US Navy Ford Class nuclear carriers

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
For those who would like to know something about EMALS and how it works, here is a primer. This information is specific to the EMALS system that has been developed for the Ford class carriers of the US Navy, but would also be applicable in principle to any Chinese carrier desiring an EMALS system::

EMALS consists of six major subsystems:

- The Prime Power Interface
- The Launch Motor
- The Power Conversion Electronics
- The Energy Distribution System
- The Launch Control
- The Energy Storage System


Prime Power Interface:
This interface provides the connection to the ship’s electrical distribution system and delivers power to drive the energy storage system.

Launch Motor:
This is a 100,000 horsepower linear induction motor. It is a compact, modular, integrated flight-deck structure that converts electrical current into the electromagnetic forces needed to accelerate aircraft along the launch track. The system is designed to be able to tolerate a broad range of conditions and aircraft on the flight deck. A moving shuttle attaches to the aircraft in the same manner as existing steam catapults. After the aircraft launches, the electric current in the motor reverses to brake the shuttle to a complete halt without the use of any water brake.

Removing the water break deletes a layer of complexity to the system and also contributes to the rest and quality of life of personnel sleeping a couple decks below in junior officers quarters who now do not have to deal wth the sound of the water break's operation.

Power Conversion Electronics:
This system takes the power from the power storage system and converts it to a traveling wave of energy of the appropriate voltage and current to drive the shuttle along the launch track for the appropriate load (aircraft). Based on solid-state technology, the conversion electronics are packaged as compact modules in cabinets located below deck.

Energy Distribution System:
This system delivers the energy from the power conversion system to the launch motor. The system is comprised of cables, disconnects, and terminations to precisely deliver the power required. This incorporates a closed loop control system with real time diagnostic health monitoring that can detect launch anomalies within 500 microseconds and adjust the system to compensate for issues ranging from aircraft engine flameouts to blown tires.

Launch Control:
EMALS uses a state-of-the-art components to finitely deliver the current into the launch motor in real time. This allows more precise end-speeds to be achieved over a wider range of aircraft types and weights than with a steam catapult. System architecture with several layers of inherent redundancy is achieved using commercial off-the-shelf components where possible, and modularity is emphasized to ease installation and maintenance.

Energy Storage System:
Potential energy for EMALS is stored with a highly developed flywheel system that fully powers each cat stroke, even if the electrical power supply is temporarily disrupted. Enough energy is stored to power multiple two- to three-second launches. The system is recharged by ship’s power system.
 

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
And mainly more easy for maintain, cheap and less stress airframes with the power of the catapult that is adjustable.

But Ford late 2/3 years minimum 8 years since the last Nimitz was put in service, long ! never since USA build CV USN don't have a CV in 8 years it is the first time and fleet get older.

No problem now for USN CVN fleet but she have need for have a fleet of 11 CVN whith a service life of 50 years one new CVN all 4.5 years it is the challenge for the future Ford.
The problem is USN can spend minimum 12 bill for a CVN put in service all 5 years or need more 6, 7...

I think Kennedy ready in 2023 minimum sometimes annouced 2020 seems very optimistic.

And things will accelerate Nimitz and Carl Vinson have only 2 years of difference and after Eisenhower several with only 3 years...

In 1980's fleet of 15 CV some Nimitz was build all 3 years for get this fleet

Or if is not possible only a new all 7 years coz budget mainly 2 solutions fleet decrease 7/9 or eventually increase service life to 60 years, much possible ? with a new RCOH eventualy also for Ford.
 
Last edited:

kwaigonegin

Colonel
And mainly more easy for maintain, cheap and less stress airframes with the power of the catapult that is adjustable.

But Ford late 2/3 years minimum 8 years since the last Nimitz was put in service, long ! never since USA build CV USN don't have a CV in 8 years it is the first time and fleet get older.

No problem now for USN CVN fleet but she have need for have a fleet of 11 CVN whith a service life of 50 years one new CVN all 4.5 years it is the challenge for the future Ford.
The problem is USN can spend minimum 12 bill for a CVN put in service all 5 years or need more 6, 7...

I think Kennedy ready in 2023 minimum sometimes annouced 2020 seems very optimistic.

And things will accelerate Nimitz and Carl Vinson have only 2 years of difference and after Eisenhower several with only 3 years...

In 1980's fleet of 15 CV some Nimitz was build all 3 years for get this fleet

Or if is not possible only a new all 7 years coz budget mainly 2 solutions fleet decrease 7/9 or eventually increase service life to 60 years, much possible ? with a new RCOH eventualy also for Ford.

At the current pace of construction it is not possible to maintain 11 CVNs. It appears that there will be a 4.5 to 5 yr cycle for the ford class however there is a distinct possibility that future carriers will be smaller. As stovl technologies mature it's quite possible future carriers will be shorter in length.

I think the ford class CVN for the USN will be the last of it's kind in terms of 100 tons large deck carriers. I see no reason why by mid century 7th generation aircraft will be mainly stovl and very likely drones as well.

If you see where the USN is going, most future ships including carriers will be more automated requiring less humans on board. Carrier will be similar. Drones are much easier to maintain than manned aircraft. The archilles heel in drones are their infancy in AI and almost non existent dogfighting capabilities but give it another 20-30 yrs I think we'll see very smart AIs coming online and they will be on board carriers. I predict a mix of both manned and unmanned aircraft by mid century and the next generation of aircraft carriers will be smaller but more lethal.
 

Brumby

Major
I think the ford class CVN for the USN will be the last of it's kind in terms of 100 tons large deck carriers. I see no reason why by mid century 7th generation aircraft will be mainly stovl and very likely drones as well.
Intuitively, I agree with the notion that the Ford class will likely be the last of the 100 tons supercarriers. Emerging trends like drone utility, Godzilla like cost, extended range of threats will likely drive competing arguments over the optimal sizing of future carriers. As is, existing carrier air wings are already downsized because the USN can't afford to operate at full strength. In my view, the most immediate pressing problem is the short legged range of the carrier airwing.
 

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Ford class and about USN combattants :

- Ford delivered in 2016 add 1/2 year for commissioning replace Enterprise retired in 2012
- Kennedy delivered in 2022 add a year for commissioning replace Nimitz in service since 1975
- Enterprise 2027 add a year for commissioning replace Carl Vinson " " 1977

After Einsenhower get 50 years in 2032 until this date USN can keep normaly easy 11 CVN but after more diffficult " Theodore Roosevelt subclass " 5 CVN have a difference of only 3 years Roosevelt to Truman 1986/98.
Remains a very distant dates but possible a gap as for SSN for them coz up to 4 LA* was build by year and replaced by 1/2 Virginia in more in 1999/2003 no SSN commissioned then number can decrase to 41 target 48 for law.

In more don' t forget new SSBN-X to build then actually 2 Virginia ordered by year and in 2020's decrease to 1.5.
But USN get solutions especialy new RCOH for LA 688i, i don' t think the numer going below 45.

Average 62 LA in 21 year 1976/96 : ~ 3 for a year, minimum 2/year, max 4.
Now 53 SSN + 4 SSGN without MTS/Training SSN no combat capable ofc.

MSC normaly no problem for her , 84 in service but according law the target is for 88.
Get a service life 35/40 years with a target of 88 USN need build 2.2-2.5/year have built often 3 Burke 62 FY 85/2005 but during several years Zumwalt take the budget FY 06/09 ! now finish USN get 2 new Burke/year and normaly no problem for the MSC fleet.

LCS have a service life of only 20 years then USN need build 2/year.
 
Last edited:

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
I did not know if anyone posted these, but the USS Gerald Ford, CV-78, completed a turning exercise recently. Preparing for her initial sea trials.

Here are some pics:

CV78-Ford-Turn-04.jpg CV78-Ford-Turn-01.jpg CV78-Ford-Turn-03.jpg CV78-Ford-Turn-02.jpg
CV78-Ford-Turn-05.jpg
 
Top