Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Per the Secretary of the Navy, Ray Mabus, in a video message broadcast the decommissioning of the USS Enterprise, CVN-65, the third ship in the Gerald Ford class of American super carriers, CVN-80 shall be christened Enterprise, the eight ship of the United States Navy to bear the name.
Artist's depiction of a Ford class super carrier.
I beg of you sarge let me lead the charge when the battle lines are drawn
Lemme at least leave a good hoof beat they'll remember loud and long
Its freakin huge! Looks to be bigger than our current ships by quite a bit. It also looks like its painted white in the artists depiction, great white fleet sails again?
Per the Secretary of the Navy, Ray Mabus, in a video message broadcast the decommissioning of the USS Enterprise, CVN-65, the third ship in the Gerald Ford class of American super carriers, CVN-80 shall be christened Enterprise, the eight ship of the United States Navy to bear the name.
Artist's depiction of a Ford class super carrier.
Bridges just keep getting smaller and smaller. Looks like they're moving it back towards the back (Stern? Aft?) also. I'm sure it will be very nice, although there's nothing wrong with the only ten Nimitz class carriers that we already have...
Apropos nothing, who cares about Gerald Ford? He was a lousy president who did nothing noteworthy besides end the (lost cause, at that point) Vietnam War. Why does he deserve and entire class of Flagships?
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
Well, how are you sure they didn't name them after Harrison Ford For coolness obviously.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
Apropos nothing, who cares about Gerald Ford? He was a lousy president who did nothing noteworthy besides end the (lost cause, at that point) Vietnam War. Why does he deserve and entire class of Flagships?
Because it keeps the political parties happy and the money flowing...
20 years from now, the USS William Jefferson Clinton
30 years from now the USS George W Bush
40 years from now, the USS Barrack Hussein Obama
50 years from now, the USS Hillary Rodham Clinton
Count on it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/02 05:39:05
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
We should go backwards and name classes after Civil War generals and early presidents.
And why not branch out a little? Take some classic names from some Mythology, Native American mythology perhaps.
How about the Sasquatch class?
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
Why not? They can simply match their forward speed with the speed of the boat. IIRC the thrusters do allow for some horizontal movement.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
Only one of the three variants can vtol, and aside from the fact that only the marine corps is getting them, they would melt through the flight deck since (afaik) the main line carriers dont receive the heatsinks and coating necessary for those ops.
My guess is that this will be the final class of aircraft carriers in the US fleet, at least as we know them now. Getting expensive, becoming the primary target of foreign weapons development, and with the rise of the railgun I hope we see the return of the long gone Battleships.
CoALabaer wrote: Wargamers hate two things: the state of the game and change.
It's something that can be and frequently is done, no question about it, but the Navy prefers the traditional method of landing fixed wing aircraft on a tiny boat in the ocean for a large variety of reasons. It's why the B variant is going to the Marines and the C variant is going to the Navy.
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
chaos0xomega wrote: Only one of the three variants can vtol, and aside from the fact that only the marine corps is getting them, they would melt through the flight deck since (afaik) the main line carriers dont receive the heatsinks and coating necessary for those ops.
My guess is that this will be the final class of aircraft carriers in the US fleet, at least as we know them now. Getting expensive, becoming the primary target of foreign weapons development, and with the rise of the railgun I hope we see the return of the long gone Battleships.
Whats more likely is they will simply mount Railguns on Aircraft carriers and create a hybrid ship class.
A ship that can launch airplanes/drones, has railguns for direct attack, and also missile bays.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
I still think a single-engine jet for naval aviation's a bad idea, but, oddly, they did not include me in the procurement process, so I guess we'll just have to see how it does.
Hopefully it doesn't poison its pilots like the F-22.
Either youre being facetious or youre being clueless. The B variant, which will be used to operate from even smaller boats known colloquially as "amphibs", isn't being used by the Navy because it has something like 1/2 the payload and 1/3 the range of the Air Force A variant and the Navy C variant, not because the navy likes the thrill of dangerous landings. If they did, they wouldnt be dropping billions to develop computerized landing software to land the plane by itself to minimize danger (and pave the way for carrier based drones). The reduced payload and range on the B would make it difficult (to say the least) to perform carrier air op without a drastic change in doctrine and group composition. Amphibs operate far closer to shore so its less of an issue, though i think the f-35 will prove to be too sophisticated and finicky (aka a hangar queen) to be the workhorse the marines want it to be. Think it would have been better served as an AF plane, but of course the AF brass doesnt want anything to do with dirt airfield operations.
As for single engines, i agree. The Navy never really wanted the F-35, I think it was more or less forced on them by the air force and the pentagon. Theres an old Air Force saying (more popular in the vietnam era than today) to the effect of "Real fighters only have one engine and one pilot."
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/02 06:43:12
CoALabaer wrote: Wargamers hate two things: the state of the game and change.
Neither. The B variant sacrifices payload and range because of the VTOL system. That's true of all VTOL aircraft. Which is, as I said, one of several reasons the Navy prefers CATOBAR.
Seaward wrote: I still think a single-engine jet for naval aviation's a bad idea, but, oddly, they did not include me in the procurement process, so I guess we'll just have to see how it does.
The AV8-B disagrees with you.
I beg of you sarge let me lead the charge when the battle lines are drawn
Lemme at least leave a good hoof beat they'll remember loud and long
Captain Fantastic wrote: Apropos nothing, who cares about Gerald Ford? He was a lousy president who did nothing noteworthy besides end the (lost cause, at that point) Vietnam War. Why does he deserve and entire class of Flagships?
Ummm, you might want to read up on the man's life story before making the claim that he did nothing noteworthy....
KalashnikovMarine wrote: Per the Secretary of the Navy, Ray Mabus, in a video message broadcast the decommissioning of the USS Enterprise, CVN-65, the third ship in the Gerald Ford class of American super carriers, CVN-80 shall be christened Enterprise, the eight ship of the United States Navy to bear the name.
Not a surprise to me. As Captain Picard said at the end of Star Trek Generations.....
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2012/12/02 08:48:37
Solve a man's problem with violence and help him for a day. Teach a man how to solve his problems with violence, help him for a lifetime - Belkar Bitterleaf
Grey Templar wrote: We should go backwards and name classes after Civil War generals and early presidents.
And why not branch out a little? Take some classic names from some Mythology, Native American mythology perhaps.
How about the Sasquatch class?
we kind of name ships after presidents and tank classes after generals, and we did name a tank after a civil war general: the Sherman. and I think in a few years we'll see a tank class christened "the powell"
also as far as naming ships after Native American mythology, while it will never happen, it would be really cool.
EDIT: also my Grandpa was a seabee stationed on the Big E and it warms my heart to see the legend of his old ship will live on.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/02 15:17:56
Admiral Chester W Nimitz wrote:The war with Japan had been re-enacted in the game rooms here by so many people and in so many different ways, that nothing that happened during the war was a surprise.
Grey Templar wrote: Why not? They can simply match their forward speed with the speed of the boat. IIRC the thrusters do allow for some horizontal movement.
I'm sure it's not as easy as all that. The first thing that comes to mind is that the carrier will bob up and down a bit in the water even on a calm day. The rise and fall can be quite a bit and if you misjudge touching down as it's on the rise you can have a serious impact. Aircraft have to be built for carrier use.
3000+
For coolness obviously.
>Raptors Lead the Way < 
