The Virginian-Pilot
©
NORFOLK
For Navy vessels, operating at sea has taken on a different feel.
Some nights, sailors cut the engines and the warship just floats.
“We did a lot of that on deployment,” said Cmdr. Michael Junge, skipper of the Whidbey Island.
The practice helped make Junge’s amphibious ship, which spent six months in the Persian Gulf region, one of the most fuel-efficient in the fleet, he said.
With fuel prices reaching record heights, the Navy has looked for creative ways to curb costs without compromising missions. Conservation efforts are expected to save the Navy about $325 million this year.
But in July, the military bumped up oil prices to $170 per barrel from $127 to reflect true costs. The increase will wipe out the Navy’s entire annual savings in just three months. Fuel costs are an issue for all the service branches.
The military is the country’s largest single consumer of energy. It spent $13.6 billion in 2006, almost double the amount since 2003, the start of the Iraq war. Every $10 increase for a barrel of oil costs the Department of Defense $1.3 billion, according to military statistics.
The Air Force is the top consumer within the military, and the Navy is second.
The Navy expects to spend $3.8 billion to power its ships and aircraft this fiscal year, a 42 percent jump from last year.
For the fleet, cutting the engines during down periods is just one way to conserve.
The Whidbey Island is powered by four 16-cylinder diesel engines capable of steaming at more than 20 knots. Steaming on one engine or two whenever possible cuts costs, Junge said. Planning transit time, speed and destination also maximizes efforts.
When the engines are shut down , the crew takes precautions, such as posting additional watches, to maintain security.
The pressure to save fuel “hasn’t had an immediate impact on training,” said Capt. Arthur “Chip” Cotton, branch head for fleet training and readiness reporting at the Pentagon.
Leadership has looked for other ways to cut costs and still perform missions. Synthetic training – through computer simulations of ship, submarine and aircraft operations – can reduce, though not eliminate, the need for live time, Cotton said.
The Navy simulates training with its foreign partners in NATO, he said.
The French navy nixed plans to send the warship De Grasse for joint training exercises this summer along the East Coast because of the high cost of transit.
A task force planned by the chief of naval operations would seek to make the Navy consider fuel costs when acquiring new systems. Some in Congress are pressing the Navy to build more nuclear-powered vessels.
The task force also would establish conservation goals and investigate the use of alternative fuels, Cotton said.
It would work on securing the energy network afloat and ashore.
The Department of Defense has a similar task force.
About three quarters of the Navy’s costs go toward running the fleet and aircraft, with the rest spent on installations.
The Navy recently finished a year-long study of F/A-18 Hornet and Super Hornet operations, looking to squeeze further efficiencies into operations , said Cmdr. Jim Nichols, an F/A-18 pilot and air wing readiness officer at the naval air force in Norfolk.
The issue has taken on more importance in the fighter jet community, he said.
“The word is out that it’s very important that naval aviation conserve its fuel resources.”
The study considered knotty, real-world problems that sound like standardized test questions. For example, is it more efficient to send two planes with five tanks of fuel or three planes with two tanks? Should a few planes fly long missions, or should several planes fly more frequent short missions?
The answers usually depend on the mission and safety factors, he said. Fighter jets must meet a weight limit to land on a carrier deck, and pilots sometimes dump fuel to lighten up.
The study’s results are expected to help squadrons make better decisions on planning and operations, Nichols said.
Louis Hansen, (757) 446-2322, louis.hansen@pilotonline.com

Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Twitter
Google
Yahoo


Fair is fair . . .
Okay, then move the Navy jets under the Air Force. The families will rejoice, as there is a far less chance of being deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan as a USAF person than as a Navy person right now!!! Cheers, MGM
I have an excellent way. .
Close Oceana, and move the jets to Langley!! Very smart move, as there are too many bases around here. We can beat BRAC to it.
Actually CS you're not too far off the mark...
Jimmy Carter did create the Windfall Profits tax so what did our oil companies do? They stopped even more drilling in the states and went elsewhere. So we got 99cent a gallon gas for years because the cheap price they were able to import it for and still pay the tax Mr. Carter levied on us. Prior to this we only imported 30 to 40% of our Oil and most of it from Canada.
After the tax we imported 60%+ still with Canada providing most of the imported oil.
It was only towards the end of the Reagan Administration did the Windfall profits tax get lifted. And we see a steady rise in the cost of Oil from around that point on because of the emerging Third World becoming more middle class.
How
Avoid jack rabbit starts. Keep the windows up as it is more aerodynamic. Use cruise control and maintain a constant reasonable speed. Make sure the engines are kept in tune. Don't leave the ship idling in the morning to warm up. Run lighter oil. Avoid running the ship into the wind (try to keep the wind at the back). Keep the props clean and straight. Keep the bottom cleaned of barnacles, etc. Don't "gun" the engine when waiting for a passing ship. Lighten the load, throw unnecessary items overboard or better yet, don't pack frivolous items in the first place. This should do it.
correction to last post
i ment gh bush not gw bush
getlaxguy
Please keep in mind that most of us were alive and able to read and process information during the years and events you reviewed. As a person who intends to vote for both parties in the upcoming election, I am bothered by your lazy linking of cause and effect. The letter is nonsensical and a child could poke holes in your timeline. It is letters like this and fervent "anti-anybody who doesn't agree w/ me on the military" views such as Carolyn that will cost republicans at the polls. It's not helping your cause anymore than some of the doozies the Obamaites post on these boards.
do some research people
Facts are facts!!
This has to make you think a little bit, if not then keep your blinders on!
George Bush has been in office for 7 1/2 years. The first six the economy was fine.
A little over one year ago:
1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.49 a gallon;
3) the unemployment rate was 4.5%.
4) the DOW JONES hit a record high--14,000 +
5) American's were buying new cars, taking cruises, vacations o'seas, living large!...
But American's wanted 'CHANGE'! So, in 2006 they voted in a Democratic Congress & yep--we got 'CHANGE' all right. In the PAST 2 YEARS:
1) Consumer confidence has plummeted ;
2) Gasoline is now over $4 a gallon & climbing!;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $12 TRILLION
DOLLARS & prices still dropping;
5) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.
6) as I write, THE DOW is probing another
Now it makes since.
Speaker Peolosi, Sen. Reid and the other Democrat Leadership don't want to drill for oil because it might help our military be more combat ready. They can't have that!
For the reasonable Democrats out there, can't you get someone other than Nancy Pelosi to lead your party? And also, when you Obama supporters go vote in November, make sure your tires are "inflated".
France lol
Gas is too high, so they do not trian with us. Good, Im sure they have no plans on fighting with us anyway.
That settles it
I am retiring and moving to my own little island in the South Pacific.