Page 2 of 25 FirstFirst 1234567891011 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 371

Thread: CVN-78 Gerald W Ford

  1. #16
    Resident Curmudgeon Military Professional Gun Grape's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Mar 05
    Location
    Panama City Fl
    Posts
    8,448
    Quote Originally Posted by blidgepump View Post
    Tophatter.....

    So we can count on Hollywood showers will being the standard on this new class of flattop?
    Hollywood showers have been the norm for many years. Even on the smaller vessels. From what I've been told even Burkes (with Reverse-osmosis desalination plants) hardly ever go to water hours.

    On the gator side, even 15 years ago, you couldn't find a shower head with a button. Unless you got stuck on some of the remaining Austin class boats.
    Its called Tourist Season. So why can't we shoot them?

  2. #17
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,537
    Quote Originally Posted by Gun Grape View Post
    Not a great idea shooting off lasers in the middle of a battle group. Friendly fire would be a bitch. 20mm and 30mm have a self destruct range. Lasers don't.
    Lasers don't miss...

    2 years ago they test fired a shipboard laser R2D2. Shot down 2 drones from a anchored ship, on a sunny day with low humidity.

    Raytheon admits there are serious problems with reliability (Burn through strength) in bad weather. Just like any laser system. Doesn't work good in smoke, fog, rain. Also no ability to Knock down high speed incoming missiles. You can urn holes in them but they and the large fragments will continue towards the target.
    technical problems nt much different than the evolution from smoothbore flintlock to m4 carbine except much more compressed. lasers can be tuned to ignore most weather.

    CBGs don't like to emit a "Powerful Energy Shield" around themselves. It attracts attention. With good EmCon, we routinely hid Carrier battle Groups off the coast of Norway during the Cold War. With real live bad guys trying to find us.
    That is because the CBG's had emissions that were easily detected. Give a CBG the ability to use powerful radars and remain undetected and they will use the radar. LPI aesa technology offers that. I don't know if the navy is using the technology but the technology exists.

  3. #18
    Resident Curmudgeon Military Professional Gun Grape's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Mar 05
    Location
    Panama City Fl
    Posts
    8,448
    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    Lasers don't miss...
    Sure they do. They only don't miss when the computer calculates the proper aim point. Especially when the firing platform is rolling,pitching and yawing at the same time.

    Otherwise the Airborne laser system would have been a success from day 1.


    technical problems nt much different than the evolution from smoothbore flintlock to m4 carbine except much more compressed. lasers can be tuned to ignore most weather.
    As a former laser operator, I'll say BS. We have been using laser designators since 1968. Still cannot get them to work in a heavy rain. Its that pesky refraction thing. Much more important when you are using the laser as the weapon and not the designator.
    Its called Tourist Season. So why can't we shoot them?

  4. #19
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 08
    Posts
    1,835
    Quote Originally Posted by surfgun View Post
    As her construction is coming along, and it is to become the new standard of what an Aircraft Carrier aspires to be, I find it appropriate to start this thread to monitor the construction and trials of the pre-commissioning unit Gerald Ford as she readies to join the fleet.

    This first post includes a link that illustrates the order of in which she is being assembled.

    Ford class: 3D build sequence - Newport News Shipbuilding
    Lego building!

    To me, as an armchair admiral, the diference that really pops up is the new tower. Not so much it's size, but it's position: it's so far back, it almost looks like the pilots will have to be extra carefull not to hit it on landing! But it does give the tower crew a much better view of the deck. And now they'll also be able to see all the elevators from the front tower windows (gallery?)

    CVN 78

    Nimitz class

  5. #20
    Patron
    Join Date
    30 Jul 08
    Posts
    272
    Most powerful collection of weapons the world has ever seen I reckon (excluding nukes)

    I would put money on it that it is the last aircraft carrier class the US builds. One of the Gerald's sisters will probably still be sailing in 2100.

    One thing that is a worry is the cost of these babies. I read recently of another 1billions in cost overruns.

  6. #21
    Colonist Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    02 Mar 08
    Location
    Adelaide, Australia
    Posts
    2,095
    Quote Originally Posted by Gun Boat View Post

    One thing that is a worry is the cost of these babies. I read recently of another 1billions in cost overruns.
    Not much more than the cost associated with moving a few air force squadrons in wartime.
    Ego Numquam

  7. #22
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 08
    Posts
    1,835
    Besides, that baby carries so much new tech, that overrun is to be expected...

