PLAN Carrier Strike Group and Airwing

Re: Aircraft Carriers II

Jeff .... why it's called Ford class carrier ?, Gerald Ford was a Vice President and only became the president after the scandal and in a very short time (~3 years). I am sure (apart from the scandal) Nixon had done more to the country and possibly Reagan would not be bad at all. How about MacArthur ?

Who decide the name of the carrier ? the congress, the President or Pentagon ? or somebody else ?

Re: Aircraft Carriers II

Newport News Shipbuilding Floods Dry Dock and Floats Aircraft Carrier Gerald R. Ford

Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII) announced today that its Newport News Shipbuilding (NNS) division began flooding the dry dock where the nuclear-powered aircraft carrier Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78) has been under construction since November 2009. With the push of a dozen buttons, ship’s sponsor Susan Ford Bales initiated the flow of more than 100 million gallons of water into the dry dock.

The flooding of the dry dock takes place in phases during which various tests are conducted. Initially, the dock is flooded about 4 feet high to its keel blocks, wood-capped concrete pads on which the ship has been supported during construction. Once the dock is fully flooded and initial afloat testing is complete, water will be partially pumped out and the ship returned to her keel blocks in anticipation of Ford’s christening on Nov. 9. The ship will float again about a week later when it is moved to a pier for outfitting. Ford is scheduled for delivery to the U.S. Navy in 2016.

Click to expand...

Re: Aircraft Carriers II

antiterror13 said:

Jeff .... why it's called Ford class carrier ?, Gerald Ford was a Vice President and only became the president after the scandal and in a very short time (~3 years). I am sure (apart from the scandal) Nixon had done more to the country and possibly Reagan would not be bad at all. How about MacArthur ?

Who decide the name of the carrier ? the congress, the President or Pentagon ? or somebody else ?

Click to expand...

3 years is 75% of a American presidents term, he may not have been a great president or even elected but he was president. He also served.

The selection is made via the Navy board although they to are in a way politicians the final okay being SECNAV who is a appointee.

MacArthur was never president, he was a general and a very very cantankerous one. His career ended when he was more or less fired. Basically he was never in the running.

Ronald Reagan already has a carrier named in his honor.

Nixon is considered disgraced and although he did serve in the Navy he is still widely unpopular, it would be like the British naming a one of the QEs after Prime Minster Chamberlain. Or Russia naming a Mistral in honor of Stalin.

Re: Aircraft Carriers II

Jeff Head said:

Depends on lot of things. If a torpedo hit one of those propellers and detonated, it would probably ruin that propeller at least...but there are four and the vessel could keep going depending on the damage.

If the detonation penetrated the hull into the machinery spaces and caused larger destruction, fires and secondary explosions, it could stop the carrier.

But the nuclear carrier is FAST. If she has time to get up to max speed, which may be as high as 50 knots or more, she may outrin the torpedo. Aslo the US is developing counter torpedo torpedos to attack oncoming torpedos too.

Click to expand...

My Grandson Ben says, hey thats the ship we saw in Virgina, our Son-In-Law Dan who is active duty ARMY, was home from Germany for some training, but found time to take the family to Newport News to see the Gerald R Ford, our daughter may have some pics???? who knows? brat

Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

snake65 said:

Care to explain, what exactly there is to experiment with?

Click to expand...

Perhaps the word "testing" would be more appropriate. An aircraft carrier uses high tensile steels with more strength than the steel used on typical destroyers. That means there will be new welding technologies and techniques applied for producing welds with higher strength. For obvious reasons, new technologies and techniques have to be tested in an actual production environment before being used on an actual aircraft carrier. Additionally, the workers also need to be trained on using those new technologies and techniques. A demonstration module can serve both of these purposes.

Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

Engineer said:

Perhaps the word "testing" would be more appropriate. An aircraft carrier uses high tensile steels with more strength than the steel used on typical destroyers. That means there will be new welding technologies and techniques applied for producing welds with higher strength. For obvious reasons, new technologies and techniques have to be tested in an actual production environment before being used on an actual aircraft carrier. Additionally, the workers also need to be trained on using those new technologies and techniques. A demonstration module can serve both of these purposes.

Click to expand...

The ramp wouldn't be kwhere the ship's structure experiences the greatest stress in normal operation. It could be made of mild steel for all the difference such would make. The midship portion of the bottom of the ship and the main strength deck is usually where a ship's structure experiences the greatest tensile and compressive stresses during normal service. Why not build a hull segment where techniques would really be put to the test, if issue with high performance steel is the reason for the module?

Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

chuck731 said:

The ramp wouldn't be kwhere the ship's structure experiences the greatest stress in normal operation. It could be made of mild steel for all the difference such would make.

Click to expand...

The ramp being curved, and the fact that the deck being one area where steel with highest tensile strength is used, make the ramp an interesting area for testing.

chuck731 said:

The midship portion of the bottom of the ship and the main strength decusage usually where a ship's structure experiences the greatest tensile and compressive stresses during normal service. Why not build a hull segment where techniques would really be put to the test, if issue with high performance steel is the reason for the module?

Click to expand...

The demonstrator is never intended for structural validation. It is not an equivalent to a static test frame in aerospace engineering. Look at the purpose of the demonstrator module form a quality control viewpoint in manufacturing rather than from an engineering viewpoint.

Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

With regard to the photo of the supposed "ramp" (or bow) of the new carrier from Dalian, have anyone one asked the following two questions?

1. What is the ramp's angle? It doesn't seems like 12 degree (correct angle for STOBAR?) to my untrained eye. If it is a ramp, it looks like it will only be able to give the plane taking off it a slight "bump" only. For argument sake, if it is a "demo module", wouldn't it be more useful it they build it ... correctly?

2. Why is the "rear" part of the structure rounded off? By that I mean the part of the supposed flight deck, on that module, that is opposite to end that is the supposed "ramp" (bow).

I'll always be glad to see or hear something relating to the next carrier: be it claimed technical drawings, supposed test modules (ramp, catapult or helicopter carrier), or better yet actual module being build. This one, although it had gotten me excited at first, is just not very convincing upon closer look; unless someone can come up with a better explanation.

Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

Jovian said:

1. What is the ramp's angle? It doesn't seems like 12 degree (correct angle for STOBAR?) to my untrained eye. If it is a ramp, it looks like it will only be able to give the plane taking off it a slight "bump" only. For argument sake, if it is a "demo module", wouldn't it be more useful it they build it ... correctly?

Click to expand...

The module is used for practice and skills demonstration.

Jovian said:

2. Why is the "rear" part of the structure rounded off? By that I mean the part of the supposed flight deck, on that module, that is opposite to end that is the supposed "ramp" (bow).

Click to expand...

The rounded off part represents the edge of the flight deck at the stern.

Re: PLAN Carrier Construction

Engineer said:

The module is used for practice and skills demonstration.


The rounded off part represents the edge of the flight deck at the stern.

Click to expand...

Wrong on both accounts.

Models for practice, that model tend to be small: much much smaller, or on computer nowadays. Also, they'll build it to the right proportion; not a compressed version that will tell them absolute nothing.

No employer will allow their employees build something like "that" for learning about building carrier! Not even one with incredible deep pocket (they'll go broke: and yes, even superpower nation). This module will be an "Ah!" moment maker, and we'll all likely enjoy seeing the final out come. However, it is unlikely to be anything carrier related.

The waiting will have to continue.