Been to Portsmouth many times whilst US Carriers were just outside port. Had a great time meeting some of the US sailors. Some of the most polite and upstanding people you'll ever meet.
Same and when they do Air Shows, was talking to one while looking at a Gatlan gun, said to him, bet you get one big buz firing that.. He replied you bet brother more so when you just above the tree tops, he served in Bosnia and he said one guy accidentally touched the barrel fetched his skin off..
What's really mind boggling is that it's fast enough to ski behind, easily. Of course that tow rope and the wake would not exactly replicate what a wakeboarding boat might use, but still...
@@admiralmallard7500hard to say since there hasn’t been an actual limit test yet. Personally, I just don’t believe big behemoths like this are practical when all it takes is one among thousands of missiles to slip through defenses. They are good at projecting power as a hegemony, but will they be able to defend against Chinese drone swarms and missile barrages in the future?
My son serve on many ships. Give [5] and I lnow the feeling. When are on internsion as l water. God bless the Military. All the men on board 5,000 at least. GOD BLESS OUR NAVY AND OUR COUNTRY. GOD BLESS THESE MEN ON BOARD. AMEN.
Beautiful ship. One of my dreams is to walk on a carrier flight deck. I’m glad they figured out the issues with the electro mag elevator and catapults.
There's a decommissioned WWII carrier that got turned into a museum in NYC! If you ever visit the city you can tour the whole ship, it's pretty awesome.
I am not sure the extra 150 feet in length is the issue. After all we dock two 950 feet carriers on the carrier quay at the same time and neither were in dock at the time. The issue will be because it is nuclear powered and Portsmouth is a very big population base.
@@Adrian-qk2fn Not true. We dock two 950 feet carriers at the same time. So I don't think the extra 1,000 feet of the Ford is an issue. More likely its because it is nuclear powered.
Its actually not. Its not allowed into Portsmouth Harbour not because its too big but because its a nuclear carrier and Portsmouth Naval Base doesn’t have a nuclear license
@@alexleanh If you knew anything about how compartmentalized and watertight a modern warship of this caliber truly is, you'd revise your statement. It would be EXTREMELY difficult to outright sink a carrier of the Ford class; there's too much that's keeping it afloat. Truth!
@@gg-ps1vz excuses, mate. We don't have any f35s either. What about your harriers or typhoons, or other carrier ready aircraft. We need a strong Royal Navy. No time for excuses.👍👍👍😊😊😊
I get the feeling the Americans were being a bit coy about showing off the ship's capabilities. "So what can this new ship do that Nimitz can't?" "Uh, here, take a look at this lift"
Can it counter hypersonic missiles though? It's too big to maneuver and avoid incoming swarms of hypersonic missiles that can also maneuver and change direction. Even a lowly diesel electric submarine was able to sunk uss Ronald Reagan with its escorts of destroyers in a naval exercise.
@@mikefarinas4885 US aircraft/super carrier’s NEVER travel alone. They’re always in a carrier strike group which consists of two US destroyers, one logistics ship, at least one nuclear sub and a few other attack ships 💀 so to answer your question, the enemy wouldn’t even be able to get off three of them before being absolutely laid out by the reaper of death itself.
@@xXtuscanator22Xx it was sunk by a diesel submarine in a naval exercise despite it's escorts of destroyers and of course they also know that a submarine is out there and I'm sure they're also familiar with the subs " signature" . Go on dreaming but all aircraft carriers can do is project power during peace times and intimidate third world countries.
@@mikefarinas4885 doesn't need to because the US Air Force has been developing laser technology to counter hypersonic missiles, amping other stuff. Can't travel faster than light yet though. And I'm sure it still has CRAM capability, or something similar as a last line
Now THIS is what I call power projection…. Also, it’s crazy that the sailors have access to amenities like Starbucks et al in the middle of the ocean, while other “military superpowers “ are struggling to feel/fuel/equip their troops just across the border in a neighbouring country
one russian tact nuke will turn this to ash---it is all show and no go--why russia has 100k high end missiles,20,000 tact nukes--it and all boats are floating targets along with anything that flys,rolls
I love how all the staff including the captain look like they could crack a joke at any moment. Looks like a happy and effective crew. Worlds away from what the russian military appears to be like. They’d be gone within hours of this ship decided to take on the Russian military in Ukraine.
It would be sunk. Very quickly. These ships are only effective oppressing enemies that can't strike it back. Otherwise it's a profoundly expensive sitting duck.
@@leetshots a "sitting duck" that has the ability to defend itself. Never mind being surrounded by other advanced naval destroyers of the sort. Whoever tries to sink this ship, will be forced to dedicate a massive amount of finite resources to even dream of destroying just one CVN 78, that will undoubtedly be in a massive escort.
@@juliomaldonado4028 Years ago, a PRC SONG-class submarine surfaced 1 mile astern of a US carrier. The Chinese did that to make a point - they easily penetrated the escort screen. And if they did it once, they could do it again.
@@juliomaldonado4028 no. You expend a large number of cheap munitions that it can't afford not to destroy. Then you hit it with serious munitions. Assuming of course you don't have hypersonic missiles against which it, and it's escorts, have no defense.
I love how the yanks just come out with “this ship is badass!” imagine our officers with their lines to take, trying to see how many times they can say game changer.
Just to correct some misunderstanding: Yanks or Yankees are the people who live/born in the north part of the States, predominantly near the Atlantic coast and in that carrier their crew probably is from all 50 States.
@@polduseri909 Around the world, Americans are called Yanks. In the US, it's a regional thing. Being from Texas, I would still be called a Yank in Europe because I'm from the US.
@@oychoppa oh ok, in other words you are called based on what other people in the world says about you but not how your own people say who you are , and that’s very funny coming from someone who claimed to be born in America, and specially from TX, but you really don’t know what are you talking about. I have never heard in my 60 years someone who is from Texas calling himself a Yankee 😂😂😂
You may want to do some research. US carriers are about 100,000 tons, while Supertankers start at 300,000 tons. And many containerships are also significantly bigger than an aircraft carrier.
@@stewartmackay Huge? No. Big? Yes. And yes, I have been on many carriers as I work at a Naval Shipyard. And once again, a lot of commercial ships are 3 or 5 times the displacement of a carrier.
@@Kriss_L And how much of that weight is from the crude oil or containers? You can't say that a ship is 3-5 times the displacement of a carrier when most of that tonnage is from of the ships cargo. What would an empty carrier weigh compared to an empty ULCC?
Thank you very much for the visit of the USS Gerald. R Ford in Oslo was lucky and got to be a Guide for some soldiers to show off our beautiful city.welcome back 🇺🇸🌞🇧🇻
For you non Navy types, this is called a "cherry cruise". Mine was in 1991 on board USS ABRAHAM LINCOLN (CVN72). She was the newest carrier in the fleet at the time. That was in the pacific (WESTPAC)
Cherry Cruise? Interesting, mine was called Maiden Voyage when I did a deployment on the then newest carrier U.S.S. Harry S. Truman's first deployment ever. It was a Med Cruise.
I went pass this thing in my 30-foot fishing boat even tho I was outside of its exclusion zone the thing is still are monster of a ship it's so unreal we can make things like this blows my mind away
@@Kriss_L It's not 1/3 or 1/5 the size of anything. There are some container ships that are slightly longer but it's wide flight deck makes it wider than any vessel.
@@pindot787 hypersonic that can change direction and trajectory is unstoppable. A swarm of hypersonic missiles is far cheaper than an obsolete aircraft carrier.
As an American, I'm happy to see the first country this great carrier travels to outside of North America is England. We will never forget how you stood up and resisted Hitler when it would have been easiest to just give up.
Yes but what a shame after the sacrifice of both our nations to rid Europe of Nazis during ww2 , now we are backing Nazis in the Ukraine, FACT, shameful betrayal of the millions of solders sailors and airmen who never got to go home.
@@robh4671 you're opinion is idiotic and you will be looked on as a collaborator when everything is done in that region. Russians are the Nazis in the current conflict and are their soldiers are rightfully called orcs. It's sad you sell your soul for a couple of rubles.
FYI, when he mentioned the tanker refueling the carrier, he means aviation fuel. Jets use lots of petrol. The ship is nuclear powered so it can run for 20+ years.
The main items that Ford adds are: electromagnetic catapults and improved arresting system which supposedly reduce maintenance and allow handling more delicate aircraft/drones and lessens the time between aircraft. New deck layout to improve the flow of aircraft so it can cycle 20% more aircraft, if needed. Aircraft fuel dispenser's are now located under armoured hatches in the deck next to the refueling farms so hoses no longer need to be manhandled from the deck edges so shorter hoses and less people needed. Also hoses no longer block movement of aircraft. Electromagnetic weapons elevators allow heavier loads and reduced maintenance while allowing sliding armoured hatches in the shafts since there are no cables that would block such things. New radar, which one of the designer later admitted, in hindsight, it wasn't really needed and added significant cost for what was gained. Improvements to the nuclear reactors power generation and life. Many changes were about reducing manning numbers and maintenance so the life time costs would be reduced. Remains to be seen if those savings overcome the high cost of the ship. If they can get the cost of future builds down, then it will probably work out.
You'll note the Ford also doesn't have any F-35Cs. Looks like everybody is disappointed. Why not fly the RN Harriers that were on previous carriers? Better still, build CATOBAR carriers and expand the types of aircraft, like France.
@@johnmarten4184 Since the F-35C and FORD were being designed at the same time, the Navy didn't know what they would need to operate the F-35 yet. The decision was made to not delay FORD, but to add the F-35C support facilities during a later maintenance period. Good decision, as FORD had so many problems as it was and is years behind schedule.
@@_xO_Ox_ The Gerald R. Ford is the first ship. Second ship thatt is already constructed and being tested is John F. Kennedy. The Third one being under construction is called Enterprise. And the forth and last for now is called Doris Miller. They are CVN-78, 79, 80 and 81 respectively.
If China thinks they can go up against several ships, their support and submarines with like power with their one Russian carrier group, they are not thinking.
Russia doesn’t have a carrier group, China does 3 carriers and 2 more on the way, only their type003 is comparable to this ford class, even still it lacks in capability such as not being nuclear powered, but it does have an electro magnetic catapult, and can hold 50+ planes
@@davidty2006 It's effectively useless because of it's engine. It won't even leave port without a tugboat always nearby because it breaks down so often.
Funny how he kinda dodged the camera. But I'm thinking if he does special things as ya say, he wouldn't need to stand in line for Liberty call....unless its to 'blend in' .. LOL 😅
Always these ridiculoid nonsense uneducated nonsense uneducated mouths hoping we will ever be as inept and as stagnant as their nonsense irrelevant stagnant nonsense countries and militaries. Ridiculous deluded triggered nonsense.
*Hypersonic missile fanboys when...* China and Russia can't properly locate aircraft carriers that can go nearly 40 knots for enough time to reliably target them... The SM-6 can intercept ballistic missiles which go much faster than Mach 6 (you can't do evasive maneuvers at Mach 6, young slavaboo)... The carrier group deploys dozens of decoys massively decreasing the chance of hitting the correct target (if they can at all)... The CG deploys quite literally a cloud of electronic noise... When "pLAsmA StEaLTh" actually isn't a thing... When all their satellites near the carrier are destroyed by SM-3s... When whatever aircraft is sending targetting info to the missiles is shot down by ninja planes: 🤯🤯🤯🤯
Americans are way overconfident with these floating targets. China / Russia have had years to figure out how to sink one don't think they can't. Keep provoking Russia with the Ukraine... they have the US right where they want them.
USN should base one of carrier strike groups in the UK , USMC should base one of the America class LHA in the UK, USAF should base the B1 lancers and about 25 F-22 raptors in the UK on permanent deployment ..
A lot of the supersonic bombers like the B1's and B2's can be anywhere in the world in a matter of hours. They really don't need to be closer. In the last Iraq war the pilots had said they left at midnight and were back before breakfast, they had 100% primary target destruction and like 30% of secondary targets. They are so fast they were two countries away before Iraq even started to fire its AA. I do think the USAF houses some B52's in other countries though, although I think the main compliment of B52's is in louisiana or arkansas? They just did some drills (I think for a nuclear response) this last week and they posted a video to youtube. It's wild seeing like 10 of them launching one after another and seeing no end to them taxing to the runway.
Always enjoyed going on a cruise on a carrier. Especially a Med cruise. And unless things changed, every port in the med was an anchor out. Sometimes way out. How about the liberty call? When we did the liberty call, it started with E-8's and above, then E-7's and above, until finally it was liberty call for E-4 and below (which comprised about 2/3rd's of the crew). Let's just say by the time the E-4's and below hit the beach, the adult beverages were warm and the 'entertainment' was rather exhausted.
The liberty boat rides to the Fleet Landings are an experience by itself. Then you get stranded for days in Malta that Disbursing will have to be airlifted to sustain sailor's wellness? Oh yes, it's the adventure!
Way different Navy than when this old Salt was in. Does remind me of my Perth Australia visit on the Kitty Hawk back in what feels like a 1,000 years ago! 🤣 Sure would like to walk the Fords decks to get that feel again. My ol' girl's been turned into razor blades 😞
Errrr .... Nuclear carriers need aviation fuel, food for the crew, spare parts and weapons. Its an utter myth that nuclear carriers can 'go forever without refuelling'. Its why the always have supply ships in their CSG.
They look good when the country can afford to put some actual aircraft on them! Unlike our carriers that have to have the US try and fill it. Maybe one day we’ll have enough aircraft to fill one carrier 🙄
@@danielleeming1027 it’s not a lie. We have two aircraft carriers (though one is already broken and going to dry dock), and only enough f-35’s for one. Even then we haven’t enough aircraft to take it to full capacity. We had to have other nations come and put planes on it and join the carrier group to protect it when it went to the south China seas recently. It’s not lying to say the conservatives talk the talk well but ultimately are more concerned with only looking like they care about defence.
@@anecdotal_mattybs5435 but they've been ordered tho haven't they? it's not that we aren't getting them cus we can't pay for them. we'll only receive 6 in 2022 and around 7 next year. it's just a matter of time
@@chriswebber6813 Agreed, we need a complete change in the electoral system to get rid of these two discredited old parties, STV PR would give people a voice, I'm standing for ReformUK.
At least you have one air craft carrier working. That's nothing more than a glorified helicopter carrier to us, but without any planes or helicopters. What kind of navy doesnt even know how to maintain the shaft of a brand new ship, a ship it couldn't afford to begin with?😶😶😶😶
@@frank-ko6de The US has been building Aircraft Carriers continually since 1951; (although you needed a lot of British help to build THOSE). Great Britain hasn't- and our shipbuilding industry has declined that we haven't been building large ships in the past few decades at all. It's understandable that we would have difficulties building aircraft carriers like the Queen Elizabeth-class. It's less understandable when for the US when you have a shipyard with an experienced workforce that has been building them for over seven decades. We also managed to keep the costs for BOTH carriers down to half that of the Gerald Ford- DESPITE our politicians sticking their oar in and adding 50% to the cost of the Programme. As for being glorified Helicopter Carriers, considering the number of FAILED VTOL prototypes produced by the US - and the US Navy's numerous attempts to produce a workable VTOL Carrier fighter, it's obvious you were just as interested as we were. The difference is we managed to get it to work: (And Yes, I know the F35B is a US designed aircraft- but it uses a lot of British- and Russian- engineering).
@@Adrian-qk2fn Regardless of the state of your ship building industry, any serious navy should at least know how to work it's shaft and propelling system, don't you think.?That has nothing to do with experience, but incompetence to the cost of your tax payers, as they now have to spend even more money on something that wasn't supposed to happen at this stage of the ship's life. In regards to vtol technology, a lot of credit definitely goes to you guys and your harrier program. But, we've come extreme leaps and bounds since then ,with far superior avionics and propulsion along with stealth technology and networking and connectivity, whether on surface,air or land. Along with the f35 program, we also have the v-22 osprey for the navy and the incoming Bell tiltrotator program for the army, along with the future vertical lift for the army by Lockheed Martin and Boeing Sikhorsky with the DefiantX and RaiderX. We are not the same, we're always innovating, while you guys are just stagnant and even regressive. Someone in your government actually believes using a ramp for your aircrafts is still a good idea in this day and age. Your compatriot just had the audacity to talk about lifts when he hasn't looked at his own mirror. Some cultures are just incapable of introspection or reflection. That's all.
@@Adrian-qk2fn In regards to costs, there's a great reason to the costs due technologies that technically allows the ship to go where it wants continuously for at least 50 years or longer with constantly evolving technologies that your government certainly can't afford. We paid bang for the buck for a new class of surface warship that's the biggest in the world while you paid for a class of war ships with regurgitated technologies that makes it less effective. Our America class carriers for our Marines are far more efficient than your carriers with better technologies and resources. You're not even on the standards of the French or the Italians with their respective carrier systems, but stay deluded and clueless.👍👍👍😊😊😊.
@@frank-ko6de To be fair, the UK put a lot of the development work from their own stealth fighter program and next generation Harrier program into the F-35B, the vertical lift system is built by Rolls Royce and the control system for VTOL flight was developed from a Prototype Harrier that had been built with a flight by wire system. It's one of the reasons the first flight of the F-35B was performed by a British test pilot from BAE Systems. The Ski-Jump is a newer design, made to replace catapults for the RN, it obviously has drawbacks but there's a reason that nowadays only one carrier outside of the US uses catapults, the performance gap between STOVL and CATOBAR has narrowed significantly since the days of the Harrier. To say they're stagnant would be untrue, the prototype Harrier was used to test new landing aids which enable SRVL (Shipborne Rolling Vertical Landing). A new type of rolling carrier landing which can be performed without an arresting gear. The America class aren't really designed as fixed wing carriers first, they have exactly half the deck area as the QE class and lack a Ski-Jump, meaning they need a longer run up to carry as much, which takes up space for simultaneous launch and recovery. Frances carrier you could argue is better in some areas, but they have a number of drawbacks due to the reactors they used, it means much more regular maintenance for refuelling and while they can launch fixed wing AEW aircraft, they don't carry enough for 24 hour coverage. Really not sure where the Italian carrier comparison comes from, it's a STOVL carrier much like the QE class, but much smaller.
Been to Portsmouth many times whilst US Carriers were just outside port. Had a great time meeting some of the US sailors. Some of the most polite and upstanding people you'll ever meet.
Same and when they do Air Shows, was talking to one while looking at a Gatlan gun, said to him, bet you get one big buz firing that..
He replied you bet brother more so when you just above the tree tops, he served in Bosnia and he said one guy accidentally touched the barrel fetched his skin off..
Every Serviceman from Uncle Sam I have ever met are always polite, friendly and immaculate......glad their our allies ❤🇬🇧🇺🇲
I was sad to hear in many ports on the USA they get robbed etc so they need to be careful. Strange land the USA.
You probably met the officers, if you met the enlisted sailors you'd be less impressed.
Glad to hear our sailors are being upstanding representatives abroad. Always proud when I see our two navies working together.
What's really mind boggling is that it's fast enough to ski behind, easily. Of course that tow rope and the wake would not exactly replicate what a wakeboarding boat might use, but still...
What a beast of a ship that is. Impressive stuff! No wonder there are only a handful of countries able to operate and maintain a fleet of carriers.
The USS Gerald Ford is only operated by the USS. No other Nation, including Russia or China, can field a similar aircraft carrier.
Russia and china have hypersonic missiles
@@bendover6987Those can be shot down. They don't automatically invalidate carriers.
@@admiralmallard7500hard to say since there hasn’t been an actual limit test yet. Personally, I just don’t believe big behemoths like this are practical when all it takes is one among thousands of missiles to slip through defenses. They are good at projecting power as a hegemony, but will they be able to defend against Chinese drone swarms and missile barrages in the future?
@@elexg6982 1 Missile is not going to sink them, more than likely they'll be able to repair the damage and keep on going, they're larger for a reason
I have been lucky enough to spend a night on the USS Enterprise. This certainly takes things to another level. Thanks for sharing.
What planet was it orbiting?
My nephew is aboard, I love the updates on his ship knowing he is safe!!
Come on Putin, finish the job. Destroy the US NATO puppets and save the genuine Ukraine population from these tyrants.
Probably the most protected piece of US property in the world when you consider the fleet, the escorts, subs, aircraft, surveillance, satellites.
My son serve on many ships. Give [5] and I lnow the feeling. When are on internsion as l water. God bless the Military. All the men on board 5,000 at least. GOD BLESS OUR NAVY AND OUR COUNTRY. GOD BLESS THESE MEN ON BOARD. AMEN.
@@rosematos757 thank you to your Son for his Service. God Bless
Beautiful ship. One of my dreams is to walk on a carrier flight deck. I’m glad they figured out the issues with the electro mag elevator and catapults.
Hope you get that chance one day....🙏
There's a decommissioned WWII carrier that got turned into a museum in NYC! If you ever visit the city you can tour the whole ship, it's pretty awesome.
@@keptick I'd also recommend the USS Midway and/or the USS Iowa here in Southern California.
Catapults are outdated for 600 years now bro
The fact that the Ford is too big for Postmouth is insane.
ALL American carriers are too big for Portsmouth.
They have been since the USS Forrestal was commissioned back in 1955.
I am not sure the extra 150 feet in length is the issue. After all we dock two 950 feet carriers on the carrier quay at the same time and neither were in dock at the time. The issue will be because it is nuclear powered and Portsmouth is a very big population base.
@@Adrian-qk2fn Not true. We dock two 950 feet carriers at the same time. So I don't think the extra 1,000 feet of the Ford is an issue. More likely its because it is nuclear powered.
Its actually not. Its not allowed into Portsmouth Harbour not because its too big but because its a nuclear carrier and Portsmouth Naval Base doesn’t have a nuclear license
@@1chish thats exactly why. At least someone realises
Living on one of these during covid was hell but happy to see people are happy to marvel at its beauty
THat's quite a ship. Welcome to the UK, cousins.
The UK has been a great friend to the USA... Hello back from America!
The Captain says it’s “Bad Ass” brilliant….👍🇬🇧
@@alexleanh what
@@alexleanh Idiot, eh?
@@alexleanh If you knew anything about how compartmentalized and watertight a modern warship of this caliber truly is, you'd revise your statement. It would be EXTREMELY difficult to outright sink a carrier of the Ford class; there's too much that's keeping it afloat. Truth!
A Carrier with aircraft aboard, take note Royal Navy!
70 aircraft
What's your point?
@@danielleeming1027 struggling to fill our carriers due to slow deliveries of the F35
@@danielleeming1027 LMAO you don't know.
@@gg-ps1vz excuses, mate. We don't have any f35s either. What about your harriers or typhoons, or other carrier ready aircraft. We need a strong Royal Navy. No time for excuses.👍👍👍😊😊😊
I get the feeling the Americans were being a bit coy about showing off the ship's capabilities.
"So what can this new ship do that Nimitz can't?"
"Uh, here, take a look at this lift"
If they're honest...
"this ship alone has a high chance of obliterating any third world country"
Can it counter hypersonic missiles though? It's too big to maneuver and avoid incoming swarms of hypersonic missiles that can also maneuver and change direction. Even a lowly diesel electric submarine was able to sunk uss Ronald Reagan with its escorts of destroyers in a naval exercise.
@@mikefarinas4885 US aircraft/super carrier’s NEVER travel alone. They’re always in a carrier strike group which consists of two US destroyers, one logistics ship, at least one nuclear sub and a few other attack ships 💀 so to answer your question, the enemy wouldn’t even be able to get off three of them before being absolutely laid out by the reaper of death itself.
@@xXtuscanator22Xx it was sunk by a diesel submarine in a naval exercise despite it's escorts of destroyers and of course they also know that a submarine is out there and I'm sure they're also familiar with the subs " signature" . Go on dreaming but all aircraft carriers can do is project power during peace times and intimidate third world countries.
@@mikefarinas4885 doesn't need to because the US Air Force has been developing laser technology to counter hypersonic missiles, amping other stuff. Can't travel faster than light yet though. And I'm sure it still has CRAM capability, or something similar as a last line
Now THIS is what I call power projection…. Also, it’s crazy that the sailors have access to amenities like Starbucks et al in the middle of the ocean, while other “military superpowers “ are struggling to feel/fuel/equip their troops just across the border in a neighbouring country
US knows logistics, that’s for sure!
As the saying goes, amateurs talk strategy, experts talk logistics.
one russian tact nuke will turn this to ash---it is all show and no go--why russia has 100k high end missiles,20,000 tact nukes--it and all boats are floating targets along with anything that flys,rolls
@@dethray1000 yet conventionally can't take over a country no wonder you need nukes outside forces would get to Moscow in a day
@@dethray1000Sure, sweetheart.
I love how all the staff including the captain look like they could crack a joke at any moment. Looks like a happy and effective crew. Worlds away from what the russian military appears to be like. They’d be gone within hours of this ship decided to take on the Russian military in Ukraine.
It would be sunk. Very quickly. These ships are only effective oppressing enemies that can't strike it back. Otherwise it's a profoundly expensive sitting duck.
@@leetshots a "sitting duck" that has the ability to defend itself. Never mind being surrounded by other advanced naval destroyers of the sort. Whoever tries to sink this ship, will be forced to dedicate a massive amount of finite resources to even dream of destroying just one CVN 78, that will undoubtedly be in a massive escort.
@@juliomaldonado4028 Years ago, a PRC SONG-class submarine surfaced 1 mile astern of a US carrier. The Chinese did that to make a point - they easily penetrated the escort screen. And if they did it once, they could do it again.
@@Kriss_L that's old news now. It would be foolish to believe that they could pull that off again.
@@juliomaldonado4028 no. You expend a large number of cheap munitions that it can't afford not to destroy. Then you hit it with serious munitions.
Assuming of course you don't have hypersonic missiles against which it, and it's escorts, have no defense.
As a brit, i have to say this is one impressive and serious bit of kit.
I love how the yanks just come out with “this ship is badass!” imagine our officers with their lines to take, trying to see how many times they can say game changer.
Just to correct some misunderstanding: Yanks or Yankees are the people who live/born in the north part of the States, predominantly near the Atlantic coast and in that carrier their crew probably is from all 50 States.
@@polduseri909 Around the world, Americans are called Yanks. In the US, it's a regional thing. Being from Texas, I would still be called a Yank in Europe because I'm from the US.
While our officers would be talking about how many double decker buses would fit in the hanger 😄.
@@oychoppa oh ok, in other words you are called based on what other people in the world says about you but not how your own people say who you are , and that’s very funny coming from someone who claimed to be born in America, and specially from TX, but you really don’t know what are you talking about. I have never heard in my 60 years someone who is from Texas calling himself a Yankee 😂😂😂
Protecting Britain's interests and contributing to global security, old chap. [Cue interviews with diverse crew-members.]
Saw it today near Split in Croatia. It really makes an impression
Its so huge it makes any other ship look small. Amazing.
You may want to do some research. US carriers are about 100,000 tons, while Supertankers start at 300,000 tons. And many containerships are also significantly bigger than an aircraft carrier.
@@Kriss_L So you dont think thats a huge ship? What the hell are you talking about?
@@stewartmackay Huge? No. Big? Yes. And yes, I have been on many carriers as I work at a Naval Shipyard.
And once again, a lot of commercial ships are 3 or 5 times the displacement of a carrier.
@@Kriss_L You are talking total nonsense buddy.
@@Kriss_L And how much of that weight is from the crude oil or containers? You can't say that a ship is 3-5 times the displacement of a carrier when most of that tonnage is from of the ships cargo. What would an empty carrier weigh compared to an empty ULCC?
Thank you very much for the visit of the USS Gerald. R Ford in Oslo was lucky and got to be a Guide for some soldiers to show off our beautiful city.welcome back 🇺🇸🌞🇧🇻
For you non Navy types, this is called a "cherry cruise".
Mine was in 1991 on board USS ABRAHAM LINCOLN (CVN72). She was the newest carrier in the fleet at the time.
That was in the pacific (WESTPAC)
A maiden operational deployment or a show-the-flag while still doing work-up?
Was with the Lincoln battle group on DD-976..1991
Cherry Cruise? Interesting, mine was called Maiden Voyage when I did a deployment on the then newest carrier U.S.S. Harry S. Truman's first deployment ever. It was a Med Cruise.
I was on the Independence out of Coronado San Diego
I remember when she first came out.
Gunners Mate seamen 1990-1994
I went pass this thing in my 30-foot fishing boat even tho I was outside of its exclusion zone the thing is still are monster of a ship it's so unreal we can make things like this blows my mind away
And it is only 1/3 or 1/5 the size of a large oil tanker or containership.
@@Kriss_L It's not 1/3 or 1/5 the size of anything.
There are some container ships that are slightly longer but it's wide flight deck makes it wider than any vessel.
@@farzana6676 US carriers displace about 100,000 tons. Super Tankers start at 300,000 and go up from there. Some ships are 500,000 tons.
@@Kriss_L Displacement is one metric. There are others like length, beam, height, draught.
@@farzana6676 And displacement is how ship sizes are compared. But what do I know? I just spent over 20 years in the Navy, and work in a shipyard now.
the ship that looks most similar to an imperial star destroyer
What a feat of engineering. Gigantic 👍🇬🇧
I went to my local aircraft dealer and it's a bit out of my budget, I'll buy a used Nimitz when they're for sale
What's also crazy is how fast these carriers go.
35mph with a top speed classified
Try a look at one of their extreme rudder tests. I'd love to try water skiing behind it if I weren't so scared by the wake it creates haha.
@@Grenadier311 hypersonic against moving target is just stupid.
@@pindot787 hypersonic that can change direction and trajectory is unstoppable. A swarm of hypersonic missiles is far cheaper than an obsolete aircraft carrier.
@@DeezNyutz 35mph try over 100 mph
Looks like a Star Ship destroyer
Best carrier in the world, keep it up US
As an American, I'm happy to see the first country this great carrier travels to outside of North America is England. We will never forget how you stood up and resisted Hitler when it would have been easiest to just give up.
Yes but what a shame after the sacrifice of both our nations to rid Europe of Nazis during ww2 , now we are backing Nazis in the Ukraine, FACT, shameful betrayal of the millions of solders sailors and airmen who never got to go home.
@@robh4671 how much you getting paid? Bot.
@@robh4671 you're opinion is idiotic and you will be looked on as a collaborator when everything is done in that region.
Russians are the Nazis in the current conflict and are their soldiers are rightfully called orcs.
It's sad you sell your soul for a couple of rubles.
@@rafaelsender367 Its the truth tho. look it up.
@@rafaelsender367 How much do you getting paid?
THE FINAL COUNTDOWN-great aircraft carrier movie! Starring Kirk Douglas!
Awesome movie
FYI, when he mentioned the tanker refueling the carrier, he means aviation fuel. Jets use lots of petrol. The ship is nuclear powered so it can run for 20+ years.
Up close, it really is freakin massive....
When you build the worlds largest most expensive hammer, everything starts looking like a nail needing hammering.
Big love from Portsmouth 👍🏻
Awesome carrier
Absolutely incredible ,marvel of modern engineering
Will she survive the German madness of ww3 ?
welcome to the uk uss Gerald R Ford
Come on Putin, finish the job. Destroy the US NATO puppets and save the genuine Ukraine population from these tyrants.
@@davidbennett1697 pogue
USS Gerald R Ford on a goodwill visit.
Man, that's a whole lot of goodwill! Welcome to our li'l island.
The main items that Ford adds are: electromagnetic catapults and improved arresting system which supposedly reduce maintenance and allow handling more delicate aircraft/drones and lessens the time between aircraft. New deck layout to improve the flow of aircraft so it can cycle 20% more aircraft, if needed. Aircraft fuel dispenser's are now located under armoured hatches in the deck next to the refueling farms so hoses no longer need to be manhandled from the deck edges so shorter hoses and less people needed. Also hoses no longer block movement of aircraft. Electromagnetic weapons elevators allow heavier loads and reduced maintenance while allowing sliding armoured hatches in the shafts since there are no cables that would block such things. New radar, which one of the designer later admitted, in hindsight, it wasn't really needed and added significant cost for what was gained. Improvements to the nuclear reactors power generation and life. Many changes were about reducing manning numbers and maintenance so the life time costs would be reduced. Remains to be seen if those savings overcome the high cost of the ship. If they can get the cost of future builds down, then it will probably work out.
You'll note the Ford also doesn't have any F-35Cs. Looks like everybody is disappointed.
Why not fly the RN Harriers that were on previous carriers?
Better still, build CATOBAR carriers and expand the types of aircraft, like France.
@@johnmarten4184 Since the F-35C and FORD were being designed at the same time, the Navy didn't know what they would need to operate the F-35 yet. The decision was made to not delay FORD, but to add the F-35C support facilities during a later maintenance period.
Good decision, as FORD had so many problems as it was and is years behind schedule.
it is a smaller crew than the Nimitz class
Hope the shops in Gunwharf got a boost to trade. I guess that the pubs did pretty well!
Amazing ship! Another one is ready and currently being tested. One is being constructed and 1 is waiting to start.
Thank you for the information. Their name would 've been nice to know too !
Come on Putin, finish the job. Destroy the US NATO puppets and save the genuine Ukraine population from these tyrants.
@@_xO_Ox_ The Gerald R. Ford is the first ship. Second ship thatt is already constructed and being tested is John F. Kennedy. The Third one being under construction is called Enterprise. And the forth and last for now is called Doris Miller. They are CVN-78, 79, 80 and 81 respectively.
@@davidbennett1697 Am I supposed to take your BS and tell him or what?
@@napobg6842 Doris Miller? 👀
you would need a huge wide angle lens to film this beast.
If China thinks they can go up against several ships, their support and submarines with like power with their one Russian carrier group, they are not thinking.
Russia doesn’t have a carrier group, China does 3 carriers and 2 more on the way, only their type003 is comparable to this ford class, even still it lacks in capability such as not being nuclear powered, but it does have an electro magnetic catapult, and can hold 50+ planes
@@damianodonnell5844 Russia technically does....
however the flagship of it rarely if ever leaves port due to maintenance issues.
@@davidty2006 It's effectively useless because of it's engine. It won't even leave port without a tugboat always nearby because it breaks down so often.
China has almost no Blue water navy. 90% coastal vessels.
Russian carrier group??? You mean the armada of tug boats 😂😂..
You can tell it's American just by it's size!
Yeah it’s fat. 😅
That’s, what she said!! 😂👍
@@CrazyAlienLady051 *thicc 😂
Dude at the end was like NOPE, you can't film me. Blur my face while I step out of the way. Guessing he does some special things :)
Or he has "wives" in every port
@@nightjarflying Great answer...🤣
Funny how he kinda dodged the camera.
But I'm thinking if he does special things as ya say, he wouldn't need to stand in line for Liberty call....unless its to 'blend in' .. LOL
😅
This was at least a year ago. Where is it now? Sitting at a dock doing nothing no doubt.
Always these ridiculoid nonsense uneducated nonsense uneducated mouths hoping we will ever be as inept and as stagnant as their nonsense irrelevant stagnant nonsense countries and militaries. Ridiculous deluded triggered nonsense.
3:50 This man did NOT want to be on camera 😆
*Hypersonic missile fanboys when...*
China and Russia can't properly locate aircraft carriers that can go nearly 40 knots for enough time to reliably target them...
The SM-6 can intercept ballistic missiles which go much faster than Mach 6 (you can't do evasive maneuvers at Mach 6, young slavaboo)...
The carrier group deploys dozens of decoys massively decreasing the chance of hitting the correct target (if they can at all)...