  8. #23
    Senior Contributor Doktor's Avatar
    Join Date
    25 Aug 08
    Location
    Skopje, Macedonia
    Posts
    13,668
    Quote Originally Posted by jlvfr View Post
    Besides, that baby carries so much new tech, that overrun is to be expected...
    Why it is expected? After all she is on time. How much new tech has been introduced in the last 3-4 years that could higher the price for $1bn?

    P.S. idk about the rest of you guys, but calling Gerald Ford is kinda weird to me
    No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

    To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

  9. #24
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 08
    Posts
    1,835
    Quote Originally Posted by Doktor View Post
    Why it is expected? After all she is on time. How much new tech has been introduced in the last 3-4 years that could higher the price for $1bn?
    Assuming the overrun includes all the research and integration of the new systems, you have:
    -a new generation nuclear reactor
    -the EMALS cat system
    -new kinds of elevators

    The development of those alone will eat up money. Integrating them in the carrier will eat up more. I expect the 2nd in the class will be considerably cheaper; the -78 will be a guinea pig...

  10. #25
    Senior Contributor Doktor's Avatar
    Join Date
    25 Aug 08
    Location
    Skopje, Macedonia
    Posts
    13,668
    They were not in the original plan when they signed the contract?
    No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

    To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

  11. #26
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 08
    Posts
    1,835
    Quote Originally Posted by Doktor View Post
    They were not in the original plan when they signed the contract?
    Sure they were. But every new tech costs more to develop than expected/admited by the developer. And, since the new class carries so much of it, an extra overrun is to be expected. Tbh, I understand the -78's overruns more than the LCS, for example...

  12. #27
    Senior Contributor Doktor's Avatar
    Join Date
    25 Aug 08
    Location
    Skopje, Macedonia
    Posts
    13,668
    Quote Originally Posted by jlvfr View Post
    Sure they were. But every new tech costs more to develop than expected/admited by the developer. And, since the new class carries so much of it, an extra overrun is to be expected. Tbh, I understand the -78's overruns more than the LCS, for example...
    To be clear, I am not affected by the increase, but rather surprised when the cuts are everywhere around
    No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

    To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

  13. #28
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 08
    Posts
    1,835
    Quote Originally Posted by Doktor View Post
    To be clear, I am not affected by the increase, but rather surprised when the cuts are everywhere around
    You mean the cuts in other "overruned" programs?

  14. #29
    Defense ProfessionalSenior Contributor tbm3fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Nov 09
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Posts
    3,141
    Quote Originally Posted by Doktor View Post

    P.S. idk about the rest of you guys, but calling Gerald Ford is kinda weird to me
    Yes, let's hope she doesn't trip over herself like Jerry.

  15. #30
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,537
    Quote Originally Posted by Gun Grape View Post
    Sure they do. They only don't miss when the computer calculates the proper aim point. Especially when the firing platform is rolling,pitching and yawing at the same time.

    Otherwise the Airborne laser system would have been a success from day 1.
    thats a tracking issue, not a weapon issue. If the mount is properly tracking the laser wont miss. Tracking with a DEW is also easier because there is no need to build in a lead, slew directly on target and fire.

    If the tracking is off and a friendly is hit, a laser designed to defeat think skinned things like missiles and aircraft is unlikely to serious damage a steel arship. and there is no shrapnel.

    As a former laser operator, I'll say BS. We have been using laser designators since 1968. Still cannot get them to work in a heavy rain. Its that pesky refraction thing. Much more important when you are using the laser as the weapon and not the designator.
    You can say BS all you want, but different substances are tuned to different freqs. You can tune a laser to virtually ignore a number of non-opaque substances including water vapor and droplets. In fact you can even tune lasers to ignore water particles of a certain size and while being especially tuned to other droplets of a certain size. This is letting scientists look inside of rain clouds to literally count rain drops. Your information is out of date.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 32
    Last Post: 05 Jul 10,, 08:18
  2. Ford does not need US government loans: CEO
    By xrough in forum International Economy
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 05 Feb 09,, 00:58
  3. CVN-78: USS Gerald R Ford
    By TopHatter in forum Naval Warfare
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05 Jan 07,, 06:50
  4. Job fears for Ford workers in Europe
    By Ironduke in forum International Economy
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02 Oct 03,, 05:23

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •