The LARGEST Ship in The Navy Has A GIANT Problem
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 май 2024
- The LARGEST Ship in The Navy Has A GIANT Problem. Today's video will analyze the different technologies that make the Ford-class aircraft carrier so great. But in order to understand that, we will look at why the Navy needed to replace tried-and-true technology in the first place. Despite the great strides made in creating this technology, we will also examine why Ford continues to suffer issues with several of its flagship systems.
Join this 'Paper Pilot CLub' to get access to perks:
/ @beyondfacts
SUBSCRIBE: www.bit.ly/beyondFactsSUB
#navy
#ship
#beyondfacts
Love our videos? Join our ‘Paper Pilot Club’ now! Get new videos first, special paper airplanes, and cool badges.
Click ‘Join’ to be a member and have more fun with us! ruclips.net/channel/UCzgWZmqmKpmsr4oPWITusKAjoin
no..................
Read the comments of people who used to be in *"The Service"* .
They are saying you have placed many mistakes in this video. 😒
@@icosthop9998 Not just this video but many others and they always make out American is the best in the world thats why i unsubscribed. This is what they claim:- "Beyond Facts is the channel to unveil all the interesting facts for you. Whether you want to learn about the lifestyle of famous celebrities, how they spend their millions, the most expensive things in the world, secret military technology, money topics and even some of the strangest discoveries - we've got." TOTAL BS.
A t and t customer service
This is old news, like about two years ago. The EMLS, AAG issues have long been known with fixes and workarounds in place. There’s always going to be bugs that need correction with new highly complex systems.
Correct. That's the point of shakedown cruises. New ships don't enter actual service for 6 months or more after being fitted out.
It would be easier for the rest of the Gerald Ford class carriers. First-of-class type design changes, especially those related to the EMALS, have already been fed back into the construction for the rest of the class.
Probably counter intell for idiots.
BS. This gives the builders more of our tax money. This carrier is a cash bonanza for the MIC. That’s the goal, our money. Fighting, that.’s the Navy’s problem. Besides, the builders will take more of our money as they try to fix this turkey. Newport News will just keep smiling. Obviously, the Navy accepted this lemon as it was. We will pay for this decision for many more years.
No "STEAM" catapaults on the USS G.R. Ford! Magnetic catapaults only.
Right on. I'm sure there is steam somewhere between the Uranium and the Aircraft, when on the catapult, but it's not the catapult.. :-D
And it's only in writing.
Because it doesn't work.
@@loktom4068 funny, they have been launching aircraft. How do you suppose they are doing that with no catapult?
@@loktom40680090o[ooo9o⁹⁹9⁹😊
Might want to look that up before commenting so you don't look like a spastic. The EMALs on the CVN-79 are fully operational and this ship is not even done being built yet.
i serve on the ford, we out preform the nimitz class in every way
Cool
Out perform by failing where other proceed
The Nimitz is as good as the Ford at a few not very important things. Pretty much everything else is better on the Ford. That's what fifty years of technological advancement gets you.
Tyvm for your service sir 😁👍🇺🇸
@@mikejeffries974keep coping😂😂
Oh B.S.! The USS Roosevelt was resupplied every few days. No ship, especially a CVN could go 5 months solo
I was going to toss a BS flag on that to. I did two med cruises and a bunch of shakedown cruises on the USS Forrestal in the early 70's, and yes, we had underway replenishment ops on a pretty regular basis.
Unless the ship can shit its own Jet fuel it was resupplied several times a month. I'm sure it can carry a lot of Jet fuel but those jet's use a butt load of it.
A carrier has a 70 day supply of both dry and cold food in storage. 15-20 years without needing to refuel the reactors. They are more limited on how much aviation fuel and weapons they have available to conduct combat operation in that 70 days. That's the reason at sea resupply is so vital.
Yeah I was like that’s BS!!!
Nimitz Class Carriers can carry a max load of 3.3M gallons of JP-5 jet fuel and an average 2.6M Gallons onboard (with peacetime replenishments).
However, the embarked Air Wing (50-60 Aircraft) can go through the average Nimitz class Carrier's JP-5 storage capacity in about a week at normal peacetime training sortie (cycles).
Maybe this is why this website is called "Beyond Facts".
Yeah, physics are indeed a problem. New system with bugs? You don't say! Sounds like pretty normal stuff to me. Sounds like a lot of hype in the tag line. 🙄
Salt water Hates Electronics
@@peterhall8572 I think it's the other way around. Electronics do not like salt water. Salt water doesn't really care.
the author saw a photo of a ship once. that makes him a expert.
Sounds like Ford Motor Company installing too many new and untried options on their vehicles. Of course you seldom have to deal with MIGS or Sukhoi aircraft in your F-150.
These ships are NOTHING more than big coffins in the age of hypersonic nuclear missiles.. 💯💯
Doesn't sound like a GIANT problem to me................
Nothing is a problem compared to the leadership of the country - Pentagon included.
😂😂😂
Wow, this is one of the most poorly informed military videos I've ever seen, and there are some terrible ones out there!
Was ai generated.
And almost 4,000 people gave it a thumbs up. Or did they?????????????????
A new ship design loaded with lots of new and advanced technology is going to have growing pains. It’s how we advance the level of innovation in engineering and unseen problems will normally emerge. Modifications will be developed and implemented in this hull and all succeeding hulls. This is nothing unusual in is actually planned for. Go Navy. Fly Navy!
8 years of shakedown and debugging and they still fail to meet design spec's is NOT normal. The flaws in critical systems are fundamental and in large part due to contractors with no real experience. GA built ONE (1) EM rollercoaster ride before getting the EMAL contract.
Yeah.. Let's keep adding to the $14 trillions debt you owe your GODS.. 💵💵😂😂😂
@@jamesb4789really.. But how many times you VOTED then HOPE for CHANGE?? 😂😂😂
@@jamesb4789 beginning with the USS Langley did every new aircraft carrier work perfectly from the beginning or did it take years to resolve what issues were going on?
You should mention that all the vessels around the GRF Aircraft Carrier have a little something to do with how it can maintain operations at sea. Just a little.
You are so Ill-advised, Ms Informed, with every Inaccurate information it's mirror's your Title. Beyond Facts
.
"The most fearsome ship prowling the oceans.." But also a nice big fat target for all sorts of hypersonic carrier busting missiles. For the price of the catapult on this carrier you can buy 10 of those missiles. Huge warships are obsolete and only good for a very expensive show.
Have they tried unplugging it then plugging it back in?
They omitted the expensive plug and hardwired it. What on earth could go wrong?
Is that you, Roy?
Bro you need to update your research The Ford is now fully operational and has exceeded daily sortie rate of Nimitz class
It was ai generated BS.
You are talking normal things. Debugging is always happening. It’s not like a brand new car.
Even brand new cars have problems. Lots of problems. Some are know as TSB (Technical Service Bulletins) which are performed without owners knowledge. 😮
Sorry, but why exactly is 8 long years of "shakedown operations and $6 billion over budget is normal? And they still have not fixed the flaws.
@@jamesb4789 what flaws. I don’t know and you don’t know. After any deployment, preventive maintenance is just normal for any flaws.
@@jamesb4789 The video is inaccurate, and even after eight years, it is not a fast process to get all the bugs out of that new technology and update it. See, as they work the bugs out, they are still updating that technology. They don't even mention their downtime and problems with the old technology. It was not a perfect system and needed a lot of maintenance.
The technology has already shown its advantage over the old technology.
Reactors dont make steam, they make hot water fed to a steam generator that makes steam.
@johnhoffman8203
Ok. Because you are so petty, I unfortunately have to react. Unfortunately, you are wrong!
Reactors don't make hot water, they produce heat, fed to a water tank, that makes hot water.
🔥😂
@@Trance2010de I know I am petty, cant help it, I was a Master Chief PETTY Officer, and nuclear trained at that, on 5 subs. I shimmed a lot of control rods in a reactor to make hot water. This hot water is pumped to steam generator tubes conducting this heat to the water surrounding them and returning the cooled water back to the reactor to rinse and repeat. There is a water tank that is electrically heated to make a steam bubble, but that only maintains pressure inside the reactor vessel.
@@johnhoffman8203 😂👍. Yes, you're right.
I tried to act like a smartass and described it in even more detailed.
Because before the steam comes the heat of the reactor, and then hot water, then steam.
Also the electricity you mentioned, is mainly produced by turbines/generators, using the steam.
@@Trance2010de You have a gross conceptual error about both reactor operational concepts and heat transfer and fluid flow. The primary fluid never comes into direct contact with the secondary system. The only component common to both systems is the steam generators that make steam form both engine turbines and generator turbines.
@@johnhoffman8203 I have not even mentioned or described in more detail, the type of heat exchange or the various water cycles.
I also know, how such a system works. Since I also have a certain technical understanding, as a trained electronics engineer with professional experience.
Just imagine how smart the Captain must be to understand in a general sense all the depth in that ship and mastering the bridge.
The F-35B doesn't need a catapult.
The F-35 does need the catapult if it needs to carry anything over the minimum weapons load. Take off vertically is not ideal for combat ops. You would burn a lot of fuel just to take off. Landing vertically would make aircraft turn around quicker though.
@@Bob-yl9rz F-35B STOVL (Short TakeOff Vertical Landing). Can it even take off vertically if it has any sort of combat load? the USMC F-35B uses no catapult, just a short flat acceleration run off the boat using engine power only.
Only the USMC/USN F-35C uses a catapult for launch and arresting wires for recovery as the C is the CATOBAR variant(Catapult Assisted Take Off But Arrested Landing)..
What about the other aircraft they use? Plus if the F35 is fully loaded, it cannot take off vertically.
@@hoghogwild F-35B requires a ski ramp if carrying a combat load, that's why our two limp biscuit carriers have them.
@@krashd I didn't realize that you're British. You guys have some pretty amazing capabilities in those ships/aircraft.
Yes the US small carriers and the UK Queen Elizabeth Class both launch F-35 from the boat without catapults. The ships both launch an F-35B with 2-1000lb precision bombs and 2 AIM-120 missiles all internal with full expendables, fly 505 nautical miles away then turn around and fly 505nm back to the ship and perform an underway vertical landing profile
The difference is that the US Navy ships use a 600ft launch strip whilst the UK carriers use a 450ft strip with a ski jump. Amazing capability for a jump jet aircraft. Current SuperHornet has a strike profile mission radius of 390nm.
"Fatal" design flaws? Foh
Haha
They were at one point. That's why delivery was 18 months late
@@robertstoneking7916 No, they weren't fatal.
Beyond Facts is right for this channel or more correctly it should be called you got your facts wrong. The Ford does not have steam catapults, they are magnetic. If you can't even get that info right then just maybe do some videos on basket weaving or something.
But they may get those wrong too and then I wouldn't know how to weave a basket.
I think the script writer meant to say that EMALS is used INSTEAD of the steam catapults used on previous carriers.
Paul, hopefully you'll get over the mistake.
@@hello_its_me. Nothing for me to get over. However, errors, propaganda, low information density, omissions of pertinent data and outdated material can lower my personal rating of a channel.
Just wait till you see a C-130 take off from the deck...
Lol
@@8731Cordova A C-130 has landed on and taken off from a carrier. The USS Forestall. You can see it here on RUclips !
It has been done, and landings, too. (USS Forrestal) YT videos may still be available.
@@charlesbranch4120yeah there's a lot of videos of it. They were able to land come to a complete stop, and then take off from that exact same spot. Pretty damn insane if you think about it
@@bushman1492 Simply not practical ! C-130 is too big.
Behold, the USS Drone Magnet. Sure, the carrier group can shoot down 100 cheap drones. Can it shoot down 10,000?
that is one giant sitting duck
Are you talking about Mark Milley?
Lol😂
Government contractors correcting defects yelling Mo money, mo money, mo money!
And why would you tell everyone about those flaws
I got an intimation of these problems years ago. I saw a documentary on design discussion in this ship, which showed disturbing mindset-revealing planning re the washrooms.
Old-school planning is to build different-style washrooms for men and women. With urinals (men's washrooms), there are at least 4 advantages. #1 More units per washroom, since urinals can be more closely spaced than toilet cubicles. More people get cycled through faster😮, freeing people up for urgent ops. #2 Less time (in urination) at the urinals vs. doing so in a toilet cubicle. Further speeding throughput. #3 less spill mess, and less smell. #4 better hygiene (health!) and improved morale. Thus, old-school-- the increased cost of dedicated washtooms, front-loaded in budget (as construction costs), leads to multiple operational dividends (and reduced costs). The right way to do it.
