BAE Systems has received a $87.2 million contract from the U.S. Navy for repair work aboard the dock landing ship USS Carter Hall (LSD 50).

The contract includes options that, if exercised, would bring the cumulative value to $92.2 million.

Under the contract, the USS Carter Hall will undergo a year of restorative work at the company’s shipyard in Norfolk, Virginia, which is also the ship’s homeport.

BAE Systems will begin working aboard the 610-foot-long ship in July 2024, performing a combination of maintenance and preservation work on the ship’s hull, its internal fuel and ballast tanks, and the engineering plant.

“Our team looks forward to working with the Navy to perform the substantial sustainment work necessary to ensure the Carter Hall remains a highly capable amphibious combatant ship,” said David M. Thomas, Jr., vice president and general manager of BAE Systems Norfolk Ship Repair.

USS Carter Hall recently returned to its homeport following an eight-month overseas deployment. It was commissioned in September 1995, and is currently the second U.S. Navy ship to bear the name. The ship is designed to carry 420 sailors and up to 500 Marines.

The company’s Norfolk shipyard employs about 1,000 people and has dozens of subcontractor partners to assist in ship repair work.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

17 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Grizzler
Grizzler (@guest_816627)
21 days ago

All I know is…I wish I’d bought shares in BAE.

Zephyr
Zephyr (@guest_816633)
21 days ago
Reply to  Grizzler

Probably not too late.

Stephanie
Stephanie (@guest_816643)
21 days ago

The sort of ship the RN needs.

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker (@guest_816650)
21 days ago

420 sailors! Yikes

Graham Moore
Graham Moore (@guest_816694)
20 days ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

Our Bay Class have a standard complement of 59 but that could surge up to 75. She too can carry up to 500 marines. Why do the Yanks need a crew of 420?

Gunbuster
Gunbuster (@guest_816701)
20 days ago
Reply to  Graham Moore

LCAC drivers and LCAC crew plus the air contingent get counted.

Graham Moore
Graham Moore (@guest_816713)
20 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

OK, thanks.

Ben Coe
Ben Coe (@guest_816773)
20 days ago
Reply to  Graham Moore

What do our Albion Class carry? Different Mission. Bay class is a ferry, Albumin is a command centre.

Graham Moore
Graham Moore (@guest_816834)
19 days ago
Reply to  Ben Coe

I referenced the Bay class as they have a similar role to the USS Carter Hall. Bit more than a ferry, the Bays are Landing Ship Dock (Auxiliary). With a well dock and the ability to carry and operate a helo up to Chinook size, they are primarily used for amphibious operations. Bay class have also been used to train the Iraqi Navy in the Persian Gulf, to conduct counter-drug deployments in the Caribbean, and operate relief operations following the 2010 Haiti earthquake. The well dock can carry one LCU Mk 10 or two LCVPs, whilst two Mexeflotes can be… Read more »

Paul
Paul (@guest_816802)
20 days ago
Reply to  Graham Moore

US amphibious ships like Carter Hall and her class also have a pretty decent armament and Combat Management System for her size and role. In the photo you can see 2 Phalanx and two 21 cell RAM launchers, she also carries a couple of 25mm chain guns. That’s more systems that take a larger crew to operate and maintain.

Graham Moore
Graham Moore (@guest_816835)
19 days ago
Reply to  Paul

Thanks Paul.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF (@guest_816663)
21 days ago

A truly intriguing theoretical option for the future could be a USN proposal to have BAES become a third vendor for USN SSNs. Inconceivable? Perhaps, but BAES has a decent rep as a contractor and there will be significant demand for the duration of the thirty year shipbuilding schedule. Strange and stranger things could materialize under the auspices of AUKUS…🤔😳😉

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke (@guest_816670)
21 days ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

But they would have to be built in the USA – by law?

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF (@guest_816686)
20 days ago

Correct, as current US law dictates. Would be somewhat analogous to Australian production of SSN-A. BAES has significant US interests. This would require a 10-15K increase in US based personnel. As an interim measure, would anticipate exploratory maintenance/overhaul contracts re SSNs.

SailorBoy
SailorBoy (@guest_816695)
20 days ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

Ha, then we could make them pay integration costs!
Taste of your own medicine, America!

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke (@guest_816696)
20 days ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

Hmmme – AUS won’t be making any of the hard bits like propulsion, control systems or switch gear.

AUS will make bits, supply steels & TBH source bits that could be made anywhere in the world. Although there are risks in bringing suppliers onboard who don’t understand the submarine thing….

Gunbuster
Gunbuster (@guest_816700)
20 days ago

Worked on her when she was out here.
Some lagging jobs, cooler cleans.

Also. Worked on a San Antonio class who was also out at the same time.
They do squeeze a lot of helos on those . She had 2 hueys, 2 cobras and a V22. Hangar could take 2 AC at a time and the rest got ranged on deck.

Last edited 20 days ago by Gunbuster