How quickly can America truly build more aircraft carriers?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 23 сер 2024
- Constructing aircraft carriers is a massive task for the U.S. Navy, both in cost and complexity. They cost billions and require collaboration with specialized shipyards. Currently, the U.S. builds carriers every 5 to 7 years. But, if prioritized, America could potentially speed up production. How fast can the U.S. build more aircraft carriers? Let's find out.
During WWII, the U.S. built 151 aircraft carriers. The majority of these were escort carriers. It took on average 14 to 22 months to build these ships . Before the war it took more than 3 years to build an aircraft carrier.
@Rob-ke4rs I know it ! Worked in the trades. Hey, they repaired the Yorktown in 48hrs .
No wonder yankees love war time,
It drives them to progress!
/s
@gambigambigambi it's not only the U.S. look at wwII as a hole , the Germans invented the ballistic missile, the first jet fighter to fight in combat , the flying wing ,and the list goes on. The British invented radar , they were also the first to launch aircraft from an aircraft carrier to sink another ship. And the list goes on & on .
@@stevenl2364 I know but cutting 3 years of building to just 14 months when in war is an insane feat.
Also my previous comment had /s
Yeah, but that's when Americans had a sense of patriotism in their blood. Look at what we have today.
During wartime, having worked at both Newport News and Bath shipyards, we can put out 4 Gerald Ford class every 13 months.
Whatever
@@matthewhuling8582 ever heard of liberty ships? When pressed, we can build ships really quickly.
@@gawainethefirstbut how though?? is it just because of how much faster people work under pressure?
@@Tacticalboredom Probably more so to prioritizing of naval shipbuilding during wartime, in a manpower, logistical, and especially material sense. If they can get better logistics, priority on shipbuilding materials, and more workers, im sure that would expedite the process greatly.
@@gawainethefirst liberty ship cracking
But one thing, a lot of people forget is that alongside making you carriers. It's also relatively easy to recommission recently decommissioned carriers that are usually set up as museums, so it might be easier to reccommission those museum carriers that have been recently decommissioned in the past 15 years, then making new ones
Not if they're nuclear it isn't.
They're not preserving any of them as museums.
It's a shameful waste but they actually scrapped or made artificial reefs of literally all of them,
except for a few WW-2 & Korean War era carriers that in an emergency would more likely be scrapped for material than recommissioned.
And now,
the only way to add as many as two more aircraft carriers to the fleet is to build two at the same time for twice the price as one.
But unfortunately,
the U.S.A. hasn't had that kind of industrial capacity since it was all shut down & disassembled from the late 1940s through the fifties until just getting one built & commissioned has since become a media spectacle of debates over necessity & costs...
@@ddandymann exactly the real issue
That is not accurate. Any carrier brought back would cost enormously to being anywhere close to today's standards. They couldn't maintain speeds needed to be mission ready. Additionally they would not be able to launch any of today's aircraft. Just wouldn't happen.
I highly doubt the fighting capabilities of Essex and Midway-class carriers in modern warfare.
Maybe as a super-sized helicopter carrier. But you got the likes of the Chesty Puller and other ESBs with more modern features
One. Every five to seven years. Wow! Thats a lot of engineering!
They can actually build carriers at a quicker rate but it makes sense to slow it down and get it right.
Also we simply don't need 20 supercarriers at the moment if we created 3 carriers in a year in a half what would we have to show for it other than us having more carriers than we can actively deploy
Not to mention finding enough sailors to man it.
The sailors that are currently manning the Nimitz class will be manning the newer Ford class carriers. One by one, the Nimitz class carriers will be retired and decommissioned.
What happened to the world over population!?
Draft what do you like the word Conscription... whether you like it or not.
We all have to pay the cost for FREEDOM
The draft will take care of that if America goes to a full scale war
@@user-yi3so1xk2h Yes, in china and India
During world war II the United States was building one ship a day. While supplying the rest of the world with needed military armory such as tanks howitzers and also first aid such as food medical supplies etc. Wrap your head around that.
Before our politicians sold us out to China.
You should probably put the pipe down bro. They didn't build a ship in one day. It took no less than 4-8 months depending on the ship type. Also, ships back then weren't as complex as they are today. Especially carriers. Ships today are way more complex in reference to their systems. So there's that.
@@markmcdonald2477it was harder back then to build a ship then it is now more technological equipment means easier
Also, there's converting smaller helicopter carriers into Lightning Carriers with F-35s. It has historical precedent, as during WWII the US fielded many smaller Pocket Carriers as well. There were more than a hundred aircraft carriers during WWII.
America has a huge back log of maintenance because they don’t have enough ship building and repair facilities.
It isn't just the carriers, but each carrier needs a support group built as well.
A major job of the US Navy is to keep shipping lanes open. 😊
And keep in mind all the metal must be made in the USA
And the the electronics
I used to work for oceaneering
The navy is so particular in what they have made
All carriers are built at Newport News Shipbuilding.
Almost violates Anti-Trust Laws
Yeah let Chinese know that so they can take that port offline
I worked there and lived in Hampton. The sheer size is unbelievable. As former Navy I was on the second atom smasher ever constructed, the USS Nimitz. It was massive but the new class, the Ford class, makes the Nimitz look small. The whole concept defies possibility but we did, we do that.
It’s not about quantity, it is all about QUALITY.
America has the luxury of being able to do both.
@@matthewharris8819 👌
We have all seen the movie 300 🤷♂️
But we can do both, we just don't need to build them fast tho anyway, no one is taking one much less all or even half of our carrier's
In a war of attrition we'd be doomed.
CV-80 USS Enterprise will be the 3rd Ford Class Carrier.
When will it be commissioned?
We need more Carriers. They truly are the Tip of the Spear of the I.M. Military
5 years to make these massive hulks is absurd. These are peace time production numbers too. Gotta remember in World War two the USA went from churning out a new liberty class ship every 3 weeks to one every day. With wartime production capacity I bet a new Ford class could be pumped out at a rate of one a year, if not less.
While specific timeliness per ship could potentially limit competition times to being somewhat longer, don't put it past them to instead start producing 10-15 at the same time if needs be, so you have a new ship coming online every month or so.
@@danielgibson3422 would have to construct more shipyards for that. There aren't enough shipyard currently that are large enough to be producing that many at the same time. I think there are currently only 2 shipyards in the country that can construct Ford classes.
@@Mika-ph6kuI think Newport can handle four a time?
In a time of need....well under 2 years.
Yeah, necessity is often the mother of accelerated production/productivity…
Sure hope we are building more than one as we speak.
Two are currently under construction the USS Enterprise and the USS John F Kennedy both are Ford class carriers
CVN-80 USS Enterprise is currently being constructed as well. Anned launch in late 2025.
One to every five to seven years? US has got to get that number down to at least two-four years without compromising safety, the build and quality. I’d love to see a pilot of that happen just to see if it could be done.
Don't forget light carriers the america class
May GOD continue to Bless the USA🙏
initial cost is exceeded by maint. & operations
No shit, and how’s that different from any ship…weenie
Makes sense, they’re in service for 50 years each now
@@YusefYoyoman i see your problem; it's nothing to be ashamed of
@@YusefYoyoman nuts
@@YusefYoyoman not your enemy; fyi 10% of the ppl you meet will try to suck the joy out of your life
Not fast enough is the answer.
If you look at carrier build during ww2 escort carriers rolled of the production line. Small fast, relatively cheap while the bigger more complex carriers where built.The F35 can land and take off easily.
Reproducing an existing design can be done in less time than radically innovating and working out the glitches on each boat.
Every part needed to fix each carrier is in a warehouse.
If it was decided to build multiples then this could easily be accomplished, it's much easier to build multiple parts at a time than one at a time.
Not accurate given today's shipbuilding limitations.
When reading many comments i thought not many understand how USA industries change during ramp threw war. During this time everything that is needed to build up, replacing ect goes to the military. ITS THE LAW. Also ships that are removed from active service goes into whats called MOTHBALL ( jets,helicopters, tanks & ships) at first fuels, oils, water, ect are removed. Its cleaned up then gets a wrapping. This is done to preserve everything inside ( like ships electronics
This is done incase carrier got sunk, big missile holes, what ever. The carrier can be fitted so fast and onto the area of battle. Same with planes,tanks,helicopters ect. Now the older like a ship is in mothball and no longer close to what we have then everything is removed, stripped down. The ships hull can be sold for scrap metal.
No way 5-7 years. The first one maybe (Ford class) but after you got the first ones down you get to smooth the edges and streamline processes because you now know what you're looking for and doing. They could probably crank a carrier at a rate of 1 a year with a 6 month buffer. I've been around shipyards and it always amazes me how much they produce
The bigger question is how fast can you build all the support ships and submarines that make up an aircraft carrier strike group.
you gotta think in wartime working 24 hours a day they could crank a ship out in 18 months. And build in 10 different shipyards so new ship every few months
If we tried we could build 2 or 3 a year
So china can make 12 to 15 per year so no match.
They could build them in 1/3 of that time if they wanted or needs to just by working around the clock maybe faster with supply efficiencies.
Also a carrier needs a carrier group, other ships that support the carrier and provide screening.
I wish we'd go back to the founding of this country and name them after crucial molitary engagements or tradition, like Saratoga, Yorktown, Guadalcanal, Enterprise (I know, not a battle, but has been a name that is revered) and the Kitty Hawk.
The sailors on this ship can call themselves Gerry's Kids 😁 but yeah, I agree. And I was kind of disappointed when they named a Little Crappy Ship after my ship, USS Independence (CV62).
Never underestimate the arsenal of decomarcay.
It's a floating hybrid between an island and a fortress!
But USN can't build CGs, FFs, in 20+ years. What good is a CVN if it doesn't have area defense ships?
Robo welder works 24/7 👍🏼
I wonder when are they going to make a new Enterprise.
CVN 80 USS Enterprise is currently under construction. It will be finished in 2025, then enter service in 2028
CVN-80, you're in luck.
To be fair, in the United States... it takes 4 years to construct 5.3 miles of road also
I'm pretty sure that's just the State milking projects as the excuse for keeping people employed all year round. If they completed their budgeted projects quickly, and then have nothing else to do for the rest of the year, it might look bad as people getting paid for doing nothing. It's kind of stupid; I think we need a better more efficient solution.
@@Seastallion basically an updated version of a "public works" program
We should make smaller ones and with a fleet of drones to deal with the future problem of ww3
In WW2 America had more than 110.
There is only one builder for CVNs in America.
We actually have three capable of building them, it would simply require more money.
@@jjnix9517 who besides Newport News?
We could absolutely construct several a year once production was ramped up. Might be a 12 month lag or so but once they start rolling off the line expect one a month or two
Given the introduction of hypersonic anti ship missile with ever increasing range and delivery systems it will be a very brave nation spending an expected 17 billion dollars on a super carrier against building three smaller support carriers
Hypersonics can still be defeated, and can't turn because they will shred themselves trying to track a target like a slower missile. Can't use Kinzle either. It's just the upper bits of an ICBM launched from fighters. Easily defeated by other radar systems.
An aircraft carrier on full speed making turns will be very very difficult to hit with any missile.
@@rxonmymind8362 think again . If the hypersonic anti ship missile is coming down from outer limits of the atmosphere at Mach 5+ with locked coordinates of the carrier from a satellite it’s game over. The missile drops down to sea level 200 km out skims at sea level hiding in ocean clutter and altering its course two to three times as it comes in. The carrier actually only travels at flank speed about its own length before impact. Such is the speed issue at Mach 5+.
At these speeds a plasma field builds in front of the missile distorting radar waves making targeting by the AGIS system almost impossible. The screening ships have around 10-15 seconds to site, target lock and fire which unless the weapons happen to be in the right location it’s highly unlikely the missile will be shit down considering it will not be just one coming in but a wave of upwards of between 8-10 from multiple directions. At the moment airborne radar is the only assistance for the task force but even this seems to have limitations for targeting.
@@kentriat2426it's been proven that a hypersonic missile can be shot down with patriot missiles and the US Navy has something similar for defense you know that
@@DAEDP_445 The west has said it can shoot down hypersonic missile in Ukraine yet to date every photographic evidence has been disproven as a alternative missile from all that I have seen. The Institute for Study for war (ISW) a leading USA based research establishment has even stated they have only seen one incident they would place at 10% as being a destroyed hypersonic missile as shot down.
It seems the plasma field developed in from if the missile traveling at this high speed distorts radar waves preventing a lock on for targeting. Navel ships in particular are at risk as hypersonic missile flying at sea level as only 12-15 seconds are available for sighting targeting and training weapons and firing close support weapons which is highly unlikely.
The other factor being there are only so many yards they can be built at currently I believe only Newport News has the required building yards for them
Very interesting!
With the advancement of anti-ship missiles are large capital ships a good idea?
Yes. Just because you have a very sharp sword does not mean the wooden shield is obsolete, it evolves, becomes a different shape, and different material. Look at the Red Sea recently. Capital ships are still a good idea, though Arleigh-Burke's ain't Nimitz.
I could’ve sworn there was a carrier already in service under the Kennedy name, could be wrong though.
CV67
There are probably blueprints somewhere for smaller less suffisticated carriers that could be build much faster during wartime.
This video covered up the fact that it took 8 years to commission USS Gerald Ford due to the unreliable electromagnetic catapult system. USS G Ford still can't form a combat group because of the same problem which couldn't be solved. It has become the biggest lemon of the US Navy. Most of the US Aircraft carriers are due for decommissioning due to old age.
Its not only the carrier, its the whole airwing and support ship to. Sure you can order long lead items quickier so you can start build one as soon as the last leave its dock. But overall its more effective to build more subs, cruisers and destroyers. J.
Money printer go brrrrrrrrr. All the aircraft carriers.
More like how slow 5-7yrs 😂
China: hold my beer 🍺, we’ll have one built in 5-7days 😅
If America ramped up wartime construction, and removed red tape, they could probably build one every Two years.
Plus, if multiple ship yards were involved, that means multiple carriers could be built at once.
And the new Enterprise is currently under construction.
The Gerald R. Ford (SVN 78) took long to make because it's a new generation. The John F. Kennedy (SVN 79) will take less time to make and so will the the other next 8 carriers or the same class.
Kennedy is actually going to take longer, new projection is 2025 so that's 10 years.
I really think if we went to war or something happened we could ramp up production and get him out a lot quicker I really hope we don't go to war though or anything like that hopefully our carriers won't ever be needed
Given a modern American carrier’s size and complexity the most practical way to add to the total of platforms relatively quickly is probably extending the operational lives of USS Nimitz and USS Eisenhower
The more you make, the easier it gets.
The same can also be said of anti-aircraft carrier autonomous drone torpedo devices. It does not matter if it takes 5 years or even 5 weeks to build an aircraft carrier. A nation of even modest industrial capacity can readily manufacture 1000 times as many anti-aircraft carrier autonomous drone torpedoes, in the same amount of time, for less expense as a single US aircraft carrier.
In a war, following the sinking of a US aircraft carrier, the US cannot simply ask the adversary nation to hold off on any further military action, for five years, while the US tries to build a replacement carrier.
US aircraft carriers are fundamentally flawed, as they are far too expensive, they take far too long to manufacture, and they are simply not invincible to torpedo attacks. The shipyards that build the carriers also cannot be hidden, which makes them vulnerable to potential attack.
US aircraft carrier strike groups commonly move continuously, so as to make position tracking harder, in addition to improving aircraft launching and landing airspeed characteristics. However, when they are on the move, they make so much noise in the water that they cannot necessarily hear autonomous drone torpedoes that may be stealthily approaching the carrier strike group.
It is also possible to design the exterior hull of autonomous drone torpedoes in such a way as to make them stealthy to active sonar pings. Sound damping torpedo hulls/skins is somewhat problematic when the torpedo needs to fit inside of a submarine torpedo launch tube, but there is no fundamental reason why torpedoes need to be launched from submarines at all, or that they need to be stored inside the hull of a submarine, since torpedoes can instead be attached to the external hull of a submarine (thus enabling larger physical sizes and more complex torpedo hull sonar absorbing skins/designs).
Build a Death Star
That's space forces goal
Nah. 1 bomb took it out. Poor design
Aren't there aircraft carriers in the mothball fleet. In an emergency could they come into action. And how fast could they be put into action.
how quickly can they decommission Virginia subs and have them upgrades, rebuilt and updated in their yards to supply to Australia under AUKUS arrangement?
Does it still have problem?
Wouldn't it be in the American interest to have more aircraft carriers, like, they could have 50 Gerald Fords if they wanted, and also build in allied countries like Japan and France, sharing technology and reinforcing them?
Invoices/ 3 million
Hahahahahahahaha good one
Build more because as we can see, the other side of the planet needs some serious babysitting
GOD bless USA
The US Navy and Coast Guard needs 250 Cruse Missile Destroyers this decade.
The future of world security depends on patrolling trade routes more than ever before.
Important Fact, even our enemies depend on the United States to maintain their own trade.
In war time, the Shipyards will be a target.
Those things are crazy expensive.
I read somewhere that the maintenance cost of a single carrier which does nothing else than being at the harbour is around 30.000$ per hour.
It's no surprise that the US has crappy healthcare and crappy infrastructure.
This is where the money goes.
And how long to train a crew on how to operate it ?
Years
Maybe I am not understanding something in place somewhere in here but it seemed like we built nearly 100 carriers of various sizes during World War II with 15 or 20 coming out of Dry Dock every month for a couple years the fact that we can't do one tenth of that now is appalling dominating the oceans so much so that enemies don't even think to poke their head up to attack us
Naming an aircraft carrier after JFK is insult to injury.
Actually US NIMITZ Class Aircraft Carrier it take 4 to 7 yrs to build and while US GERALD FORD Aircraft carrier it take 8 yrs to build .
The Nimitz was a 4 year build from 1968 to 1972.
I think they should go back to the steam catapult and hydraulic elevators and don't you the same design Ford carrier there is lots of problems with the electric elevators they break down nobody knows how to fix them
When they are really needed the answer is quickly. At the moment there is no real need
To tell you guys, i have also a carrier in the Philippines .... It's a coconut carrier ! 🇵🇭❤️🤠😛😲😋😁😝😂😜
The American Great Era is Gone with the wind!!
Should prioritise it to cut down on the length of time to produce one!!!
Now the Gerald R. FORD has a lot of new features. The Gerald R. Ford is a revolutionary air craft carrier.
The second Ford Class USS John F Kennedy is about to enter service next year as well
@@tylerclayton6081the video said 2024?
WE NEED THEM THE WAY THE WORLD IS GOING 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
A lightning carrier takes the same time to build at less than 45% of the tonnage.
Given the need for more due to say, a war. I'm reasonably certain we could speed up the process to a light f35 carrier in under 12 months from a single yard times a dozen yards.
And if ships were "simplified" we could produce many more, think a modern liberty ship with f35s, VLS tubes, and CIWS
AutoCAD steel company work orders
Put America to the test. We’d build one in a year.
Oh for sure, we could build them much faster in a war time scenario, but we take 5-7 years because when a carrier comes to the end of its life cycle they don’t have to be decommissioned all at once giving us time to build replacement carriers whilst still having some of the older models in service.
In the future ships planes and land vehicles will have to be designed so they can be produced rather quickly in order to replace losses on the battlefield, otherwise they'll be next to pointless.
War in Ukraine had show us that a lot of old weapons is going to be obsolete in future.Same goes for a lot of war doctrine.US naval strategy based on supercarriers is one of that obsolete things that they will find out on the hard way.Drones and missiles are the future.Huge,expensive, manned war machines are thing of the past.
Duh, if you have been to Europe you notice how clean and efficient their infrastructure is….
It’s because Europe doesn’t have to pay for 11 carriers roaming the ocean and many other military cost!
I think that's a major downside of America's modern carriers (as well as other units), namely that they're so expensive and take so long to build compared to previous carriers such as the Essex class which were relatively cheap and quick to build so we could crank out tons of them like crazy and thus be able to replace any losses and or overwhelm the enemy via numbers, and likewise the planes of those days were much cheaper and faster to make so they too could be quickly replaced or used to overwhelm an enemy.
Of course, modern jets and carriers are way more advanced, and the world has changed so we probably can't backtrack on any of those advancements, but still I think the US would benefit by looking into how to make military units that could be quickly and cheaply built like in WW2 in the event of a major conflict where such a thing is needed.
Then again, perhaps they've already looked into it and already have contingency plans, but still.
Bad analogy. USS Ford was first in its class and had many new technologies. We can and have built more that 2 a year.
“Fuck around and find out 💪🏿💪🏾💪🏽💪🏼💪🏻🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸”
It honestly just depends on who messed with America’s ships and how pissed the general public is about what happened. Look at how fast America rebuilt the Pacific Fleet after the attack on Pearl Harbor. Yes, modern ships are more complex but if the American Populace gets mad enough we’d have enough people to fill a double capacity shift in three shift rotations 24/7… bet we could bust out a carrier in two years. I honestly hope we never have cause to find out.
We have 10- 11 carriers in use,which is more than the rest of the World combined-and our jets have best capabilities than other countries'!!
Who makes Aircraft carriers to begin with? Lockheed Martin? Boeing?
Newport news shipbuilding, Boeing and Lockheed don’t have the expertise or facilities to build an aircraft carrier.
@@Stack4Freedom I highly doubt Lockheed doesn't have the expertise, they probably didn't want to venture into it, or government won't let them. I mean, we can't just let companies sell aircraft carriers.
@@murrowboy they could definitely get the expertise but they currently don’t have the people who are experienced shipbuilders and they don’t have the facilities to build naval vessels
2nd best option is amphibious carrier or smaller aircraft carriers 😊
Built more!!!
Pls get rid of the text in the middle.
I hope the new carriers have defensive lasers on them. Because a carrier killing hypersonic missile could get there very fast. Just saying.