If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Hampton Roads)   Milestone in construction of USS Gerald R. Ford, America's newest nuclear powered aircraft carrier; its penis was installed yesterday (pic)   (hamptonroads.com) divider line 105
    More: Interesting, USS Gerald R. Ford, President Ford, Newport News, warships, The Virginian-Pilot, construction manager, Bronze Star, sensitivity training  
•       •       •

15424 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 May 2012 at 11:29 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



105 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-05-25 10:26:32 AM
Question for the metallurgical engineers, why not use stainless steel for something that'll be a) a warship and b) in a corrosive environment its entire life? Or is the strength vs hardness an issue there?
 
2012-05-25 10:37:44 AM
Found the answer myself: Because it'll turn the ship into a galvanic battery.
 
2012-05-25 10:48:51 AM
Interesting aircraft carrier fact:

You can taste jet fuel in the drinking water when there is a concentration of 8 part per million or greater.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-05-25 10:56:58 AM

gaslight: Question for the metallurgical engineers, why not use stainless steel for something that'll be a) a warship and b) in a corrosive environment its entire life? Or is the strength vs hardness an issue there?


Because it's farking expensive and difficult to work.
 
2012-05-25 11:04:29 AM
I understand the function of the bulbous bow from a stability and efficiency point of view, but do they do anything else with it? Storage hold? Sonar suite? Crew quarters? Anything like that?
 
2012-05-25 11:11:52 AM
electromagnetic catapults

Railguns lol
 
2012-05-25 11:19:35 AM

NowhereMon: I understand the function of the bulbous bow from a stability and efficiency point of view, but do they do anything else with it? Storage hold? Sonar suite? Crew quarters? Anything like that?


Ballast?
 
2012-05-25 11:26:35 AM
The ship promptly bumped its head, and stumbled down a flight of stairs
 
2012-05-25 11:29:29 AM
Jerry Ford was a nice enough guy, but I can't get excited about naming ships after unelected presidents.
 
2012-05-25 11:31:03 AM
Does it like beer and nachos?
 
2012-05-25 11:31:42 AM
is this a penis joke?
 
2012-05-25 11:32:52 AM

NowhereMon: I understand the function of the bulbous bow from a stability and efficiency point of view, but do they do anything else with it? Storage hold? Sonar suite? Crew quarters? Anything like that?


On destroyers it often does house a sonar dome. On carriers, I don't know.
 
2012-05-25 11:33:26 AM
I prefer to think of it as a nuclear-powered-aircraft carrier.
 
2012-05-25 11:34:16 AM

Old_Chief_Scott: Interesting aircraft carrier fact:

You can taste jet fuel in the drinking water when there is a concentration of 8 part per million or greater.


Been there done that :)
 
2012-05-25 11:34:57 AM
This makes the liberal in me so angry. This will cost $16 billion, we don't need it, and we can't properly fund schools in this country.
 
2012-05-25 11:35:03 AM
Now I'll admit I haven't seen an aircraft carrier being built. But that pic looks like they are taking apart a rusted out hunk of junk.
 
2012-05-25 11:35:03 AM

92myrtle: MaudlinMutantMollusk: The ship promptly bumped its head, and stumbled down a flight of stairs

...and then was eaten by wolves. It was delicious.

[otrsportsonline.com image 300x225]


At the senseless age of eighty-three
 
2012-05-25 11:37:16 AM

Old_Chief_Scott: Interesting aircraft carrier fact:

You can taste jet fuel in the drinking water when there is a concentration of 8 part per million or greater.


Really? sounds a mite unhealthy...cross-contamination in fuel and water tanks?

Hopefully we're not going to see another cancer cluster:

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2009/09/26/lejeune-s-breast-cancer-marin e s/
 
2012-05-25 11:37:20 AM
"From here on we erect the ship in large chunks like this,"

/good choice of words
 
2012-05-25 11:37:50 AM
They really need to rename it. I hear Enterprise will be free soon.
 
2012-05-25 11:39:06 AM
Good thing all the sick people have hospitals, student loans are not driving people to the poor house.

Oh wait. No poor houses.

We have a shiat ton of aircraft carriers, though.

/ fark the military
 
2012-05-25 11:39:07 AM
In addition to being president, he was a basketball player in the navy: Link
 
2012-05-25 11:40:23 AM
How many of these things do we really need, anyways?
 
2012-05-25 11:41:32 AM

stuhayes2010: This makes the liberal in me so angry. This will cost $16 billion, we don't need it, and we can't properly fund schools in this country.


I think we should spend as much per student as Finland or Australia. Then use the savings to buy more carriers.
 
2012-05-25 11:42:42 AM

illegal.tender: Good thing all the sick people have hospitals, student loans are not driving people to the poor house.

Oh wait. No poor houses.

We have a shiat ton of aircraft carriers, though.

/ fark the military


You won't think like that the day they're defending your right to be a worthless jackass by putting themselves between you and the incoming bullets.
 
2012-05-25 11:44:12 AM
stuhayes2010

This makes the liberal in me so angry. This will cost $16 billion, we don't need it, and we can't properly fund schools in this country.


Throwing money at schools that suspend 60+ kids for riding bikes or wearing t-shirts isn't the farking answer, as recent history shows. Other nations spend far less and get far better results. But don't let facts get in the way of your whargarble.
 
2012-05-25 11:44:52 AM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: The ship promptly bumped its head, and stumbled down a flight of stairs


Came here for this, leaving satisfied.
 
2012-05-25 11:45:54 AM
I worked at a shipyard building container ships, oil tankers and navy supply ships. so I'm getting a kick out of these replies.

But to answer a few questions. The ship looks like a heap of rusted metal but it is only surface rust. when the ship is ready to paint it is sandblasted out and paint applied to a nice shiny surface.
 
2012-05-25 11:47:34 AM
Alright... who voted for this?!
 
2012-05-25 11:48:55 AM
Unfortunately, it's likely that nuclear carriers will continue to be named after politicians (Vinson, Stennis, Ford, etc). However we may see the Enterprise name resurface for an Amphibious assault ship. All the recent ones share names with historical aircraft carriers (Wasp, Essex, Boxer, America, etc.)
 
2012-05-25 11:50:30 AM

OnlyM3: Other nations spend far less and get far better results.


Same could be said of our military.

But don't let facts get in the way of your whargarble.

Fact is that we don't need it

$16 billion construction cost (+ the cost of the air wing + operational costs for the next 25 years) should be going towards debt reduction. We shouldn't be spending money we don't have.

But don't let facts get in the way of your whargarble.

Take your own advice.
 
2012-05-25 11:51:20 AM
I'd want to serve on the U.S.S. Bill Clinton.

"One reactor is devoted entirely to the margarita blender, and the steam catapult has enough power to simultaneously remove the clothes of 234 drunk college girls."
 
2012-05-25 11:55:13 AM
About a third of Newport News' Shipyard's 21,000 employees have worked on the carrier in some form.

16bn / 7000 = 2,285,714

On a cost per job basis it's better then some of those shovel ready stimulus jobs.
 
2012-05-25 11:58:40 AM
I read that even though they're going strictly low-tech, it will compare quite well to more advanced carriers like the German M3. In fact, with a few mods, it will significantly outperform it while still costing less. Still waiting for numbers from the 'ring and Laguna Mojada, though.
 
2012-05-25 12:05:05 PM

trappedspirit: is this a penis joke?


It was hoisted into dry dock by a crane that suspended it in the air with about a dozen thick cables as it slid it into place so it can be welded together with other parts of the ship.
 
2012-05-25 12:05:53 PM
MaudlinMutantMollusk Smartest
Funniest
2012-05-25 11:26:35 AM


The ship promptly bumped its head, and stumbled down a flight of stairs


See, that's actually what should have been the joke when it comes to Gerald Ford.

Penis jokes and mentioning Gerald Ford...that really doesn't work.
 
2012-05-25 12:11:03 PM
Cool thing about this ship: it will be the first to do away with the steam catapult launch system in favor of electromagnetic propulsion. That's right; we're building a ship with a railgun that shoots fighter jets.
 
2012-05-25 12:12:35 PM
Why are they building it from recycled shipping containers?
 
2012-05-25 12:15:04 PM

Giltric: About a third of Newport News' Shipyard's 21,000 employees have worked on the carrier in some form.

16bn / 7000 = 2,285,714

On a cost per job basis it's better then some of those shovel ready stimulus jobs.


Then there is the rest of the supply chain...steal producers, miners, electronics, and producers of every other part, and then moving all that stuff to the drydock. You're looking at 10-20x that number of jobs easily.
 
2012-05-25 12:16:20 PM

Giltric: About a third of Newport News' Shipyard's 21,000 employees have worked on the carrier in some form.

16bn / 7000 = 2,285,714

On a cost per job basis it's better then some of those shovel ready stimulus jobs.


Except for that whole no-bid contract thing.
And Aircraft Carriers can't really be used for public transportation or electrical grid.
Oh, and our Navy being bigger than the next 13 navies COMBINED, and 11 of those are considered allies.
 
2012-05-25 12:19:34 PM

Smeggy Smurf: illegal.tender: Good thing all the sick people have hospitals, student loans are not driving people to the poor house.

Oh wait. No poor houses.

We have a shiat ton of aircraft carriers, though.

/ fark the military

You won't think like that the day they're defending your right to be a worthless jackass by putting themselves between you and the incoming bullets.


Usually that "defending" is because we've installed some tinpot dictator in their country in the past, or bombed the &%00000000# out of em because one of their politicians said something stupid - and one of 'em gets torqued off and takes a swing at us. Amirite?

\loves the troops, hates the jackasses that send them places
 
2012-05-25 12:23:29 PM

OnlyM3: stuhayes2010

This makes the liberal in me so angry. This will cost $16 billion, we don't need it, and we can't properly fund schools in this country.

Throwing money at schools that suspend 60+ kids for riding bikes or wearing t-shirts isn't the farking answer, as recent history shows. Other nations spend far less and get far better results.


Are you talking about education or the military, because the answer is both. Especially on the spend part.
 
2012-05-25 12:24:06 PM

GasDude: Unfortunately, it's likely that nuclear carriers will continue to be named after politicians (Vinson, Stennis, Ford, etc). However we may see the Enterprise name resurface for an Amphibious assault ship. All the recent ones share names with historical aircraft carriers (Wasp, Essex, Boxer, America, etc.)


I don't like that. It needs to be an aircraft carrier, and the biggest, baddest one at that. They need to have a special set of Ship Nutz commissioned just for it.

Oh, and dibs on the current Enterprise.
 
2012-05-25 12:39:50 PM

StrangeQ: Cool thing about this ship: it will be the first to do away with the steam catapult launch system in favor of electromagnetic propulsion. That's right; we're building a ship with a railgun that shoots fighter jets.


SDF-1 cannot be far off!

/gimme my Gladiator destroid....
 
2012-05-25 12:41:21 PM
Quick get some carrier-poacher-poachers on the job! Carrier penis is a traditional mood brightener in Laos, they'll kill it just for the penis and leave the rest to rot!
 
2012-05-25 12:41:48 PM

clyph: Fact is that we don't need it



Yeah, lets not build any more carriers so they can age so that they're in the same condition as our nuclear power plants. That's a great plan and it certainly won't put any lives at risk to have sailors and aviators deployed on vessels designed during the Cold War as we approach the middle of the 21st century.
 
2012-05-25 12:43:59 PM
Big son of a biatch!

i536.photobucket.com
 
2012-05-25 12:44:01 PM
But come on, it is gonna be a sweet ride; rail gun catapult, re-positioned tower, bulbous bulb front

And cool stuff like this:
- Advanced arresting gear.[6]
- Automation, which reduces crew requirements by several hundred from the Nimitz class carrier.
- The updated RIM-162 Evolved Sea Sparrow missile system.[7]
- AN/SPY-3 dual-band radar (DBR), as developed for Zumwalt class destroyers.
- An Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) in place of traditional steam catapults for launching aircraft.[6]
- A new nuclear reactor design (the A1B reactor) for greater power generation.
- Stealthier features to help reduce radar profile.
- The ability to launch the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, EA-18G Growler, and the F-35C Lightning II.[8]

upload.wikimedia.org

And just LOOK at that turning radius
 
2012-05-25 12:48:57 PM
JohnCarter Smartest
Funniest
2012-05-25 12:44:01 PM


But come on, it is gonna be a sweet ride; rail gun catapult, re-positioned tower, bulbous bulb front

And cool stuff like this:
- Advanced arresting gear.[6]
- Automation, which reduces crew requirements by several hundred from the Nimitz class carrier.
- The updated RIM-162 Evolved Sea Sparrow missile system.[7]
- AN/SPY-3 dual-band radar (DBR), as developed for Zumwalt class destroyers.
- An Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) in place of traditional steam catapults for launching aircraft.[6]
- A new nuclear reactor design (the A1B reactor) for greater power generation.
- Stealthier features to help reduce radar profile.
- The ability to launch the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, EA-18G Growler, and the F-35C Lightning II.[8]



And just LOOK at that turning radius



I'm reading this, looking at the picture and Scorpion's "Rock you like a Hurricane" is going through my head.

I hate that song.
 
2012-05-25 12:52:18 PM

zarberg: Oh, and our Navy being bigger than the next 13 navies COMBINED, and 11 of those are considered allies.



Using the ranking of navies by tonnage as a measure of combat effectiveness is somewhat dumb considering a 7 to 8 thousand ton destroyer has the armament to cripple or sink a 100 thousand ton aircraft carrier.

Also, most nations don't have the array of vessels we have to support amphibious operations, vessels which are included in the overall tonnage of the navy but would not be deployed to combat other naval vessels.
 
Displayed 50 of 105 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report