@hughfisher9820
Australian here. Right now we have six Collins class SSKs. They're good SSKs, but built in the 1990s. The first couple of our nuclear subs are going to be Virginias, built by the US and sold/leased to us some time in the 2030s. So that only happens if you guys sort out your shipbuilding (sorry, boatbuilding) problems and have SSNs to spare. The new design UK-Aus-US subs will be built ... some time in the 2040s? If everything goes to plan? Glad to hear that you like our frigates.
@slimeydon
You guys are so funny. Who knew talking ships could be so entertaining
@davidvavra9113
Old Carrier Names!
@Knight6831
104,000 tons is arguably the practical limit for aircraft carriers as the Gearld R Fords are not that much bigger than the Nimitz as the US is probably hitting the practical limits for carriers
@navylostboy
Only name after presidents with strong ties to the navy. Either by service, or as secnav or instrumental to navy growth or development
@geoguy001
Australia has 2 LHDs (Canberra class) that have ski jumps but don't have the reinforced decks and thermal protection to operate F35s...Japan has 4 Helicopter Destroyers..The Izumo Class has been refitted to accept F35s...the smaller ISE and Hyuga are rotary wing only
@Taospark
I like your discussion and while the age of plentiful cruise, ballistic, and even hypersonic missiles that cannot be reliably shot down, the aircraft carrier is not only an offensive platform but also to defend key waterways. (Raytheon's Patriot System has never beat 40 percent in four countries in the past 30 years even against slower missiles.) While officers got busted for corruption and filling the rockets with water (to use the fuel for cooking), China's Mobile Rocket force would cause far more than 20 percent ship losses which could maintain a strong resupply rate unlike Russia's dwindling missile fabrication. China's own Fujian EMAL carrier is still facing power issues (since it's steam turbine) and pilot skill issues but has been moving fast to fill those gaps with most experts expecting at least one at-peer carrier group within 10 years with Western carrier pilots being hired at high sums to help in the training. You do have a point of the US Navy's escort ship quantity creating a targeting conundrum for Chinese commanders in any scenario but they're arguably much more at peer on attack submarines which could pick off both shipping and lighter ships before being countered.
@gwagnsso
I'm allways here for the discussions, and the tangents 😁Love me some good tangents 😎
@jeffsr8300
I wish the Navy would just STOP naming ships after people.👍👍🇺🇸🇺🇸
@ronmaximilian6953
We don't have enough escorts to build a lot of small carriers. And we don't have enough ship building capacity to build more right now. We are in a horrible position
@k4000
cool episode!
@keithbreuer7355
Bring back a Yorktown carrier!
@Knight6831
04:25 probably not although the USN won't have answer that question any time soon but what we'll probably see is the later Ford class getting more automation as the USN adopts more of the Royal Navy's method of automation where possible to reduce crew numbers.
@alexis_ianf2
My proposal is for the Gerald R. Ford-class CVN will be increased from 10 to 11! Supplemented by a mid-sized Fleet Carrier CV that displaces 55,000 to 70,000 tonnes with a length of 265 to 280 meters, with a beam of 78 meters (overall)/39 meters (waterline). With a range of 12,000 nmi (22,224 km; 13,809 mi) at 18 knots (33 km/h; 21 mph), with a maxed speed of 30 knots (56 km/h; 35 mph) a crew of 2,000 to 3,900 personnel. With a mixed of manned fighters likely 24 supplemented by Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA), UCAV, and E-2D Advanced Hawkeye AWACS with 3~4, and mixed rotery-wing fleet of manned/unmanned. As for how many I think 6~9 with 1~2 forward-deployed in Japan in the Pacific, another in Joint-Base Pearl Harbour-Hickam, and 1 forward-deployed in either Spain or the UK.
@NFS_Challenger54
Well, you guys haven't lost this subscriber, so you can rest assure. I love the fact both of you have so much fun doing these podcasts. Though while not a fan of war, but although a history buff/enthusiast of war, I'm hoping that things don't deteriorate any further. I know that sounds naive of me, but I digress. If a war with China does happen, could the Navy use already existing vessels like one of the battleships (I would be aiming for Wisconsin since she's in the best material condition)? In a way to temporarily keep the number of ships high enough. If the battleship (as a whole) were to come back, I'd advocate for the construction of a modern-day Montana-class.
@richardmeyeroff7397
You always talk about warships of all sizes. I think that we need to build up our logistical fleet; tankers, ammo ship and repair ships.
@jackray1337
Bring back the old carrier names!
@MichaelHeal99
I would like to see a new Yorktown, but lots of smaller carriers like the US has.
@christianvalentin5344
Yes,. Saratoga, Yorktown, Lexington, Hornet, Boh Homme Richard,…..
@Knight6831