if you do that anyone have
major problems in the last years of the ships life. >> you have to do both.ble ques you have to do the maintenance. if anybody thinks we can get to 355 without growth in both of those that is not going toou landen. you have to factor those in from the creation of an honest discussion about the budget. if you want to get to 355 you have to do both. you have to build and maintain.d if you skip on one of them which has been our history then you run yourselves into trouble. we have to be willing to break the investments. t i'm not concerned they would eat
into it i do think one of the things on the new construction side of the house that we don't pay enough attention to is that we could spend more money up front. we don't tend to make this investment because of the way the budget works the budget year matters with a budget that you're in.10, we have to take a more total ownership cost perspective as we get into the next round ofp cosp ships.hat for all the talk about how much the first ship costs we did make an investment in the ship that would save 4 billion so that is a significant savings. not
while people might not be interested in that today when they are struggling to balance the budget if you are fleet15 commander you'll be happy that whoever was building the fort in 2008 was smart enough to make investments up front. >> on the end. >> i'm toby with bloomberg viewg you mentioned briefly that this happenehad to happen on the prie side asd well. short of hoping for another hurricane what to do to make sure the private size invest as much money as you want? >> if you look at the shipowners
today, i'm satisfied the shipbuilders are making the investments they need to make. e some of the things they're doing to build facilities to allow more work to be done inside they have a thing called the outfitting home the private sector is incentivized to make those investments. is it makes it more profitable going forward. con we have been in contract on the construction site to partner with them and share some of those costs if they're willing to make those investments. i'm satisfied that those today that are out there competing for work are making the investmentse
necessary to keep them competitive.about the competition incentivize them to make them more profitable i don't have the same business model. i'm not out to make a prophet. what is incentive for me to ma e investments in the yard? i need that same type ofts in thinking. to me, the investments is that i get more productive and therefore i spend less maintenance dollars in the future so there is more money available for procurement.al aca >> you made a point earlier about a resource constrained budget. if you can explain more about that taken into consideration your service on the staff and
the role you played the onn getting the maintenance dollars increase for after he left and what you're seeing today among the resource sponsors. does it play the same role as it shifted over time nine? how does that impact in yourimpt budget. >> clearly always have more requirements than we have dollars. the gap may be bigger but we've always face the challenge. the organization today and for niill plays a prominent role and i think the prophet is more transparent than i have seen it in the past.
that doesn't operate always in an enterprise fashion. it was designed that way. they're focused on 98's. so they are the advocates for that. they tend to advocate for that. i think what we're trying to get after is an enterprise look that says where should the next dollar go to make the most impactful? i think what i have seen today in my 18 years in d.c. is that it's as good as it has ever been. where having that openn discussion in a corporate manner to decide where the money wills go. what happens if you put the
money here. instead of winners and losers is getting back to the question of what does the navy need. we are working hard to optimize the resources. we hav i'm satisfied the processes wead had today were tweakingto third-party to david. the navy leadership we had is doing a terrific job of managing that. i think everybody gets a voice in the process. as a result we have a better outcome. >> a few seconds or less. i have to ask, there is somee concern that some have not received the love and attention they need.
within the navy you have those assets which are large and complex and important.very could you talk about recovery their readiness some of the cross between the navy and marines on that? >> i have a marina myself who manages amphibious ships with me. were talking to the marine corps all of the time. whether it may have been in the past on the nuclear side of theo house today i think there's a robust and we understand the service life and so i am
satisfied that were making the investments necessary there. i'll see any indication there the last person for the maintenance dollars. >> she had to sit out for five to make seven years. that's an example of recovery. >> she just came back from deployment and we immediately we have done extremely well and she'll get over to japan into great things. >> will have to cut it here. we want to thank padma for giving his remarks today.e his a very busy man with a lot on his plate.
>> was a just industry coming in.c yards t >> no, we had columbus coming in, boys it will go to one of those 2 yards. going forth we want to keep it as an option. i want to prevent another -- as we go into the workforce and what we have on the plate i'm trying to get out far enough in advance. i don't have the capacity the naval shipyard if you look at it out there there are several cases were looking at in the future where you have to go into the industry earlier. >> in the budget documents why
is that longer? >> it's not going to take longer. it will start a year later because we looked at whether not we wanted to be an activator and you are well aware of the discussions we went through on that. they're going to start here on august. so the fleet needed her longer.a and when they moved to the right year to create a significantn rierlap between the end of thehe george washington and when you look closely at that overlap figure too much of an overlap then they would've been doing gw i'm building 79 and 80, that looked like a workload that would be a recipe for disaster.t
the fleet wanted to move it, if it what the industrial base needed so i would say it's a model on that is we take these years in advance. look at the work that we have but if we can meet the fleet needs then the better way isle that will get the work done on time and cheaper if we can apply the resources. >> you mention moving away from the one shipyard is there a classical ship. >> i think there's one shipyard building that i may have misinterpreted what you said.
>> that was on the main side ofa house where use the resources from the entire industrial base in fact we use them when we do carriers. in terms of new construction competition is always going toms be were striving to get. the only place we don't have -- we're looking to maintainly -- competition. >> are you looking to extend service lives across the board? >> everything. of all your amphibious class ships. can actually some of the combat ships as well. as the ship today were taken look at.
>> it is specifically an evence number? >> so what happens over 25 years it doesn't quite have the strength. we have seen this with some of the cracking on the superstructures. there are issues as you operate the ship from a stress -- standpoint. you have to look carefully and will proceed cautiously on the extended service life. >> and he said five years. >> i have said that you can easily have five years.
coming up on wednesday morning, new york republican congressman on president trumps budget, the gop budget and efforts to combat lyme disease. muslim advocates, president and executive director will speak on president trumps proposed travel ban and recent terrorist attack in portland. watch suspense "washington journal", live at 7:00 a.m. join the discussion. >> former fbi director will testify thursday investigating russian activities. the committee says the former director will testify in an open
session which will followed by a closed session with members. you can watch coverage at 10:00 a.m. eastern at c-span three and on c-span.org. you can listen with the free c-span radio at and downloaded at the apple app store or google play. the hearing will re- air thursday evening at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span2. >> in case you missed it, veteran affairs secretary on the state of the virginia. >> 20 veterans a day or die by suicide. that should be unacceptable to all of us. this is a national public health crisis. requires solutions on all partnerships. >> there's a community that relates to the class that we have in this country. mark twain he can go to from us anything writes about this in