Skip to content
 
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.

(Hindustan Times)   Won't someone think of the Navy's poor defenseless new $13B aircraft carrier?   (tech.hindustantimes.com) divider line
    More: Awkward, Aircraft carrier, United States Navy, Nimitz class aircraft carrier, combat system, Navy, aircraft carrier, Submarine, Gerald Ford  
•       •       •

2570 clicks; posted to Politics » on 25 Jan 2022 at 11:38 PM (15 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



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


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2022-01-25 9:21:08 PM  
$23 billion once you add the F-35s.
 
2022-01-25 9:23:23 PM  
So... this Gerald Ford is a disappointment, too. Figures.

/  Many pardons.
 
2022-01-25 9:50:12 PM  
The USS Glass Cannon.
 
2022-01-25 10:05:51 PM  
Floating targets are often vulnerable
 
2022-01-25 10:07:11 PM  
A ship gets a name whitewashed on the side, can't defend itself.  Gerald was elevated to an office and never won an election.
 
2022-01-25 10:59:41 PM  

edmo: $23 billion once you add the F-35s.


23.1 billion after you add the giant bandage.
 
2022-01-25 11:40:47 PM  
Why must we deploy new technology without a beta test?
 
2022-01-25 11:42:25 PM  
I mean, that's the whole reason you park destroyers all around it.
 
2022-01-25 11:44:01 PM  
Clearly what we need are expert interventions. If only they had a fleet of Aerogavins to defend themselves.

i.redd.itView Full Size
 
2022-01-25 11:45:20 PM  
If your aircraft carrier is defending itself, something has already went wrong. We have other ships, and planes, and missiles for that.
 
2022-01-25 11:45:42 PM  
I've read soooo many Doonesbury paperbacks (got a whole shelf of them at the family farm), and I have no farking clue what Gerald Ford did except golf? Was he the president with all the golf balls flinging past the White House? Like, if Doonesbury can't even give him a memorable Thing, then was he even a president?
 
2022-01-25 11:48:13 PM  
The carrier built by Huntington Ingalls Industries Inc. is still dogged as well by the "poor or unknown reliability" of its aircraft launch and recovery systems

This sounds like a bigger problem than being able to defend itself.  It's meant to operate in a large group of other ships that I'd guess should be able to do a pretty good job of defending it.  However, it's primary purpose is to carry, launch and land aircraft.  I guess we should be thankful planes aren't falling off it in rough seas, at least as far as we know.
 
2022-01-25 11:49:36 PM  
So what if it doesn't work? The important thing is we kept that money out of healthcare, education, infrastructure, and climate change negation.
 
2022-01-25 11:50:04 PM  

iheartscotch: Why must we deploy new technology without a beta test?


Maybe this isn't The Plan.

Maybe the fleet near China had to move because of Ukraine, and the USA, post-Trump, flat-footed and broke-ass, still hung over from Kandahar, is in worse disrepeair than we realize. Like, maybe Trump defunded every aircraft carrier that refused to roll past him in a parade, and the whole program got farked up, while Putin was on the phone telling Donald, "Da, da, my friend, aircraft carriers are big wastes of monkey."
 
2022-01-25 11:50:31 PM  
The carrier built by Huntington Ingalls Industries Inc. is still dogged as well by the "poor or unknown reliability" of its aircraft launch and recovery systems

YOU HAD ONE JOB!!
 
2022-01-25 11:52:20 PM  

harleyquinnical: The carrier built by Huntington Ingalls Industries Inc. is still dogged as well by the "poor or unknown reliability" of its aircraft launch and recovery systems

YOU HAD ONE JOB!!


They succeeded. It was to make shiateloads of money for them Mission accomplished.
 
2022-01-25 11:54:22 PM  
So basically it can launch birds for about two days before the cat breaks. Nice. Good jorb guys.
 
2022-01-25 11:55:12 PM  
Too bad we don't do things like N. Korea. This should be a matter of life and death for everyone involved in making it, because it is for those who sail on it.

It is farking pathetic that Congress lets the military get the shaft like this.
 
2022-01-25 11:55:36 PM  

Bennie Crabtree: I've read soooo many Doonesbury paperbacks (got a whole shelf of them at the family farm), and I have no farking clue what Gerald Ford did except golf? Was he the president with all the golf balls flinging past the White House? Like, if Doonesbury can't even give him a memorable Thing, then was he even a president?


He pardoned Nixon, thus cementing the idea that the President is above any and all legal consequences for even the most flagrant of crimes.
 
2022-01-25 11:56:31 PM  
I should add- this is a great way to get chatter out- HIndustan quoting Bloomberg.
A lot more subtle than other countries psyops , but seeming much more "reliable" .
 
2022-01-25 11:59:03 PM  
The so-called "tech wonder" has me wondering if the creators of the tech exaggerated its capabilities. It also has me wondering if some of that $13 bn wasn't diverted to envelopes handed under the table to someone.
 
2022-01-25 11:59:45 PM  
The person who added the image to the article certainly didn't.  That's the Carl Vinson and Abraham Lincoln in the pic.  Ford carriers have the island so close to the stern that it looks like it's about to fall off the back.
 
2022-01-26 12:02:06 AM  
The anti-missle systems need some work sure, but what about the anti-stair systems?
 
2022-01-26 12:03:50 AM  
Good thing we have like a dozen backups until they get this one fixed, huh?  That's forward thinking on America's part.  Most other countries don't have a single backup carrier.
 
2022-01-26 12:07:05 AM  

Dodo David: The so-called "tech wonder" has me wondering if the creators of the tech exaggerated its capabilities. It also has me wondering if some of that $13 bn wasn't diverted to envelopes handed under the table to someone.


The creators of the contracts to sell that tech invest a lot of effort in keeping the creators of the tech away from capability language.  See also: Thiokol
 
2022-01-26 12:09:00 AM  

alienated: harleyquinnical: The carrier built by Huntington Ingalls Industries Inc. is still dogged as well by the "poor or unknown reliability" of its aircraft launch and recovery systems

YOU HAD ONE JOB!!

They succeeded. It was to make shiateloads of money for them Mission accomplished.


Touché
 
2022-01-26 12:12:30 AM  
Because when I think of military readiness, I think of Hindus.
 
2022-01-26 12:15:54 AM  
That's a pretty costly bathtub toy
 
2022-01-26 1:28:20 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size


Neither aircraft carrier pictured in the article are the USS Ford coont8). They are both Nimitz class of aircraft carriers.

Fark user imageView Full Size


If you are going to do a story on the USS Ford, and include a photo, one of the carriers should be the USS Ford. In this case The USS Ford is the one closest to the camera. The one in the background is a Nimitz class carrier.
 
2022-01-26 1:31:53 AM  

Kraig57: [Fark user image 850x519]

Neither aircraft carrier pictured in the article are the USS Ford coont8). They are both Nimitz class of aircraft carriers.

[Fark user image 850x427]

If you are going to do a story on the USS Ford, and include a photo, one of the carriers should be the USS Ford. In this case The USS Ford is the one closest to the camera. The one in the background is a Nimitz class carrier.


I guess the filter doesn't like ( C V N ). Which is US Navy speak for C = Carrier, V = Fixed Wing, N = Nuclear Propulsion.
 
2022-01-26 1:35:56 AM  
There is more firepower protecting an American carrier than most entire navies can muster.
 
2022-01-26 1:47:42 AM  
This is a Carrier Battle Group. Everything that isn't a carrier is there to make sure nothing bad happens to the carrier.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-01-26 1:47:45 AM  

Kraig57: [Fark user image 850x519]

Neither aircraft carrier pictured in the article are the USS Ford coont8). They are both Nimitz class of aircraft carriers.

[Fark user image 850x427]

If you are going to do a story on the USS Ford, and include a photo, one of the carriers should be the USS Ford. In this case The USS Ford is the one closest to the camera. The one in the background is a Nimitz class carrier.


It kind of helps to read the thread, too.
 
2022-01-26 1:57:11 AM  
Why do we bother decommissioning old ships that aren't broken in favor of this stupid bullshiat again?

The military is just a pit that America throws money into, rightly or wrongly (these days it's mostly wrongly).

The Navy is clearly run by professional money wasters. I think we're past due time on cutting them off.

If they can't figure out how to make do with the toys they have, why should they get new ones?

They built littoral combat ships thinking they'd be something terrific, and they're not. They built the USS Zumwalt thinking that would be terrific, and they can't even fire the guns because the ammo is too expensive. I mean, how stupid is the Navy? Seriously. You knew how to make ships for over 200 years, and suddenly you're farking it up. Badly. No new shiat for you.
 
2022-01-26 2:18:38 AM  
So possibly about to have a conflict in the Mediterranean. Let's have a news stories how the ship can't defend itself, stupidity or a dare to test
 
2022-01-26 2:48:43 AM  

iheartscotch: Why must we deploy new technology without a beta test?


It's a testing vessel, it is the beta test.
 
2022-01-26 4:14:06 AM  

Kraig57: Kraig57: [Fark user image 850x519]

Neither aircraft carrier pictured in the article are the USS Ford coont8). They are both Nimitz class of aircraft carriers.

[Fark user image 850x427]

If you are going to do a story on the USS Ford, and include a photo, one of the carriers should be the USS Ford. In this case The USS Ford is the one closest to the camera. The one in the background is a Nimitz class carrier.

I guess the filter doesn't like ( C V N ). Which is US Navy speak for C = Carrier, V = Fixed Wing, N = Nuclear Propulsion.


The filter is a dick.

And sexist.
 
2022-01-26 6:00:23 AM  

Stands With A Tiny Fist: So... this Gerald Ford is a disappointment, too. Figures.

/  Many pardons.


They should have gone with John Wayne or Bruce Willis.
 
2022-01-26 6:12:01 AM  

alienated: harleyquinnical: The carrier built by Huntington Ingalls Industries Inc. is still dogged as well by the "poor or unknown reliability" of its aircraft launch and recovery systems

YOU HAD ONE JOB!!

They succeeded. It was to make shiateloads of money for them Mission accomplished.


They will happily let you hire consultants to prolong the problem at great expense. Just like the IT industry does.
 
2022-01-26 6:48:47 AM  

iheartscotch: Why must we deploy new technology without a beta test?


It's not deployed yet.

It's a brand new electromagnetic launch and recovery systems. Bug are being worked out still.

Later in  the article it says some things are improved in launch and landing as the Ford was used in quals for ~8K pilots over the summer.

The CIWS (they called it a gattling gun) is a well known defense system, I'm much less concerned about this.
We use this technology on just about every ship in the fleet.

That the story is being pushed by the Hindustan Times and selectively quotes the Bloomberg piece makes me wonder if this media outlet is intentionally obfuscating the bugs in this brand new carrier which will be worked out.

Still, 13 Billion would buy a shiat ton of school lunches.
 
2022-01-26 6:52:09 AM  
Was it eaten by wolves?
 
2022-01-26 6:52:20 AM  
I would like to also add that every carrier in the fleet currently has well tested and established Sea Sparrow anti-air missile defense systems as well, and some have longer range SM2 standard missile systems, so the CIWS is the last gasp defense system, not the ONLY defense system as the article fails to mention the ring of other highly capable ships and the other defense systems our carriers have.

I wonder why subby chose THIS media outlet...as they seem to like to be overly critical of US Military.
 
2022-01-26 6:54:30 AM  

X-boxershorts: That the story is being pushed by the Hindustan Times and selectively quotes the Bloomberg piece


You're adorable.
 
2022-01-26 6:56:55 AM  

slobberbone: X-boxershorts: That the story is being pushed by the Hindustan Times and selectively quotes the Bloomberg piece

You're adorable.


I'm a former US Navy fire control technician and still follow current Fire Control technicians and technology.
I am adorable, yes, but I also know what the fark I'm talking about.

(Fire control technicians don't control fires, they control weapons systems)
 
2022-01-26 7:05:28 AM  

X-boxershorts: slobberbone: X-boxershorts: That the story is being pushed by the Hindustan Times and selectively quotes the Bloomberg piece

You're adorable.

I'm a former US Navy fire control technician and still follow current Fire Control technicians and technology.
I am adorable, yes, but I also know what the fark I'm talking about.

(Fire control technicians don't control fires, they control weapons systems)


Congrats on yer resume. I don't see anywhere on it that you have vetted news. And since you've now made the case that prior job-related experience directly matters ...
 
2022-01-26 7:10:36 AM  

slobberbone: X-boxershorts: slobberbone: X-boxershorts: That the story is being pushed by the Hindustan Times and selectively quotes the Bloomberg piece

You're adorable.

I'm a former US Navy fire control technician and still follow current Fire Control technicians and technology.
I am adorable, yes, but I also know what the fark I'm talking about.

(Fire control technicians don't control fires, they control weapons systems)

Congrats on yer resume. I don't see anywhere on it that you have vetted news. And since you've now made the case that prior job-related experience directly matters ...


So, it's wrong to try to add context and missing detail, OK...

I see where you're going with this and am removing your ability to interact with my comments.
 
2022-01-26 7:49:45 AM  

Jeff5: This is a Carrier Battle Group. Everything that isn't a carrier is there to make sure nothing bad happens to the carrier.

[Fark user image image 850x542]


Not quite.

No subs in pic. A carrier group rolls HARD
 
2022-01-26 8:00:56 AM  

Turbo Cojones: No subs in pic


Well, yer generally not going to see them when a carrier group is deployed, but...yeah! A carrier group rolls hard indeed!
 
2022-01-26 8:16:27 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-01-26 8:42:14 AM  
Lets hope their return policy is half as good as Amazon's.
 
Displayed 50 of 71 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.