Aircraft Carriers III
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Jura The idiot
General
LOL man what is it you're trying?
the subject of this conversation has been the flawed statement
:
"A new carrier costs over $7 billion, ..."
in the context of replacing the Nimitzes, LOL the Ford indeed costs more,
so your statement
"7 billion even a little more than that is not a massive jump."
is also flawed, as there's no such thing as seven-billion-dollars USN aircraft carrier currently replacing the Nimitzes;
all what's currently available to the USN are the Fords costing approximately twice than that EDIT each,
other "options" are drivel, it's d-r-i-v-e-l
Last edited:
Jura The idiot
General
there're just nine (9) though; would you comment
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
have you taken the time to actually go over and compile single cost spend on those Nimitz class carriers and then adjust by inflation?
I bet it would ring up far more than 14 million a ship in that.
I pointed to the last of the class because that is the most modern of the class and closest to the Fords.
No matter what ever has been said Jura the end result in this would have been. The same. Because whether named Ford class or Ford Subclass of Nimitz the same changes and technologies would have been involved. Ford is an evolutionary step not a "Game Changer" the next line of upgrades to the classic design.
I bet it would ring up far more than 14 million a ship in that.
I pointed to the last of the class because that is the most modern of the class and closest to the Fords.
No matter what ever has been said Jura the end result in this would have been. The same. Because whether named Ford class or Ford Subclass of Nimitz the same changes and technologies would have been involved. Ford is an evolutionary step not a "Game Changer" the next line of upgrades to the classic design.
Jura The idiot
General
I didn't, because
there's no such thing as a Nimitz-class aircraft carrier currently replacing the Nimitzes, and in fact
the Fords, transformational, revolutionary quantum leaps of Rumself Era are replacing the Nimitzes;
why on Earth would I talk about how much the stuff would've cost if it'd been built while it won't ever be huh
Jura The idiot
General
anyway still didn't get your point:
"The last of the Nimitz carriers the USS George Bush cost 6.5 Billion in 2009. 7 billion even a little more than that is not a massive jump"
#4680 TerraN_EmpirE, 49 minutes ago
then
"have you taken the time to actually go over and compile single cost spend on those Nimitz class carriers and then adjust by inflation?
I bet it would ring up far more than 14 million a ship in that."
#4684 TerraN_EmpirE, 22 minutes ago
"not a massive jump" first, "more than 14 million" (LOL obviously a typo) now??
"The last of the Nimitz carriers the USS George Bush cost 6.5 Billion in 2009. 7 billion even a little more than that is not a massive jump"
#4680 TerraN_EmpirE, 49 minutes ago
then
"have you taken the time to actually go over and compile single cost spend on those Nimitz class carriers and then adjust by inflation?
I bet it would ring up far more than 14 million a ship in that."
#4684 TerraN_EmpirE, 22 minutes ago
"not a massive jump" first, "more than 14 million" (LOL obviously a typo) now??
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Jura there is a open debate that happens with US CVN that it wasn't three classes Enterprise, Nimitz and now Ford but Five
Enterprise class
Nimitz to Carl Vincent as Nimitz class
Theodore Roosevelt to Harry S Truman as Theodore Roosevelt class.
And Ronald Reagan to George Bush as Reagan class.
And then Ford.
The Nimitz major change that made it not Enterprise class was reactors. All the "Nimitz" carriers use the same reactor design.
Ford changed to a new reactor. That's it that's the only reason that Ford is not a Nimitz.
All the other bits don't matter. Because if you look at the history of the designs the same degrees of changes save for reactor happened between Nimitz and Roosevelt or Roosevelt and Reagan. And heck the Bush could be a class by herself.
Actually each one is a one off.
So when you bring up that. "transformational, revolutionary quantum leaps" that's a load of malarkey. They are evolutionary steps. Oh but EMALS... So so are you saying that Catapults were unique to Nimitz? No they came from earlier ships.
But the radar.... radar changes happened across the classes between ships.
But the computers.
Also changed and even retrofit to older ships where possible...
But the elevators... okay fine but that's it?
No they are evolutionary.
Jura The idiot
General
did you ignore
#4686 43 minutes ago
?
regarding what you called "a load of malarkey" right above:
"In 2002, the Department of Defense opted to attempt to achieve a revolutionary approach in introducing new technologies on the lead ship. The Navy sought to research, develop, and produce 14 critical technologies aimed at facilitating CVN 78’s capability and efficiency gains."
June 2017 p. 11 (16 of 56 in PDF)
If there are going to be 11 CVNs no matter the class there needs to be 10 complete air wings plus a reserve air wing manned by USN reserve forces. It is up to the US congress to make those decisions and appropriate the $$$.That's all I have on that.
Actually the Ford class is quite different from a Nimitz class. A Ford class has only three aircraft elevators. The island is further aft than on a Nimitz. Bomb assembly is right under the flight deck on the 03 level. On a Nimitz bomb assembly is in the first forward and aft magazines on the 4th deck. These were the former special weapons magazines.