The Launching of the USS Gerald Ford aircraft carrier.

[kaykay]

Probably US will decommison Its oldest active AC with it. I feel that US will maintain it's 11 Super carrier fleet in future too. 2-3 more such Super Carriers are coming.

 

[GR!FF!N]

@Oldman1

nice pics buddy..well Gerald Ford will be equipped with EM Catapult.is that first AC where EM catapult will be installed??also,why number of aircrafts carrying capability is reduced from 90 to 75??

 

[KAL-EL]

when is this bad boy going to be commissioned? and which fleet with it be inducted in?

According to Wiki, ship will be christened in November of this year. Ship will be commissioned sometime in early 2016. Not sure about what fleet it will be placed in though? Can already see are some are upset by it

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Gerald_R._Ford_(CVN-78)

 

[walle]

You do realize that it is quite difficult to even get close to the carrier, the US carrier battle group can easily take care of any air or underwater threat.

That's why its a ballistic missile and not a cruise missile dummy.

 

[xunzi]

You do realize that it is quite difficult to even get close to the carrier, the US carrier battle group can easily take care of any air or underwater threat.

That is assuming the US can detect an incoming ASBM in the air and given enough time to launch counter missile at incoming ASBM. It is not an easy task just as it is not an easy task to strike an aircraft carrier on the move. However given the size of the aircraft carrier in comparison with an ASBM, I take my chance on ASBM being the winner.

 

[Oldman1]

The aim of Chinese ASBM was never to sink US carrier, 2 hits on the deck renders the carrier useless and forces it to flee.

The Japanese learned a lesson not to allow the aircraft carrier to survive. USS Enterprise has shown that. Came back and killed more Japanese.

 

[flamer84]

Of course it was inevitable this thread would attract the America haters. None the less, ship looks like a real beauty. Willing to lay odds that the very same people that are/or will be bashing here will be creaming their pants and lavishing supah dupah praise when China launches its first home grown carrier. I know the way it works here of course. if the carrier mentioned happens to be of American origin, then that must mean the carrier is bad and inferior. if carrier happens to be of Chinese (or any other country origin) that means it is all powerful and unstoppable. Thanks for the pics @Oldman1

Yes ,it's funny to see how some people think that americans are building 12 billion $ carriers without thinking that they're targets for sooper dooper chinese missiles,wishful thinking,at best

Still,i would like to see these carriers bringing democracy to countries like Myanmar,or maybe Myanmar can't into democracy,unlike Irak

 

[Oldman1]

That is assuming the US can detect an incoming ASBM in the air and given enough time to launch counter missile at incoming ASBM. It is not an easy task just as it is not an easy task to strike an aircraft carrier on the move. However given the size of the aircraft carrier in comparison with an ASBM, I take my chance on ASBM being the winner.

Lockheed Martin Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR) - YouTube

China Criticizes Japan for Military Radar Plans | Military.com
As the Chinese have said before about concerning the X band radar that could shift the balance in the region. The technology has negate whatever effectiveness of an anti ship ballistic missile.

BEIJING - China criticized Japan on Monday for its plans to install a cutting-edge U.S. military radar system to monitor North Korean missile launches, saying that could impact regional stability and upset the strategic balance.

The X-band radar system would boost Japan's ability to track and intercept missiles from across the Sea of Japan. That was "not conducive to regional nuclear non-proliferation and stability, and will cause an extremely negative impact on the global strategic balance," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said.

"Some countries or blocs in the region, on the pretext of the North Korea nuclear threat, have unilaterally set up anti-missile systems or conduct bloc cooperation (with the United States)," Hong said.

The comments came after the governor of Japan's Kyoto region, where the radar will be based, endorsed it last week. The facility will be staffed by as many as 160 U.S. service members and civilian contractors.

Hong's statement implied the radar was being installed for purposes other than to keep tabs on North Korea, although he gave no details. China tends to see virtually all U.S. military activity in Asia as part of a plot to curb its growing military, diplomatic and economic power.

The issue also comes amid ongoing tensions between Tokyo and Beijing over an East China Sea territorial dispute. Beijing has issued months of angry rhetoric and frozen high-level contacts with Japan following Tokyo's nationalization last year of tiny islands claimed by China. Patrol boats from both sides regularly confront each other in the waters surrounding the uninhabited archipelago.

China also is highly critical of the U.S.-Japan military alliance along with Tokyo's moves to upgrade its armed forces, saying they are steps toward a revival of the strain of militarism that led to Japan's brutal invasion and occupation of China in the 1930s and 1940s.

 

[xunzi]

Here is my proposal to our American friend to play a friendly game of ASBM vs aircraft carrier simulation. We will test whether our ASBM can hit a moving aircraft carrier and settle the controversy. Our mutual objective is to better understand both side capability in order to avoid miscalculation. The US can train death row inmates to run one of the decommission aircraft carrier, simulate on the high sea in the pacific ocean and we will simulate our ASBM to target the moving aircraft carrier. If the US can defend incoming ASBM, the US will freed all death row inmates and award them a medal of honor. We can both split 50/50 on the cost of carrying out this real simulation test.

 

[Oldman1]

Here is my proposal to our American friend to play a friendly game of ASBM vs aircraft carrier simulation. We will test whether our ASBM can hit a moving aircraft carrier and settle the controversy. Our mutual objective is to better understand both side capability in order to avoid miscalculation. The US can train death row inmates to run one of the decommission aircraft carrier, simulate on the high sea in the pacific ocean and we will simulate our ASBM to target the moving aircraft carrier. If the US can defend incoming ASBM, the US will freed all death row inmates and award them a medal of honor. We can both split 50/50 on the cost of carrying out this real simulation test.

Should try testing it on your carrier first. Put an inert warhead on the missile and lets see if it hits close to your carrier. Also its best to test your defenses as well and how to hide the carrier from satellites, submarines and aircraft. Just to simulate a possible U.S. Navy and Air Force threat to your carrier.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvHlW1h_0XQ

 

[xunzi]

Should try testing it on your carrier first. Put an inert warhead on the missile and lets see if it hits close to your carrier. Also its best to test your defenses as well and how to hide the carrier from satellites, submarines and aircraft. Just to simulate a possible U.S. Navy and Air Force threat to your carrier.

LRASM Overview - YouTube

But but but... we are a poor country with only 1 carrier. The US has so many. They can afford one for a friendly game. Everyone can agree on that. Other countries can place bet in a pool and the loser pool money will be reward to the winner of this friendly game. Wouldn't that make the US less concern about not benefiting in this simulation?

 

[Oldman1]

日媒臆想心神战机全æ*¼ä¸*国两个航母编队高清版] - YouTube

Just to put something I forgot about Japan and other allies.

But but but... we are a poor country with only 1 carrier. The US has so many. They can afford one for a friendly game. Everyone can agree on that. Other countries can place bet in a pool and the loser pool money will be reward to the winner of this friendly game. Wouldn't that make the US less concern about not benefiting in this simulation?

We always tend to plan ahead. Hence why China was so concerned about the radar.

 

[timetravel]

That is assuming the US can detect an incoming ASBM in the air and given enough time to launch counter missile at incoming ASBM. It is not an easy task just as it is not an easy task to strike an aircraft carrier on the move. However given the size of the aircraft carrier in comparison with an ASBM, I take my chance on ASBM being the winner.

The US would detect the Missile miles away... US spy satellites will detect your stupid ASBM just after launch... now they would know where it is heading.

you would be lucky if your ASBM can hit in a 20 KMs radius from the A/C. Forget about hitting the A/C....

silly dreams and boasting..

the only way to take down a A/C is by Submarines or by Fighter jets penetrating and launching cruise missiles.

stop this non sense of ASBM. looks Childish.

 

[Shankranthi]

The US would detect the Missile miles away... US spy satellites will detect your stupid ASBM just after launch... now they would know where it is heading.

you would be lucky if your ASBM can hit in a 20 KMs radius from the A/C. Forget about hitting the A/C....

silly dreams and boasting..

the only way to take down a A/C is by Submarines or by Fighter jets penetrating and launching cruise missiles.

stop this non sense of ASBM. looks Childish.

You mean Chinese is BOASTING

Dint they just tell us that they are really Humble and all ? .... did they mean Humbug ?

 

[gambit]

That is assuming the US can detect an incoming ASBM in the air and given enough time to launch counter missile at incoming ASBM. It is not an easy task just as it is not an easy task to strike an aircraft carrier on the move. However given the size of the aircraft carrier in comparison with an ASBM, I take my chance on ASBM being the winner.

There is no 'assuming' about it. We can detect a ballistic warhead and it has been so for decades. You think that just because you attached 'anti-ship' that somehow make the ballistic missile and warhead any different?

As for intercepting the descending warhead, the Nike-Zeus program back in the 1950s were already well on the way to achieve a kinetic kill ON THE FIRST PASS. Under testing, the interceptors were getting closer and closer to the target warhead. It was only weapons treaties with the Soviets and budgeting that cancelled the program. So if you think that you can bet your renmibi on the DF-21D and come out ahead, your money to lose.