The Launching of the USS Gerald Ford aircraft carrier.

[Mugwop]

Good Luck!

 

[gambit]

But but but... we are a poor country with only 1 carrier. The US has so many. They can afford one for a friendly game. Everyone can agree on that. Other countries can place bet in a pool and the loser pool money will be reward to the winner of this friendly game. Wouldn't that make the US less concern about not benefiting in this simulation?

Sure...How about we give China ONE CHANCE for one DF-21D against a US carrier? In return, we have ONE CHANCE for a US Navy strike package against China's single aircraft carrier.

Keep in mind...The DF-21D have yet to see open water testing while US naval aviation has a wealth of combat experience going back to WW II against all kinds of ships. Both aircraft carriers are allowed their full countermeasures.

Clue for you, clueless one. The world will bet on US to win and win big, as in the Chinese ship becoming an artificial reef.

 

[GR!FF!N]

@gambit @Oldman1

can you guys point out how SM-3 can play its game against ASBM like DF-21D???as SM-3 can intercept IRBM,that means it can intercept something like DF-21D,don't you think???

 

[474474]

Lets think of nicknames
Explosive peace? Love cannon? Democracy to go?

 

[timetravel]

@gambit @Oldman1

can you guys point out how SM-3 can play its game against ASBM like DF-21D???as SM-3 can intercept IRBM,that means it can intercept something like DF-21D,don't you think???

Yar its impossible for the ASMB to hit the A/C..

its difficult even for the Subs and Cruise Misslies to hit the A/C... how the heck the BM which will be tracked right from its launch point hit the A/C...

US had the ability to track any BM launch from whole of Russia way back in 60/70s.... now its 2013... any BM launch from China and US would know about it. A/C can move East, West, North, South at appreciable speed.

normally you know what is the accuracy of a BM against a standing target? its from 100-200 meters. So guess the accuracy against a fast moving target. 20-30 KMs.... lol

the ASBM will only kill some innocent fish and nothing else..

 

[noname1]

The US Navy’s Dual-Band Radar that equips its forthcoming 14,500t Zumwalt class“destroyers” and Gerald R. Ford class super-carriers replaces several different radars with a single back-end. Merging Raytheon’s X-band SPY-3 with Lockheed Martin’s S-band VSR allows fewer radar antennas, faster response time, faster adaptation to new situations, one-step upgrades to the radar suite as a whole, and better utilization of the ship’s power, electronics, and bandwidth.

Rather than using the existing Dual-Band Radar design in new ships, however, the “Air and Missile Defense Radar” (AMDR) aimed to fulfill future CG (X)/ DG-51 Flight III cruiser needs through a new competition. It could end up being a big deal for the winning radar manufacturer, and for the fleet. If, and only if, the technical, power, and weight challenges can be mastered at an affordable price.

 

[SHAMK9]

That's a giant beast, more pics please

 

[gambit]

@gambit @Oldman1

can you guys point out how SM-3 can play its game against ASBM like DF-21D???as SM-3 can intercept IRBM,that means it can intercept something like DF-21D,don't you think???

Yes it can.

The SM-3 and others like it are for defense against ballistic warheads/missiles that are in terminal stages.

That would be the stage on the far right of the illustration.

Terminal stage defense is about head on collisions and this is the most problematic because you effectively have only one chance. In a head on collision, you can stand literally still and let the body impact you and it would still qualify as an interception. But the reality is that you want the collision to be as far away from whatever you are defending as possible. So your interceptor must fly as fast as possible to interrupt the attacker's flight or descent as far away from you as possible.

The problem for the interceptor is that one chance. If you missed, the attacker continues and given the great speed the ballistic warhead is descending, which is probably double digits Mach, it is not possible for the interceptor to execute a turn around and try to reacquire the warhead. The SM-3's designers have been working and largely succeeded in making possible this 'one chance' intercept. There is no guarantee, just as there is no guarantee that a single DF-21D can hit a moving ship. But the problem for the Chinese is that there is are many countermeasures and to date, the DF-21D have yet to perform an open water test, let alone against full countermeasures. If the Chinese cannot devise tests with full countermeasures, the odds of the DF-21D being the much hyped 'area denial' weapon dramatically decreases.

 

[rockstar08]

wow lovely ship

 

[gambit]

U have 11 carrier groups already in service and U need one more?

We WANT one more.

What about your recent gov shutdown?

What about it? The government shutdown have nothing to do with this. The ship was contracted a long time ago.

The carriers U already have are technologically decades ahead so much so that those are already more than enough to quince the war mongering thirst of washington for decades to come.

War mongering? We call it deterrence.

I hope China succeeds in developing and deploying the ASBM system. A mere $10-13 mn/missile to destroy these $10-15 bn white elephants. These would make the idea of having this ships counter-optimal while turning them into setting ducks of PLAN.

And hope is all that you will have. If the PLAN is not careful, the Ford will be dining on Peking Duck if you get my meaning.

 

[Alpha1]

@IndoUS
DF-21D ASBM
3,000 kilometres (1,900 mi)

 

[Oldman1]

@gambit @Oldman1

can you guys point out how SM-3 can play its game against ASBM like DF-21D???as SM-3 can intercept IRBM,that means it can intercept something like DF-21D,don't you think???

I already posted the video on how the U.S. Navy would respond to such weapons whether cruise missiles or ASBM.

Yes it can.

The SM-3 and others like it are for defense against ballistic warheads/missiles that are in terminal stages.

That would be the stage on the far right of the illustration.

Terminal stage defense is about head on collisions and this is the most problematic because you effectively have only one chance. In a head on collision, you can stand literally still and let the body impact you and it would still qualify as an interception. But the reality is that you want the collision to be as far away from whatever you are defending as possible. So your interceptor must fly as fast as possible to interrupt the attacker's flight or descent as far away from you as possible.

The problem for the interceptor is that one chance. If you missed, the attacker continues and given the great speed the ballistic warhead is descending, which is probably double digits Mach, it is not possible for the interceptor to execute a turn around and try to reacquire the warhead. The SM-3's designers have been working and largely succeeded in making possible this 'one chance' intercept. There is no guarantee, just as there is no guarantee that a single DF-21D can hit a moving ship. But the problem for the Chinese is that there is are many countermeasures and to date, the DF-21D have yet to perform an open water test, let alone against full countermeasures. If the Chinese cannot devise tests with full countermeasures, the odds of the DF-21D being the much hyped 'area denial' weapon dramatically decreases.

Not to mention besides the countermeasures but the speed of the carriers which are still classified. But they can go really fast thats for sure.

 

[Oldman1]

Another pic.

 

[Tacticool]

Is it same as present class or it is a new class of carriers?

 

[Wright]

Is it same as present class or it is a new class of carriers?

It replaces the Nimitz class, and I believe it gets rid of steam catapult.