USS Gerald R. Ford

[asianobserve]

Some more photos:

(One of the several Bomb Jettison Ramps in USS Ford)

 

[asianobserve]

Yet more photos of USS Ford:

(Note the sink: It looks like it's been made from carbon fiber.)

 

[asianobserve]

And some videos:

Inside the hangar

On the flight deck

 

[Armand2REP]

I wonder why they didn't put ESSM in a VLS cell like the CdG does Aster 15.

 

[asianobserve]

I wonder why they didn't put ESSM in a VLS cell like the CdG does Aster 15.

The ESSM in USN aircraft carriers are intended as medium range defense against sea skimming supersonic anti-ship missiles (not aircraft). Perhaps a horizontal position of the Mk29 launcher is the most direct, shortest and faster way to intercept sea skimming supersonic anti-ship missiles, as opposed to vertical launcher, or perhaps it is an added safety measure for its flat tops (for the aircrafts).

Notice that in the USN, the Mk29 launchers can only be found in its super carriers and amphibious assault ships.

 

[Armand2REP]

The ESSM in USN aircraft carriers are intended as medium range defense against sea skimming supersonic anti-ship missiles (not aircraft). Perhaps a horizontal position of the Mk29 launcher is the most direct, shortest and faster way to intercept sea skimming supersonic anti-ship missiles, as opposed to vertical launcher, or perhaps it is an added safety measure for its flat tops (for the aircrafts).

Notice that in the USN, the Mk29 launchers can only be found in its super carriers and amphibious assault ships.

The ESSM has a high g pull much like the Aster 15.



Of course there are RIM for VSHORAD but CdG also has Sadral Mistral launchers for the same purpose. They should want a 360 degree engagement envelop for their top SAM and not a limited box launcher which also reduces launch times.

CdG can ripple fire Aster 15 in any direction even at the most heavy saturation strikes.

 

[asianobserve]

The ESSM has a high g pull much like the Aster 15.



Of course there are RIM for VSHORAD but CdG also has Sadral Mistral launchers for the same purpose. They should want a 360 degree engagement envelop for their top SAM and not a limited box launcher which also reduces launch times.

CdG can ripple fire Aster 15 in any direction even at the most heavy saturation strikes.

The USN has also installed ESSM in Mk41, 48 and 56 VLS lunchers in frigates, destroyers and other ships (non-flat tops). As I said it is only on flat tops (super carriers and LHDs) that the ESSM is launched via Mk29 launcher so there are definitely very good reasons on this launching set up for the ESSM.

 

[Armand2REP]

The USN has also installed ESSM in Mk41, 48 and 56 VLS lunchers in frigates, destroyers and other ships (non-flat tops). As I said it is only on flat tops (super carriers and LHDs) that the ESSM is launched via Mk29 launcher so there are definitely very good reasons on this launching set up for the ESSM.

The MN has also installed Aster in Sylver A43, A50 and A70 VLS launchers in frigates, destroyers and other ships (non-flat tops). As I asked before, why not put ESSM in a VLS for the most important ship in the USN? The benefits are quicker launch times, 360 engagement and ripple fire capable. Why not have that instead of antiquated box launchers on a $15 billion warship?

 

[asianobserve]

The MN has also installed Aster in Sylver A43, A50 and A70 VLS launchers in frigates, destroyers and other ships (non-flat tops). As I asked before, why not put ESSM in a VLS for the most important ship in the USN? The benefits are quicker launch times, 360 engagement and ripple fire capable. Why not have that instead of antiquated box launchers on a $15 billion warship?

There is no available article on the reasoning behind the use of Mk29 ESSM launcher in USN flat tops. But I can wager that it has specific considerations on why that is so. I already mentioned my speculations that it could be that 1) between a VLS and Mk29 launching system the latter provides faster and more direct path for the ESSM against incoming supersonic sea-skimming anti-ship missiles, and 2) the horizontal flight profile of the Mk29 launched ESSM might be safer for the planes taking off and landing on the carrier.

Also note that the SEA RAM point defense missiles is also horizontally positioned. So I think horizontal installation of anti-ship missiles provide the most direct path to intercepting anti-ship missiles at medium and close ranges.

Regarding, 360 degrees coverage of VLS launched missiles, I do not dispute that. In fact, almost all USN ships aside from flat tops are using VLS launchers for ESSM and other air defense missiles. But the Mk29 ESSM launchers in US flat tops are placed on both sides of their flat tops ensuring 360 coverage.

 

[asianobserve]

USS Ford completes post shakedown cruise

 

[charlie]

Some of my colleagues worked on commissioning those two system.

 

[HariPrasad-1]

Bloody Horrible. This can finish half of Chinese navy alone.

 

[asianobserve]

U.S. Navy’s largest shipbuilder prepares for christening of newest aircraft carrier USS John F. Kennedy (CVN-79)

https://defence-blog.com/news/u-s-n...r-christening-of-newest-aircraft-carrier.html
https://defence-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/DCS19-618-145.jpg

 

[Armand2REP]

Bloody Horrible. This can finish half of Chinese navy alone.

The CdG can take half of the Chinese navy alone, when the Ford is fully loaded it can take it all. The problem with the Americans is they never load up their carriers.

 

[asianobserve]

The CdG can take half of the Chinese navy alone, when the Ford is fully loaded it can take it all. The problem with the Americans is they never load up their carriers.

Fully loading carriers during peacetime will unnecessarily shorten the lifespan of these carriers through increased wear and tear.

But in wartime these carriers will be fully loaded. Even some LHAs in previous wars are fully loaded with Harriers.

 

[Armand2REP]

Fully loading carriers during peacetime will unnecessarily shorten the lifespan of these carriers through increased wear and tear.

But in wartime these carriers will be fully loaded. Even some LHAs in previous wars are fully loaded with Harriers.

The USN doesn't even have enough fighters to load up half of its carriers. You wouldn't use jump jets in the initial stages of conflict with China, they don't have the range.

 

[asianobserve]

The USN doesn't even have enough fighters to load up half of its carriers. You wouldn't use jump jets in the initial stages of conflict with China, they don't have the range.

The USN will not use all its carriers in a single theater. So in case of war whatever carrier or carriers as part of a task force assigned to that theater will be fully loaded not only with fighters but also with other support aircraft.

We just have a traitor President right now. But after his term the Philippines remains America's best aircraft carrier in case of a conflict with China. Here F-15s, F-35As, F-22s, F-16s, B-1s can operate from or refuel and rearm from.

 

[Armand2REP]

The USN will not use all its carriers in a single theater. So in case of war whatever carrier or carriers as part of a task force assigned to that theater will be fully loaded not only with fighters but also with other support aircraft.

We just have a traitor President right now. But after his term the Philippines remains America's best aircraft carrier in case of a conflict with China. Here F-15s, F-35As, F-22s, F-16s, B-1s can operate from or refuel and rearm from.

If the US is going to war with China they will bring everything they have. That would be 5 fully loaded CVNs, if they are sunk they would lose all of their aircraft and the other half of the carriers would be useless.

It is a good thing they have USAF because the USN is severely lacking in fighters for the amount of carriers they have. Duterte would never allow Americans to base in the Philippines to attack China, he is willing to give it to "Supreme Leader" Xi.

 

[asianobserve]

If the US is going to war with China they will bring everything they have. That would be 5 fully loaded CVNs, if they are sunk they would lose all of their aircraft and the other half of the carriers would be useless.

It is a good thing they have USAF because the USN is severely lacking in fighters for the amount of carriers they have. Duterte would never allow Americans to base in the Philippines to attack China, he is willing to give it to "Supreme Leader" Xi.

But Duterte will not last forever. Either he dies from cancer or his term ends. Either way, whoever comes after Duterte will not be very friendly to China.

 

[Armand2REP]

But Duterte will not last forever. Either he dies from cancer or his term ends. Either way, whoever comes after Duterte will not be very friendly to China.

It is clear now that the Phillipines is anti-US. The attrocities the US committed during the occupation will never be forgotten.