The CG deploys quite literally a cloud of electronic noise...
When "pLAsmA StEaLTh" actually isn't a thing...
When all their satellites near the carrier are destroyed by SM-3s...
When whatever aircraft is sending targetting info to the missiles is shot down by ninja planes:
🤯🤯🤯🤯
nonsense--eyes in the sky know where they are 24/7
@@dethray1000 cope and seethe
Americans are way overconfident with these floating targets. China / Russia have had years to figure out how to sink one don't think they can't. Keep provoking Russia with the Ukraine... they have the US right where they want them.
Soon to arrive, CVN-80 USS ENTERPRISE ... Go Navy !!
USN should base one of carrier strike groups in the UK , USMC should base one of the America class LHA in the UK, USAF should base the B1 lancers and about 25 F-22 raptors in the UK on permanent deployment ..
Which CSG would you want based in the UK?
I agree,the UK is like a giant aircraft carrier so fill her up with firepower
No
What happens when they can't? What about your own indigenous aircraft?😶😶😶😶
A lot of the supersonic bombers like the B1's and B2's can be anywhere in the world in a matter of hours. They really don't need to be closer. In the last Iraq war the pilots had said they left at midnight and were back before breakfast, they had 100% primary target destruction and like 30% of secondary targets. They are so fast they were two countries away before Iraq even started to fire its AA. I do think the USAF houses some B52's in other countries though, although I think the main compliment of B52's is in louisiana or arkansas? They just did some drills (I think for a nuclear response) this last week and they posted a video to youtube. It's wild seeing like 10 of them launching one after another and seeing no end to them taxing to the runway.
Always enjoyed going on a cruise on a carrier. Especially a Med cruise. And unless things changed, every port in the med was an anchor out. Sometimes way out. How about the liberty call? When we did the liberty call, it started with E-8's and above, then E-7's and above, until finally it was liberty call for E-4 and below (which comprised about 2/3rd's of the crew). Let's just say by the time the E-4's and below hit the beach, the adult beverages were warm and the 'entertainment' was rather exhausted.
The liberty boat rides to the Fleet Landings are an experience by itself. Then you get stranded for days in Malta that Disbursing will have to be airlifted to sustain sailor's wellness? Oh yes, it's the adventure!
That carrier with all fighter jets on board is stronger than entire Philippines Armed Forces, but ilove my country 🇵🇭🤣
King of the Sea! 🤘😎🤘
Nah
@@mikes7446 What Ship is King of the Sea in your opinion? 🤔
Way different Navy than when this old Salt was in. Does remind me of my Perth Australia visit on the Kitty Hawk back in what feels like a 1,000 years ago! 🤣 Sure would like to walk the Fords decks to get that feel again. My ol' girl's been turned into razor blades 😞
Ex-KITTY HAWK was just towed from Bremerton earlier this year. I used to drive by her on the way to and from work.
@@Kriss_L..That's where she was when I reported on board in 82. She just came out of dry dock.
There's a guy here on the YT that flies his drone over the Hawk about once a month. You should check it out. Michael Farrell is his name.
@@stanstenson8168...is he located in Brownsville TX? That's where the Hawk is now.
bloomin marvelous
Hope the sailors enjoy their time in Portsmouth. You deserve it
Come on Putin, finish the job. Destroy the US NATO puppets and save the genuine Ukraine population from these tyrants.
Especially the one guy that put a fellow crew member between himself and the camera and had his face blurred ;
@@davidbennett1697 shut up bot
@@davidbennett1697 Mad Vlad couldn't find his rear end with both hands if you spotted him nine fingers.
That is a hell of a 'stache, LT
Never a day goes by when I’m not incredulous at American ingenuity.
I don't know what that tanker is doing, but it is NOT "refueling her." It's nuclear powered.
Replenishing the jet fuel and lubricants.
Errrr .... Nuclear carriers need aviation fuel, food for the crew, spare parts and weapons. Its an utter myth that nuclear carriers can 'go forever without refuelling'. Its why the always have supply ships in their CSG.
Didn't know the aircraft were nuclear powered
Solar powered fighter jets aren't a thing yet.
@@rats2864 Ah I see what you did there ... 🤣🤣
This is wonderful
They look good when the country can afford to put some actual aircraft on them! Unlike our carriers that have to have the US try and fill it. Maybe one day we’ll have enough aircraft to fill one carrier 🙄
Oh and no we do not NEED the US to fill them with their aircraft. We need the US to deliver OUR aircraft! ✌
Why are you lying?
@@danielleeming1027 it’s not a lie. We have two aircraft carriers (though one is already broken and going to dry dock), and only enough f-35’s for one. Even then we haven’t enough aircraft to take it to full capacity. We had to have other nations come and put planes on it and join the carrier group to protect it when it went to the south China seas recently. It’s not lying to say the conservatives talk the talk well but ultimately are more concerned with only looking like they care about defence.
We are waiting for delivery of f35's not our fault
@@anecdotal_mattybs5435 but they've been ordered tho haven't they? it's not that we aren't getting them cus we can't pay for them. we'll only receive 6 in 2022 and around 7 next year. it's just a matter of time
WOWWW FORD!!!!
Fantastic 👍
It is great idea to measure everything in feets and pounds so that nobody else would know exactly what is all about this carrier. 😂
Live in the US for a couple of years, I'm sure you'll get the hang of it. LOL😉
@@Nevada_Dan Twenty two years in the US, and the secret code was never passed down to me.
The electromagnetic part was a bit of a pain in the ass to get it working right. But I'm glad to see it at 100%
About the same number of planes as the entire front line RAF after 12 years of Conservative defence cuts!
Yet labour would probably scrap the RAF.
@@chriswebber6813 Agreed, we need a complete change in the electoral system to get rid of these two discredited old parties, STV PR would give people a voice, I'm standing for ReformUK.
What a beauty!
Awesome war canoe ! and assigned to NATO Atlantic !
Back ,Already from its first deployment.. No combat planned for. Must be a record for an American Carrier...
Visited England, had a few beers.
All the Chinese spies: "Write that down, write that down!"
So glad I got out before chicks were on the boat wtf
now THATS some good HOT bunking!!!
As a carrier vet I agree with you.
Fan rooms for rent by the hour.
USA! USA! USA!
Wow great amazing
Keep the Top Speed.. SECRET Its Mind Boggling 🚀
Crazy fast. Nothing but nuclear subs can keep up. And being nuclear, can run across the oceans top speed.
NAVY is still very technologically advanced!
2023 uss gerald R FORD!
And she's got eleven angry sisters! RIP FID
seeing this on it's way to our Cost on Norway is quite something. i dont think this thing could come in the Fjord i live in with that size.
its strange how it can be that stable with this shape
Hopefully this great ship can be a guardian of freedom and democracy of the world against maddog Russia Putin. Regards from south east Asia nations
God Bless America
Very cool! 😁👍
God bless America.
I was most impressed by the elevator.
It's quite an improvement.
I wish I had one
I'll buy you a model... and I'll even throw in a tube of cement.
1:38. What is this footage source?
As a plank owner on The Vinson, I may be still living when she gets decommissioned. I will do my best to be there. CVN 81 replaces her
Freedom made manifest
Wow God bless
Top stuff 👍
I also noticed that they install the same shield generators on top of star destroyers.
Its ceartinly impressive
This ship is parked right outside my window now. In Norway.
See how it’s built above the water? It will survive many torpedo attacks.. holy moly.
Faster than the fastest roller coaster.
Aw gee golly folks 😂
Best friends
Yes, very nice and big and technical, still end up at the bottom of Davy Jones.
Not Portsmouth, it's anchored off Gosport. You can't even see it from Portsmouth.
Most advanced "to date" it should read
What would an EMP disruption do to all that EM drive tech on that ship? They must have some sort of defense for that.
Yeah, it's all shielded from any emp. People need to stop living in the 50s, emp is not as big as a threat as you would think it is.
USA, USA, USA
"There are eleven lifts onboard the Ford-class..."
Oh, so they've finally got them all working, I presume?
At least you have one air craft carrier working. That's nothing more than a glorified helicopter carrier to us, but without any planes or helicopters. What kind of navy doesnt even know how to maintain the shaft of a brand new ship, a ship it couldn't afford to begin with?😶😶😶😶
@@frank-ko6de The US has been building Aircraft Carriers continually since 1951; (although you needed a lot of British help to build THOSE). Great Britain hasn't- and our shipbuilding industry has declined that we haven't been building large ships in the past few decades at all.
It's understandable that we would have difficulties building aircraft carriers like the Queen Elizabeth-class. It's less understandable when for the US when you have a shipyard with an experienced workforce that has been building them for over seven decades. We also managed to keep the costs for BOTH carriers down to half that of the Gerald Ford- DESPITE our politicians sticking their oar in and adding 50% to the cost of the Programme.
As for being glorified Helicopter Carriers, considering the number of FAILED VTOL prototypes produced by the US - and the US Navy's numerous attempts to produce a workable VTOL Carrier fighter, it's obvious you were just as interested as we were. The difference is we managed to get it to work: (And Yes, I know the F35B is a US designed aircraft- but it uses a lot of British- and Russian- engineering).
@@Adrian-qk2fn Regardless of the state of your ship building industry, any serious navy should at least know how to work it's shaft and propelling system, don't you think.?That has nothing to do with experience, but incompetence to the cost of your tax payers, as they now have to spend even more money on something that wasn't supposed to happen at this stage of the ship's life.
In regards to vtol technology, a lot of credit definitely goes to you guys and your harrier program. But, we've come extreme leaps and bounds since then ,with far superior avionics and propulsion along with stealth technology and networking and connectivity, whether on surface,air or land. Along with the f35 program, we also have the v-22 osprey for the navy and the incoming Bell tiltrotator program for the army, along with the future vertical lift for the army by Lockheed Martin and Boeing Sikhorsky with the DefiantX and RaiderX. We are not the same, we're always innovating, while you guys are just stagnant and even regressive. Someone in your government actually believes using a ramp for your aircrafts is still a good idea in this day and age. Your compatriot just had the audacity to talk about lifts when he hasn't looked at his own mirror. Some cultures are just incapable of introspection or reflection. That's all.
@@Adrian-qk2fn In regards to costs, there's a great reason to the costs due technologies that technically allows the ship to go where it wants continuously for at least 50 years or longer with constantly evolving technologies that your government certainly can't afford. We paid bang for the buck for a new class of surface warship that's the biggest in the world while you paid for a class of war ships with regurgitated technologies that makes it less effective. Our America class carriers for our Marines are far more efficient than your carriers with better technologies and resources. You're not even on the standards of the French or the Italians with their respective carrier systems, but stay deluded and clueless.👍👍👍😊😊😊.
@@frank-ko6de To be fair, the UK put a lot of the development work from their own stealth fighter program and next generation Harrier program into the F-35B, the vertical lift system is built by Rolls Royce and the control system for VTOL flight was developed from a Prototype Harrier that had been built with a flight by wire system. It's one of the reasons the first flight of the F-35B was performed by a British test pilot from BAE Systems.
The Ski-Jump is a newer design, made to replace catapults for the RN, it obviously has drawbacks but there's a reason that nowadays only one carrier outside of the US uses catapults, the performance gap between STOVL and CATOBAR has narrowed significantly since the days of the Harrier.
To say they're stagnant would be untrue, the prototype Harrier was used to test new landing aids which enable SRVL (Shipborne Rolling Vertical Landing). A new type of rolling carrier landing which can be performed without an arresting gear.
The America class aren't really designed as fixed wing carriers first, they have exactly half the deck area as the QE class and lack a Ski-Jump, meaning they need a longer run up to carry as much, which takes up space for simultaneous launch and recovery.
Frances carrier you could argue is better in some areas, but they have a number of drawbacks due to the reactors they used, it means much more regular maintenance for refuelling and while they can launch fixed wing AEW aircraft, they don't carry enough for 24 hour coverage.
Really not sure where the Italian carrier comparison comes from, it's a STOVL carrier much like the QE class, but much smaller.