Navy testing two pricey, super-fast warships

[John Picard]

Colonel Midnight wrote:

---

Here's another photo of the Independence that I located, courtesy of Google Images, at its launching last year... Showing just how unusual the hullform is.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/28767657@N00/4048136492/

Cheers,
-CM-

I never cease to marvel at ships on blocks. That is an amazing hull design.

[Marc]

F. Kreuger wrote:

---

I never cease to marvel at ships on blocks. That is an amazing hull design.

Have to admit I'm tad surprised that they allowed a photo showing the hull. Thought it would be like submarine props which they keep hush hush.

Are they wings on the centreline keel or supports to hold her in place (I'm surprise at how she seem seems to be standing there.

[USS KG5]

F. Kreuger wrote:

---

Again, it's like battleships. They were great back in the days when you wanted to nail the enemy with offshore bombardment; however, they're only effective for 25 miles (more or less). With the Aegis class, a cruise missile can be sent from thousands of miles away, told to hang a left, go 15 miles, turn right, and nail the large building with the water fountain out front.

Well I agree totally that UAVs are likely to replace many roles currently occupied by conventional fast jets (though clearly you would still need a carrier for the UAVs) there are in fact some rather cool pics of a concept aircraft for the US Navy that can do either role.

Typically with the carrier fleet, there is a "ready" carrier that's in port receiving minor maintenance but can theoretically deploy in days if needed, then there's a stand-by carrier, followed by another carrier in dry dock. The other carrier(s) are either on deployment or in the training fleet. And that's on both coasts. Bear in mind that there are rumblings in Japan that the US needs to move out, and the nuclear powered George Washington is currently there. I've heard that the days of a carrier being parked in Japan are numbered.

Well I can see how by that reckoning they could drop to maybe 8 carriers, but not really 5, though in reality I guess it ultimately depends on whether the "War On Terror" remains a series of occupations fighting low-tech guerillas, or whether at some point the US faces off against someone like Iran who will take some serious putting-down.

[Colonel Midnight]

Marc wrote:

---

Have to admit I'm tad surprised that they allowed a photo showing the hull. Thought it would be like submarine props which they keep hush hush.

Are they wings on the centreline keel or supports to hold her in place (I'm surprise at how she seem seems to be standing there.

Actually, the hullform (from what I've read) has been floating around out in the public domain for a few years. There was a a smaller R&D ship a while back that was the basis for the trimaran.

That being said, typically the props on a USN asset are hidden from view... but this sucker doesn't have props, just four big honking water-jets.

The centerline hull is actually fairly wide, and from what I gather that's where most of the weight is located, so I can see it being able to sit on the blocks like that -- much like an icebreaker with the bow overhang. Still, walking underneath her would give me the heebie-jeebies, even as a naval architect.

I have some other shots taken from her Acceptance Trials that I'll post links to momentarily.

Cheers,
-CM-

Edit to Add:

Here are the other photos:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/2876765...n/photostream/

(One of my office-mates said, after seeing this shot, "Dang, talk about 'Junk in the Trunk!!' )

From above:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/2876765...n/photostream/

And one final one from somewhere off Mobile, AL:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/2876765...37136/sizes/o/

Cheers,
-CM-

[John Picard]

I would love to have been out on deck when the Conning Officer ordered: "All ahead full".
http://www.flickr.com/photos/2876765...n/photostream/