Gerald R. Ford Class CVN

Scott Kenny said:
Let's talk schedules and cycles for a second. The US has 11 carriers right now, maybe 12 when CVN79 hits the water. 4 are underway at any given time. 4 more are in work-ups getting ready to go underway, and are the easy surge capability. The last 4 are in shipyards for work after coming back from their last underway. These cycles are normally staggered out so that any one base that homeports more than one carrier usually doesn't have both/all carriers home. (If you live in San Diego when two carriers are in at 32nd St, my condolences)
Click to expand...
Probably not 12 - the Navy deliberately stretched out JFK's construction so her commmissioning would coincide with Nimitz's retirement.
 
CV12Hornet said:
Probably not 12 - the Navy deliberately stretched out JFK's construction so her commmissioning would coincide with Nimitz's retirement.
Click to expand...
IIRC, the Navy will briefly have 12 carriers when JFK is delivered in 2025. But that will almost immediately drop back to 11 when Nimitz decommissions in 2026. It will then drop to 10 when Eisenhower decommissions in 2027 before rising back to 11 in 2028 when Enterprise joins the fleet. Of course, this all depends on the Navy electing not to refit Nimitz and/or Ike to push them past 50 years of service and keep numbers up.
 
Hydroman said:
CVN-65 (my old ship) was built, quick into service, first nuke carrier, had right reactors and served the US for 51 years. The Big E was built to shock the Soviet Union (which it did). We left PSNS in Mar 1982 for NAS Alameda, completed all work-ups and qualifications then a nearly nine month West Pac setting sail on 9/1/1982, pretty damn good.
Click to expand...
That must have been quite the experience. Like they say, a floating city (with cool aircraft).
 
Flogger15 said:
That must have been quite the experience. Like they say, a floating city (with cool aircraft).
Click to expand...
A buddy of mine on the Big E was an ABE (he worked the catapult maintenance, I ran the AIMD hydraulic shop), even with steam cats being around for many decades, constant maintenance and had to use fresh water only (nice thing about the nukes, plenty of fresh water), so with the teething pains of EMALS as an example, still way better than the steam cats. Like any other new tech, EMALS and the CVN-78 class will become routine like CVN-65 and CVN-68 through CVN-77.
 
Hydroman said:
CVN-65 (my old ship) was built, quick into service, first nuke carrier, had right reactors and served the US for 51 years. The Big E was built to shock the Soviet Union (which it did). We left PSNS in Mar 1982 for NAS Alameda, completed all work-ups and qualifications then a nearly nine month West Pac setting sail on 9/1/1982, pretty damn good.
Click to expand...
With Midway?
 
CV12Hornet said:
Probably not 12 - the Navy deliberately stretched out JFK's construction so her commmissioning would coincide with Nimitz's retirement.
Click to expand...

I do not think there is any chance of a CVN extension past 50 years. The USN I think just retired a CVW; it barely has the fights for the ships it has now. There was talk at one point of not even refueling Truman.
 
Hydroman said:
CVN-65 (my old ship) was built, quick into service, first nuke carrier, had right reactors and served the US for 51 years. The Big E was built to shock the Soviet Union (which it did). We left PSNS in Mar 1982 for NAS Alameda, completed all work-ups and qualifications then a nearly nine month West Pac setting sail on 9/1/1982, pretty damn good.
Click to expand...
5-6 months from Refit to deployment is really good time!
 
Josh_TN said:
I do not think there is any chance of a CVN extension past 50 years. The USN I think just retired a CVW; it barely has the fights for the ships it has now. There was talk at one point of not even refueling Truman.
Click to expand...
They already are. Nimitz was supposed to decommission in 2025. But the Navy is giving her a 5.5 month refit to perform another deployment cycle and now won't leave the fleet until 2026. The same is happening for Ike. They're basically extending each of the Nimitz class ships 13 months past their original planned decommissioning date to keep carrier numbers up.
 
Ah, ok, I was thinking a second ROCH. They are instead just squeezing some more time out of the core. Does a an extra tour or two allow the Ford program to catch up forvv CB one to one replacement, and does that mean the entire Nimitz class will have to take on extra time to keep numbers up?
 
SSgtC said:
Honestly, I've given up trying to argue with @Cordy about the Ford class. The guy has such a hate boner for them, it's just pointless to even try anymore
Click to expand...
Considering the findings of the DOT&E FY2023 report consider my criticism of Ford mild as 7 years post commissioning, still relying on civilian contractor support reflecting the very high risk Navy strategy of installing untested systems (concurrency), a few highlights with some quotes taken from the report.

Advanced Arresting Gear - AAG.
The specified requirement is 16,500 mean cycles between operational mission failures (MCBOMF). During FY23, DOT&E observed AAG reliability similar to recent developmental testing (115 MCBOMF in FY21 and 460 MCBOMF in FY22). The fourth engine (so Ford already on 3rd generation installed, having had to cut out the flight deck to install new engines) would improve the reliability and availability of AAG, improve pilot boarding rate, and restore barricade redundancy. The fourth AAG engine was not installed as a cost savings measure. Additional details on AAG suitability can be found in DOT&E’s classified EFR.

Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System -EMALS
Specified requirement is 4,166 MCBOMF. During FY23, DOT&E observed EMALS reliability remained consistent with recent developmental test (460 MCBOMF in FY21 and 614 MCBOMF in FY22). Despite engineering upgrades to hardware and software, reliability has not appreciably changed from prior years and reliance on off-ship technical support remains a challenge.

Advanced Weapons Elevators -AWEs
The AWEs met operational mission needs during these underway periods, but preliminary data suggest AWE is unlikely to meet its operational availability requirement of 99.7 percent. Of note, the crew is reliant on off-ship technical support for correction of hardware and software failures. The Navy has yet to build and transfer ordnance to the flight deck at combat-representative rates

Dual Band Radar - DBR
Availability was observed to be lower than that during developmental testing. This is in part due to the operational expectation of continuous radar coverage. Reliability concerns are amplified due to the one-of-a kind nature of the DBR. The radar relies on embarked contractor support and there is uncertainty on sourcing replacement parts as the system ages. The Navy should ensure replacement parts are manufactured and available for the life of the system or develop a timeline and strategy for replacing DBR with EASR on CVN 78 to bring it in line with CVN 79’s radar configuration. Additional details on DBR suitability can be found in DOT&E’s classified EFR


https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24400278/2023annual-report.pdf p.175
 
During the second leg of NORPAC/FLEETEX '83, the entire battle group did go to general quarters and it was no drill, quite a few Soviet bombers were coming our way but the bombers turned and then transitioned back to the mainland. We were at GQ for quite a long time then to a more relaxed condition. Interesting times. Sorry if this off-topic.
 
Josh_TN said:
I do not think there is any chance of a CVN extension past 50 years. The USN I think just retired a CVW; it barely has the fights for the ships it has now. There was talk at one point of not even refueling Truman.
Click to expand...
The USN hasn't retired a CVW since deactivating CVW-14 in 2017. However, the bill allowing that deactivation had this to say:

‘‘(e) The Secretary of the Navy shall ensure that—
‘‘(1) the Navy maintains a minimum of 9 carrier air wings
until the earlier of—
‘‘(A) the date on which additional operationally
deployable aircraft carriers can fully support a 10th carrier
air wing; or
‘‘(B) October 1, 2025;
‘‘(2) after the earlier of the two dates referred to in subpara-
graphs (A) and (B) of paragraph (1), the Navy maintains a
minimum of 10 carrier air wings; and
Click to expand...

That deadline is fast approaching, and once George Washington stands up from her post-RCOH trials they'll have enough deployable carriers to justify the air wing. That said, there has been basically zero news on the reactivation of CVW-14, which is worrying.
 
The future aircraft carrier USS Enterprise (CVN-80) will deliver a year and a half later than prior projections, according to the Navy.
The Ford-class carrier, which is currently under construction at HII’s Newport News Shipbuilding in Virginia, will deliver in September of 2029, 18 months later than its previous scheduled delivery date in March of 2028, according to the Navy’s Fiscal Year 2025 budget documents.
Click to expand...

Also revealed in the FY2025 proposed budget the the fifth Ford-class aircraft carrier, CVN-82, which was previously planned for purchase in 2028, is now scheduled to be put under contract two years later in 2030.

 
Firefinder said:
They do.

They dont care.

Which apparently was part of the reason why the Ford had issues, they were too well sealed. Great since they were expecting, and did achieve, the old catapults reliability. Not so great when working out the kinks to get said reliability.
Click to expand...
It was a dig at a certain politician who said that the Fords shouldn't use 'magnetic elevators' because he knew for sure that when magnets get wet, they don't work.
 
Then all of the roller coasters which use a form EMALS or magnetic elevator tech will not work in the rain. Quick, someone needs to immediately broadcast global bulletins to all theme parks stating your coasters with electro-magnetics will not work! But they were working in the rain, how can this be?
 
Forest Green said:
Guess it depends on how mobile the system is.
Click to expand...
I like to imagine a scenario where the catapult and arrestor are set up on a single, integrated unit. Maybe in some kind of flat deck. And if this deck could be grafted onto a larger mobile platform, it could move all kinds of places. Obviously, in any realistic scenario, even the smallest such set up would be very heavy, so a conventional wheeled, or even tracked configuration is a no-go. But if it was ship-based, it could potentially carry all kinds of aircraft all over the seas.
 
Doesn't have to be a unified piece either anyhow.

Can easily see a module set up, call each 50 foot long, 10 wide and a foot tall?

Can easy have 400 foot long deal, the Fords cats are bout 325, in roughly the same space as a 40 foot container when stow and just needs a fork lift and 5 guys to to put together. That be 8 such 50 foot long modules on a M1000 tank transporter trailer.

Have another truck with the Generator, cables, and like?

Be a solid set up for the Combat airfields both the Seabees and Army Engineers still train to set up in a week with the AM2 mats, which are modern days versions of tge WW2 Martson matts.

Plus the Air Force Already has a Mobile Arresting system.

Curtiss-Wright EMS - Arresting Systems / ESCO - Mobile Arresting Systems

www.cw-ems.com www.cw-ems.com

Replace that old deal with the Fords set up? Be handy.

So a Platoon with a Dozer, a folklift and some tools can set up a air field with a insane launch time and speed within a week. And can be taken down within a day.
 
Last edited:
Firefinder said:
Doesn't have to be a unified piece either anyhow.

Can easily see a module set up, call each 50 foot long, 10 wide and a foot tall?

Can easy have 400 foot long deal, the Fords cats are bout 325, in roughly the same space as a 40 foot container when stow and just needs a fork lift and 5 guys to to put together. That be 8 such 50 foot long modules on a M1000 tank transporter trailer.

Have another truck with the Generator, cables, and like?

Be a solid set up for the Combat airfields both the Seabees and Army Engineers still train to set up in a week with the AM2 mats, which are modern days versions of tge WW2 Martson matts.

Plus the Air Force Already has a Mobile Arresting system.

Curtiss-Wright EMS - Arresting Systems / ESCO - Mobile Arresting Systems

www.cw-ems.com www.cw-ems.com

Replace that old deal with the Fords set up? Be handy.

So a Platoon with a Dozer, a folklift and some tools can set up a air field with a insane launch time and speed within a week. And can be taken down within a day.
Click to expand...
Probably going to need 2-3 generators on trucks, each towing a generator on a trailer. EMALS is power hungry.

And there's probably also a couple 48ft containers full of capacitors in there, too.
 
I have visions of dormant, cheap, dispersed drones in underwater containers surrounding islands across the Pacific that could wreak havoc on expeditionary forces.

Hell, a nation could flood the Pacific skies with high altitude balloons and munitions that could glide down and do the same.

A lot of different ways to skin a cat but I'd hate to be islanding hopping if things ever went hot.
 
In_A_Dream said:
I have visions of dormant, cheap, dispersed drones in underwater containers surrounding islands across the Pacific that could wreak havoc on expeditionary forces.

Hell, a nation could flood the Pacific skies with high altitude balloons and munitions that could glide down and do the same.

A lot of different ways to skin a cat but I'd hate to be islanding hopping if things ever went hot.
Click to expand...

I don’t see why they would need to be underwater. Put them in a TEU and mix them anywhere; TEUs are so ubiquitous thely are literally used for housing and restaurants in the region, never mind actual cargo and storage. Hell, my favorite Rockaway Beach taco joint is in a TEU.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Probably going to need 2-3 generators on trucks, each towing a generator on a trailer. EMALS is power hungry.

And there's probably also a couple 48ft containers full of capacitors in there, too.
Click to expand...
The Storeage system....

Are not Capacitors.

They are Flywheel Storage systems, Basically a motor spins up a Flywheel to 6000 PLUS RPM, then when it time to power system the motor turns into a generator which feeds the system.

To Spin up the Rotors you generallly need 45 seconds of a electric motor pulling roughly less then a megawatt of power.

ALL that enegry is dump at once in less then 3 seconds, pumping out over 81 Megawatts of power. That is feed into the power controller then into the Catapult itself.

Each of the Ford EMALS is a double set up that alternates with one feeding while the other charges. With one fitting in a 10 foot connex so a single 20 footer on a trailer.

You can cut down the power demand by increasing the charge time and vice versa. As is the Army does have a mobile megawatt generator that uses a gas turbine to spin it. It used by the Thaad TPY2 radar, comes in both Trailer and Truck form.
 
Last edited:
Firefinder said:
The Storeage system....

Are not Capacitors.

They are Flywheel Storage systems, Basically a motor spins up a Flywheel to 6000 PLUS RPM, then when it time to power system the motor turns into a generator which feeds the system.

To Spin up the Rotors you generallly need 45 seconds of a electric motor pulling roughly less then a megawatt of power.

ALL that enegry is dump at once in less then 3 seconds, pumping out over 81 Megawatts of power. That is feed into the power controller then into the Catapult itself.

Each of the Ford EMALS is a double set up that alternates with one feeding while the other charges. With one fitting in a 10 foot connex so a single 20 footer on a trailer.

You can cut down the power demand by increasing the charge time and vice versa. As is the Army does have a mobile megawatt generator that uses a gas turbine to spin it. It used by the Thaad TPY2 radar, comes in both Trailer and Truck form.
Click to expand...
That's surprisingly less power hungry than I thought....

I'd still want the energy storage systems in separate boxes, mind you. If that generator fits into a 10ft Connex, have a generator and flywheel in a 20ft container (or 40ft with 20ft of fuel tank, whichever), and split those into separate revetments. So in the event of attack they have to hit multiple different spots. And in the event of flywheel oops, it doesn't take down the entire EMALs.
 
Scott Kenny said:
That's surprisingly less power hungry than I thought....

I'd still want the energy storage systems in separate boxes, mind you. If that generator fits into a 10ft Connex, have a generator and flywheel in a 20ft container (or 40ft with 20ft of fuel tank, whichever), and split those into separate revetments. So in the event of attack they have to hit multiple different spots. And in the event of flywheel oops, it doesn't take down the entire EMALs.
Click to expand...
Mind yous that still 82 megawatts for ONE!

1.

Uno

Single Emal.

And the Ford has 4 which is 328, call it 330 for spare, Megawatts needed per launch every 45 seconds. You see where it hunger rep comes from.

Big thing with the EMals is that it removes Like 40 miles of steam piping coming from the reactors for like a mile of electrical cable.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom