Aircraft Carriers III

Finally Master Jura you post an article that practically verbatim quotes the Air Force Brats assessment that ...
good for you :)

but joking aside ...:

I post both unpopular stuff which of course gets ignored like, just give examples quickly, this thread lately:
Jun 8, 2017
oops until now I thought one of the advantages of the Fords should be a reactor lasting as long as the ship heck I believe I read it somewhere but whatever:
Ford Aircraft Carriers Designed with Midlife Refuelings Planned
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
and Thursday at 9:35 PM
I beg you pardon

"... Instead of learning from the mistakes of CVN 78, the Navy developed an estimate for CVN 79 that assumes a reduction in labor hours needed to construct the ship that is unprecedented in the past 50 years of aircraft carrier construction.”

such a cheap gimmick? I wouldn't be surprised if the TOTAL cost of such a 'technology marvel' (which won't be able to launch aircraft when commissioned) turned out to be twenty bil ... and in the meantime
US Navy underestimating cost of second Ford-class carrier: GAO
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and I also post popular stuff, quickly examples again:
Saturday at 8:41 PM
a3Sb8.jpg

from inside of
or the F-35 Yesterday at 10:16 PM
liked the square loop most ... "in its corner":
vR3NC.jpg


my point? I'll repeat what I said in a Private Message to a member recently:

... I sometimes (OK pretty often) make critical remarks about the US Military procurement; I don't make them to go against the US Military, to the contrary: I wish the US Military is stronger!

actually not just the US Military, but the US of A overall; I wished it was as strong as when I had lived there (zero-one, two)
 
IMG_0900-768x357.jpg
it's from
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

First it was cyber. Now I find myself covering ships at an air show. Ok. They are aircraft carriers so I guess we can give the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
a pass. The big news here? The first of the two ships should sail for the first time later this month, or maybe next month — depending on the weather and the tides. That was the word from Rear Adm. Keith Blount of the Royal Navy who came here for a visit of several hours, much of which he spent with the press.

Why did he spend so much time with the dreaded media at an air show? Probably because the main combat power of the ship (aside from SAS, Royal Marines and anti-submarine helicopters) will derive from the 36 F-35Bs the QE class can carry into battle.

Among the QE class’ most intriguing characteristics will be its completely clear and uncluttered flight deck which will allow a large number of helicopters to be stationed ready for takeoff or a large number of F-35s. Since the QE class was reportedly built from the start with an eye to putting Special Air Service and Royal Marines directly into harm’s way, supported by Merlin helicopters
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
s, there’s an obvious logic to this deck.

And Blount told reporters the carriers would carry a Royal Marine Special Purpose Task Group of indeterminate size on every mission. In addition, they will sail with the best Combat Search and Rescue (CSAR) capabilities they can carry, given whatever other missions they’ve got, Blount told us. One of the more likely aircraft to be added to the ship to support these
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. There have been persistent rumors that Britain wants to buy some, but nothing definitive has been said publicly.

And that’s why we’re talking about ships at the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.
source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

cockneyjock1974

New Member
Registered Member
;)
how you doing
cockneyjock1974
? I see you're new here so let me tell you you're supposed to say something for example
:cool:
not just post the link :) in this case it contains the picture:
DCxxS9eXsAQKXGg


which I now "processed":
XJWz0.jpg

because I had nothing better to do right after the dinner :)
Hi Jura, thanks for that, I know the protocol, I was just messing about on preview trying to get the link to work and it must have posted it in error. Cheers for the assistance;)
 
some time ago Aug 12, 2015
related:
Pentagon Directs Shock Tests on Carrier Ford

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
and now Navy might get to skip Ford shock trials ahead of first deployment
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
The U.S. Navy might not have to conduct shock trials on its new aircraft carrier. That means the Ford could be on deployment much sooner, easing the burden on the Navy’s overstretched carrier fleet.

The House Armed Services Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee is inserting language in its markup of the 2018 National Defense Authorization Act that would strike the requirement to send the ship into shock trials before its first deployment. Carrying out full-ship shock trials has been the plan since Congress mandated it in the 2016 NDAA.

The Navy could still chose to do the shock trials on Ford if it wanted, according to House aides familiar with the matter. The plan to have the Navy do FSSTs for Ford was pushed by Michael Gilmore, the former director of the office of test and evaluation, and supported by Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Sen. John McCain, McCain, R-Ariz.

If enacted, it would be welcome news to fleet schedule planners who opposed the move because it would delay Ford’s first deployment. The fleet has been strained under the weight of unrelenting requirements for its forces, and budget cuts that have eaten away at readiness and created backlogs in the shipyards.

The carrier successfully completed its acceptance trials May 26 after the U.S. Navy's Board of Inspection and Survey completed its assessment of the ship and was accepted by the Navy June 1.

"The Navy initially didn't want to shock-trial [Ford], they wanted to shock-trial [John F. Kennedy]," said an aide to the House Armed Services Committee. "So ... by taking out the shock trial associated with CVN-78 we are at least able to accelerate to Ford delivery by at least a year."

The Navy is still working out the kinks in several new technologies, including the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System and the Advanced Arresting Gear. The service originally had plenty of time to do that, because it wasn't scheduled for deployment until 2022.

But if they can skip the shock trials, Fleet Forces Command would likely get to move up to Ford's first deployment to 2019 or 2020, which was the original plan. That would put pressure on the Navy and contractor General Atomics to speed up the process.

Getting the Ford earlier would be a win for Fleet Forces, which has been trying to get its new optimized fleet response plan on track. The schedule change would ease the pressure as the Navy looks to maintain a carrier presence off North Korea and in the Persian Gulf as often as possible, said Bryan Clark, an analyst for the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.

"Ultimately if they don't have to do shock trials it means you can more quickly reduce the stress on sailors and ships," he said. "Once the Ford comes online you can have the East Coast carriers essentially cover the Middle East with short gaps and have the West Coast carriers fill the gaps in the Pacific while Reagan is in its spring maintenance availability."
 
Top