What's new

Tripoli LHA 7 launched!

Oldman1

ELITE MEMBER
May 28, 2011
9,428
-1
4,312
Country
United States
Location
United States

http://seapowermagazine.org/stories/20170502-Tripoli.html

PASCAGOULA, Miss. — The future amphibious assault ship USS Tripoli (LHA 7) was launched May 1 following a successful translation April 9 from land to the dry dock at Huntington Ingalls Industries’ (HII) shipyard, Naval Sea Systems Command announced in a May 2 release.

“It was probably the most well-executed translation event that we’ve seen on a larger ship,” said Cmdr. Randy Slaff, LHA program manager’s representative with Supervisor of Shipbuilding, Gulf Coast.

The translation required 247 jacking and pallet cars to support the displacement of the ship and ensure even distribution throughout. The translation completed following 19 hours of continuous work.

Following the translation, Tripoli was launched on May 1 after the dry dock was flooded to submerge the ship and allow it to float off for the first time.

“We’ve made tremendous progress on Tripoli over this past month, completing two major production milestones,” said Capt. Scot Searles, Amphibious Warfare deputy program manager, Program Executive Office-Ships. “Moving and launching a ship of this size is tedious work and our teams did a superb job executing.”

Tripoli will incorporate an enlarged hangar deck, enhanced maintenance facilities, increased fuel capacity and additional storerooms to provide the fleet with a platform optimized for aviation capabilities. The ship is planned to be christened later this year with delivery planned for late 2018.
 

Penguin

ELITE MEMBER
Jan 11, 2009
13,097
56
11,538
USS Tripoli (LHA-7) is the second America-class amphibious assault ship built for the United States Navy.

The design is based on USS Makin Island, itself an improved version of the Wasp-class amphibious assault ship. Approximately 45% of the Flight 0 design is based on LHD-8, with the well deck removed to allow more room for aircraft and aviation fuel. The removal of the well deck for landing craft allows for an extended hangar deck with two significantly wider high bay areas, each fitted with an overhead crane for aircraft maintenance. The design of Tripoli features an enlarged hangar deck, realignment and expansion of the aviation maintenance facilities, a significant increase in available stowage for parts and support equipment, and increased aviation fuel capacity. The ship will also be the first LHA replacement ship to deliver fully ready to integrate the entire future air combat element of the United States Marine Corps to include the F-35B Lightning II.


44,971 long tons.....
 

jhungary

MILITARY PROFESSIONAL
Oct 24, 2012
13,880
357
13,730
Country
China
Location
Australia
A few thing to people who don't familiarize with America class development.

LHA-7 Tripoli was 1 hours 2 months late in construction (Original Planning all for kneel laid on April 2013, but Kneel was not laid until June 2014) However, the timeline of commission have not changed on late 2018. Subject to the shake down cruise result and crew certification.

LHA-7 is the second ship, after LHA-6 USS America, is the only Flight 0 of the ship, without well deck, they are more of a light aircraft carrier rather than Amphibious Assault ship, they (Tripoli and America) cannot be used to launch Amphibious Craft, but retain the same complement (a MEU complement) meaning they are most likely used as overflow diverted mission.

Tripoli is the first battle USMC fought in history, all LHA/LHD were named after Navy/Marine Battle with the exception of USS Essex (LHD-2) named after Essex County, USS Bonhomme Richard (LHD-6) named after JPJ's frigate, which in turn named after US president Benjamin Franklin, and USS America (LHA-6) named after the country of United States of America. All other Tarawa Class, Wasp Class and America Class ship were named after Marine Land battle of Naval Battle.

Unlike the much hyped Chinese Launch of their first Aircraft Carrier Type-001A, US have a different launch requirement than most other country, US Navy only launch ship's that's seaworthy, with minimal work have yet to do on them, usually from launch to commission is about 2 years, and it is the same regardless of the ship type (It can be a destroyer, Aircraft carrier or Cruiser or as small ship like LCS, all of which commissioned 2 years more or less after it was launched, this is because US commissioning of a new ship follow a strict program, which included a 6 months shake down cruise, 6 months IOC tour, 6 months certification trial. A ship can launch at the shortest at 18 months (1.5 years) from launch if the ship is delivered unflawed, most ship launched within 2 years, some less than 2.5 years.

On the other hand, country like UK, India and China launch ship when they are not seaworthy. HMS Queen Elizabeth class take 4 years from launch (in 2014) to actual commission (Planned on 2018) while HMS Daring take 2.5 year from launch to commission. China Type-001A take 3 years to commission, launched at April 2017 and planned to commission on 2020.
 

