shep854 0 Posted April 5, 2017 Report Share Posted April 5, 2017 http://taskandpurpose.com/navy-futuristic-aircraft-carrier-uss-gerald-ford/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=tp-today&utm_content=image "The USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78), America’s futuristic new aircraft carrier, will finally hit the open water for sea trials this week, the Navy confirmed to Business Insider."The ship and crew have already completed a pier side dry run of operations in Newport News, Virginia, and will hit the seas later this week to test out its most basic functions." Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JasonJ 0 Posted April 5, 2017 Report Share Posted April 5, 2017 Looks like a good class. Haven't seen the kind of criticism about it like some of the other new naval ship classes have. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Skywalkre 0 Posted April 5, 2017 Report Share Posted April 5, 2017 Looks like a good class. Haven't seen the kind of criticism about it like some of the other new naval ship classes have.Is that true? I was reading something the other day (I thought on here but not finding it atm) discussing all the issues with the class (basically 'designing it as they build it'). I don't follow Navy issues that closely so I don't know if the issues were specific to the Ford or more of the same for the Navy. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Ken Estes 0 Posted April 5, 2017 Report Share Posted April 5, 2017 Now that we have run out of presidents remotely acceptable or suitable for ship naming, is this the end? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tim the Tank Nut 0 Posted April 5, 2017 Report Share Posted April 5, 2017 Enterprise, Hornet, Yorktown, Saratoga, Lexington, even Langley would be better than ANY President's name. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JasonJ 0 Posted April 5, 2017 Report Share Posted April 5, 2017 Looks like a good class. Haven't seen the kind of criticism about it like some of the other new naval ship classes have.Is that true? I was reading something the other day (I thought on here but not finding it atm) discussing all the issues with the class (basically 'designing it as they build it'). I don't follow Navy issues that closely so I don't know if the issues were specific to the Ford or more of the same for the Navy. I can't say for sure. The carrier class has somehow been spared from the typical TN scrutiny treatment. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
shep854 0 Posted April 5, 2017 Author Report Share Posted April 5, 2017 I've read that were issues with the new electro-magnetic catapults. Since this is a brand new tech application, that should not be too surprising. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rickard N 0 Posted April 5, 2017 Report Share Posted April 5, 2017 Is Oriskany off limits? /R Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Brian Kennedy 0 Posted April 5, 2017 Report Share Posted April 5, 2017 Enterprise, Hornet, Yorktown, Saratoga, Lexington, even Langley would be better than ANY President's name. There should certainly always be an Enterprise, Hornet, Yorktown and Saratoga. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
shep854 0 Posted April 6, 2017 Author Report Share Posted April 6, 2017 (edited) CVN-80 will be named Enterprise. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Enterprise_(CVN-80)CVN-79 will be John F. Kennedy Edited April 6, 2017 by shep854 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Ken Estes 0 Posted April 6, 2017 Report Share Posted April 6, 2017 Before we resurrect Hornet and Saratoga [an IJN submarine torpedo magnet for most of the critical part of the war], we need to have a new Lexington. If we factor in the performance of WWII air groups with their carriers, we should equate Enterprise and Yorktown. Just ask our fellow TNetter, RLeonard, if in doubt. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Ken Estes 0 Posted April 6, 2017 Report Share Posted April 6, 2017 (edited) Ack, double post. This space for rent. Edited April 6, 2017 by Ken Estes Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Stuart Galbraith 0 Posted April 6, 2017 Report Share Posted April 6, 2017 Plenty of good names out there. USS Ark Royal for example.Im just saying.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
EvanDP 0 Posted April 6, 2017 Report Share Posted April 6, 2017 Considering the shortages of hulls and the modern love of synergy and branding I suggest: General George C. Thurgood/Thorogood Marshall That way we honor a General, a Justice and a Bluesman all in one shot. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
sunday 0 Posted April 6, 2017 Report Share Posted April 6, 2017 With a new Kaga just commissioned, the Japanese only need to launch new Hiryu, Akagi, Zuikaku and Shokaku to justify Saratoga, Yorktown and Hornet. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JasonJ 0 Posted April 6, 2017 Report Share Posted April 6, 2017 I'd have to say that I like the sound of "USS Lexington, USS Saratoga, JS Kaga, and JS Akagi to participate in joint-training between the USN and JMSDF". Quote Link to post Share on other sites
shep854 0 Posted April 6, 2017 Author Report Share Posted April 6, 2017 Considering the original concept and designation of carriers in the US Navy was an 'aircraft carrying cruiser-- CV=Cruiser (C) Fixed-wing aircraft (V), the Japanese designation of their carriers as 'destroyers' makes a bit of (whimsical) sense. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Ivanhoe 0 Posted April 6, 2017 Report Share Posted April 6, 2017 If we are to reprise the "major American battles" naming scheme, I suggest "USS Super Bowl LI." Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mnm 0 Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 If you're out of presidents you can go with the VPs. USS Quayle for a start. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JasonJ 0 Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 USS Joe Biden??? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Stuart Galbraith 0 Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 No love for Spiro Agnew? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rick 0 Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 Plenty of good names out there. USS Ark Royal for example.Im just saying....Will have to admit, Her Majesty's Navy had some impeccable aircraft carrier names. The Glorious class and the Illustrious class come to mind first. Also some majestic battleship names. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Stuart Galbraith 0 Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 Im glad to see a Prince of Wales again. Queen Elizabeth, im not mad about naming a warship after a cruiser liner, but still... FuriousGloriousHermesBulwarkArk RoyalEagleIllustriousInvincible So many good names, so little money. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
sunday 0 Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 USS Joe Biden??? Guaranteed to provoke WWIII, at least. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
urbanoid 0 Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 As a result of some gaffe? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.