Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

USS Gerald R Ford Reaches A Construction Milestone
businessinsider ^

Posted on 05/27/2012 9:06:09 PM PDT by moonshot925

The USS Gerald R. Ford, a huge new aircraft carrier, reached a milestone in its pricey and extensive construction Thursday when its final keel section was lowered into place at Newport News Shipbuilding in Virginia.

The 680-metric-ton lower bow unit is one of the largest of the 500 modules that will make up the completed ship and is over 60-feet-tall.

The bulbous bow seen in the picture shifts water flow around the hull, reducing drag and thus increasing speed, range, fuel efficiency, and stability. Carriers with bulbous bows have achieve about 12 to 15 percent increased fuel efficiency than vessels without them.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-uss-gerald-r-ford-reaches-a-construction-milestone-2012-5?op=1#ixzz1w8MTW7yd

(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...


TOPICS: History; Military/Veterans; Science
KEYWORDS: aircraft; carrier; cvn78; ford; gerald

1 posted on 05/27/2012 9:06:28 PM PDT by moonshot925
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: moonshot925

Yep. Quite a canoe.


2 posted on 05/27/2012 9:19:43 PM PDT by Wingy (Don't blame me. I voted for the chick. I hope to do so again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moonshot925

120524-N-ZZ999-003 NEWPORT NEWS, Va. (May 24, 2012) The final keel section of the future USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78) is lowered into place at Huntington Ingalls Industries-Newport News Shipbuilding. The 680-metric-ton, 60-foot-tall lower bow unit was joined to the other keel sections and was the last major section of the ship installed below the waterline. Gerald R. Ford is now more than 75 percent structurally complete in the dry dock, and is on schedule to launch in 2013. The ship is scheduled to be delivered to the fleet in 2015. (U.S. Navy photo courtesy of Ricky Thompson Huntington Ingalls Industries Newport News Shipbuilding Division/Released)

120524-N-ZZ999-004 NEWPORT NEWS, Va. (May 24, 2012) The final keel section of the future USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78) is lowered into place at Huntington Ingalls Industries-Newport News Shipbuilding. The 680-metric-ton, 60-foot-tall lower bow unit was joined to the other keel sections and was the last major section of the ship installed below the waterline. Gerald R. Ford is now more than 75 percent structurally complete in the dry dock, and is on schedule to launch in 2013. The ship is scheduled to be delivered to the fleet in 2015. (U.S. Navy photo courtesy of Ricky Thompson Huntington Ingalls Industries Newport News Shipbuilding Division/Released)

3 posted on 05/27/2012 9:19:52 PM PDT by A.A. Cunningham (Barry Soetoro is a Kenyan communist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A.A. Cunningham

Currently being assembled in Newport News, Virginia, the Ford-class will replace the Nimitz-class carriers and will include an array of new technology.

•Advanced arresting gear used to grab planes as they land on the deck.
•Automation, which reduces crew requirements by several hundred from the Nimitz class carrier.
•The updated RIM-162 Evolved Sea Sparrow missile system.
AN/SPY-3 dual-band radar (DBR), as developed for Zumwalt class destroyers.
•An Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) in place of traditional steam catapults for launching aircraft.
•A new nuclear reactor design (the A1B reactor) for greater power generation.
•Stealthier features to help reduce radar profile.
•The ability to launch the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, EA-18G Growler, and the F-35C Lightning II.


4 posted on 05/27/2012 9:30:47 PM PDT by moonshot925
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: magslinger

anybody home?


5 posted on 05/27/2012 9:35:22 PM PDT by Vroomfondel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vroomfondel

Pardon me?


6 posted on 05/27/2012 9:47:05 PM PDT by al baby (Hi Mom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: moonshot925

World Wide Aircraft Carriers
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/carriers.htm


7 posted on 05/27/2012 9:49:19 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet (Ich habe keinen Konig aber Gott)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Aren’t we all looking forward to the USS Barraqa Hussein Obama?


8 posted on 05/27/2012 9:56:35 PM PDT by AlmaKing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: AlmaKing

I thought i’d be the Travon Martin.


9 posted on 05/27/2012 10:12:15 PM PDT by Iron head mike (The government will soon make criminals of us all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: AlmaKing

“Aren’t we all looking forward to the USS Barraqa Hussein Obama?”

Yes, but it won’t be flying a US Flag.


10 posted on 05/27/2012 10:14:51 PM PDT by tcrlaf (Election 2012: THE RAPTURE OF THE DEMOCRATS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: moonshot925
Carriers with bulbous bows have achieve about 12 to 15 percent increased fuel efficiency than vessels without them.

EXCELLENT! Increased fuel efficiency means longer range while pursuing America's enemies and ultimately blasting them to Hell as the U.S.S. Gerald R. Ford does more to be environmentally friendly.

(how 'bout that you envirowackos? lol)
11 posted on 05/27/2012 10:17:17 PM PDT by mkjessup (Eternal Vigilance (aka FReeper Tom Hoefling) has my vote for President in 2012.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AlmaKing
Aren’t we all looking forward to the USS Barraqa Hussein Obama?

Actually this was considered, but as a test the Navy put a rowboat of the same name into the Potomac in Washington DC and due to unknown forces it was impossible to change the direction of the rowboat from its vector of 56.622857 degrees. When the Navy changed the name of the rowboat to "George Washington crossing the Trenton," the said same vessel became a warrior to be feared by its enemies

12 posted on 05/27/2012 10:27:28 PM PDT by cpdiii (Deckhand, Roughneck, Mud Man, Geologist, Pilot, Pharmacist. THE CONSTITUTION IS WORTH DYING FOR!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: moonshot925

I wish I was 35 years younger!

I’d be proud to serve this boat...


13 posted on 05/27/2012 10:32:56 PM PDT by Randy Larsen (I hate pragmatists!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mkjessup
EXCELLENT! Increased fuel efficiency means longer range while pursuing America's enemies and ultimately blasting them to Hell as the U.S.S. Gerald R. Ford does more to be environmentally friendly.

LOL It's a nuke. Why would it matter?

14 posted on 05/27/2012 10:44:16 PM PDT by cva66snipe (Two Choices left for U.S. One Nation Under GOD or One Nation Under Judgment? Which one say ye?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: mkjessup

The 2 A1B nuclear reactors on the Gerald R. Ford class can produce 485 MW of power. The 2 A4W nuclear reactors on the Nimitz can produce 208 MW of power. So the Gerald R. Ford class can produce 135% more power than the Nimitz class.


15 posted on 05/28/2012 12:42:04 AM PDT by moonshot925
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: cva66snipe

Power:
Nimitz class = 208 MW
Ford class = 600 MW

The Ford class will produce 3 times the power.

Complement:
Nimitz class = 5,680
Ford class = 4,660

The Ford class will have a smaller crew thanks to automation.

Ford class armament:
- 2 x 16 RIM-162 Evolved Sea Sparrow Launchers (32 missiles)
- 2 x 21 RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile Launchers(42 missiles)
- 2 x 20mm Phalynx CIWS
- 4 x .50 cal MG


16 posted on 05/28/2012 12:43:32 AM PDT by moonshot925
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: moonshot925
She is quite a ship.


17 posted on 05/28/2012 1:46:09 AM PDT by Red_Devil 232 (VietVet - USMC All Ready On The Right? All Ready On The Left? All Ready On The Firing Line!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AlmaKing

I am sure it would sink to the bottom when they tried to float it out of the dock.


18 posted on 05/28/2012 1:55:12 AM PDT by she geek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: she geek

Clarification the Obama would sink when they tried to float it not the Ford.

Also the bulbous bow has been used before, it isn’t something new to carriers.


19 posted on 05/28/2012 1:59:24 AM PDT by she geek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: moonshot925

Fuel efficiency?The damned carrier is nuclear powered so why should fuel efficiency matter?

If anything is a benefit of a now of that design it should be an increase in forward speed.

I think your average nuclear carrier is refueled every 20 years or so.It maybe even longer between refuelings.


20 posted on 05/28/2012 3:32:07 AM PDT by puppypusher (The World is going to the dogs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cva66snipe

Ahemz

“reducing drag and thus increasing speed, range, fuel efficiency, and stability”

The speed and stability increases are independent of the power source.


21 posted on 05/28/2012 3:41:37 AM PDT by saganite (What happens to taglines? Is there a termination date?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: moonshot925

Let’s hope it doesn’t fall down the stairs.


22 posted on 05/28/2012 4:26:49 AM PDT by frithguild (You can call me Snippy the Anti-Freeper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: saganite
The speed and stability increases are independent of the power source.

Somewhat. There is a post on another thread a while back that said the older KH class conventionals and even the Forestall class out preformed the Nimitz class in speed because of hull design. Big E was the exception on the nukes because she was a modified KH class design which for the era makes sense. Post 56 another thread

All carriers even in the Forestall class except Forestall which was the last 600psi powered carrier seemed to have higher flank speed than a Nimitz class because of hull design.

23 posted on 05/28/2012 5:10:52 AM PDT by cva66snipe (Two Choices left for U.S. One Nation Under GOD or One Nation Under Judgment? Which one say ye?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Red_Devil 232

WOW... by moving the island so far aft, they have significantly reduced the size of the junkyard... i guess they do not expect aircraft to go down while on the deck...


24 posted on 05/28/2012 5:27:45 AM PDT by joe fonebone (I am the 15%)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: cva66snipe
LOL It's a nuke. Why would it matter?

Well in reality it doesn't, I just thought it semi-humorous to tweak the enviromental wackjobs by citing 'greater efficiency' as a way to kill our enemies with less energy. ;)
25 posted on 05/28/2012 5:28:42 AM PDT by mkjessup (Eternal Vigilance (aka FReeper Tom Hoefling) has my vote for President in 2012.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: moonshot925
Got her nickname ready to go: "The Big Pardon"
26 posted on 05/28/2012 6:51:48 AM PDT by BenLurkin (This is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion or satire; or both)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: al baby

Magslinger has a NavAir ping list. Haven’t heard anything from him since the beginning of April.


27 posted on 05/28/2012 8:07:36 AM PDT by Vroomfondel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: moonshot925
485/208 = 2.3317

X/208 = 1.35

X = 280.8

28 posted on 05/28/2012 10:52:42 AM PDT by A.A. Cunningham (Barry Soetoro is a Kenyan communist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: moonshot925

Shore Power: Nimitz Class 4.16 kV; Ford Class 13.8 kV

How’d you like to haul that cable up the gangplank?


29 posted on 05/28/2012 7:50:18 PM PDT by Thrownatbirth (.....Iraq Invasion fan since '91.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: puppypusher; cva66snipe

It does matter...the more efficient the hull design the less wear and tear on the propulsion plant, and the less power that needs to be generated by the reactor plant.

This 12-15 percent increase in efficiency translates directly to increased service life of both the reactor and the propulsion plant. This translates directly to more time at sea for the USS Ford.


30 posted on 05/28/2012 8:02:33 PM PDT by rottndog (Be Prepared.....for what's coming AFTER America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson