Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 75

Thread: Ford gets an island

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    virginia beach,VA.
    Posts
    746

    Ford gets an island

    Looking more like a carrier now. http://blogs.defensenews.com/interce...sland-landing/
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	CVN78130126-P8.jpg 
Views:	243 
Size:	108.6 KB 
ID:	211770   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	CVN78130126HII-DCS13-47-81.jpg 
Views:	288 
Size:	300.8 KB 
ID:	211771  

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    322
    Wow! Such a huge structure being moved by a single crane.

    I wonder how much that island weighs.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,929
    Quote Originally Posted by killerbean View Post
    Wow! Such a huge structure being moved by a single crane.

    I wonder how much that island weighs.
    555 tons (493 tons of structure, 62 tons of equipment). The island was the 452nd lift of nearly 500 lifts involved in the construction. And ... on a side note .... she will not have urinals (i.e. more gender neutral facilities will be provided)

    http://wtkr.com/2013/01/26/live-stre...craft-carrier/
    http://events.tvworldwide.com/Events...ndLanding.aspx
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Gerald_R._Ford_(CVN-78)

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    virginia beach,VA.
    Posts
    746
    I understand the male crewmen will be under strict order to sit down when using the facilities.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,389
    No Urinals?

    Isn't that stupid from a simple "time-to-leak" or clean up the bathroom, perspective?
    http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/9098/rsz11rsz3807.jpg

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    between the mountains and the desert
    Posts
    3,391
    Actually, it is more from a "reduce the maintenance" perspective, as part of the ~30% reduction in ship's company that CVN-78 achieves over CVN-77.

    Urinals are, from what the USN says and from what those who have done plumbing maintenance aboard ship say, more frequently plugged-up or otherwise defective... to the level of requiring nearly twice the man-hours per urinal as per toilet.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,929
    Quote Originally Posted by Bager1968 View Post
    Actually, it is more from a "reduce the maintenance" perspective, as part of the ~30% reduction in ship's company that CVN-78 achieves over CVN-77.

    Urinals are, from what the USN says and from what those who have done plumbing maintenance aboard ship say, more frequently plugged-up or otherwise defective... to the level of requiring nearly twice the man-hours per urinal as per toilet.
    Guys are retards/pigs when it comes bathroom use....

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,389
    Quote Originally Posted by Wanshan View Post
    Guys are retards/pigs when it comes bathroom use....
    I've heard horror stories about female bathrooms though

    @ Badger- thanks!
    http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/9098/rsz11rsz3807.jpg

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    South East Essex
    Posts
    2,054
    Quote Originally Posted by Bager1968 View Post
    Urinals are, from what the USN says and from what those who have done plumbing maintenance aboard ship say, more frequently plugged-up or otherwise defective... to the level of requiring nearly twice the man-hours per urinal as per toilet.
    That doesn't just apply to ships !
    When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No one has ever collided with the sky

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,126
    I can't believe the power and size of that crane!

    Quote Originally Posted by TR1 View Post
    I've heard horror stories about female bathrooms though
    My wife will back you up on that one. Some of the stories she has about female public toilets are pretty nasty.
    Last edited by thobbes; 29th January 2013 at 22:26.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    504
    Quote Originally Posted by Bager1968 View Post

    Urinals are, from what the USN says and from what those who have done plumbing maintenance aboard ship say, more frequently plugged-up or otherwise defective... to the level of requiring nearly twice the man-hours per urinal as per toilet.
    Can be summed up and blamed all in a single word .... Gum.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Tampa, Florida USA
    Posts
    11,705
    It will be interesting to see the USS Gerald R. Ford, HMS Queen Elizabeth, and FNS Charles De Gaulle operating together in the near future.
    F-35 Lightning II

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    virginia beach,VA.
    Posts
    746
    I imagine the QE would be more at home operating with the America, Iwo Jima, or the New York.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Tampa, Florida USA
    Posts
    11,705
    Quote Originally Posted by 19kilo10 View Post
    I imagine the QE would be more at home operating with the America, Iwo Jima, or the New York.


    The Combat Range of a clean Super Hornet is ~1275 (Miles) vs 1035 for the F-35B. I would add the latter can carry a few thousand pounds of weapons internally. So, by time the Super Hornets carries a similar load externally. The F-35 likely has superior range.


    Also, with the except of USN Super Carriers. What other Carrier in the World can out perform the CVF/F-35 Carrier Strike Group.
    F-35 Lightning II

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    virginia beach,VA.
    Posts
    746
    How many F-35Bs are operationaly deployed right now? And the combat range of the "B" will maybe be 470 nm not 1035. And I do remember seeing that the Navy will be getting the "C" model which will have pretty good range itself.....maybe......
    Realisticaly, CVF will deploy 8-12 "B"s and a sqdrn of Merlins. That coupled with their sppeed of 25knts and excellent supply capabilities and troop accomadation makes them very much a more useful asset with the amphibs.
    Last edited by 19kilo10; 31st January 2013 at 01:57.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    virginia beach,VA.
    Posts
    746
    I pretty much agree with this study. http://www.usnwc.edu/getattachment/8...craft-Carriers

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Tampa, Florida USA
    Posts
    11,705
    Quote Originally Posted by 19kilo10 View Post
    How many F-35Bs are operationaly deployed right now? And the combat range of the "B" will maybe be 470 nm not 1035. And I do remember seeing that the Navy will be getting the "C" model which will have pretty good range itself.....maybe......
    Realisticaly, CVF will deploy 8-12 "B"s and a sqdrn of Merlins. That coupled with their sppeed of 25knts and excellent supply capabilities and troop accomadation makes them very much a more useful asset with the amphibs.

    The CVF Class will likely deploy with many more than a Dozen F-35's. Even if she doesn't during peacetime. She surely could during times of Crisis or Conflict. Again it sounds like you are comparing the UK Carriers with US Carriers. Yet, conveniently forget all the other current and planned carriers from around the world. In that context I think the CVF's measure up well...
    F-35 Lightning II

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    virginia beach,VA.
    Posts
    746
    Im not comparing us to uk carriers, YOU are! Im pointing out where they would fit in better. The CVF is most certainly not a a cv in the US sense of the word and is not meant to be. YOU were the one that brought up her operating with the Ford. I didnt once mention CVF in this thread until you brought it up. And when comparing the CVF design to the upcoming Vikrant and the Chinese designs, CVF comes off quite poorly.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,929
    Quote Originally Posted by 19kilo10 View Post
    How many F-35Bs are operationaly deployed right now? And the combat range of the "B" will maybe be 470 nm not 1035. And I do remember seeing that the Navy will be getting the "C" model which will have pretty good range itself.....maybe......
    Realisticaly, CVF will deploy 8-12 "B"s and a sqdrn of Merlins. That coupled with their sppeed of 25knts and excellent supply capabilities and troop accomadation makes them very much a more useful asset with the amphibs.
    AV8B combat radius is about 560km / 300 nmi
    http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/harrier/
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British...ace_Harrier_II

    As compared to 540 nmi (620 mi, 1,000 km) for SHAR
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British...ce_Sea_Harrier

    (wonder what - if any - carriage differences are...)

    F-35A/b/c
    Range: 1,200 nmi (2,220 km) / 900 nmi (1,670 km) /1,400 nmi (2,520 km)
    Combat radius on
    internal fuel: 584 nmi (1,082 km) / 469 nmi (869 km) / 615 nmi (1,141 km)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-35B#F-35B

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,929
    Quote Originally Posted by Scooter View Post
    The Combat Range of a clean Super Hornet is ~1275 (Miles) vs 1035 for the F-35B. I would add the latter can carry a few thousand pounds of weapons internally. So, by time the Super Hornets carries a similar load externally. The F-35 likely has superior range.


    Also, with the except of USN Super Carriers. What other Carrier in the World can out perform the CVF/F-35 Carrier Strike Group.
    F/A-18E/F
    Range: 1,275 nmi (2,346 km) clean plus two AIM-9s[13]
    Combat radius: 390 nmi (449 mi, 722 km) for interdiction mission
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_...F_Super_Hornet

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Tampa, Florida USA
    Posts
    11,705
    Quote Originally Posted by Wanshan View Post
    F/A-18E/F
    Range: 1,275 nmi (2,346 km) clean plus two AIM-9s[13]
    Combat radius: 390 nmi (449 mi, 722 km) for interdiction mission
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_...F_Super_Hornet
    So, in many cases the F-35B likely has better range vs payload compared to the Super Hornet.
    F-35 Lightning II

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    birthplace of aviation
    Posts
    8,818
    Any further news?? This is an important year for the program, Not only will the first CVN-21 (Ford) be commissioned, we will likely see work on the Next (USS JFK) to begin as well...
    Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    109
    Does anyone know what the island on HMAS Canberra weighs? Because BAe up the road in Williamstown Melbourne built it and craned it onto the hull (built in Spain and bought out here on the Blue Marlin) a few months ago. I've seen photos but can't find them on the interweb, it's a hefty unit.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    birthplace of aviation
    Posts
    8,818
    Here's a video of the event :

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tC-jy94CBKw
    Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,458
    Quote Originally Posted by Riaino View Post
    Does anyone know what the island on HMAS Canberra weighs? Because BAe up the road in Williamstown Melbourne built it and craned it onto the hull (built in Spain and bought out here on the Blue Marlin) a few months ago. I've seen photos but can't find them on the interweb, it's a hefty unit.
    Have a look here:

    http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/na...s-lhd-12136-2/

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Tampa, Florida USA
    Posts
    11,705
    Impressive ships I think India should seriously consider the design.
    F-35 Lightning II

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    birthplace of aviation
    Posts
    8,818
    Impressive ships I think India should seriously consider the design.
    CVN-21? I do not think they are even considering this mega carrier. They are committing to building smaller carriers for themselves.
    Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Tampa, Florida USA
    Posts
    11,705
    Quote Originally Posted by bring_it_on View Post
    CVN-21? I do not think they are even considering this mega carrier. They are committing to building smaller carriers for themselves.

    I was referring to the previous posting in regards to the Canberra Class LHD's.
    F-35 Lightning II

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    birthplace of aviation
    Posts
    8,818
    The U.S. Navy's new launch system for carrier-based aircraft has demonstrated its generator-sharing capabilities for multiple catapults.


    http://www.avionics-intelligence.com...ch-system.html
    Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Tampa, Florida USA
    Posts
    11,705
    The Ford is going to be a big leap forward.........
    F-35 Lightning II

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES