World-Wide Aircraft Carriers Site Announced by Freeper Jeff Head

World-Wide Aircraft Carriers ^ | 16 October 2005 | Jeff Head

[The Shrew]

I just love it when the teacher has already answered the question and I just didn't find the answer. Just like school! ;-) Thanks for the info:

Regards,

TS

[The Shrew]

There hs been some consideration of forward deploying another US aircraft carrier to the western Pacific to join the USS Kitty Hawk there. If this occurs, it is possible that the John F. Kennedy will be considered for this role because her conventional power makes her more politically friendly to nations like Japan who may port her.

Great info.

Regards,

TS

[Oztrich Boy]

Good job. Had to really search to find a flaw.

But you missed the Spanish Strategic Projection Ship (laid down by IZAR September 2003)

Large Deck Amphib at 27000 tonnes - approaching Tarawa/Wasp size

[tlb]

>>>>> I wonder what would be a good name for CVN-78 (CVN-21 program)?

CVN21 will almost certainly be the USS Bill Clinton, and the followups the Clinton class.

We've had the USS Jimmy Carter, the USS Ronald Reagan, and the USS George H Bush. That makes it Clinton's turn and I rather doubt the naming format will change now.

[Jeff Head]

Thank you VERY much. I certainly dd miss that one and will have it up there ASAP!

I appreciate that very much. It looks like a fine and capable vessel. Clearly, with the ski-jump, it will have VSTOL aircraft from the outset.

I hope it has two props, as the current Spanish carrier only has one.

[Jeff Head]

No problem. I thought about that same issue as I was putting the site together, and that is why I amde that statement. If we have to have a second carrier in the WESTPAC area after that (meaning a nuc), it may have to be based somewhere else than Japan.

[tanknetter]

On the site, under Kitty Hawk..or the JFK...I mention that it will probably be the JFK.

What's the current status of JFK? DoD wanted to retire her this year, but I think the House went against it in its appropos bill. I'm not sure what happened in the Senate though.

Alternative options in the mid/long-term that I've heard are to either extend out Kitty Hawk for another ten years (a real possibility, given the miracle workers at Yokosuka who care for her, plus the fact that she's now considered to be in better material condition than the younger Kennedy), or to forward base a CVN or two at Pearl and/or Apra.

[The Shrew]

That makes it Clinton's turn and I rather doubt the naming format will change now.

The class could then be nicknamed the "Pillage class" of aircraft carriers. Or, the "TRIMPOTUS Class" or Congress could actually acquire some spine and skip him.

Regards,

TS

[Jeff Head]

I have read that the George HW Bush will replace Kitty Hawk in 2008, and that the 1st CVN21 will replace Enterprise in 2013, leaving JFK to be replaced by the 2nd CVN21 in 2018.

Maybe they should push JFK to 2008 with the GHWB, then the Kitty Hawk in 2013, and then the Enterprise in 2018. Depends on the shape of the ships.

I know JFK went through some real hard times when it failed a readiness review a few years ago. The CO was relieved and they had some real problems. Like 3 of the 4 elevators were not working up to snuff.

Anyhow...I have also heard about moving at least one CVN to Pearle too.

[fredo1070]

I found your site very interesting. It was a good break from studying.

I also purchased and read the hardcover version of your book a couple of months ago. It was a very enjoyable read...are you planning any other publications?

[Jeff Head]

Thank you very much. I hope you get a lot of use out of that site.

...and thanks VERY MUCH for reading

THE DRAGON'S FURY SERIES

and for those ekind words about the series. Please consider a review here on FR if you are so inclined.

In the future I will be publishing a non-fiction book about my experiences at

THE STAND AT KLAMATH FALLS.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Cool!

I'll check it out.

[fredo1070]

Sounds interesting...I'll be sure to read it.

As for China I'm on the international law journal at my school and I'm thinking about writing a note on China's nuclear proliferation. I haven't narrowed down the topic yet but from my limited research I am intrigued as to what China has been up to especially in regards to Pakistan and North Korea.

[Jeff Head]

Great! Please let me know what you find out regarding the same...and if you are allowed to, please post the info here on FR!

[Jeff Head]

Alright! I look forward to your comments and thoughts after you do.

[freekitty]

Cool

[Jeff Head]

Now addressed...check it out, HERE ON THE SITE.

Again, thanks for the input. The POD propulsion look very intriguiing for such a large vessel.

[Jeff Head]

Thanks a lot. Hope it is interesting and enjoyable for you.

[neutronsgalore]

"We've had the USS Jimmy Carter, the USS Ronald Reagan, and the USS George H Bush. That makes it Clinton's turn and I rather doubt the naming format will change now."

The fact that Carter's name got put on a submarine shows there is no gaurantee that it'll be an aircraft carrier Clinton's name will be attached to, assuming his name gets slated for a ship at all. Hmmm...I wonder if the Navy owns any barges and if they're planning on aquiring more?

I agree with fallujah-nuker that one more political name could be used as the name-ship of the class. I like the sound of USS Joseph McCarthy. It would send a chill up the spines of liberals to here the name of that ultra-patriot for decades.

[Jeff Head]

I thought they were already naming an important area of most of the ships in the fleet after Clinton...that would be the "Clinton bilge".

Could be wrong about that...and its probably completely unofficial, but also widespread.