US Testing its New Gigantic $13 Billion Aircraft Carrier

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 8 พ.ย. 2024

ความคิดเห็น • 1.7K

  • @keithyoung7
    @keithyoung7 3 ปีที่แล้ว +233

    That was interesting - the narrator was telling us about the nuclear reactors and we were looking at someone checking the oil level in a Diesel engine.

    • @arty4308
      @arty4308 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      Ha ha ..you noticed that too.

    • @gobalmighty7463
      @gobalmighty7463 3 ปีที่แล้ว +9

      I was shouting "Nooooooooooo............. DON'T DIP THE REACTORRRRRRRRRR........" looked like he was having a good sniff too.

    • @fodank
      @fodank 3 ปีที่แล้ว +13

      This is clickbait 'content' at its best. Lots of video snippets barely related to the topic and some knucklehead reading copy he knows next to nothing about.

    • @Metalhead396
      @Metalhead396 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      LOL, I commented on that too.

    • @prokesuk
      @prokesuk 2 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      "A nuclear reactor is like a bomb, but not really" yeah, stunning commentary.

  • @organicdudranch
    @organicdudranch 3 ปีที่แล้ว +254

    I had a friend who ran a nuclear power plant on a carrier (1 of 2 ) he said that they will go about 20 yrs before they need refueling and etc. that really is amazing, they say the subs are about the same. they usually have 2 because they need to go down on occasion. but 20 yrs without fuel is darn impressive. i think the value of nuclear is very under rated .

    • @codygauthier8382
      @codygauthier8382 3 ปีที่แล้ว +30

      It's undervalued because of the risk it possesses. If one of those Subs or carriers sink, it'll cost a lot of money to either raise them from the sea bed or to cap them in concrete so their waste does not leak into the water way.
      Edit: If interested, the Russian Kursk submarine was sunk in the Arctic and they're still having issues with it 20+ years later. Couple cool videos on the incident

    • @flamingfrancis
      @flamingfrancis 3 ปีที่แล้ว +11

      It certainly is impressive...20+ years of energy stored but you also need to think about the other side of the equation.

    • @cris-vv1pn
      @cris-vv1pn 3 ปีที่แล้ว +6

      Nuclear energy going to be the end off use there s be 100+ underground nuclear tests then there's the big concrete dome near bikini islands full off nuclear crap the USA left in case any general might read go you really need to go look at that dome the sea is hitting it as your doing nothing about it the rest off use will suffer when all that nuclear wast USA left gos into the sea

    • @codygauthier8382
      @codygauthier8382 3 ปีที่แล้ว +23

      @@cris-vv1pn What are you even saying?

    • @pouncepounce7417
      @pouncepounce7417 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      Nuclear has drawbacks and there is tech that rivals it depending how you use it.
      Given human crews depend on regular "refuelling" that 20 year frame between refuels would be an real big advantage with automated systhems.
      Then, reactors may run for 20 years with one fuel package, but the periphery needs maintance that can only done in an base, so it is relative too.
      It is an impressive number, but as long you can not build everything else that plays into the whole to go on for 20 years too you can not really have an advantage.
      That reactors can be run underwater at full power without the need to surface at all, that is the real advantage, not the 20 years, if they would run only one year or six month without refueling, that would make them as much an asset as 20 year refueling cycles.
      the 20 years number is more to impress the civilians, but for the purpose they have, it does not really give an big advantage aside that you do not have to worry so much for fuel logistics.
      Carriers need jet fuel that is the real limiting factor (even the best carbon based fuel go stale in matter of month)
      Submarines need a pletora of refills on an monthly basis to work fine, if fully equiped you can stretch that to 3 or 4 month, then they are not fully operational anymore.

  • @geraldmurphy1428
    @geraldmurphy1428 3 ปีที่แล้ว +47

    I was 2 Air Craft Carrie' . Franklin D Roosevelt and USS America. 1975 and 1976. Enjoy every Moment. Retired Navy Veteran.👍👍👍👍⚓⚓⚓⚓⚓⚓⚓

    • @g.g4816
      @g.g4816 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      You was?

    • @NoPulseForRussians
      @NoPulseForRussians 2 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      How did you manage 2 deployments on 2 different carriers in 2 years? What was your rate? Where did you serve? I was an AO on CVN-70.

    • @stevelawrence8352
      @stevelawrence8352 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      I was in the Navy from 90 to 94. Still kicking myself in the @$$ for not staying in. My dad was also in the Navy and served on the U.S.S. America during Vietnam. He got out about 1973. Thank you for your service.

    • @geraldmurphy1428
      @geraldmurphy1428 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@stevelawrence8352 thanks for your service. Best of luck to you and your Family.

    • @stevelawrence8352
      @stevelawrence8352 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@geraldmurphy1428 Thank you. Looking back, I wish I would have stayed in and retired. Hindsight's 20/20.

  • @fuffoon
    @fuffoon 2 ปีที่แล้ว +70

    We are in the class of super-carriers. Soon will be mega-carriers, ridiculous carriers, and finally ludicrous carriers.

    • @rogelioVela1985
      @rogelioVela1985 2 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      at this rate, S.H.I.E.L.D. Helicarriers just like in the Marvel Avengers films.

    • @shilohgardner
      @shilohgardner 2 ปีที่แล้ว +10

      As farmers in the us we definitely need to raise more raspberries to help with the war effort. Those radars aren’t gonna jam themselves.

    • @southoripper
      @southoripper 2 ปีที่แล้ว +6

      @@shilohgardner Lord Helmet agrees!!

    • @jphillips4371
      @jphillips4371 2 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      Do the ludicrous Carriers go ludicrous speeds?

    • @dlm3027
      @dlm3027 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      the ludicrous carriers will be Battlestars and will operate in space

  • @johncherni7211
    @johncherni7211 3 ปีที่แล้ว +16

    I was so lucky my grandson, Jordon (Engineer at Newport News) invited me to attend the Christening of the JFK--Dec.7, 2019. When President Kennedy's daughter (Caroline) 52 yrs. later, tried to Christen the aircraft carrier, the bottle once again did not break on the first swing. It was a funny moment on a very cold day at the port. Beautiful day. Thanks Jordon!

  • @sdcoinshooter
    @sdcoinshooter 3 ปีที่แล้ว +15

    “Nuclear reactors are like Nuclear bombs… but not really” Well I’m glad to hear that!

    • @gshrdy5415
      @gshrdy5415 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Right, they want to destroy man.

  • @photomanwilliams4147
    @photomanwilliams4147 2 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Funny story, I was on a hill in Point Loma CA. watching a new aircraft carrier come into the Navy harbor base in San Diego. I was excited and kept clicking my camera getting pictures from every angle. My wife who was only mildly impressed said to me "come on, how many pictures do you need, its just a ship" A few moments later a guy was excited and wildly taking picture, after picture of the same carrier. followed by his wife saying, "why do you need so many pictures? My wife looked at me and said........... guess it must be a man thing.
    Being at a elevated level looking down at one of these wonders of the world is a WOW moment.

    • @jmemixx
      @jmemixx 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      I remember Point Loma well. It was always a point fix landmarker to guide us in the navy and mark our points for our fixes coming in and out of sand diego

    • @ThomasSDavis-mc9of
      @ThomasSDavis-mc9of 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      It must be a woman thing to get annoyed when their husbands finds something more interesting than them. How shallow on the part of BOTH these wives!

    • @photomanwilliams4147
      @photomanwilliams4147 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@ThomasSDavis-mc9of agreed, a women gets a new pair of shoes and the man is expected to show excitement, and great approval.

  • @danielchoi6477
    @danielchoi6477 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Proud US citizen...Thank you USA.

  • @chrissharp5073
    @chrissharp5073 2 ปีที่แล้ว +39

    As a Royal Navy veteran I served on a carrier in my early career and freely admit to green eyed envy of the USN carriers then and now. I'm afraid that there is going to be a time in the not too distant future when carriers will go the way of the old battleships as technology will render them obsolete. Russia and China are developing hypersonic missile systems that have the potential to be a clear threat to large ocean going vessels well away from the combat zone or area of interest. But until that time comes these beautiful beasts will always be there to serve and protect us and our allies freedom.

    • @watchme2day
      @watchme2day 2 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      Fortunately, as Russia and China are developing hypersonic weapons the US has been for decades working on hypersonic counter-measures. The Israelis have benefited from US interception technology in the form of the Iron Dome. There are other more lethal weapons coming online that can track and down a hypersonic missile with the use of high-powered lasers.

    • @juliopena2098
      @juliopena2098 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Hypersonic missiles are not as effective at sea apparently because they can’t maneuver too well at long distance. Reason is as a missile travels it has to curve which is why we use the slower ones already. The missiles are too fast for that kind of shot. Carriers can perform their duty by getting aircraft near the area to take out the missile sites. But not getting too close where a hypersonic missile can be a threat. This came off an article I read which could be false ofc. But give me your thoughts

    • @chrissharp5073
      @chrissharp5073 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@juliopena2098 another gap in my knowledge filled. Thank you.

    • @SuperVidtech
      @SuperVidtech 2 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      They may be in development but thus far they have tested them only on stationery land targets with limited success..
      It's a big leap to hit a fast moving carrier at several hundred or thousands of miles away..They need land based control as well as satalite , radar and GPS all working together in real time to hit the carrier..
      They are not fire and forget missles.
      They are not there yet..
      Neither Russia or China are close at this point in doing that..

    • @shaunelijah2232
      @shaunelijah2232 2 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      It's already obsolete Brit Buddy. The final wars will all be fought with nukes. What every free country needs to do is (very secretly) plant hidden nuclear- headed missile silos all over the earth. THEN show proof to the Chinese, Russians, Iranians, and N Koreans etc. The FEAR this will cause will hopefully prevent "The Big One". God save the Queen.....

  • @thomasmatlock584
    @thomasmatlock584 2 ปีที่แล้ว +20

    Love those ships as a Merchant Marine.
    I always enjoy working with US navy ships

    • @josephgriffin3688
      @josephgriffin3688 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      My brother was a merchant Marine and serves on a funeral detail for the American legion now. I find it funny that when he started doing the funeral detail for the legion during the last few months of my active duty service in the military I was on military detail for funeral services while on active duty. I was originally part of the firing squad and then I elevated to being the commander of the firing squad. When I ETSd I actually had to train a guy who is twice my rank to take over my squad. I miss so extremely being on active duty.

  • @cmpremlap
    @cmpremlap 3 ปีที่แล้ว +25

    Thanks for the update. I served on CVN-72. Would be great to get a tour of this class of carrier.

  • @Ironhead251
    @Ironhead251 2 ปีที่แล้ว +7

    I was onboard the USS R.K. Turner CG20 (Guided Missile Cruiser) that was shotgun for the USS Theodore Roosevelt in the Gulf War 91’. GO NAVY!!

    • @TheEudaemonicPlague
      @TheEudaemonicPlague 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Personally, I'm kind of glad I left TR before that went down. I was stationed at Great Lakes while that went on.

  • @bfdzvalable
    @bfdzvalable 2 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Imagine if we as a society put this much effort into making our world a better place to live.

    • @Akaneblaze1345
      @Akaneblaze1345 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      nothing but weapons weapons, and more new ways to kill people.

    • @jonbongjovi1869
      @jonbongjovi1869 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      WHERE THERE's A WILL, THERE'S A WAY.
      We have tens of millions of EMPTY GOVT BUILDINGS across the nation.
      Millions of empty houses, just DECAYING EMPTY.
      Millions of empty apartments, just decaying....empty.
      We have no choice: we have to start burning their mansions down.
      We have a right to self defense.

    • @jonbongjovi1869
      @jonbongjovi1869 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      THE PENTAGON is such a complete CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE, that Dubya, Obama and the rest had to THREATEN OUR ALLIES WITH ANNIHILATION:
      "IF YOU EVEN THINK OF INVESTIGATING OUR ENDLESS WAR CRIMES, we reserve the right to BLOW OUR ALLIES OFF THE MAP, starting with the WORLD COURT in The Hague, Netherlands!"
      AND EVERY JOURNALIST (all war criminals under current laws) COVERED THIS UP FROM THE PUBLIC, bc it PROVES we are the new nazi germany, but less honest or lawful!

  • @tomaszprzetacznik7802
    @tomaszprzetacznik7802 2 ปีที่แล้ว +17

    Quote: "Nuclear reactors that are like atomic bombs, but not really." end of quote. First, nuclear reactors are nothing like bombs. Reactor operates by sustained controlled fission of slightly enriched uranium, usually in the form of pellets embedded in zirconium set in rods and deposited with boron containing control rods in in the reactor core, fuel must be surrounded by the moderator in water-pressure reactors it is water and in RMBK - graphite. And so, the operation of the reactor is the right balance between the amount of active control rods, the coolant, the moderator, and the fuel. Fission gives huge amounts of thermal energy, a heat, that combined with water gives steam and steam drives turbines giving electricity.. Quite simple rules, right?. Far from a bomb which, in one of types can be set on the implosion lens, used to initiate a sudden fission of the fission material - highly enriched plutonium - as a highly unstable material, it is easily subjected to rapid fission, generating a huge amounts of energy in a sudden and uncontrolled burst. So it is not even close to each other, huh? To whom have you prepared your clip, for children in age up to 6? Cos level of your text is like that.

    • @TheMorelli3
      @TheMorelli3 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Also the A1 reactors are far "from the most powerful"

  • @jameshutchins8965
    @jameshutchins8965 3 ปีที่แล้ว +62

    I was with the marine air wing contingent on the USS Nimitz back in 1975. Impressive vessel.

    • @joekepshire7215
      @joekepshire7215 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      I was on the nimitz jan 75 plank owner. It is still a great ship

    • @jonbongjovi1869
      @jonbongjovi1869 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      THE PENTAGON literally says BOXCUTTERS (in 4 separate incidents!!!!!) UTTERLY DEFEATED THE GREATEST MILITARY IN HISTORY on 9/11.
      I have millions more of these that prove THE WORST MILITARY IN HISTORY is Murica's.
      AMERICA'S MILITARY SURE IS BIG (like McDonald' Rump's butt!)....but THAT DON'T MAKE IT SMART, ha ha.

    • @unclelarry9138
      @unclelarry9138 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      My cousin was on the Nimitz in that time frame. It was a beast.

    • @NorfolkKillaB
      @NorfolkKillaB 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Thank you for your service sir 🫡

  • @caruniv3287
    @caruniv3287 3 ปีที่แล้ว +29

    Yes 20+ years refueling for the ship, but the crew still has to eat, muntions have to be replenished and the jets still need JP5. Though they are awesome to serve and live on. God bless all the crews out there in the high seas.

    • @bossdog1480
      @bossdog1480 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      They're very noisy to live on..

    • @stevensoo6591
      @stevensoo6591 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Will be destroyed by DF-21D, a hypersonic nuclear missile.

    • @phenri4809
      @phenri4809 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@stevensoo6591 better be ready for hell to rain down on you when you do

    • @Mr.Robert1
      @Mr.Robert1 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      People are clueless

    • @Mr.Robert1
      @Mr.Robert1 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@stevensoo6591
      Are you sure have you served in the Navy?

  • @josephgriffin3688
    @josephgriffin3688 2 ปีที่แล้ว +24

    In junior high I did a report on super carriers like the USS Nimitz. When they are fully manned and fueled they were capable of staying out at sea for 13 years without ever docking but they however had to dock every few years to get that barnacles scraped off

    • @garystarr9176
      @garystarr9176 2 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      Wouldn't food be the biggest limiting factor?

    • @rebelthreefiftyseven6739
      @rebelthreefiftyseven6739 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@garystarr9176 no food is loaded at sea

    • @josephgriffin3688
      @josephgriffin3688 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@garystarr9176 when they have everything stored food wouldn't be the issue nor anything else because military rations can actually last for years on the shelf. We have what's called MREs meals ready to eat back in the old days of the 40s and 50s they were called C rations which meant canned rations. MREs some of them are absolutely delicious others are completely disgusting LOL. My favorite was beef stew or the chicken and rice. There was one that took me over 3 years before I would try it and it's the omelet with ham. I just couldn't imagine packaged egg tasting good but it was actually quite delicious. But military rations are made to give us enough energy even if we only have one a day instead of three meals one MRE can sustain us with zero problems. As I said already they last for years obviously when unopened. I find it kind of comical the first time I experienced anything that had a massive shelf life was when I was on missionary work in Labrador. They had these leader sized cardboard boxes of milk that could last for over 6 months without souring and it was true milk not something synthetic. It tasted like normal milk. But to reiterate a supercarrier staying out at sea for a decade or more has no issues when it comes to the food unless the sailors don't like what they're being served and want to mess with the cooks LOL. The super carriers are actually like a small City they even have their own post office. Not just a a little postal department it's considered an actual post office. Granted the report and studies I did were decades ago and it might have changed since then but it doesn't seem logical to think it would especially since they've only grown bigger. The sailor compliment back then was over 3,000 and some over 5,000 for a supercarrier. They're an amazing beast. I wasn't Abrams tanker and they are also one badass machine. Even without the bullets they are a lot of fun. The engine is a jet turbine just like in any plane that flies around the world. It takes 12 gallons of fuel just to start it. Normally there is an engine governor keeping it at 45 mph or less I've had mine one of mine I should say 10 miles over that. Without the governor that 77 ton beauty can do 95 miles an hour. When you get to go as fast as you can in them it is one hell of a rush.

    • @josephgriffin3688
      @josephgriffin3688 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @Repent to Jesus Christ! The NIV is one of the worst translations of the scriptures because it's inaccurate and summarizes crap leaving out details that are extremely important. I probably have more information than any priest minister or Reverend or pastor you've ever met because I have done extensive and I mean years of extensive research into the scriptures. I am not a bible thumper and unfortunately I have not been able to spread the gospel enough to be able to quote many verses anymore. But I probably have more knowledge than you could imagine about the scriptures and God's ordination and decrees. Don't challenge me when it comes to scripture I will bury you. My faith is as unwavering as the sun and just as hot.

    • @josephgriffin3688
      @josephgriffin3688 2 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      Also you don't repent to Jesus you, you repent to the one he repented to and that is God whereas Christ was the only begotten son. Traditional Christians of both Catholic and Protestant faith always talk about following the path that Christ led us to yet instead of doing what he did they worship him whereas he worshiped Our Father. They try to defend the belief in eternity when you actually do research and learn the truth you find out that the idea and concept of a trinity is of pagan belief not of any level of Judaism and the subsequent Christianity. The entire concept of the Trinity didn't exist until after 325 years after Christ's death. It was at the council of nicea when they created the concept and implemented it into the Eastern Roman empire and Christianity. The original Christian people saw God as one entity and Christ as another and the holy Spirit as the force by which God makes his will happen. Christ is called the master of creation because of the power that was granted to him by the father whose name in Hebrew is Yahweh and in English it's Jehovah. So you repent through Christ like he was an operator on the phone but you repent to God himself not his son. Christ isn't the forgiver he's the Redeemer giving his life by his father's decree, if you remember he prayed to God asking for it not to happen but he was willing to do it anyway so that any one of us might gain everlasting life. But it is Jehovah God that forgives us upon judgment Day. Dividing us as goats to his left and sheep to his right and those to his right may be granted gracious everlasting life. Don't challenge me I will bury you when it comes to scripture. You can quote a multitude of versus like most church people do while ignoring a multitude of others that define the truth of God's love. To put it into an analogy if God has an order for us that takes 35 verses to explain it you must read all 35 to get the accurate knowledge and direction. But the traditional churches of protestantism and Catholicism read about 15 or 20 sometimes even 25 repeatedly over and over and over. But without the remaining verses you only have a semblance of truth the scriptures warn us about that the false ones will have a semblance of Truth. You can never negate the entire word of God by selecting a few verses here and there.

  • @robertfelixjr.6717
    @robertfelixjr.6717 3 ปีที่แล้ว +15

    My father was on The USS Kitty Hawk CVN-63 1968 to 1983. Actually worked on the radar system of the A-6 Intruder

    • @AakeTraak
      @AakeTraak 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      So?

    • @navychop6667
      @navychop6667 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      The Shitty Kitty, and she lived up to that nickname since when in port she smelled so bad.

    • @robertfelixjr.6717
      @robertfelixjr.6717 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@navychop6667 My pops was just calling her that very name

    • @navychop6667
      @navychop6667 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@robertfelixjr.6717 She replaced the Independence when I was station in Yokosuka, Japan on the Vincennes.

    • @robertfelixjr.6717
      @robertfelixjr.6717 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@navychop6667 Getting ready to take my pops to San Diego. They made her a floating museum there I believe.

  • @mhherr
    @mhherr 2 ปีที่แล้ว +8

    Narration makes a mistake in describing the length of a supercarrier. "Three football fields SIDE-BY-SIDE" would be 580 feet (160x3). The proper description should have been "longer than three football fields placed END-TO-END" (300x3). In actuality, it would be more accurate to state "nearly the length of four football fields."

  • @SunCoastFilms
    @SunCoastFilms 2 ปีที่แล้ว +9

    I was on the Nimitz CVN-68. In the late 80s. Steam catapults were the beast. That is old school now.

    • @josephgriffin3688
      @josephgriffin3688 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      I just saw a video yesterday about the new catapult system talking about how much it's better than the old steam catapults obviously myself being an army man never experienced the old way and never will the new but as a brother in arms I say go Navy

    • @SunCoastFilms
      @SunCoastFilms 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@josephgriffin3688 Yeah I think it is some some kind of magnetic system Now. I'll have to do some homework. Thank you for your service. Always thought the Army was cool. Cheers brother!

    • @josephgriffin3688
      @josephgriffin3688 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@SunCoastFilms you know I've watched so much and read so much since I saw that video I honestly don't recall if it said it was magnetic but it was here on TH-cam that I saw it I can look through my history and send it to you if you wish. Also thank you for thanking me but I honestly feel very uncomfortable getting thanked because I considered my service a privilege and honor and I don't feel the need to be thanked even though I think fellow veterans myself in fact I was given a great honor a few years ago. I met a World War II veteran and thanked him for his service he was with his wife at the time and she told me that I was the first person that had ever thanked him. Our World War II veterans come from the greatest generation and it disgusts me the ingratitude of the civilians thinking themselves so Almighty and privileged and completely disregarding us veterans and active duty members.

    • @SunCoastFilms
      @SunCoastFilms 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@josephgriffin3688 I try to think every veteran I can. I do alot of filming on my Channel in cemeteries. I always give a shout to several. Read their name and rank and thank them for their service and sacrifice.

    • @VorAbaddon
      @VorAbaddon 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@SunCoastFilms Electromagnetic. Apparently the principle benefits are that it requires less fresh water (No steam), supposedly easier and cheaper to maintain (Believe that when I hear it over time though it is possible), it's supposedly quicker to recharge and fire allowing for more frequent launches upping the sortie/day numbers, and that it can be dialed in more exactly in terms of the force needed so while it can still launch heavy planes it can also be dialed back to launch lighter drones without damaging them.
      So far it's apparently had reliability issues, breaking more often than the Steam catapults. Where that is in being addressed, I don't know.

  • @robertnorton701
    @robertnorton701 2 ปีที่แล้ว +12

    Just an FYI, the latest carrier in the Ford class capable of flight ops is CVN-78 which is the Ford. The JFK, CVN-79 is not currently operable. It is still being built.

    • @robertnorton701
      @robertnorton701 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @Bullseye But it's never launched a single plane let alone left the yards for any reasonable amount of time. Hence my comment about operability.

    • @pogo1140
      @pogo1140 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @Bullseye November 2021 the ship was still under construction and USNI reported that parts from the ship were being removed and sent to the USS Ford to replace broken parts on the Ford.
      Per USNI News the parts taken from Kennedy for Ford range from pumps to limit switches, HMI screens for stores elevators as well as motor controllers, power supplies, small pumps, limit switches and valve actuators for various systems throughout the ship,”

    • @robertnorton701
      @robertnorton701 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@pogo1140 Exactly. The 79 cannot do flight ops yet. So 78 took parts so it can continue doing flight ops.

  • @lafcat
    @lafcat 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Fantastic!!! American Exceptionalism! Long Live the Republic ! The United States of America!🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🙏!

  • @josephgriffin3688
    @josephgriffin3688 2 ปีที่แล้ว +22

    As an army veteran I say HOOAAH, go Navy. I actually come from a long line of Navy and Marine service members. I was one of four that went into the regular army.

    • @tjcombo9328
      @tjcombo9328 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      man i can hardly wait until the railgun tech is miniaturized and put on all our ships and craft and land armor!
      heres to the future you proudly LEFT US...... CW5 DONNIE MIMS JR - R.I.P. !

    • @josephgriffin3688
      @josephgriffin3688 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@tjcombo9328 while I was in the army they were trying to do away with the Chief warrant officers. The CW one and twos were given either the butter bar or silver bar lieutenant rank and the cw3s and four were either given captains or majors oak leaves. Our battalions cw3 at Our battalion Aid station was promoted to Captain. He would never answer to Captain he only allowed people to call him chief. And just for a comical side note I was actually walking over to weed Army hospital one day and I saw a cw2 female and boy was she cute LOL. I learned that bdus either made our sisters in arms look horrible or completely delicious. One of my friends married to fellow soldier and my ex-wife used to babysit their child because of the two of them having their duty shifts. I miss being active duty. If I were capable I would with no hesitation go back on duty to serve this Grand Republic and her people.

    • @josephgriffin3688
      @josephgriffin3688 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@tjcombo9328 oh and we only had CW one through four there was no five

    • @brettc1984
      @brettc1984 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      I was Navy, Made E5 then went CW. Anyways the JFK is a POS, one of the newest ACC is the Ronald Regan, commissioned in 2003 I think maybe later. It is a super carrier. The JFK was supposed to relieve us on station after 6 months didn’t happen, they were late by 2 months. POS JFK. Anyways he chose the wrong boat to focus on.

    • @josephgriffin3688
      @josephgriffin3688 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@brettc1984 so you were a squid LOL I was what they used to call a dat and then because of the Abrams tank a cdat. Dat of course was dumbass tanker and due to the computerization of the Abrams tanks it became cdat which stood for computerized dumbass tanker. I know we have the rivalries between the branches But ultimately we are all DOD and we defend and protect this Grand Republic and her people. As a veteran I actually consider our police and firefighters as the true Homeland security because they do their jobs every single day keeping people safe whereas the government agency only arises during certain events.

  • @steedblackman1615
    @steedblackman1615 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    I hauled from Long Beach, CA port 2 experimental F-22 Raptor fighter jet engines to a secret Navel testing site in the middle of a swamp in South Carolina. The engines barely fit into my 53ft semi trailer. This place was unmarked. No vehicles anywhere. I rang the doorbell. A scientist in a white lab coat told me to leave my doors closed and back into that only dock when the door opened. He closed it. As I got out of my truck. Two more guys in lab coats opened my doors and began unloading those engines. This place was full of jet and C-130 simulator's and so many other future Air force equipment. Fascinating stuff.

  • @xkm-thebasetecchannel3823
    @xkm-thebasetecchannel3823 3 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    Who clicked after seing the thumbnail and was disapppointed to see the GFF?

  • @SELKCOMM
    @SELKCOMM 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    It's comforting to know that we are still fighting WWII.

    • @johnbenjamin2703
      @johnbenjamin2703 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      GETTING READY FOR WW III
      BETTER KNOWN AS ARMAGEDDON
      GO TO U TUBE PUT IN
      60 minutes Australia
      Chinese threat starting WW III
      jb.ok

    • @SELKCOMM
      @SELKCOMM 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@johnbenjamin2703 John. The United States, China and Russia have hypersonic weapons that render conventional warfare null and void. They have kinetic energy weapons that are launched from space and have the destructive force of a nuclear weapon. An aircraft carrier is just a target. A 13 billion dollar target.

  • @duhhawaiian
    @duhhawaiian 3 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    America the Beautiful. Home of the brave, land of the free.

    • @camcameron1430
      @camcameron1430 3 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      It used to be. Not so much anymore.

    • @tu3aa121
      @tu3aa121 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      ……….the US is only as tough and weak as it’s politicians allow…..what with this mighty fire power if politicians are afraid to use it.

  • @actsismmljcorrectlyobeyed6190
    @actsismmljcorrectlyobeyed6190 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    The generous man that was commentary in this video is more civilian than civilian.

  • @joehughes5177
    @joehughes5177 3 ปีที่แล้ว +6

    Had to check it out after seeing the teaser frame posted. No us carrier would land planes toward a fixed structure on a carrier, ever.

    • @tedwojtasik8781
      @tedwojtasik8781 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Kinda thought it looked like the Battlestar Galactica on water but, dumber.

    • @fodank
      @fodank 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Clickbait photo got you.

  • @colombiangimgo
    @colombiangimgo 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    USA should spend more money on health care and education

  • @mikemyers4327
    @mikemyers4327 3 ปีที่แล้ว +10

    I was an airman on cvn,-65 it was great now they've made it greater😹 I was in squadron VA-95 that's what we need, get them in the air and show no mercy oorah, oorah

    • @tommyboss4067
      @tommyboss4067 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Couldn't agree more. LoL

  • @IonSen06
    @IonSen06 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Love seeing my old squadron in these videos

  • @forrestchase899
    @forrestchase899 3 ปีที่แล้ว +11

    “The range of the Navy is simply anywhere in the world”.
    Laughs in Alice Springs.

    • @peteguard3571
      @peteguard3571 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      You are within their range

    • @asleytamkei7507
      @asleytamkei7507 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Too fight over what,,, the WAR,,,is COVID WAR EXTREME FORCES FROM NATURE ,, WAR,, wild fires A war in California,, soo soo spend wisely Ammmerica? .

    • @oscarantoniomoreno5247
      @oscarantoniomoreno5247 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@peteguard3571 I served aboard the USS ENTERPRISE, I appreciate your comment. 👍

    • @peteguard3571
      @peteguard3571 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      @@oscarantoniomoreno5247 Thanks for your service.

    • @TeamJY
      @TeamJY 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@oscarantoniomoreno5247 so is it true you could run that baby at 18.56 warp speed?

  • @rebeccastone3301
    @rebeccastone3301 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Great video!

  • @robertbrown374
    @robertbrown374 3 ปีที่แล้ว +29

    Maybe homeless veterans can live in it

    • @HLC64
      @HLC64 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      You can say it again !

    • @tommyboss4067
      @tommyboss4067 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      LoL

    • @arty4308
      @arty4308 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Great Idea!

    • @HLC64
      @HLC64 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@arty4308 I can see ... if US Adminstration not careful about spending and keep printing money ... and they rank military more important than medical and housing ... eventually these big aircraft carrier will be abandoned .... ghost ship ... matter of time .. we can see it

  • @SuperLuminalElf
    @SuperLuminalElf 3 ปีที่แล้ว +23

    Supercarriers - no matter how large or lethal - are still extremely vulnerable to hunter killer subs and long-range anti-ship missiles

    • @chachi9945
      @chachi9945 2 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      Possibly, but they each have 3-4 subs defending it and this super one would probably have its own iron dome like missle/torpedo defence system, it would be extremely difficult but not impossible to destroy it

    • @StephenZ827
      @StephenZ827 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      the war you are thinking of....nothing is out of range or scope. Carriers are for Iran, Syria...or just in your face....You thinking WW3...you wouldn't survive even if hiding under a boulder in Grand Canyon....

    • @questionauthority7377
      @questionauthority7377 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@StephenZ827 says you ,mr expert

    • @StephenZ827
      @StephenZ827 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@questionauthority7377 No...but the actual expert have said so for years..

    • @TheEudaemonicPlague
      @TheEudaemonicPlague 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@StephenZ827 Name your "expert", son. So-called "experts" are wrong more often than not. Never trust anyone who tells you they're an expert--they're the most likely to let their ego blind them.

  • @Dissent-Rising1
    @Dissent-Rising1 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Awesome!

  • @NorfolkKillaB
    @NorfolkKillaB 2 ปีที่แล้ว +13

    I remember seeing this behemoth being constructed when I used to deliver containers at the port.
    The "all capital" letters don't emphasize enough how MASSIVE this thing was. I remember going through the tunnel and seeing it and thinking "Holly shit, that's gotta be an aircraft carrier." No joke, that's exactly what it was. Go Navy 💪🏿
    Thank you so all for your service. 🇺🇸

    • @waypasthadenough
      @waypasthadenough 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      The military doesn't serve us and certainly doesn't serve liberty.

    • @NorfolkKillaB
      @NorfolkKillaB 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@waypasthadenough the government is just all around problematic. However, this is a marvelous creation of destruction.
      But are they just overbuilt outdated relics of a time far gone?

    • @waypasthadenough
      @waypasthadenough 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@NorfolkKillaB Who owns the net and its infrastructure? Who makes the rules for it?
      If we had no 'govt.' which neighbors would you be forced to kill first?

  • @exaltedsawgunner
    @exaltedsawgunner 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Still looking for that "new gigantic 13 billion dollar aircraft carrier."

  • @johnmozina
    @johnmozina 3 ปีที่แล้ว +51

    Very impressive. $13 Billion to defend against international threats. Yet, we don't want to spend a quarter of that to finish the wall to protect our own boarders from trojan horses.

    • @Talashaoriginal
      @Talashaoriginal 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      One of these items can be defated by a ladder or some shovels and Pickaxes, the other can't sooooo. ;-)

    • @johnmozina
      @johnmozina 3 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      @@Talashaoriginal We need both. What good is a $13 billion carrier if we are overthrown from within if we let people illegally enter our country.. The Trojans were defeated after the Greeks left behind a large wooden horse and pretended to sail for home. ... They sacked Troy after the Trojans brought the horse inside the city walls.

    • @mymidlifeadventures4248
      @mymidlifeadventures4248 2 ปีที่แล้ว +10

      @@johnmozina you are quite possibly one of the dummest commenters on TH-cam… Congratulations.

    • @Lusk17
      @Lusk17 2 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      You know the Trojan War was a Greek Myth right? 😆

    • @johnmozina
      @johnmozina 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@Lusk17 I really did not think I had to explain that Greek mythology has an application to contemporary society today.

  • @petersipp5247
    @petersipp5247 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    I served on the USS Constellation CVA-64. She was one bad a** machine. I did the shaft alley watch for a month or so. Then developed a rash on the back of my legs (from sitting on the so many hatches before going down to see what the 4 propellar shaft's temps were). Went to one of the ships Dr's'...I got transfered to the bow on the flight deck. Much better. There is one action packed area. I remember these #'s about the cat's...They were sending 20-25 ton airplanes off from a dead start & in 280' going up to 165 mph... in 2-1/2 seconds.
    Was exactly 50 yr ago...our longest time "on the line"...49 days straight. The only time "off" was during a launch. The rest of the day (14-16 hrs...was tieing down planes during a recovery. When that was over...we untied the jets and freed up the bow for the next launch.

  • @chriss-nf1bd
    @chriss-nf1bd 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Russia isn't slacking off. It is unlikely they would ever fight anywhere in the Americas. The need for carriers isn't a priority. Land bases aircraft can do the job. Now with hypersonic missiles will be a game changer. Rendering surface ships in a real problem. As there is no defense against them. A hit from one of them can take out a small city without any warhead. China too has this capability.

    • @rarrodrig4703
      @rarrodrig4703 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      IDK 🤔.......
      CCP's Navy is new and untested....

  • @henrysantos121
    @henrysantos121 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Excellent video well done

    • @fodank
      @fodank 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      This video is a lot of things, but excellent is not one of them. Lots of inaccurate video clips stitched together to fill in the time while they talk about what they know little about. Just saying... Cheers, D.

  • @LeatherneckJoe133
    @LeatherneckJoe133 2 ปีที่แล้ว +12

    Yeah my father in-law spent 30 + years in the navy he started out as a seaman and worked up to chief and retired commander, he was a electronics warfare officer and spent haft his life on the carrier…hell of a man…semper fi….

  • @jamesbugbee6812
    @jamesbugbee6812 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    This 'history' of the supercarrier gave me gas.

  • @70stunes71
    @70stunes71 3 ปีที่แล้ว +10

    I spent some years on carriers. Really happy to be home now LOL

    • @douglashardy3408
      @douglashardy3408 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Thank you for your service sir God Bless

  • @brentonmcclean3647
    @brentonmcclean3647 3 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    Sweet vid !!!

  • @kristinaF54
    @kristinaF54 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    After the carrier came the supercarrier. After the supercarrier comes the superduper carrier, after the superduper carrier comes the superduper mega carrier, after the superduper mega carrier comes the superduper mega ludicrous carrier!

  • @TacTechMic
    @TacTechMic 3 ปีที่แล้ว +12

    The best aircraft carrier ever would be able to submerge. Imagine not being able to find it... after It just launched 90 fighters into the air, then submerges. Imagine if the deck could be the only thing above the water, at times, keeping visibility to a minimum.

    • @getredytagetredy
      @getredytagetredy 3 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      Imagine PEACE ON EARTH
      instead of Zionist jewish banker wars

    • @rogersmith5167
      @rogersmith5167 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Imagine not being able to find it, that's what the pilot said, sitting in his underground bunker in front of a computer located in area 73 that nobody can find.

  • @martiansoon9092
    @martiansoon9092 3 ปีที่แล้ว +8

    Russia has so tiny usable port areas. In Baltic sea, it is hard to go to the Atlantic ocean because of danish straits. And sea route from Black sea to Mediterranean is blocked by NATO country Turkey. In North Arctic ocean is mostly covered by sea ice. And on the Asian side, Russia has hardly any factories there and lots of sea ice comes there too. So, Russia has very few naval bases that can really work all the time. Using submarines is wiser, just because they may avoid contact to the enemy even in narrow places that Russia often has.
    In US there are lots of ports and possible routes to the sea where enemies has hard time to do anything. If US doesn't have enough marine vessels, then enemies may land on several lightly protected areas. So USA needs its carriers., while ie. Russia doesn't need them.
    Also Russia's land borders are crowded with enemies (you may argue that its their own fault) while USA has mostly allies and only 2 countries on its land based borders. So their armies will have very different things to handle when they prepare for war.

    • @jimiisafiade1442
      @jimiisafiade1442 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      They figure they can use hypersonic missiles to get some parity. That tech is not mature yet though and the US is getting theirs

    • @anheuserbusch37
      @anheuserbusch37 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Russia doesn't need carriers ? Ahahaha

  • @juni674
    @juni674 3 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    I was on the U.S.S. John F. Kennedy CV-67 from '84 - '88. The predecessor to this JFK. I was also on the U.S.S. Theodore Roosevelt CVN-71. Also served on a couple of subs as well.

    • @geraldmurphy1428
      @geraldmurphy1428 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Thank you for your service. Retired Navy Veteran.

    • @TheEudaemonicPlague
      @TheEudaemonicPlague 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      When were you on TR, sometime in the '90s? I was there '85 (PCU) to early '89.

  • @richardlinn5512
    @richardlinn5512 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Largest Floating Targets !

  • @MD-gt6xw
    @MD-gt6xw 2 ปีที่แล้ว +7

    Add in placements for rail guns, high energy lasers being tested. That helps future proof the new class of super carrier (Gerald Ford Class). Also, more subs have been outfitted with aerial drones that can be used to take out guidance systems near shore where anti-ship installations are often placed. Between that and 3rd gen stealth fighters there is really no adversary in the same category. Hypersonic is not yet functional and Russia/China love to brag about their capabilities whereas U.S. keeps quiet but keeps developing so any serious conflict would be unpleasantly surprising to the U.S. adversary. Russia likes to think they can compete militarily, but they are decades behind in technology and their air force is a joke with much of it mothballed or being used for spare parts. China is mainly looking to compete economically and believes that is the route to dominance. They may be right but it's the long game and nothing to worry about in the short term.

    • @MrGary10k
      @MrGary10k 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Agreed. It amazes me sometimes how people think a country with the GDP of Italy can match the US. China is much more formidable, but their airforce needs better jet engines in their aircraft than poor facsimiles of Russian design. Their stealth aircraft designs are highly suspect, and their subs are not very good. They are investing in missiles because of these deficiencies, which in turn makes them very one dimensional. Their reliance on Area Denial will leave them extremely vulnerable outside that area. And for a country that can't feed itself, and is heavily reliant on trade and fishing fleets, those are some pretty significant red flags.

  • @mark11967AD
    @mark11967AD 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    I just hope drones and hypersonic missiles don’t make warships marginalized or even obsolete.

  • @BigFred458
    @BigFred458 3 ปีที่แล้ว +16

    I think that Russia is a regional land power concerned principally with its border and some of the old USSR countries. Russia is self sufficient and is one of , if not the only country that spans two continents- both Europe and Asia. While Russia could be regionally aggressive and diplomaticallly global in influence : Russia has its defense against Western Europe, the Middle Eastern Turkmen republics and China on its plate. A large land area to defend with no sea front in most of Europe and Asia. The USA is a 'projector' of power and is without any enemies that can attack it over land successfully and hence the USA can build Carriers and Submarines in greater number and quantity to project influence.

    • @nigegibbs4547
      @nigegibbs4547 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Fighting against Germany and Japan with Allied power and support is one thing. Fighting against A Russian military might that can overwhelm much of eastern Europe, and have more land space, to buffer Foreign attack is something to consider. Now picture having to attack the largest country in the world add possible allies like China and Some Asian and Arab states. Let's see how effective your carriers will be. THERE WILL BE NO WINNERS. Maybe none of your carriers will make it back you your shores.

    • @jessecriddle8644
      @jessecriddle8644 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@nigegibbs4547 they had sailing in troubled water for years. And if they were able to act one they know all he'll would follow in a matter of seconds with all the other ship around it that you don't see but are there

    • @nigegibbs4547
      @nigegibbs4547 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@jessecriddle8644 he'll you say, the Taliban did not get hell, how would you give the Russiand hell, they counter you in every turn. Prayer will wor, So start playing. Never wake a sleeping giant, Germany did ask them what happened when thw Russiand came.to towm.

    • @MrGary10k
      @MrGary10k 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@nigegibbs4547 I would pose this question. Why was Stalin so desperate and begging for the allied invasion of Western Europe if he could win on his own? Also Lend Lease helped Russia stay in it until they could build what they needed in adequate amounts and designs. And where was the USSR in the Pacific theater? They fought a one front war. A Herculean effort and their contribution in WW2 and the cost they bore are immense, but they couldn't do what the US did, which was wage war in a dominating fashion across multiple theaters. Something that is still true today. Russia has the GDP of Italy. They couldn't sustain what you are suggesting.

  • @cesarregalado3420
    @cesarregalado3420 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Very Cool!

  • @johnshields6852
    @johnshields6852 3 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Awesome power, super carriers have a whole battle group that surrounds them. It's like having an American base anywhere on the planet. They are as intimidating as it gets.

    • @MrSummerblade
      @MrSummerblade 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      So true. I remember encountering one whilst on holiday in Corfu in the 90s while the Balkan conflict was raging. I was visiting the island’s capital, a medieval town of narrow winding streets, walking towards the harbour when, emerging into the open, I was totally dumbstruck by the sight of the carrier, towering over the town like some enormous, out of scale, alien mothership had landed. I think my jaw literally hit the floor. Easily one of the most impressive things I’ve ever seen, man-made at least, especially when contrasted with the Lilliputian surroundings of the ancient town

  • @Steven-dt5nu
    @Steven-dt5nu ปีที่แล้ว

    Enjoying your videos

  • @robertschulke1596
    @robertschulke1596 3 ปีที่แล้ว +20

    Quite a step up from the last one I was on, the USS Valley Forge, our last coal fired steam engine powered carrier.

    • @robertschulke1596
      @robertschulke1596 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@jeffsantarpio tbh: I was 8 years old. I “served” 14 years as an Air Force brat, then when I tried to enlist they turned me down.

    • @stevehuffman4625
      @stevehuffman4625 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Robert Schulke, Thanks for your service!

    • @ChrisHyde537
      @ChrisHyde537 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      That’s great. I was aboard the USS Constitution on a tour. I’ll add that to my service record.

    • @DIYDaveT
      @DIYDaveT 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Thank everyone for their service!! Thank you thank you thank you! We fought nothing but wars of aggression for corporate interests since the last honest war (WW2) but thank everyone, including me for 6 years in the USAF! Oh aren't we so special keeping everyone safe!!!
      I want to barf when people try to spew this empty, politically correct plastic fuzzy. It was a job. I volunteered thinking I would see the world and get some experience (which I did on both counts). I was not a hero and very very few were. And we don't go around honestly thanking people for doing their daily job. Not unless we are brainwashed. So stop it.

  • @aadilansari5997
    @aadilansari5997 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Aircraft carriers have outlived their usefulness.

  • @RichValrek
    @RichValrek 3 ปีที่แล้ว +14

    There were only 2 Nimitz class carriers built in the 70's. The USS Nimitz and Eisenhower. You made this video and know nothing about US carriers. The last Nimitz class carrier was the Bush which was commishioned 10 January 2009. You kept talking about the JFK and never showed it.

    • @artzuiani6055
      @artzuiani6055 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      OK, BUT WE NEED 10 MORE BY 2026!

    • @RichValrek
      @RichValrek 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@artzuiani6055 if the US needed 10 more carriers they would build them. I think the 10 nimitz-class carriers and two Ford class carriers are more than the rest of the world combined! More than adequate! Not to mention all the amphibious assault ships the US has. Which are larger than WWII carriers.

    • @qqube4762
      @qqube4762 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      It may not look like it but the Navy is very protective of its ships. A lot of these films are made by the Navy then released to the public. You only get a needle point of information and no more. Sorry about that but myself wouldn't give the public nothing about our military except for propaganda.

    • @jamesquinn8900
      @jamesquinn8900 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Mighty ike I am a plankowner she stiiholds her own

    • @tommyboss4067
      @tommyboss4067 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@qqube4762 Good point

  • @LeonBackland
    @LeonBackland 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    "... nuclear reactors are just like nuclear bombs, but not really."
    Thanks for the clear and accurate explanation, but not really.

  • @Southernstar-RINO
    @Southernstar-RINO 2 ปีที่แล้ว +6

    4:00 Seeing that super carrier turn at speed was spectacular.

    • @jonbongjovi1869
      @jonbongjovi1869 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      but also FAKE as hell!
      you KNOW there's no cargo / crew on that thing, and that was a DEMO turn to show something it could / would NEVER do while packed with planes, bombs, etc!

  • @alexbaugh5585
    @alexbaugh5585 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    I was aboard USS John F. Kennedy, CV-67 for 4 years back in 1986 and 1990 - 1993.

  • @ValkyrieMagnus
    @ValkyrieMagnus 3 ปีที่แล้ว +40

    Awesome video, but the Nimitz class carriers were not just built in the 70’s. They were also built in the 80’s 90’s and 2000’s the last one in 2009.

    • @kag2306
      @kag2306 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      The video says the Nimitz class was commissioned in the 70's

    • @ValkyrieMagnus
      @ValkyrieMagnus 3 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      @@kag2306 the video says that but the video implied that the Nimitz class carriers are a product of the 70’s but the 80’s batch, 90’s batch and 2000’s batch incorporated later technologies. He says that the carriers are only somewhat up to date blanket statement. The George Bush is only 12 years old and I seriously doubt they only put 70’s technology in it. Anyways that’s just my take on it. 🍻 🙂 I could be wrong also.

    • @fodank
      @fodank 3 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      @@ValkyrieMagnus You're not wrong. It's just that the 'creators' of this 'content' know very little about what they've made video about. It's basically clickbait and if you're thinking you'll find any good information here, well, I think you're going to be disappointed. Cheers, D.

    • @ChrisHyde537
      @ChrisHyde537 2 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      @@ValkyrieMagnus No, you’re right. There’s so many inaccuracies in this video.

    • @CS-ru4xd
      @CS-ru4xd 2 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      @@fodank Of course it's clickbait... lol....the picture alone of that funky looking spaceship looking carrier isn't even what the vid is about so there's that! Lol...and yea...dodgy facts too.

  • @phillaw7952
    @phillaw7952 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Happy it is named after the best president we have had since FDR.

  • @g.g.hochstetler2286
    @g.g.hochstetler2286 3 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    The title and thumbnail are a bit hyperbolic. The Ford is basically an upgraded Nimitz. There isn’t anything truly groundbreaking about it. It isn’t even completely sorted yet. Meanwhile there are almost a dozen Nimitz carriers in service. Point is that if you need to fear the Ford then the Nimitz will be just as lethal and you should equally fear the Nimitz.

    • @jonbongjovi1869
      @jonbongjovi1869 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      PLUS THEY'RE ALL USELESS NO MATTER HOW YOU SLICE IT.
      FACT:
      WHO KILLS MORE OF OUR SOLDIERS:
      ENEMY SOLDIERS.....or OUR OWN SOLDIERS???
      #1 KILLER OF MURICAN MILITARY?
      MURICAN MILITARY!
      (Suicides!)
      #2 KILLER OF MURICAN MILITARY??
      (Friendly Fire!)
      NO ENEMIES NECESSARY.
      13 NYPD KKKOPS DIED IN 2019.
      ALL 13 WERE MURDERED BY.....NYPD KKKOPS ha ha!!
      11 suicides. (Adios!)
      and impossibly, not one but TWO IDIOTIC FRIENDLY FIRE deaths... that were unrelated!! IN ONE YEAR?? IN ONE PD???????
      WOW that musta been some great "RE-TRAINING" after you murdered your own teamate the first time that year! Months later, you AGAIN murder your fellow kkkop??
      OOOOOOF!!!
      DUMBEST HUMANS EVER.

  • @rg6569
    @rg6569 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    A HUGE Thank-you to all Service MEN/WOMEN everywhere. Stay Safe!. You allow us all to sleep easy at night!!! - A Thankful Canadian !!

  • @binay413963
    @binay413963 3 ปีที่แล้ว +8

    I felt sorry for this video having so less views so I clicked XD

  • @larrylama9772
    @larrylama9772 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    That brings the fight to any enemy for sure.

  • @CrazyFunnyCats
    @CrazyFunnyCats 3 ปีที่แล้ว +8

    How big would a 13 billion dollar 💵 pile of bacon 🥓 look like?
    Great vid thanks 👍

  • @johngardiner6800
    @johngardiner6800 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    The flat top was born in Briton as was the dedicated first all-purpose aircraft carrier, angled flight deck, catapult launches, ski slopes, vertical take-off and landing fighter's, Radar and much more. Briton from the industrial revolution that started hear has always been a world leader

  • @miketiberio9362
    @miketiberio9362 3 ปีที่แล้ว +15

    ya gotta love the attention to detail that they put into this video. i never knew we had a General R. Ford class aircraft carrier. i hope to God Grumman wasn't behind the video.

    • @joeshearer3620
      @joeshearer3620 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      I've heard of a Gerald Ford, but not of a general of that name?

    • @robertbrown374
      @robertbrown374 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      They missed the deal regarding American homeless and veterans with no health care, safe drinking water....

    • @utubewillyman
      @utubewillyman 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      I wish I'd named my kid "Gerald" so that he could automatically attain a military rank and be admiralble to many people.

    • @joeshearer3620
      @joeshearer3620 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@utubewillyman LOLOL.

    • @fredmagallano7803
      @fredmagallano7803 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      🤣

  • @robscott4723
    @robscott4723 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Well done Michael Chern! Keep that Guy on his Toes!!!!

  • @z.k.2744
    @z.k.2744 3 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    God Bless America !
    Long live US Navy the greatest !

  • @thealienpersonlivingineart4936
    @thealienpersonlivingineart4936 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Small in camera but in personal is Gigantic

  • @markwildman2
    @markwildman2 3 ปีที่แล้ว +7

    Putin once said he doesn’t need to spend billions on aircraft carriers when he only needs to spend some millions on hypersonic missiles that can take them out.

    • @userjlj
      @userjlj 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      hope he has alot of missiles.. CV66 took alot of missiles and torpedo and it did not even sink the USS AMERICA(without a damage control crew).. they had to scuttle it in order for it to sink.. just think about that..

    • @susannedugas8219
      @susannedugas8219 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Russia (or anyone, for that matter) sinking an American nuclear-class aircraft carrier is the equivalent of declaring full-on nuclear war.

    • @theinfralink6598
      @theinfralink6598 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@userjlj you need to think again. A supersonic missile coming down at 10X speed of sound is able to penetrate the carrier even without any explosive. US is not capable of or unwilling to simulate that result.

  • @Harrison2253
    @Harrison2253 ปีที่แล้ว

    No country in the world can come any where near the experience level the US has with building, operating and maintaining air craft carriers.

  • @andywong9847
    @andywong9847 3 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    I didn't want to see the video, more interested to see the comments. 🙈🙈🙈

  • @mikenazers96
    @mikenazers96 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    The US continues to prepare to fight WWII again.

  • @uptheriverful
    @uptheriverful 3 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    I like the comment `The country that has the most powerful aircraft carriers will win the war'. So what happened in Korea, Vietnam and Afghanistan?

    • @alviecrumpton5216
      @alviecrumpton5216 3 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      Politicians

    • @joebarber4030
      @joebarber4030 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Hard to fight a war with your hands tried behind your back.

    • @shellysmith1037
      @shellysmith1037 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      limited warfare vs all out war

  • @eddymahon1503
    @eddymahon1503 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Love these videos. Love my country. U.S.A!!!!!!!!!

  • @larrylyon6695
    @larrylyon6695 3 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    The U.S. should be deploying less expensive (non-nuclear) aircraft carriers which wouldn’t be so expensive that only U.S. ally’s without deep pockets can afford to buy and deploy now that the STOL F-35C is available for carrier use. This would make sense for various NATO and ASEAN navies including Australia, South Korea and many other. More decks are more important than a few $13 Billion monster aircraft carriers.

    • @PurpleHaze4me
      @PurpleHaze4me 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Ikr. Actually they should have stopped building more 25 years ago. I dont see much difference except more planes but considering that weapons nowadays are autonomous and can be launched from thousands of miles away they make this carrier virtually useless. Even in dogfights those hornets are not as capable as f 15s, f16s, & f22s which are not carrier based aircrafts. I’m

    • @Yxalitis
      @Yxalitis 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      The F-35C is not STOL.
      The Marine Corp and RN F-35B's are STOVL, and incur significant reduction in payload and range as a result of the compromises made to turn the F-35 into a true STOVL platform

    • @sanjivjhangiani3243
      @sanjivjhangiani3243 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Sorry, but wouldn't using midget aircraft carriers restrict the kind of planes they could use? The Royal Navy used small carriers in the Falklands War, which meant they could only use jump jets. Although the British won that war, there must be scenarios where you need a different fighter.

    • @shellysmith1037
      @shellysmith1037 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@sanjivjhangiani3243 you are right. Do countries want to face what GB faced in the Flaklands? No
      And we do remember the US was requested to loan GB a carrier for that. They backed off though be cause they thought it would not look good.

  • @avatarmong
    @avatarmong 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Humans races, intelligent beings, who haven’t yet learned to peacefully work with one another!

  • @davidv2260
    @davidv2260 3 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    It’s the perfect target for hypersonic missiles. LOL

    • @dakinghunter8284
      @dakinghunter8284 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      1% chance of enemies to target and hit that damn carrier..think about it my friend

    • @rogerwilco5918
      @rogerwilco5918 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      How do you track it if you can't get close enough?

  • @mymidlifeadventures4248
    @mymidlifeadventures4248 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    I feel bamboozled!… I came here to see our carrier powered by eight ginormous jet engines!🤣🤣🤣

    • @caelib8229
      @caelib8229 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      It's because this guy produces nothing but clickbait to try to gain subscribers.

  • @pogo1140
    @pogo1140 3 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    The aircraft carrier in the thumbnail isnt going to work unless all the planes are vertical landing aircraft

  • @samhoward9802
    @samhoward9802 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    The irony that you called out Russia and Putin at the very end for falling behind! Wow

  • @jkthomas1245
    @jkthomas1245 3 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Russia decided they couldn't compete with us carrier-wise, and sold at least one of theirs to China. Sending soldiers and/or weapons to places like Syria better served their purposes.

    • @darrylknight2675
      @darrylknight2675 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Very true. Russia has directed their cash spend on weapons to defense of Russia, they don't need aircraft carriers if they don't want to project their force in far away places.

  • @mikebarbieri7125
    @mikebarbieri7125 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Thumbs up good job

  • @jaydubbyuh2292
    @jaydubbyuh2292 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    "...impregnable...", "...unmatched...", "...untouchable..."
    Pride goeth before destruction, and haughtiness before a fall.
    I am a Virginian.
    I have had kinfolk & neighbors work at, "the Shipyard", in Newport News where these carriers are built. The Ford class was aptly named, bc it is , thus far, an inept lame duck just like its namesake.
    If the fundamental problems are not soon remedied, then it will be the biggest embarrassment to us since Pearl Harbor. It is a vessel, built of steel, by the hand of man. What one man builds, another can destroy. Just present the honest facts, without the dishonest propaganda / spin.

    • @SmeeUncleJoe
      @SmeeUncleJoe 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      I think they need to go back to the drawing board period as far as conflict resolution goes. War itself is antiquated ... at least the hot ones.

  • @cheemk
    @cheemk 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    The tumbnail looks like a star wars star destroyer

  • @johnvaladez8976
    @johnvaladez8976 3 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    Interesting how many people assume there are no defenses for anti carrier measures factored in to the carrier itself and it's armada of escorts, not to mention the aircraft it carries.

    • @badlandskid
      @badlandskid 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      One Poseidon = one carrier group.

    • @mwtrolle
      @mwtrolle 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@badlandskid the Poseidon is probably fake. Anyway it doesn’t do more then a ICBM or maybe a few would do.
      If you wanna use nukes no ships got a change. But then again using a Poseidon as an nuclear armed ICBM would result in an nuclear response. That would most likely result in an MAD scenario.
      So it parasitically useless, as anything besides being an nuclear deterrence, if it’s even real in the first place.

    • @badlandskid
      @badlandskid 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@mwtrolle cool story though

    • @mwtrolle
      @mwtrolle 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@badlandskid you don't agree that a Posidon is nuclear-armed?

    • @badlandskid
      @badlandskid 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@mwtrolle never said that.
      But if it's fake as you have asserted then it isn't anything. 🤷‍♂️

  • @truefiles_kgp5301
    @truefiles_kgp5301 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    The US is maintaining world order and balance as well.

  • @AccordionJoe1
    @AccordionJoe1 2 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Carriers replaced battleships. But a submarine can take out the biggest carrier. So perhaps its time to give up on naval power and switch to drones. They can be operated from across the globe and are very inexpensive so losing one is no big deal.

    • @darlenesmith5690
      @darlenesmith5690 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Not quite yet.
      First off, submarines are tracked very efficiently these days. The days of subs being totally invisible are mostly gone. The US knows the approximate location of nearly all subs in the world at any given time and they track them closely. An anti-sub helicopter can chase down an enemy sub that gets too close. And nuclear weapons are still mostly off the table.
      Second, drones are big and expensive if they are carrying heavy ordinance. Plus, the US Navy has lasers now to quickly handle drones at many miles away, along with Phalanx for closer range.
      Hypersonic weapons with large payloads are probably the primary weapon that could make aircraft carriers obsolete, but nobody is quite there yet. Even so, lasers can affect them as well. Eventually, jet fighters / drones will need lasers to handle hypersonic weapons. But not yet there either.
      The main issue is getting close enough. The Navy now has long range drones in their carrier groups. In wartime, the US is going to destroy any enemy weapons, planes drones, or ships within 500 miles of an aircraft carrier group. About a dozen world militaries have ballistic missiles that have over 1000 KM range, but half of those are allies, and even so, the odds of not getting detected at long range and shot down by one of several layers of defense are slim.

    • @corey2232
      @corey2232 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Definitely false.
      Carriers travel in strike groups that can defend against subs very reliably, not to mention the sheer durability of them in the first place. In fact, when the US decided to scuttle an older Kitty Hawk class supercarrier in 2005 (the America), it took 4 weeks of taking many direct hits of torpedoes & missiles from a wide range of weapons and still didn't sink.
      They had to get manually place detonators at specific points all across the ship just to finally sink it... and that was a ship commissioned in 1965! Considering what goes into an aircraft carrier 2 generations removed from that & commissioned in the 2010's-2020's, it's pretty safe to say it'll take more than a sub to "take out the biggest carrier."

  • @samsonmaximus2951
    @samsonmaximus2951 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    I'm proud to know the US has a formidable military mite. Still, do not compare us with the competition. Anything can happen in war. So best be quiet and not brag.

  • @beezo1029
    @beezo1029 3 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    Crazy how five off'em bow to stern would be almost a mile long.

  • @curtiskimbrel1760
    @curtiskimbrel1760 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Thak you from a Airedale who served on the carriers America, Constellation, and Kitty Hawk!

  • @longdatedoptionsleaps6112
    @longdatedoptionsleaps6112 3 ปีที่แล้ว +10

    You are missing the most important aspect of US aircraft carrier dominance …. There are only 2 countries with extensive REAL large scale Carrier task force combat experience and thats the US and Japan. That combat experience is institutionalised and passed along generation to generation in both countries Naval Academies and this is the key to difference. China doesn’t stand a chance even if they build up their Aircraft Carrier numbers, they will face both the US and Japan in any open conflict and its GAME OVER. This isn’t speculation it’s confirmed by China Millitary Naval leadership who are much more realistic than their political counterparts.

    • @SmeeUncleJoe
      @SmeeUncleJoe 2 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      "Game over" you mean like in Vietnam and Korea when the USA indirectly tried to take on China and got it's ass handed back to them in a basket ? These people are indefatigable, all the more so on a battle field. They are determined and super hard workers. Pretty hard to beat that. Look what they just built in China in the last 3 decades. I would never underestimate them. "Everyone has a plan , until they get punched in the mouth" ~~ Mike Tyson. In the end, you have to put boots on the ground and America has never done well in foreign land battles and never will. They don't even speak the language when they go to overseas missions. They are f'g tourists with guns. Maybe take the money being spent on these hyper expensive toys and start the work of bringing the troops up to speed on linguistics and cultural anthropology.

    • @Palimbacchius
      @Palimbacchius 2 ปีที่แล้ว +6

      @@SmeeUncleJoe You don't appear to have read - or at any rate understood - the post you imagine you're replying to.

    • @dg-vg9di
      @dg-vg9di 2 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      China couldn’t sustain a war. They can’t feed their own people. Their military is disjointed. They have a factionalized military and they do not have any real experience in any military conflicts. Trump already warned both the Russians and Chinese to not try anything. He himself told them in one of his speeches that we have things they have never seen before. Amazing things. I believe him. 50 plus years of black projects that no one knows what’s truly being developed. These politicians we have wouldn’t be told anything about them. For obvious reasons. But when these things are needed, they’ll be used.

    • @lokmanhussain3805
      @lokmanhussain3805 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@dg-vg9di it's good to have great power, but sadly it has been used to kill countless numbers of people for a lie of wmd, intimidating of other countries, use of dirty strategies like smear campaigns and many other.

    • @dg-vg9di
      @dg-vg9di 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@lokmanhussain3805 that’s because we have a deep state, it’s worldwide, that uses war to keep themselves in power. They create events that are used to mask their agendas. It’s all being exposed. Follow the money. Who’s been benefiting from the conflicts. We can see them now. They are not even hiding their agenda any more. They openly broadcast it.

  • @jadenephrite
    @jadenephrite 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Regarding 4:15, nuclear reactors are not like nuclear bombs; instead nuclear reactors are more like steam turbine electrical power generators.