BUT, done in self-congratulatory (over-confident) tone, the documented discussion of "improved" and "more scientific" washroom design on this new ship--toilet cubicles only--let the design costs go down, but at the price of increased operational costs and headaches. The planners wanted themselves to look good, while not caring a fig sbout downstream headaches.
Seeing this, I thought, "Oh, boy!" AND "What will be the results of this design philosophy on the other systems in this ship?"
The present documentary shows further negative consequences.
What is that first graphic displaying?
The Ford, no matter how impressive, is not by any metric more powerful than France.
What do those bombs even represent?
whoever made this video is very uneducated on the USS Ford. The catapult and elevator issues were fixed 2 years ago. There is no carrier afloat that can be at war for 5 months without resupply. The Roosevelt was supplied every couple of days. Actually do research before posting BS!
The "Bomb Farm" is located normally behind the Island starboard side somewhere to afford its safety and for ready issue. What you referred to as the Bomb Farm here is the magazines storage areas and assembly areas. I spent 21 years as a Ships Company Aviation Ordnanceman and was an instructor to teach that NEC at Namtragrudet 4033 North Island Ca.
Secret? The power of these carriers is a secret? I don’t think so. Besides, you just told the world about this “secret”!
I'm sure the US Navy shares secret information with "Beyond Facts." This isn't War Thunder. Lol
Yeah I always laugh when people talk about "secrets" that they magically know everything about
I saw an article in an aviation magazine about 3 pages long going into detail of all the problems with a new aircraft coming into navy service and how bad it was with lots of faults showing up, this was around the time the F18 was just entering service so people reading immediately thought it was about the recently released problems with that aircraft, however when you reached the end of the article they explained that it was taken from the into service report on the F4 Phantom, and was being used to indicate that even the best machinery often starts with problems that need fixing
2:45 the F-35B can and does do that.
Without resupply? Don't talk bollocks, she was RAS'ed (Replenish At Sea.) daily
Lets see....first all new launch and recovery system in 60 years. Power generation more than 6 times previous ship...meaning shes built to accommodate nextgen electromagnetic weapons. Streamlined operating overhead to make sizable reduction in crew size (some reports over 1000). Increased airwing capacity. Basically one of the most complex machines on the planet that "has a few bugs". The Navy is giving CVN 80 the legendary name Enterprise....they have faith in this class
Bugs don't take 8 years to patch. The EMAL and AAG issues are fundamental design flaws that the best efforts of crew and shipyard people can not correct.
If you want to trust the military industrial complex -and the woke brass in the military, go ahead.
@@jamesb4789 The problems are ALREADY fixed.
@@jamesb4789 your 'current events/facts' are dated.
@@jamesb4789 you do realize most of the info in this video is old, don't you?
I think you have the Kennedy and Nimitz stats backwards at 0:19
Alarming TAG LINE IS BUNKO..
NEXT...?
Sources for this?
Sensors failing? That's something that's fairly easily fixed by the manufacturer usually. It sounds like overall it's good, just has some minor kinks left which nonetheless don't have a severe impact on performance since parts can be replaced much more easily.
I'd bet it's something unanticipated like steel capacitor leads being bent by the electromagnets. That would crack the seals or attachments in the capacitors, or wear out the solder connections. Since almost all capacitors with wire leads use steel wire, the fix will be expensive since the parts would no longer be off-the-shelf. This will lead to some Congress critter grandstanding about paying $30 for a part that usually costs less than $2.
yeah, hey comms signal the enemy to pause actions while we call a contractor to repair ... expected downtime about a week
but the submarine depth charge system looks good, must remember to reverse the ship as not to blow up the bow !
When a new ship of even a tried and proved design is first launched, it will have issues.
The have been operating he carrier for 8 years and they can not fix the major issues. There are serious design flaws.
@@jamesb4789 funny, they have only had possession of it for 7 years.
The Ford would not be deployed unless it was ready.
It has to be a miracle that the Reactor on the Ford and other ships.
The trouble is these carriers are big targets.
I’m glad I checked the comments at the start of the video.✌️
I did 90 days on the cargo team instead of galley work as a new crewman. The Nimitz took on supplies such as fuel, weapons and food often. The reactors didn't need refuel, but JP-5 fuel tanks that feed the planes sure do. Plank Owner U.S.S. Nimitz. BOHICA!
The REAL STORY after the first cruise:
In 239 days underway, the ship’s crew conducted 43 underway replenishment, logged more than 17,826 flight hours and 10,396 sorties, sailed more than 83,476 nautical miles, and safely transferred 20.7 million gallons of fuel with zero mishaps. The Ford crew conducted 33,444 flight deck moves, 3,124 hangar bay aircraft moves, 2,883 aircraft elevator moves, 16,351 aircraft fueling evolutions, and transferred 8,850 pallets of cargo and mail. The Gerald R. Ford culinary team prepared and served 3.1 million meals, which included approximately 48,000 dozen eggs, 24,000 gallons of milk, 131,000 hamburgers, 367,000 pounds of chicken, and Gerald R. Ford’s favorite . . . 79,000 chocolate chip cookies.
THAT is nothing to sneeze at . . . However, we still do not have a way to continue deck launch operations while working on one of the EMALS launchers.
Wouldn't working on a steam catapult also interrupt launch operations?
No big deal, Every new weapon system is basically obsolete as soon or shortly after it’s deployment,
The hope is that the advancements are good enough to keep the weapon relevant for long enough until the next generation comes along,
Ckick bait, the Uss Gerald R Ford has been on deployment for ayear now with no issues.
Basically what we have here is click bate.
That's "can not be overstated."
We don't want the enemy knowing what is on our aircraft carriers
Tell that to Mark Milley. He called the Chinese every time Trump made a move that could get them into trouble. And he is still there.
Ocean water as fuel source by Eirex Tech in Canada.
That huge magnetic field must be a real challenge for both the ship and aircraft electronics.
No more so than a rotating motor. EMALS is just a large linear electric motor. The magnetic field is confined within the pole pieces in a similar manner. A bigger issue is the magnetic field around the power cables feeding the catapult. No plastic conduit for those wires!
Did the magnets get wet? LOL
Any effective countermeasure to hypersonics?
That depends on the particular form of the attacking weapon. Ballistic intercepts are now almost routine. Hypersonic maneuvering vehicles may be more difficult, but not impossible. The g-force tolerance of such a weapon poses a physical limit on its ability to get past countermeasures, and its path necessarily becomes more predictable as it approaches its target. I surmise the ability to knock down hypersonic vehicles is one of the goals of the rail gun program.
you do know that she's a test bed ship, like the last Enterprise was for the Nimitz class.
What is the probability that the Fujian will NOT be severely handicapped by these 2 problems (electromagnetic catapult and advanced arresting cable system) that have plagued the USS Gerald Ford?
they just have to fix the cracks in the Fujian's deck
Awesome, and wonderful. Rodney Alan Godwin RAG 24
The Ford is first in class. This means it will be used to troubleshoot and fix problems before, and as, the next in class are being built and trialed. Every new weapons system needs to be used and abused in order to find out what breaks. All of this is standard and expected for the first ship in a new class.
it is a floating target
Alas
So this multi billion aircraft carrier is now just a floating hotel🤔
Maybe the site name BEYOND FACTS is the most honest part of this piece.
Electric Launch and electric elevators were a big payoff scheme that will never work.The only way to fix it is to have steam catapults and elevators .
A steam cat can be fixed with a wrench and a hammer, Electronic stuff doesnt do well when exposed to a sea water environment
Just like the battle ships 100 years ago became obsolete ,these big floating target are now obsolete . Concentrating so much military asset was an issue that was debated 50 years ago , and now with the development hypersonique missile I dont think they will be build anymore .
You are using the wrong type of catapults and arresting gear on the Ford carriers.
Best comments by knowledgeable people.😯😯😯😯😯
11 Aircraft Carriers & no Health Care..
The United States of Spartan Inequity.
I'm one minute in,, and I'm going to guess the electric catapults are one of the issues...
Without resupply ??? it requires a resupply EVERY week
The battleships became obsolete when the carriers came into their own. The carriers will become obsolete as anti-ship missles become much more effective.
Every new innovation in weaponry breeds a new countermeasure for it.
Marine F-35Bs can launch from US carriers without catapults. Just to be pedantic. It is possible the Navies F-35Cs could operate without catapults but with significant disadvantages. Using a larger portion of the deck, carrying less fuel and bombs. To be even more pedantic. Super Hornets may also have this capability. And would likely require full afterburners. B-25 bombers did so during WW2 with shorter decks, no catapults and far less power. Catapults remain a very important advantage. Future carriers should be built to carry either steam or electric drives until the electric drives are proven. And more or larger bomb elevators added. They could even have steam power from the reactors. Or more batteries. Which could be used as counterweights.
Short point: It's complicated.
Who woulda knew brand new tech would have some teathing problems? 🤦♂️
Upgrades in technology always have as many bugs as a cicada swarm. But without upgrades, the flaws and deficiencies of current tech become exposed and exploitable over time.
“Secret Weapon?” Not a secret!
The problem might be already fixed!
It’s a little scary how they named it after the clumsiest president ever you wonder why it has issues
These aren't critical design flaws; It's just predictable debugging of radically new systems. Give the Ford a year or two to get the bugs out and get the crew trained. :-)
Those little red rectangular drones (series around 6.00 / 6.40) are terribly unreliable
They were flung off the catapult well enough but none of them continued into controlled flight
Seems a bit shoddy if we're being honest about things
This is old news like 5 years ago
The claimed number of "traps" for the Ford over an 8 month cruise is Nowhere near a record, even though it has more planes. The Nimitz, in its 2002/3 cruise had over 11,000! And I am not sure what a record is for a carrier cruise.. For years Navy Brass hid the deep problems that the Ford had. I bet they Still are. Other classes of aircraft carriers have been started with far less problems. Carriers I have been on: Enterprise, Roosevelt, Lexington, Midway. And Yes, that Lexington Was in WW2. CV16.
You can't buy that equipment off the shelf and much of it is One Off.
A big target, in a real war it is obsolete.
We don't know that yet. There's still a need to have tactical combat aircraft within range of the combat zone, and airfields are even larger and more vulnerable, to say nothing of not always being in convenient locations. At least a carrier can move to where it's needed, and retreat if necessary. Historically, the means of preventing the carrier from being a "big target" is to have a strong defending screen of ships and aircraft. The U. S. won the war in the Pacific in WWII because it was ultimately more successful at protecting its carriers and supply vessels than the Japanese and had a much more robust supply chain. The key is to have the proper mix of defensive weapons - AA, AM, ASW, and surface combat capability. We must not let those go obsolete.
In today's current wartheatre ACC's are extreme vulnerable....
And yet it can easily be attacked by missiles and drones before it makes any difference!!!
..hm ..a good target..but a great vessel
The Ford class uses an electromagnetic launch and arrestor.
how f35 can take up vertical so whats the problem
It can't, the F-35B requires a short take off, the F-35A and C require a full take off. The B can land vertically though.
They will perfect it and get all the bugs worked out.
What are those numbers beginning to be shown at 0:15? How many tons each ship can carry? How many tons each ship weighs? How come the numbers keep changing? Makes no sense. And what are those pictographs to the left of each changing number? Can't be the number or airplanes that can be stored on each carrier? The airplanes take off and land on a carrier much like they do on a land-based runway - horizontally. They don't take off or land vertically. More senselessness.
This is "Americas Secret Weapon"??? Theres NOTHING SECRET about this giant ship!
Well. Itsnot a secret now is it?? Good In formation.
The Ford is a very expensive ship to build and operate. As such I believe that manufacturers should step up to the plate and carry through with their products to ensure utmost reliability. The United States Navy has always been a world leader. This is a great nation that will continue to be a world leader.
No new innovation comes without some bumps in the world. If they haven’t given up of remedying the issues, they’ll get it.
It's not steam launch it is electric launch
I love these people that broadcast their weapons system how the motor runs giving away weaknesses or top secret stuff that people should know but they love doing that so they are more spies to the United States people
Back in the days of the USSR the granit anti-ship missile was developed. These supersonic inertia guided armored missiles carry 500 kilo ton thermonuclear warheads and can be launched individually or in swarms from submarines. Aircraft carriers are just a giant floating coffin.
Hardly a secret when it is seven touted on YT. And what's this 'up to snuff' bizzo??
Just like staged AC and heating, all that happens is increased cost and expensive repairs.
An Aircraft carrier has one job; launch and recover aircraft. If one carrier is not fast enough, there are ten more available. All this tech is just feathers in a flags hat.
“Because it’s not what you think.” 🙄😑