Aircraft Carriers III

[FORBIN]

Also if V22 can top up the F35B the situation becomes more easy

A VARS V22 has already done the trials in the F35 last summer so it's become a reality

What RN could do with is a AWACS V22 that could further and faster than the current RN helicopters

V22 is not a fighter you have curious ideas

 

[bd popeye]

Some troublesome words about CVN-78.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Skip down to page 209. Use the bookmarks on the link provided. Click on Navy Programs.

DOT&E’s assessment of CVN 78 remains consistent with the DOT&E Operational Assessment report submitted in December 2013. Poor or unknown reliability of newly designed catapults, arresting gear, weapons elevators, and radar, which are all critical for flight operations, could affect CVN 78’s ability to generate sorties, make the ship more vulnerable to attack, or create limitations during routine operations. The poor or unknown reliability of these critical subsystems is the most significant risk to CVN 78. - Reliability for the catapults was last reported in December 2014. While catapult reliability is above the re-baselined reliability growth curve, the re-baselined curve is well below the reliability requirement and the catapults are unlikely to achieve required reliability. - Reliability for the arresting gear has not been reported in almost two years. The last reported reliability estimates for the arresting gear were well below the re-baselined reliability growth curve, and indicated that the system was unlikely to achieve required reliability. The Navy began measuring reliability again in 4QFY15, but does not expect to have new reliability estimates until the end of 2015. Additionally, reliability test data are not available for the radar and the weapons elevators. - Absent a major redesign, the catapults and arresting gear are not likely to meet reliability requirements. • In FY14, testing at the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launching System (EMALS) functional demonstration test site at Joint Base McGuire- Dix- Lakehurst, New Jersey, discovered excessive airframe stress during launches of F/A-18E/F and EA-18G with wing-mounted 480-gallon external fuel tanks (EFTs). This discovery, until corrected, will preclude the Navy from conducting normal operations of the F/A-18E/F and EA-18G from CVN 78. • In FY15, the Navy identified an inability to readily electrically isolate EMALS components to perform concurrent maintenance. This inability to readily electrically isolate EMALS components could preclude some types of EMALS maintenance during flight operations, decreasing EMALS operational availability. • In October 2015, the Navy discovered that one of the three Prime Power Interface Subsystems (PPIS) Transformer Rectifiers (TRs) had been damaged during shipboard certification testing. Two of the three TRs are required for normal catapult operations. The TRs were designed to last the life of the ship. Earlier faults discovered during developmental testing resulted in stepwise improvements to the PPIS TR design and construction. This failed TR had one of the four improvements. • In FY15, the Navy began performance testing of the Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) at a jet car track site at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, New Jersey. This testing is examining the performance of the redesigned arresting gear to meet the system specification with improve reliability.

Troublesome. HOWEVER as with any new system the
"kinks" need to be worked out. I'm sure they will. CVN-78 was scheduled for her first sea trails later this year. I've read that that may be pushed back until Jan-FEB 2017.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[schenkus]

V22 is not a fighter you have curious ideas

I think Asif meant to use the V22 as a tanker to top up the fuel (and thus increase the range) of the F35.

 

[Jura The idiot]

...

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

the article you linked is dated September 22, 2015 ... in the meantime,
USS Gerald R. Ford to be delievered to US Navy in September

The U.S. Navy’s next-generation aircraft carrier, USS Gerald R. Ford, should be ready to join the Navy in September this year, U.S. Navy officials said.

Sean J. Stackley, Assistant Secretary for acquisitions outlined the timetable for the lead ship of the class in a statement ahead of a U.S. Senate hearing on U.S. Navy shipbuilding programs.

According to Stackley, the 100,000 ton, 1,100 foot (335 meter) ship would be delivered within the $12.887 billion congressional cost cap.

As of March 2016, the Gerald R. Ford was 97% complete and is currently projected to begin sea trials in July 2016.

After the ship is delivered to the Navy in September 2016, the ship is expected to start the post shakedown availability (PSA) in 2017 while the first of class full ship shock trials (FSST) are
planned for FY 2019.

Should everything go according to the plan, the carrier’s first deployment would take place in 2021.

The Gerald R. Ford class is the future aircraft carrier replacement class for Enterprise and Nimitz class aircraft carriers.

Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78) was ordered from Newport News Shipbuilding, a subsidiary of Huntington Ingalls Industries, on Sept. 10, 2008.

With this new class of ships the U.S. Navy hopes to save $4 billion in total ownership costs during each ship’s 50-year service life, compared to the Nimitz-class.

According to the U.S: Navy, the CVN 78 is designed to operate effectively with nearly 700 fewer crew members than a CVN 68-class ship. Improvements in the ship design will allow the embarked air wing to operate with approximately 400 fewer personnel.

today's source:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[FORBIN]

According to the U.S: Navy, the CVN 78 is designed to operate effectively with nearly 700 fewer crew members than a CVN 68-class ship. Improvements in the ship design will allow the embarked air wing to operate with approximately 400 fewer personnel.

Yep, less but yet the last Nimitz the Bush get less personnel :
9 first Nimitz : 3200 ship + 2900 CAW : 6100
Bush : 3200 + 2500 : 5700
Ford : 2400 + 2200 : 4600

Flottes de Combat, oui

 

[bd popeye]

Yep, less but yet the last Nimitz the Bush get less personnel :
9 first Nimitz : 3200 ship + 2900 CAW : 6100
Bush : 3200 + 2500 : 5700
Ford : 2400 + 2200 : 4600

Flottes de Combat, oui

Those numbers are the optimum number of crew. When I served aboard Nimitz in '91 I think we had 5200 total crew aboard. And in '73 aboard JFK we had 4514 maxium..I just looked that up in my cruise book...

@Jura.. thanks for posting that article on CVN-78. I still wonder will the cats and arresting gear be ready? And I don't like the shock wave test..at all. The USN needs to get CVN-78 trained up and ready to deploy as soon as possible. Just my opinion.

 

[FORBIN]

And yes my Friend " damn " seems i have get wrong datas !
Here

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and on Wiki same except Ford a little less on Wiki

Nimitz : 3200 ship + 2500 CAW : 5700
Ford : ? + ? : 4300/4600 say me please

 

[Jura The idiot]

...

@Jura.. thanks for posting that article on CVN-78. I still wonder will the cats and arresting gear be ready? And I don't like the shock wave test..at all. The USN needs to get CVN-78 trained up and ready to deploy as soon as possible. Just my opinion.

I'm a big fan of the USN, for example I had watched the christening ceremony of CVN-78, live (webcast of course which you could see on my Facebook Profile) and so on, but I'll tell you this:
the US Military has become involved in "concurrency" BALONEY when hulls/frames are being built for untested/unproven/unfinished components and oops, because of changes in components, hulls/frames which are being built need to be changed (I've been saying this in more than one Thread for some time, and if you asked me what I suggested:

... the US Military should've instead gradually develop, gradually test, gradually manufacture, gradually field new options, not like scrambling many of them together and wait more than a decade for some Wunderwaffe, which only "ultimately" works ...

... for NOW, the results of "concurrency" (just to make sure what Projects I'm talking about: LCSs; Zumwalt Destroyers; Ford Supercarriers; F-35) are cost overruns threatened by Nunn-McCurdy, and unending delays (will give you an example:
Sep 23, 2015

...
Ford Carrier Suffers ‘Slight Deterioration’ in Testing Schedule, Could Delay Sea Trials 2 Months

... and the above press-release; source:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

see? the September 2015 spin was "slight deterioration", more than a half of year after it's

...
USS Gerald R. Ford to be delievered to US Navy in September

today's source:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and don't worry, I'll be following what actually happens this September ...)

I end my rant here.
Your Armchair Admiral

 

[FORBIN]

Mr Ford ! with a new CAW

 

[FORBIN]

And yes my Friend " damn " seems i have get wrong datas !
Here

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and on Wiki same except Ford a little less on Wiki

Nimitz : 3200 ship + 2500 CAW : 5700
Ford : ? + ? : 4300/4600 say me please

Finaly I took out the archives
A special edition for US CV, 2011 with interesting datas for the number of sorties by day

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

But for crew again different !
Nimitz : 3200 ship + 2000 CAW : 5200
Ford nothing

Sorties for a day
Nimitz : 120/140 in surge 240
Ford : 160 in surge 270

I put the link for Jura