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.

(WTKR)   Will the anti-wolf defenses work? Who will fall down the stairs? It's the christening of the aircraft carrier Gerald R. Ford. LGT 11am ET livestream and 'Damn that's big' photos   (wtkr.com) divider line 85
    More: Spiffy, President Gerald Ford, Navy Secretary Ray Mabus, navies, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, President Gerald R. Ford, Jonathan Greenert  
•       •       •

3920 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Nov 2013 at 10:52 AM (44 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



85 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-11-09 10:54:39 AM
I am not watching unless I get to see it stumble and fall
 
2013-11-09 10:55:22 AM
What does LGT stand for?  Lesbian, Gay, Transsexual?  Is this another one of them liberal groups?
 
2013-11-09 10:55:52 AM
That's what she said.
 
2013-11-09 10:55:56 AM
check check check, testing one too

my tax dollars at work
 
2013-11-09 10:56:37 AM

sefert: What does LGT stand for?  Lesbian, Gay, Transsexual?  Is this another one of them liberal groups?


in case you weren't joking, it stands for "link goes to"
 
2013-11-09 10:58:05 AM
and live now means live in a few minutes

worst link ever
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-11-09 10:58:17 AM
I'm with sefert. Fark is discriminating against bisexual aircraft carriers. What if the crew includes both Navy and Marines?
 
2013-11-09 10:59:07 AM

ZAZ: I'm with sefert. Fark is discriminating against bisexual aircraft carriers. What if the crew includes both Navy and Marines?


and seamen
 
2013-11-09 10:59:49 AM

sefert: What does LGT stand for?  Lesbian, Gay, Transsexual?  Is this another one of them liberal groups?


"Link Goes To"

Our military is too goddamn big. This is a machine that will ultimately end up killing people in the name of protecting and extending US hegemony. It represents, in the final sense...

Still...military hardware is cool. Especially super-carriers.

/So conflicted.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-11-09 11:01:22 AM
Fuggin Bizzy: So conflicted.

See also "Shipbuilding" by Elvis Costello.
 
2013-11-09 11:01:46 AM

Fuggin Bizzy: sefert: What does LGT stand for?  Lesbian, Gay, Transsexual?  Is this another one of them liberal groups?

"Link Goes To"

Our military is too goddamn big. This is a machine that will ultimately end up killing people in the name of protecting and extending US hegemony. It represents, in the final sense...

Still...military hardware is cool. Especially super-carriers.

/So conflicted.


oh my

resources3.news.com.au
 
2013-11-09 11:01:55 AM
I'm on a boat,
1.bp.blogspot.com
motherf*cker!
 
2013-11-09 11:03:21 AM
Wow, good thing. I couldn't sleep at night, just knowing we didn't have enough aircraft carriers to provide for the defense of this country.

img.fark.net
 
2013-11-09 11:03:28 AM
HA!  It launches planes with FRIGGING RAILGUNS instead of steam!
 
2013-11-09 11:03:28 AM
Allow all scripts
Allow all scripts
Allow all scripts

Still no video?

Are these the same guys that did the Obamacare web site?
 
2013-11-09 11:05:54 AM
The signature dish in the officers mess will be chicken wings.

i.cdn.turner.com
 
2013-11-09 11:06:47 AM

clkeagle: Wow, good thing. I couldn't sleep at night, just knowing we didn't have enough aircraft carriers to provide for the defense of this country.


You could always use a little more. Amirite or amirite? Right? Right.
 
2013-11-09 11:07:19 AM
what a firkin clown show
 
2013-11-09 11:08:47 AM
I watched my first ship, USS Horne, come out of dry dock in '82, it's a site to see.  May this ship never be used in war and may it's crew always have fair winds following seas.
 
2013-11-09 11:08:48 AM
nice hat dick
 
2013-11-09 11:09:06 AM
My old landlord was Steve Ford.  He doesnt really care for politics, but he's pretty pumped about this giant boat.

/Had to wait a couple weeks to tell him how excited I was that he was in Heat, and Starship Troopers.
//Weird guy, that man.
 
2013-11-09 11:10:04 AM
Yeah, not watching Cheney and Rumsfeld.  F*ck those assholes.
 
2013-11-09 11:11:32 AM
The Navy enters the 22nd century on Saturday with the christening of its newest aircraft carrier, the Gerald R. Ford, at Newport News Shipyard

are my maths wrong or is this not the way math works ?

and oh my got that singing is horrid
 
2013-11-09 11:13:53 AM

HMS_Blinkin: Yeah, not watching Cheney and Rumsfeld.  F*ck those assholes.


double f*ck with sand and kerosene
 
2013-11-09 11:14:38 AM

Fuggin Bizzy: sefert: What does LGT stand for?  Lesbian, Gay, Transsexual?  Is this another one of them liberal groups?

"Link Goes To"

Our military is too goddamn big. This is a machine that will ultimately end up killing people in the name of protecting and extending US hegemony. It represents, in the final sense...

Still...military hardware is cool. Especially super-carriers.

/So conflicted.


Before you start thinking these things are juggernauts--remember, we don't even know whether we can defend them against China's "carrier-killers"...

And one day--we may have to.
 
2013-11-09 11:16:23 AM

BravadoGT: Fuggin Bizzy: sefert: What does LGT stand for?  Lesbian, Gay, Transsexual?  Is this another one of them liberal groups?

"Link Goes To"

Our military is too goddamn big. This is a machine that will ultimately end up killing people in the name of protecting and extending US hegemony. It represents, in the final sense...

Still...military hardware is cool. Especially super-carriers.

/So conflicted.

Before you start thinking these things are juggernauts--remember, we don't even know whether we can defend them against China's "carrier-killers"...

And one day--we may have to.


well it's got nice whitewall tires
 
2013-11-09 11:19:15 AM
Waste of money /dwindling defense resources. Nimitz still exceeds anything any future enemy has will have fro a long time. We could even afford and should downgrade to a smaller size to something along there Forestall or even the UK's Queen Elizabeth class and still out class everything else and meet our needs.

Old ship need to be replaced and yes we need to expand our navy but this is not the way to do it.


The Ford is a nice to have but unrealistic want in the face of a more pressing National Security issue-the National Debt.
 
2013-11-09 11:19:41 AM

BravadoGT: we don't even know whether we can defend them against China's "carrier-killers"...


Good point. We'd better double the defense budget. We cannot allow a carrier-killer gap!
 
2013-11-09 11:23:23 AM
Ship's Motto: "Quomodo autem posset infernum Nixon ignoscit?"
 
2013-11-09 11:23:52 AM

HMS_Blinkin: Yeah, not watching Cheney and Rumsfeld.  F*ck those assholes.


Hoping that they use their heads to do the christening with.......
 
2013-11-09 11:23:53 AM
"The arresting gear that grabs planes when they land will be software-controlled, with the goal being less wear and tear on the planes."

You'd think the "goal" would be less explosions, fireballs, death, destruction and general mayhem on deck during landings. But what do I know about programming software.

"Ghost Rider to Tower"
"This is Tower, go ahead"
"Permission to buzz the Tower?"
"Negative Ghost Rider, the buffer is full, I repeat, the buffer IS full"
 
2013-11-09 11:25:38 AM
and then there's Bob McDonald........just before he is indicted for fraud, accepting bribes, theft and just being stupid.
 
2013-11-09 11:26:10 AM
talk talk talk, we pay these folks for what?  and we are terribly in debt?  we fly them all over the planet to talk talk talk. I have a question.
 
2013-11-09 11:27:14 AM
Meanwhile, there's a dinky missile frigate named after Mr. and Mrs. FDR; tell me again how the US military is apolitical?

/The largest military spendgasm in US history was under FDR, but never mind because Commie Dimocrat!!
 
2013-11-09 11:32:34 AM
Can't wait for "The Real Locker Wars of The USS Ford" reality show. Every week a bunch of sailors' lockers are switched and they have one day to track them down.
 
2013-11-09 11:33:24 AM

clkeagle: Wow, good thing. I couldn't sleep at night, just knowing we didn't have enough aircraft carriers to provide for the defense of this country.

[img.fark.net image 554x677]


The point still stands, but the image is outdated.  Strike off those first three ships in each of the USA columns; they're not presently active.  Haven't checked for the other countries.
 
2013-11-09 11:35:30 AM
imageshack.us
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-11-09 11:36:04 AM
BolshyGreatYarblocks

Ford saw combat on a carrier, so he got a carrier. Carter served on a sub, so he got a sub. FDR was assistant secretary of the Navy, so he got an assistant surface vessel.

Actually CV-42 was named after FDR.  It was decommissioned. Get over it.
 
2013-11-09 11:36:14 AM
why yes I know, here is my great granpaw he made a few ships and stuff

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Blake_Glover
 
2013-11-09 11:36:49 AM

mudpants: The Navy enters the 22nd century on Saturday with the christening of its newest aircraft carrier, the Gerald R. Ford, at Newport News Shipyard

are my maths wrong or is this not the way math works ?


It's like how you can buy a 2014 model year car right now, or the December issue of your favorite magazine.
 
2013-11-09 11:36:56 AM
The stumblestairs are the best feature of the Gerald R. Ford.

/We have secretly made one step an inch higher than the rest. Let's see if anyone notices the difference.
 
2013-11-09 11:37:39 AM

Fuggin Bizzy: BravadoGT: we don't even know whether we can defend them against China's "carrier-killers"...

Good point. We'd better double the defense budget. We cannot allow a carrier-killer gap!


Fear China's 'Squeaky Fromme'-class frigates!!
 
2013-11-09 11:38:23 AM
Yeah, what we really needed was another carrier

/4 years as a nuke on the Lincoln
 
2013-11-09 11:38:36 AM
what the hell, let's see if it floats this is boring
 
2013-11-09 11:41:19 AM

ZAZ: BolshyGreatYarblocks

Ford saw combat on a carrier, so he got a carrier. Carter served on a sub, so he got a sub. FDR was assistant secretary of the Navy, so he got an assistant surface vessel.

Actually CV-42 was named after FDR.  It was decommissioned. Get over it.


So on which carrier did St. Ronald serve?
 
2013-11-09 11:42:42 AM

Lee Jackson Beauregard: ZAZ: BolshyGreatYarblocks

Ford saw combat on a carrier, so he got a carrier. Carter served on a sub, so he got a sub. FDR was assistant secretary of the Navy, so he got an assistant surface vessel.

Actually CV-42 was named after FDR.  It was decommissioned. Get over it.

So on which carrier did St. Ronald serve?


he was in a movie
 
2013-11-09 11:43:37 AM

HMS_Blinkin: Yeah, not watching Cheney and Rumsfeld.  F*ck those assholes.


Maybe the ship will stumble and fall on them, or the wolves will eat them first before feasting on the ship.
 
2013-11-09 11:45:02 AM
or cheney will shoot them in the face, by accident
 
2013-11-09 11:45:33 AM

itsaidwhat: You'd think the "goal" would be less explosions, fireballs, death, destruction and general mayhem on deck during landings. But what do I know about programming software.


They've already got that down pretty low, so now they're going for less wear and tear. The launch and recovery system on that ship is also built to accommodate drones- right now, the steam catapults on our other carriers would tear them apart, but the electromagnetic ones can be programmed to however much force you need. And the software controlled arresting gear is kinda important for drones as well.


It's a substantial upgrade on the Nimitz class, and better configured to modern warfare. This thing is planned to stay in service for about 60 years, they need to plan ahead. Can't keep building Nimitzes. Also, aircraft carriers are about projecting power, which is why we have so many. A US Aircraft carrier parked near the South China Sea ensures that the various parties in the South China Sea don't start lobbing missiles at each other. Which would probably have already happened if the US wasn't there.

The world cop bit gets a bad rap because we've used it as an excuse to invade small nations on a few occasions. But somebody has to walk the beat, and right now it's us. It would be great if international tensions didn't exist and we all got along. Someday, we may be there. The overall trend of World History makes me think that we will. But just like in policing, you need to be there if anything starts going wrong, and people need to know you're there if things start going wrong. Should it just be the US? Hell no. Other nations need to chip in, and that's been a long term effort in US Diplomacy, and it's paying off. Several European nations are ramping up their military spending so they can help out. Japan is taking on additional responsibilities for that region. Which might be a bit of a fox guarding the henhouse deal considering their interests in the region, but we trust them. But it takes time to design and build the infrastructure. Right now, we're the ones doing it because we're the only ones who CAN do it.

Military power is necessary to keep the world peaceful, and that's really been the job of the US in recent decades. We use diplomacy, we use economic power, and we use military power, usually just as a deterrent and a calming influence that keeps people from doing stupid things in the first place. Just remember what happened the last time we had an isolationist streak and withdrew from world affairs.
 
2013-11-09 11:48:25 AM

cptjeff: itsaidwhat: You'd think the "goal" would be less explosions, fireballs, death, destruction and general mayhem on deck during landings. But what do I know about programming software.

They've already got that down pretty low, so now they're going for less wear and tear. The launch and recovery system on that ship is also built to accommodate drones- right now, the steam catapults on our other carriers would tear them apart, but the electromagnetic ones can be programmed to however much force you need. And the software controlled arresting gear is kinda important for drones as well.


It's a substantial upgrade on the Nimitz class, and better configured to modern warfare. This thing is planned to stay in service for about 60 years, they need to plan ahead. Can't keep building Nimitzes. Also, aircraft carriers are about projecting power, which is why we have so many. A US Aircraft carrier parked near the South China Sea ensures that the various parties in the South China Sea don't start lobbing missiles at each other. Which would probably have already happened if the US wasn't there.

The world cop bit gets a bad rap because we've used it as an excuse to invade small nations on a few occasions. But somebody has to walk the beat, and right now it's us. It would be great if international tensions didn't exist and we all got along. Someday, we may be there. The overall trend of World History makes me think that we will. But just like in policing, you need to be there if anything starts going wrong, and people need to know you're there if things start going wrong. Should it just be the US? Hell no. Other nations need to chip in, and that's been a long term effort in US Diplomacy, and it's paying off. Several European nations are ramping up their military spending so they can help out. Japan is taking on additional responsibilities for that region. Which might be a bit of a fox guarding the henhouse deal considering their interests in the region, but we trust them. But it ...


trolling?
 
2013-11-09 11:53:12 AM
..fark.. Donald
 
2013-11-09 11:55:24 AM

BravadoGT: Before you start thinking these things are juggernauts--remember, we don't even know whether we can defend them against China's "carrier-killers"...

And one day--we may have to.


China, like many countries far less technologically capable than China, can send a nuclear weapon on a rocket into space and have it land on a specific  part of an aircraft carrier.

Show me a circumstance in which China would feel free to blow up a US aircraft carrier with a conventional missile but not a nuclear one, and I'll show you a spec draft for the latest Tom Clancy-branded novel. It'd go something like this.

With President Stern Lanternjaw hospitalized while receiving treatment for the Super-AIDS virus that the Russo-Japanese alliance had infected him with, Acting President Snidely von Liberal was sitting in the Oval Office when the COMSECDEFFLTPAC brought him news that the Chinese People's Army Navy had destroyed the  USS Nimitz with a carrier-killer missile.

"Mr. 'President,'" the COMSECDEFFLTPAC spat, hating the taste of the word in his mouth, "this is an act of naked aggression. It is war, sir, and we must retaliate with all we have, immediately."

"But, but... a carrier-killer uses conventional explosives!" von Liberal wailed, as tears ran down his blubbery face. "We've drawn a line around use of WMDs, but we never said they couldn't blow up our ships with regular weapons! If we retaliate, I'll be humiliated at U.N. cocktail parties!"


But even then, it's not fear of starting a war with the US that keeps China from aiming them at us. It's the fact that China has about as much to gain from attacking the US as you do from setting your car on fire, while it's in your garage.
 
2013-11-09 11:56:54 AM
Big,  expensive  .... not paid for.


And unlike the Forrestal,  it doesn't even have an escalator.    Pffft...
 
2013-11-09 11:57:01 AM

mudpants: cptjeff: itsaidwhat: You'd think the "goal" would be less explosions, fireballs, death, destruction and general mayhem on deck during landings. But what do I know about programming software.

They've already got that down pretty low, so now they're going for less wear and tear. The launch and recovery system on that ship is also built to accommodate drones- right now, the steam catapults on our other carriers would tear them apart, but the electromagnetic ones can be programmed to however much force you need. And the software controlled arresting gear is kinda important for drones as well.


It's a substantial upgrade on the Nimitz class, and better configured to modern warfare. This thing is planned to stay in service for about 60 years, they need to plan ahead. Can't keep building Nimitzes. Also, aircraft carriers are about projecting power, which is why we have so many. A US Aircraft carrier parked near the South China Sea ensures that the various parties in the South China Sea don't start lobbing missiles at each other. Which would probably have already happened if the US wasn't there.

The world cop bit gets a bad rap because we've used it as an excuse to invade small nations on a few occasions. But somebody has to walk the beat, and right now it's us. It would be great if international tensions didn't exist and we all got along. Someday, we may be there. The overall trend of World History makes me think that we will. But just like in policing, you need to be there if anything starts going wrong, and people need to know you're there if things start going wrong. Should it just be the US? Hell no. Other nations need to chip in, and that's been a long term effort in US Diplomacy, and it's paying off. Several European nations are ramping up their military spending so they can help out. Japan is taking on additional responsibilities for that region. Which might be a bit of a fox guarding the henhouse deal considering their interests in the region, but we trust them. ...


No. I take a nuanced view of foreign policy, hard as that may be to grasp. I'm not saying we should start a whole bunch of wars just to feel useful. I'm saying that carriers make countries think twice before they start shooting off at each other.

Somebody's gotta do it. Right now it's us. I'd prefer, for budget reasons, that the load be shared among lots of other countries. But right now that's not the case. It's probably increasingly going to be the case in the next few decades, but it's not now. So we build carriers.

Yes, we screw up on occasion. But have you got a better solution?
 
2013-11-09 12:09:35 PM
They farking forgot the anti-wolf defenses.
 
2013-11-09 12:17:58 PM
Tiger Woods will be on hand to shank a drive into the crowd.
 
2013-11-09 12:19:15 PM

clkeagle: Wow, good thing. I couldn't sleep at night, just knowing we didn't have enough aircraft carriers to provide for the defense of this country.

[img.fark.net image 554x677]


Not to nit pick but your cute little Chart is out fo date and inaccurate.


Of the 12 US carriers shown 3 are no longer in service-USS Kitty Hawk, USS  JFK and USS Enterprise.



It shows 12 American Amphibious Assaults Ships as aircraft carriers.  Of those all the  LHAs USS Tarawa, USS NAssau and USS Saipan are out of service



Yes he remaining  LHAs/LHDs can  carry AV-8 Harriers but let us  consider a few things. The Harrier is no longer in productions and may not last out the decade. . The USMC only has about 130 Harriers so even if they were all deployable along withe all the amphibs that would make only 14 Harriers per ship.

If many have their way and the F-35 is canceled that means no replacements for the Harriers and those 12 Amphibs are nothing more than Helicopter carriers in terms of air power as many fo the socalled foreign aircraft carriers on your cute little chart.



Now let look at the remaining  US carriers status: Two of those are unavailable for  3 to 3.5 years as they are undergoing a refueling and overhaul.  Two of the  LHDs are also unavailable for 9-18 months for overhaul.



www.stratfor.com
So allow me to fix your cute little chart.

imageshack.com
 
2013-11-09 12:22:53 PM

semiotix: BravadoGT: Before you start thinking these things are juggernauts--remember, we don't even know whether we can defend them against China's "carrier-killers"...

And one day--we may have to.

China, like many countries far less technologically capable than China, can send a nuclear weapon on a rocket into space and have it land on a specific  part of an aircraft carrier.

Show me a circumstance in which China would feel free to blow up a US aircraft carrier with a conventional missile but not a nuclear one, and I'll show you a spec draft for the latest Tom Clancy-branded novel. It'd go something like this.


1.  China transfers carrier-killer missiles to hostile country, like Iran.
2.  Israel attacks Iranian nuclear program.
3.  Iran attacks Tel Aviv, Dimona, and uses new-found tech against US carrier in Persian gulf.

But even then, it's not fear of starting a war with the US that keeps China from aiming them at us. It's the fact that China has about as much to gain from attacking the US as you do from setting your car on fire, while it's in your garage.

China does not want to destroy our economy.  At least not now.  But they don't like us.  And a US carrier sunk in the Persian Gulf?  That would make their year.
 
2013-11-09 12:23:38 PM
Gerald R. Ford had a tough life in the wilds of Michigan. At the age of seven he was devoured by wolves, so his Father whittled a boy out of wood. As the years passed, he was upgraded until he became a wooden man.

His wooden head served him well at Michigan State University, where he was first in his class and a linesman on the football team. His numbskull and his wooden manners and greater than average heighth were noticed by scouts for the Republican party and he became a Republican Stooge.

Nixon realized that such a idiot could be useful and got Ford appointed to the Commission into the JFK assassination. Ford was so thick he swallowed all the shiat fed to him by Nixon and the other conspirators and when Spiro Agnew was prematurely caught with his hands in the cookie jar, Ford was selected as the Fall Guy for Nixon's next conspiracy, Watergate. Unfortunately, Nixon was forced to resign before Ford could be implicated, but a grateful President Ford pardoned everybody left and right, so that wooden head came in useful one last time.

Today we honor that little wooden boy who became President by naming a ship after him. True, ships are no longer built of planks, tar and rope, but Gerald R. Ford was unsinkable, so it's a good name for a boat.
 
2013-11-09 12:26:34 PM

BravadoGT: Fuggin Bizzy: sefert: What does LGT stand for?  Lesbian, Gay, Transsexual?  Is this another one of them liberal groups?

"Link Goes To"

Our military is too goddamn big. This is a machine that will ultimately end up killing people in the name of protecting and extending US hegemony. It represents, in the final sense...

Still...military hardware is cool. Especially super-carriers.

/So conflicted.

Before you start thinking these things are juggernauts--remember, we don't even know whether we can defend them against China's "carrier-killers"...

And one day--we may have to.


Whatev.  That thing has whitewalls.
 
2013-11-09 12:32:54 PM

BolshyGreatYarblocks: Meanwhile, there's a dinky missile frigate named after Mr. and Mrs. FDR; tell me again how the US military is apolitical?

/The largest military spendgasm in US history was under FDR, but never mind because Commie Dimocrat!!


You are sniveling about what exactly?

i0.wp.com


www.digtriad.com

www.amv83.fr
 
2013-11-09 12:35:26 PM

BravadoGT: semiotix: BravadoGT: Before you start thinking these things are juggernauts--remember, we don't even know whether we can defend them against China's "carrier-killers"...

And one day--we may have to.

China, like many countries far less technologically capable than China, can send a nuclear weapon on a rocket into space and have it land on a specific  part of an aircraft carrier.

Show me a circumstance in which China would feel free to blow up a US aircraft carrier with a conventional missile but not a nuclear one, and I'll show you a spec draft for the latest Tom Clancy-branded novel. It'd go something like this.

1.  China transfers carrier-killer missiles to hostile country, like Iran.
2.  Israel attacks Iranian nuclear program.
3.  Iran attacks Tel Aviv, Dimona, and uses new-found tech against US carrier in Persian gulf.

But even then, it's not fear of starting a war with the US that keeps China from aiming them at us. It's the fact that China has about as much to gain from attacking the US as you do from setting your car on fire, while it's in your garage.

China does not want to destroy our economy.  At least not now.  But they don't like us.  And a US carrier sunk in the Persian Gulf?  That would make their year.


You don't think that sinking a carrier in the Gulf wouldn't destablize global economies, including ours and China's?

And China doesn't like us you say?

Any other wisdom you'd like to impart today?
 
2013-11-09 12:40:37 PM

netcentric: Big, expensive .... not paid for.


Just put it on the US taxpayers tab. They're good like that.
 
2013-11-09 12:44:08 PM

J. Frank Parnell: netcentric: Big, expensive .... not paid for.

Just put it on the US taxpayers tab. They're good like that.


It is always OK to spend money on these things, but never on critical infrastructure in the civilian world. I thought everyone understood this?
 
2013-11-09 12:48:43 PM
hasty ambush:
So allow me to fix your cute little chart.

So we don't own or pay for the ones that are refueling, but every other nation has self-fueling maintenance-free ships?  Our amphibious support ships don't count, but all other nations do?  Interesting, and certainly a reason for the US having military spending greater than the rest of the developed world combined.
 
2013-11-09 12:52:00 PM
vehiclevinyls.com
 
2013-11-09 01:00:09 PM

BravadoGT: Before you start thinking these things are juggernauts--remember, we don't even know whether we can defend them against China's "carrier-killers"...


I still have a difficult time believing that a ballistic missile could hit a carrier moving at full speed, and, most likely, taking evasive action.
 
2013-11-09 01:10:22 PM

whither_apophis: Can't wait for "The Real Locker Wars of The USS Ford" reality show. Every week a bunch of sailors' lockers are switched and they have one day to track them down.


For a season ending cliffhanger, they could steal the XO's door.
 
2013-11-09 01:14:25 PM

cptjeff: itsaidwhat: You'd think the "goal" would be less explosions, fireballs, death, destruction and general mayhem on deck during landings. But what do I know about programming software.

They've already got that down pretty low, so now they're going for less wear and tear. The launch and recovery system on that ship is also built to accommodate drones- right now, the steam catapults on our other carriers would tear them apart, but the electromagnetic ones can be programmed to however much force you need. And the software controlled arresting gear is kinda important for drones as well.


It's a substantial upgrade on the Nimitz class, and better configured to modern warfare. This thing is planned to stay in service for about 60 years, they need to plan ahead. Can't keep building Nimitzes. Also, aircraft carriers are about projecting power, which is why we have so many. A US Aircraft carrier parked near the South China Sea ensures that the various parties in the South China Sea don't start lobbing missiles at each other. Which would probably have already happened if the US wasn't there.

The world cop bit gets a bad rap because we've used it as an excuse to invade small nations on a few occasions. But somebody has to walk the beat, and right now it's us. It would be great if international tensions didn't exist and we all got along. Someday, we may be there. The overall trend of World History makes me think that we will. But just like in policing, you need to be there if anything starts going wrong, and people need to know you're there if things start going wrong. Should it just be the US? Hell no. Other nations need to chip in, and that's been a long term effort in US Diplomacy, and it's paying off. Several European nations are ramping up their military spending so they can help out. Japan is taking on additional responsibilities for that region. Which might be a bit of a fox guarding the henhouse deal considering their interests in the region, but we trust them. But it takes time to design and build the infrastructure. Right now, we're the ones doing it because we're the only ones who CAN do it.

Military power is necessary to keep the world peaceful, and that's really been the job of the US in recent decades. We use diplomacy, we use economic power, and we use military power, usually just as a deterrent and a calming influence that keeps people from doing stupid things in the first place. Just remember what happened the last time we had an isolationist streak and withdrew from world affairs.


A boat is a hole in the water in which to throw money. The military just does it bigger and better. Don't get me wrong, without the military, all that money (read as debt) wouldn't be worth the "paper" it's printed on ESPECIALLY in the other countries that buy it.
 
2013-11-09 01:22:23 PM

frankmanhog: hasty ambush:
So allow me to fix your cute little chart.

So we don't own or pay for the ones that are refueling, but every other nation has self-fueling maintenance-free ships?  Our amphibious support ships don't count, but all other nations do?  Interesting, and certainly a reason for the US having military spending greater than the rest of the developed world combined.


Other than France we are the only nation withe nuclear power aircraft carriers , and they take a long time to refit and refuel.   Go ahead and take out  the other nations amphibs.    As the UK s Fleet Air Arm has no fighter aircraft  you can discount them entirely.   Also you cute littlel chart  shows at least three foreign carriers not in service yet and some no longer in service


Then look at a map and realize we are still essential an island nation that have since our inception been reliant on maritime trade. Heck our first wars as a Nation (the Naval War with France, Barbary Wars I and II and War of 1812) were essentially about free trade and free navigation of the seas..  It is not nor has ever been  just about protecting the shore.



Our navy has to be setup  for keeping seal lanes open.  A far more costly and ship intensive  operation than sea denial operations.   A few submarines ,shore based anti-ship missiles or mines at choke points along key shipping lanes can threaten freedom of the sea.  Neutralizing those threats requires a larger force.



World War II is a classic example. The UK an Island nation depending to keeping sea lanes open-required a large navy it was  Maritime power.   Germany , more of continental power  had a smaller Navy built to try and deny  the UK free use of the seas.but not necessarily to seize control for it for its own purposes.


The Cold War same thing.  Russia a continental power  the US a maritime power.  The US also became by default the worlds guarantor of keeping the sea lanes open simply because it is also in our interest and after WWI we were the ones with the resources to do it.



Since ships cannot be in two places at once  no matter how good they are we need a 320-350 ship Navy to really effectively get the job done.


The Influence of Sea Power Upon History, 1660-1783 by A. T. Mahan
 
2013-11-09 01:27:41 PM
semiotix:Show me a circumstance in which China would feel free to blow up a US aircraft carrier with a conventional missile but not a nuclear one, and I'll show you a spec draft for the latest Tom Clancy-branded novel.

BravadoGT:1.  China transfers carrier-killer missiles to hostile country, like Iran.
2.  Israel attacks Iranian nuclear program.
3.  Iran attacks Tel Aviv, Dimona, and uses new-found tech against US carrier in Persian gulf.


Tom! But they said you were dead!
 
2013-11-09 01:35:19 PM
-burp-
 
2013-11-09 01:43:05 PM
shut up and take my money.

I just want to see the mag-launcher work.
 
2013-11-09 01:47:34 PM

semiotix: Tom! But they said you were dead!


From San Diego up to Maine,
In every wannabe's fancy,
Where silly hacks write boilerplate,
It's there you'll find "Tom Clancy"!
It's there you'll find "Tom Clancy"!

/apologies to Joe Hill
 
2013-11-09 01:56:38 PM
Because 13 carrier battle groups is never enough.
 
2013-11-09 02:12:09 PM
The company I'm working for produces the aircraft launching and recovery systems for the ship, called EMALS (Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System) and AAG (Advanced Arresting Gear). My department produces the training for the sailors on these systems.

In the older carriers the planes were launched with steam catapults, which worked like a can of shaken soda. Pop the top and all the steam comes out at once, kicking the shuttle (the part the plane is attached to) down the deck and launching the plane... very hard on airframes and pilots, and unchanged since the 1950's.

EMALS uses tech from MAGLEV trains and "Superman: the Ride" to move the shuttle and the plane down the deck from a standing start smoothly and quickly without jerking the pilot's eyeballs loose, and can be set for any weight plane - including predator drones and other UAV's, which the steam catapult would have ripped to shreds. Electricity moving through coils pushes a steel shuttle down the track, adjusting it's speed over 100 times a second until the plane leaves the deck, all computer controlled. Just put in the exact weight of the plane, check the system, clear the deck, and press a button.

AAG is just as amazing... instead of huge cylinders filled with hydraulic fluid attached to the cables that the plane catches with it's tailhook when landing, the cables are attached to what is basically a shock absorber system and paddle wheel (called a "water twister") that uses nothing but water to take the load. Again, the advantage is that the exact weight of the incoming aircraft can simply be put into the computer with the click of a mouse and the whole system adjusts automatically. Easier on components, easier on planes, easier on pilots.

All this will save taxpayer billions in the long haul when aircraft don't have to be put out of service because their airframes are trashed, and since the system overall has many fewer moving parts, maintenance costs and the number of sailors needed will be cut drastically.

It's amazing to see this stuff work. I like my job.
 
2013-11-09 02:15:30 PM
It looks delicious
 
2013-11-09 02:19:10 PM
hasty ambush

If you're going to fix the chart right at least be fair to the entire chart!. You're just being intellectually dishonest. You're right it's not up to date but on the US AND the non US side as well. How convenient you only 'corrected' the USN's.

Last I check ALL ships/carriers go through year long refit not just USN's. In countries that has one or two it means they will have only one or NO carriers. The first QE class is not anywhere near completion let alone having 2 same with India, Japan etc. France has 1 carrier NOT 2.

If you're going to fix charts at least make it accurate!
 
2013-11-09 02:23:59 PM

mudpants: why yes I know, here is my great granpaw he made a few ships and stuff

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Blake_Glover


That was an interesting read. I got a kick out of this factoid: "It is rumoured that the moustache of the mythical creature featured on Kirin beer labels is in fact a tribute to Glover (who sported a similar moustache)."

/how cool!
 
2013-11-09 03:31:47 PM

rewind2846: The company I'm working for produces the aircraft launching and recovery systems for the ship, called EMALS (Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System) and AAG (Advanced Arresting Gear). My department produces the training for the sailors on these systems.

In the older carriers the planes were launched with steam catapults, which worked like a can of shaken soda. Pop the top and all the steam comes out at once, kicking the shuttle (the part the plane is attached to) down the deck and launching the plane... very hard on airframes and pilots, and unchanged since the 1950's.

EMALS uses tech from MAGLEV trains and "Superman: the Ride" to move the shuttle and the plane down the deck from a standing start smoothly and quickly without jerking the pilot's eyeballs loose, and can be set for any weight plane - including predator drones and other UAV's, which the steam catapult would have ripped to shreds. Electricity moving through coils pushes a steel shuttle down the track, adjusting it's speed over 100 times a second until the plane leaves the deck, all computer controlled. Just put in the exact weight of the plane, check the system, clear the deck, and press a button.

AAG is just as amazing... instead of huge cylinders filled with hydraulic fluid attached to the cables that the plane catches with it's tailhook when landing, the cables are attached to what is basically a shock absorber system and paddle wheel (called a "water twister") that uses nothing but water to take the load. Again, the advantage is that the exact weight of the incoming aircraft can simply be put into the computer with the click of a mouse and the whole system adjusts automatically. Easier on components, easier on planes, easier on pilots.

All this will save taxpayer billions in the long haul when aircraft don't have to be put out of service because their airframes are trashed, and since the system overall has many fewer moving parts, maintenance costs and the number of sailors needed will be cut dra ...


Thanks for clearing the air a bit. Those systems are incredibly fascinating and (IMO) a necessary leap forward.

To the wankers in here that oppose all military spending on principle: Sorry you hate free trade lanes and safe oceans. We'll get right on fixing that.
 
2013-11-09 03:45:56 PM

SuperNinjaToad: hasty ambush

If you're going to fix the chart right at least be fair to the entire chart!. You're just being intellectually dishonest. You're right it's not up to date but on the US AND the non US side as well. How convenient you only 'corrected' the USN's.

Last I check ALL ships/carriers go through year long refit not just USN's. In countries that has one or two it means they will have only one or NO carriers. The first QE class is not anywhere near completion let alone having 2 same with India, Japan etc. France has 1 carrier NOT 2.

If you're going to fix charts at least make it accurate!


Ladies, please. You're  both pretty!
 
2013-11-09 03:54:31 PM

mudpants: check check check, testing one too

my tax dollars at work


I'm going to get flamed for this, but for every dollar spent on this monstrosity, I can probably point out an even dollar for dollar waste in any given local government (especially here in Seattle).  Just because the tax dollars are spent on a cause you support, doesn't mean it isn't as wasted as this is.
 
2013-11-09 04:52:30 PM

ZAZ: BolshyGreatYarblocks

Ford saw combat on a carrier, so he got a carrier. Carter served on a sub, so he got a sub. FDR was assistant secretary of the Navy, so he got an assistant surface vessel.

Actually CV-42 was named after FDR.  It was decommissioned. Get over it.


Which ships did Franklin, Lincoln and Reagan serve on?

You sound Republican.
 
2013-11-09 09:38:09 PM

clkeagle: Wow, good thing. I couldn't sleep at night, just knowing we didn't have enough aircraft carriers to provide for the defense of this country.

[img.fark.net image 554x677]


At least 3 of the US carriers on that list aren't in service anymore.
 
2013-11-10 01:38:49 PM
That's a big airplane.
 
Displayed 85 of 85 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report