Genesis

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 26, 2013
4,601
24
7,500
Country
China
Location
China
A few thing to people who don't familiarize with America class development.

LHA-7 Tripoli was 1 hours 2 months late in construction (Original Planning all for kneel laid on April 2013, but Kneel was not laid until June 2014) However, the timeline of commission have not changed on late 2018. Subject to the shake down cruise result and crew certification.

LHA-7 is the second ship, after LHA-6 USS America, is the only Flight 0 of the ship, without well deck, they are more of a light aircraft carrier rather than Amphibious Assault ship, they (Tripoli and America) cannot be used to launch Amphibious Craft, but retain the same complement (a MEU complement) meaning they are most likely used as overflow diverted mission.

Tripoli is the first battle USMC fought in history, all LHA/LHD were named after Navy/Marine Battle with the exception of USS Essex (LHD-2) named after Essex County, USS Bonhomme Richard (LHD-6) named after JPJ's frigate, which in turn named after US president Benjamin Franklin, and USS America (LHA-6) named after the country of United States of America. All other Tarawa Class, Wasp Class and America Class ship were named after Marine Land battle of Naval Battle.

Unlike the much hyped Chinese Launch of their first Aircraft Carrier Type-001A, US have a different launch requirement than most other country, US Navy only launch ship's that's seaworthy, with minimal work have yet to do on them, usually from launch to commission is about 2 years, and it is the same regardless of the ship type (It can be a destroyer, Aircraft carrier or Cruiser or as small ship like LCS, all of which commissioned 2 years more or less after it was launched, this is because US commissioning of a new ship follow a strict program, which included a 6 months shake down cruise, 6 months IOC tour, 6 months certification trial. A ship can launch at the shortest at 18 months (1.5 years) from launch if the ship is delivered unflawed, most ship launched within 2 years, some less than 2.5 years.

On the other hand, country like UK, India and China launch ship when they are not seaworthy. HMS Queen Elizabeth class take 4 years from launch (in 2014) to actual commission (Planned on 2018) while HMS Daring take 2.5 year from launch to commission. China Type-001A take 3 years to commission, launched at April 2017 and planned to commission on 2020.

Is that right. The first America class took close to two years, the first 071 took less than a year. Ford was launched in 2013, you know what year it is now.

Bringing China into this, this is just like you, no wonder you were on my ignored list for so long, and after this you are going back on it.

In terms of Arleigh Burke, it took a few month longer than China's first type 52d.

Of course there are reasons for why some take longer than others, for America and China, but you are not interested in that, are you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Arleigh_Burke
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_052D_destroyer

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Gerald_R._Ford
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_America_(LHA-6)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kunlun_Shan_(998)
 

Blue Marlin

SENIOR MEMBER
Jul 7, 2015
6,751
6
6,897
Country
United Kingdom
Location
United Kingdom
Is that right. The first America class took close to two years, the first 071 took less than a year. Ford was launched in 2013, you know what year it is now.

Bringing China into this, this is just like you, no wonder you were on my ignored list for so long, and after this you are going back on it.

In terms of Arleigh Burke, it took a few month longer than China's first type 52d.

Of course there are reasons for why some take longer than others, for America and China, but you are not interested in that, are you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Arleigh_Burke
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_052D_destroyer

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Gerald_R._Ford
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_America_(LHA-6)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kunlun_Shan_(998)
did you even understand what jhungary even said? they prefer to work on the ship whilst in the dry dock to ensure it's sea worthy, whilst most builders launch ships at a state where they need ~2 years more for them to be fitted out.

look at the new chinese carrier it will spend 1.5-2 years before it goes for sea trials

as for the type 071 that is true it only took 1 year but thats simply because they. did what the usa are doing having everything done whilst in the dock before launch. to clarify its the individual shipyard that build them this way in this case Hudong-Zhonghua Shipbuilding. they did the same thing with the f22p for pakistan. launched in 2008 and commissioned in 2009
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-22P_Zulfiquar-class_frigate

the chinese carrier along with some type 052'd are being built by the Dalian Shipbuilding Industry Company. they can pop them out quickly (launch) but it would take another 2 years to get it ready for sea trials.
 

nang2

SENIOR MEMBER
Dec 14, 2015
5,714
2
5,393
Country
China
Location
Canada
did you even understand what jhungary even said? they prefer to work on the ship whilst in the dry dock to ensure it's sea worthy, whilst most builders launch ships at a state where they need ~2 years more for them to be fitted out.

look at the new chinese carrier it will spend 1.5-2 years before it goes for sea trials

as for the type 071 that is true it only took 1 year but thats simply because they. did what the usa are doing having everything done whilst in the dock before launch. to clarify its the individual shipyard that build them this way in this case Hudong-Zhonghua Shipbuilding. they did the same thing with the f22p for pakistan. launched in 2008 and commissioned in 2009
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-22P_Zulfiquar-class_frigate

the chinese carrier along with some type 052'd are being built by the Dalian Shipbuilding Industry Company. they can pop them out quickly (launch) but it would take another 2 years to get it ready for sea trials.
It is possible that dry docks aren't as scarce in US as in other countries.
 

C130

ELITE MEMBER
Aug 1, 2014
8,095
-1
7,398
Country
United States
Location
United States
you can build 4 America Class ships for the price of a single Gerald R. Ford.

why not build just 7 Gerald R Fords, and field 16 America Class instead??

like I can see

4 Gerald R Fords for the Pacific
2 Gerald Ford Middle East
1 Gerald R Ford Europe can split duties with HMAS Elizabeth and Prince of Wales


8 America Class Pacific
3 America Class Europe
3 America Class Middle East
2 America Class South Atlantic
 
Last edited:

jhungary

MILITARY PROFESSIONAL
Oct 24, 2012
13,880
357
13,730
Country
China
Location
Australia
Is that right. The first America class took close to two years, the first 071 took less than a year. Ford was launched in 2013, you know what year it is now.

Bringing China into this, this is just like you, no wonder you were on my ignored list for so long, and after this you are going back on it.

In terms of Arleigh Burke, it took a few month longer than China's first type 52d.

Of course there are reasons for why some take longer than others, for America and China, but you are not interested in that, are you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Arleigh_Burke
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_052D_destroyer

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Gerald_R._Ford
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_America_(LHA-6)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kunlun_Shan_(998)



I compare the US Launch NOT JUST WITH CHINESE but the rest of the world, Did you even get the detail UK launch of the QE Class and Daring as well? I used the launch hype from China because.

A.) Type 001A was launched 7 days ago, Tripoli 4 days ago
B.) Type 001A was at similar size and tonnage.

The launch requirement I emphasis is on the launch date across different ship WITHIN THE UNITED STATE NAVY, they are much nearly the same between a LCS (6000 tons) (which take from 16 months to 19 months) to Arleigh Burke Class destroyer (9,000 tons), which took (1 years 9 months for DDG-51 and subsequent in majority fall into 1 year and 8 months) Ticonderoga class (~10,000 tons) all class fluctuated between 1 year 5 months to 1 year 7 months.) Zumwalt Class (15,000 tons) took the longest, the lead ship took 3 years (Oct 2013-Oct 2016) from Launch to Commission, HOWEVER, the US Navy officially accept the ship on May 2016 instead, and usually a ship only accepted after the ship is commissioned, which mean Zumwalt actual date is from Oct 2013 to May 2016, 2 years 7 months. America Class (45,000 tons) take 2 years 4 months from launch to commission. Nimitz class (100,100 tons) took average of 2 years 6 months with most at or under 2 years, with the exception of USS Nimitz (3 years) John C Stennis (2 years 1 months) Ronald Regean (2 years 4 months) and George H W Bush (2 years 6 months)

On the other hand, Chinese launch their ship does not run on a schedule, looking at Type 052D alone. The first one launched 1 year 7 months or 19 months, subsequently 2nd 052D at 2 years 8 months (32 months) 3rd 2 year 7 months (31 months) 4th at 2 years 4 months (28 months) and so on, it wasn't consistent EVEN AT THE SAME CLASS AT THE SAME SHIP.

Gerald Ford Class was launched at Nov 2013. And to be precise, the Ford is currently under Acceptance Trial, which like Zumwalt Class, was done PRIOR to commission where as the other was done AFTER the ship is commissioned. When Gerald Ford Class commissioned, it will not need to go thru acceptance trial again, and will put straight into Operational Status.

The launch to commission is consistence across ALL SHIP from the US Navy, I have no interest on how and what and how long Chinese Launch their ship, as long as they don't launch the ship at the same period or roughly the same period of time regardless of ship type, if they are, then they ARE DIFFERENT than the US Navy, so does RN, so does RAN, so does IN.

Stop thinking everything people say and do is revolving China, you call it the "Centre Country" does not really mean everything the world say or do evolve around China.

did you even understand what jhungary even said? they prefer to work on the ship whilst in the dry dock to ensure it's sea worthy, whilst most builders launch ships at a state where they need ~2 years more for them to be fitted out.

look at the new chinese carrier it will spend 1.5-2 years before it goes for sea trials

as for the type 071 that is true it only took 1 year but thats simply because they. did what the usa are doing having everything done whilst in the dock before launch. to clarify its the individual shipyard that build them this way in this case Hudong-Zhonghua Shipbuilding. they did the same thing with the f22p for pakistan. launched in 2008 and commissioned in 2009
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-22P_Zulfiquar-class_frigate

the chinese carrier along with some type 052'd are being built by the Dalian Shipbuilding Industry Company. they can pop them out quickly (launch) but it would take another 2 years to get it ready for sea trials.

lol.......I don't really know why they got pissed when I simply said the American did this, I did not say anything beside the actual launch time for Chinese Navy or British Royal Navy, as I don't know how you or the Chinese require to launch a ship, I am simply saying in the US, it was THE SAME across every type of ship because they have a standard rules to launch a ship, where they have to acquired some sort of seaworthiness.

Is it better than the Chinese? Maybe? I don't know, and I don't want to know, he got pissed for the first 6 words of that paragraph, I guess he wasn't really interested in keep reading before he decided to go on the offensive?

Beside, what after commissioning a ship is also different between US and China, after commissioning a ship, US Navy usually put it on operational duty in 3 to 6 months (which is called accepted into service), while I don't know about the other ship type in China, but from Type 001A news, even if they do commissioning on 2020, they won't be fully operational before 2011 or maybe longer, and QE will be commissioned this year, but fully OC is not reach until 2020.

you can build 4 America Class ships for the price of a single Gerald R. Ford.

why not build just 7 Gerald R Fords, and field 16 America Class instead??

like I can see

4 Gerald R Fords for the Pacific
2 Gerald Ford Middle East
1 Gerald R Ford Europe can split duties with HMAS Elizabeth and Prince of Wales


8 America Class Pacific
3 America Class Europe
3 America Class Middle East
2 America Class South Atlantic

It is going to be 11 America Class with 10 Gerald Ford Class, well, at this moment at least.

America Class cannot sustain itself under their own Carrier Group, do bear in mind, America Class is a Amphibious Assault, it's job is to launch the Marine ashore, not to provide local sea/air interdiction. The US Navy planned to have 2 Flight 0, which lack well deck (hence is not really a amphibious assault ship) but with aircraft complement of 30 with 9 Flight 1 Which will have limited Aviation facilities (estimated from 15 to 20 planes), It will not be the same with 18 America Class (9 flight 0 and 9 Flight 1) which you can use 1 for each to complement each other, but then you need to maintain 18 America + 7 G R Ford instead of 11 America and 10 G R Ford. you will have 4 more ship you need to put into dock at the same service cycle, that mean you will need more dry dock and more money to service the increased number of ship.

Also, HMAS is Australian Ship, HMS is British Ship....
 
Last edited:

jhungary

MILITARY PROFESSIONAL
Oct 24, 2012
13,880
357
13,730
Country
China
Location
Australia
It is possible that dry docks aren't as scarce in US as in other countries.

In Chinese case, most likely, no.

Both US and China have 6 Warship dock yard,

US

Newport News, VA (Carrier, Virginia Class)
Ingalls Shipbuilding Pascagoula, Mississippi, (LHA, Arleigh-Burke Class, LPD)
Baths Iron Works, (Arleigh-Burke Class)
Austral, Mobile Alabama (LCS - Independence Class)
General Dynamics Electric Boat, Gorton (Virginia Class)
Marinette Marine, Marinette, Wisconsin (LCS - Freedom Class)

China

Dalian Shipbuilding
Hudong-Zhonghua Shipbuilding
Changxingdao-Jiangnan Shipyard
Guangzhou Shipyard
Bohai Shipyard, Huludao
Wuchang Shipbuilding, Wuhan

A probable answer to that question is China is pumping out more ship than US, hence the 6 dockyard in US is not that heavily used, meaning they can afford to have everything ready before launch, China on the other hand, have to rotate the drydock quickly.

For other country, like UK or Australia, the requirement for accepting a ship is different.
 

nang2

SENIOR MEMBER
Dec 14, 2015
5,714
2
5,393
Country
China
Location
Canada
In Chinese case, most likely, no.

Both US and China have 6 Warship dock yard,

US

Newport News, VA (Carrier, Virginia Class)
Ingalls Shipbuilding Pascagoula, Mississippi, (LHA, Arleigh-Burke Class, LPD)
Baths Iron Works, (Arleigh-Burke Class)
Austral, Mobile Alabama (LCS - Independence Class)
General Dynamics Electric Boat, Gorton (Virginia Class)
Marinette Marine, Marinette, Wisconsin (LCS - Freedom Class)

China

Dalian Shipbuilding
Hudong-Zhonghua Shipbuilding
Changxingdao-Jiangnan Shipyard
Guangzhou Shipyard
Bohai Shipyard, Huludao
Wuchang Shipbuilding, Wuhan

A probable answer to that question is China is pumping out more ship than US, hence the 6 dockyard in US is not that heavily used, meaning they can afford to have everything ready before launch, China on the other hand, have to rotate the drydock quickly.

For other country, like UK or Australia, the requirement for accepting a ship is different.
exactly. scarcity is always a relative term, a relationship between supply and demand.
 

Genesis

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 26, 2013
4,601
24
7,500
Country
China
Location
China
did you even understand what jhungary even said? they prefer to work on the ship whilst in the dry dock to ensure it's sea worthy, whilst most builders launch ships at a state where they need ~2 years more for them to be fitted out.

look at the new chinese carrier it will spend 1.5-2 years before it goes for sea trials

as for the type 071 that is true it only took 1 year but thats simply because they. did what the usa are doing having everything done whilst in the dock before launch. to clarify its the individual shipyard that build them this way in this case Hudong-Zhonghua Shipbuilding. they did the same thing with the f22p for pakistan. launched in 2008 and commissioned in 2009
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-22P_Zulfiquar-class_frigate

the chinese carrier along with some type 052'd are being built by the Dalian Shipbuilding Industry Company. they can pop them out quickly (launch) but it would take another 2 years to get it ready for sea trials.

Actually, the 052s usually can go into sea trial about a year or less. China has a shortage of sailors capable of handling these beasts. Keep in mind China only recently began the experiment with high tech ships. What China lack isn't ships, but the men to men them. China isn't building two or three, as of this moment, 12 052D exists, not to say anything of the 6 052C 24 054A, 35 056s and much more.

Which I did elude to in my post, but as I said, it's not really a priority for him.

As to what that guy said, I know him long enough to know what he meant even without looking at his posts. If he had meant a specific builder or a way of working on ships, he would have posted nothing at all.
 

Penguin

ELITE MEMBER
Jan 11, 2009
13,097
56
11,538
America Class cannot sustain itself under their own Carrier Group, do bear in mind, America Class is a Amphibious Assault, it's job is to launch the Marine ashore, not to provide local sea/air interdiction. The US Navy planned to have 2 Flight 0, which lack well deck (hence is not really a amphibious assault ship) but with aircraft complement of 30 with 9 Flight 1 Which will have limited Aviation facilities (estimated from 15 to 20 planes), It will not be the same with 18 America Class (9 flight 0 and 9 Flight 1) which you can use 1 for each to complement each other, but then you need to maintain 18 America + 7 G R Ford instead of 11 America and 10 G R Ford. you will have 4 more ship you need to put into dock at the same service cycle, that mean you will need more dry dock and more money to service the increased number of ship.
Hence, also, fewer large (100k ton plus) CVNs rather than a larger number of smaller aircraft carriers: it is more cost effective. And not just from servie cycle perspective. You would also need more escorts. The benefit of dispersion that a larger number of hulls would offer does not off-set this.
 

C130

ELITE MEMBER
Aug 1, 2014
8,095
-1
7,398
Country
United States
Location
United States
Hence, also, fewer large (100k ton plus) CVNs rather than a larger number of smaller aircraft carriers: it is more cost effective. And not just from servie cycle perspective. You would also need more escorts. The benefit of dispersion that a larger number of hulls would offer does not off-set this.
I was thinking using America class for low intensity conflicts.

1x America Class with 20 F-35B
2x DDG Arleigh Burke
1 USS Virginia

thinking you can get what 30+ sorties a day to hit ISIS?? and since you don't need to go in stealth mode you can carry drop tanks and A2G bombs on pylons.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom