Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The U.S. Navy's New Ford-Class: The Worst Aircraft Carrier Ever
The National Interest ^ | 7/9/24 | Brandon Weichart

Posted on 07/10/2024 7:28:14 AM PDT by hardspunned

The United States Navy remains heavily invested in aircraft carriers, with the new Gerald R. Ford-class intended to replace the aging Nimitz-class. However, these new carriers are costly, over-budget, and fraught with technological issues, raising concerns about their effectiveness in modern warfare.

(Excerpt) Read more at nationalinterest.org ...


TOPICS: Government
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-83 next last
To: shooter223

“We have 11 carriers. 4 are currently deployed.”
I wonder if this is all about maintenance or is there problems crewing these ships.


41 posted on 07/10/2024 9:20:38 AM PDT by MCF (If my home can't be my Castle, then it will be my Alamo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: ducttape45

> I don’t think good military aircraft are capable of being built in the US anymore.

Maybe, but who builds better aircraft?


42 posted on 07/10/2024 9:31:14 AM PDT by glorgau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Reno89519


43 posted on 07/10/2024 9:38:16 AM PDT by Bonemaker (invictus maneo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: montag813
We need hybrid subs that can launch thousands of killer drones.

Exactly, submersible drone carriers would seem to be a smart innovation. How many of these could be built for the cost of one super carrier group? They could have:
☻ anti-ship drones, like flying torpedos
☻ anti-aircraft drones with stealth capabilities ("smart flak")
☻ anti-personnel drones which scatter hundreds of submunitions

Also, we need several hundred destroyers in order to be capable of interdicting Chinese shipping in the event of war. Stop those oil tankers and pretty soon their military runs out of fuel.

44 posted on 07/10/2024 9:39:51 AM PDT by Max in Utah (A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: SpirituTuo

You are fighting the last war—understandable—every general and admiral does it.


45 posted on 07/10/2024 9:39:51 AM PDT by cgbg ("Our democracy" = Their Kleptocracy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: TexasGator
Having served on a nuclear carrier as part of a damage control evaluation team I find your post uninformed.

True, I have only been trained in damage control on FF and DD platform but it seems to me the slightest damage in an engineering space on a CVN would cause a immediate reactor scram.

46 posted on 07/10/2024 10:08:46 AM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: hardspunned

If that were the least bit true, the Japanese Navy would have been doing it.

Your posts demonstrate a lack of understanding of Carrier history, WWII Naval History, and the roles that the modern carriers serve to project power around there world.

Of course, you probably think the Russian Navy is vastly superior. LOL


47 posted on 07/10/2024 10:20:44 AM PDT by Vermont Lt (Don’t vote for anyone over 70 years old. Get rid of the geriatric politicians.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: central_va

I have zero experience in any naval ship. That said if they were as easy to put off line as your last post suggested, I think that would have happened by now, don’t ya think?


48 posted on 07/10/2024 10:22:10 AM PDT by Vermont Lt (Don’t vote for anyone over 70 years old. Get rid of the geriatric politicians.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: cgbg

The last war was an insurgency.

The next war will definitely include drones (and lots of them!), but will most likely include a near peer, as well as land and sea combat. Cyber, space, and missile combat will also be in play.

As with any war, boots on the ground are necessary to hold key terrain, even if it has been bombed to snot. Holding terrain requires not just troops, but also air support. Getting to the enemy requires sea and air power.

As we’ve seen from the Russian/Ukraine war, the Russians are fans of mid-20th century combat. The Chinese lack significant combat experience. How to fight and beat them is somewhat uncertain, specifically, where the key battles will take place and the tactics the Chinese will use.

Let’s hope the next war never takes place, and lets also hope it doesn’t involve nuclear weapons.


49 posted on 07/10/2024 10:22:48 AM PDT by SpirituTuo ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: CodeJockey

Just put a 100% tariff on everything from China or containing Chinese components and put that money into defense programs.


50 posted on 07/10/2024 10:23:20 AM PDT by Reno89519 (I'll go out on a limb: Trump & Gabbard 2024 or Trump & Sanders 2024)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Vermont Lt

There has never been shooting a naval war involving nuclear warships. The reactors on SSN’s, SSBN’s and CVN’s scram for the slightest reason for safety. What? Do they turn of all the safeties in a war?


51 posted on 07/10/2024 10:27:45 AM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: SpirituTuo

Imho there is a lot of new technology that is very classified—and we know nothing about it.

As you noted that probably includes space based weapons (that imho can hit ground/sea targets) for major powers.

The carriers would be easy to target (slow moving) and easy to hit targets for that kind of technology.

That is only a dozen or so targets even if all were out in the open ocean.

The old space treaty has been decorating circular files for decades.

I see carriers as analogous to the French Maginot Line—a throwback to the last war(s) doomed to failure in a major conflict.


52 posted on 07/10/2024 10:28:21 AM PDT by cgbg ("Our democracy" = Their Kleptocracy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Vermont Lt
There has never been a shooting naval war involving nuclear warships.

Fixed it.

53 posted on 07/10/2024 10:29:22 AM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: hanamizu

Oh I think they are talking Biden 24/7 right now. It’s enjoyable.


54 posted on 07/10/2024 10:30:50 AM PDT by napscoordinator (DeSantis is a beast! Florida is the freest state in the country! )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: TexasGator

Conventional carriers need huge fuel bunkers. Nuclear carriers don’t. Plus modern aircraft use jet fuel which is far less flammable than avgas. You can throw cigarette butts into a bucket of jp4 and it won’t ignite. This is just for starters. Fire destroyed many ships in WW2. Modern carriers have much lower fire risk. And top notch damage control tech.


55 posted on 07/10/2024 10:35:50 AM PDT by Seruzawa ("The Political left is the Garden of Eden of incompetence" - Marx the Smarter (Groucho))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: uranium penguin

Hell.. the sub itself could be a remote controlled “drone”..

That’s the future. Self assembling, with possible human control that drifts and is powered by nuke or a variation of chemical process from salt water in order to power batteries.

Lay on the bottom and surface on command with occasional testing.


56 posted on 07/10/2024 10:43:16 AM PDT by Dick Vomer ( (2 Timothy 4:7 "deo duce ferro comitantes" <p><b></B><P> <img src="">)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: central_va
Go back to conventional CVs. Build two for the price of one and crew training is easier. Tell me damage control is not easier on a conventional ship as opposed to an exotic nuclear one. Go on, try to tell me that whopper.

Training PQS goes much faster on a conventional carrier. A conventional carrier sailor will have a six-seven month deployment behind them and work ups before a Nuke snipe ever reports to the carrier. Carriers are a lot tougher then people think. My old ship Cv 66 took live fire for 30 days before finally being scuttled internally and sank. At least a third of our carrier fleet for readiness and training purposes from mass causality need to be conventional.

The main issues with FORD is they tried to jump several general generations in technology without putting it to use first. The Navy is also bad for ordering ship-alts during construction. FORD should have taken three prior builds before becoming what theey made in just one ship.

57 posted on 07/10/2024 10:47:57 AM PDT by cva66snipe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: central_va

I would imagine if they are taking hits to the engineering section, there are bigger issues.

I am not arguing that the Air Craft Carrier is likely the WII battleship of the next large conflict. I DO think that the need still exists and the infrastructure can be used to deliver a massive drone Air Force to foreign shores.

I was just questioning the suggested fragility.


58 posted on 07/10/2024 10:48:25 AM PDT by Vermont Lt (Don’t vote for anyone over 70 years old. Get rid of the geriatric politicians.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Vermont Lt

I am a big fan of CV’s. CVN’s, not so much.


59 posted on 07/10/2024 11:01:32 AM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: shooter223
We have 11 carriers. 4 are currently deployed. The rest are in port for maintenance, repairs, etc. Not a very high percentage of cruising around, doing “carrier stuff”. I understand that they are complicated, and need maintenance, but less than half of them out in the world at any given time just doesn’t seem reasonable. https://apnews.com/article/aircraft-carriers-usa-navy-e7904f8dd1ba1f65a9d07a31fd9fb8eb

Except for the fact we used to have more carriers this has always been about the norm. The ships nuke or conventional come out of a year long overhaul, spend about 6-9 months in and out doing work ups, training, inspections for readiness, may include a up to 2 month mini deployment, then head out for a 6-7 month deployment. Upon return they go to either Bremerton or Norfolk Naval shipyard for a 3-4 month maintenance period. They then come out and do the above mentioned cycle two more times and then they require a year long overhaul again or roughly once every 5-6 years. In 3 years and 9 months I made two Six - Seven month deployments, months of workups and inspections at sea, a trip south to RIO, a Carribean sea deployement and one three month yard periods and a year long stint in the yards for overhaul.

What makes the yards take so long is to replace any equipment below the hanger bay anything from galley kettles to electrical switchboards you have to cut the ship open several decks, install, and weld her back up. Just one six month deployment requires things like new ice machines etc. The stuff wears out fast.

60 posted on 07/10/2024 11:05:38 AM PDT by cva66snipe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-83 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson