Trump sends the US Navy back to the steam age

President Trump has ordered the US Navy to draw up plans to replace electromagnetic aircraft catapults and weapons elevators with old-fashioned steam and hydraulic systems. America’s commander-in-chief issued a presidential memorandum directing the secretary of defense, in consultation with the secretary of the Navy, to come up …

[wiggers]

We (UK) spent billions on EM catapults when steam powered ones would have been a fraction of the cost.

[Vulch]

Ummm, no we didn't?

The two current aricraft carriers can only operate V/STOL aircraft.They are supposed to be upgradeable but the cost is likley to be astronomical.

[Anonymous Coward]

Er, no we didn't.

Back in the mists of time there was some sort of plan to fit the new carriers with a steam generation plant specifically to run steam catapults. That didn't happen. Then there was an effort (originating in the Navy I think) to ditch the F35B order and go with F35C instead, and fit electromagnetic catapults to loft those into the sky. That didn't happen either, I think partly because Rolls Royce lobbied against it (their F35 work share is solely in the -B lift fan). Their fear was that if the UK dropped the -B then the -B might never happen at all. There was also some kind of study done that came up with a "cost / risk" estimate in the £billions for adopting EMALS, ignoring the fact that the US would have to get it right somehow or other. The result is that the carriers are supposedly "for but not with" EMALS i.e. it can be fitted at a later date without having to spend that much reconfiguring the vessels.

As to whether or not VSTOL or a cats / traps system is best is a matter of debate and very much depends on what one wants to do with one's carrier, though the biggest disadvantage of not having cats / traps is a shortage of different aircraft types that can be operated. With cats / traps, there's a whole panoply of aircraft types that can be bought off the shelf and operated fulfilling a lot of diverse roles (air superiority, transport, IFR, land attack, etc). Without, it's the F35-B or helicopters. A not very flexible force mix.

[thedarkstar]

AV-8B Harrier II can also be operated from them during joint exercises with the Spanish and Italians (and formerly USMC)

[BoHu]

Hmmm, not too sure about that one ... WikiPedia sees it as retired 3 June 2026 (USMC), and British Harrier Jump Jets retired in 2006 and in 2011, which I guess was the crux of the problem discussed in the previous "reported by The Register" (TFA link) piece, and Lewis Page's detailed analysis of that long-running quagmire (wrt Royal Navy) ... with no available jump jets and no catapults, the aircraft carriers were going to be a bit 'impractical' iiuc.

[thames]

The RN did their sums and found that when all the costs were rolled in, vertical/short take off and landing was significantly cheaper than catapults.

Training time and maintaining qualifications required significantly more flight hours for catapults than for V/STOL, and the cost of operating an entire carrier just for keeping pilot licenses in qualification was significant. With V/STOL most of that can be done on much cheaper land air strips, with minimal annual hours on an actual carrier.

The US have a much bigger navy with more carriers, so arranging for one to be available for conducting training flights is less of an issue for them.

With the UK, the planes are shared between the RAF and the RN, so maintaining qualification currency is a much bigger consideration.

V/STOL requires smaller deck handling crews and allows for higher sortie rates, as planes can take off and land more quickly. Fewer crew reduces operating costs, and higher sortie rates allows a V/STOL carrier to generate as much effective air power as a larger carrier with catapults.

V/STOL also allows planes to take off and land in sea states that would ground (or whatever they call it at sea) planes on a catapult equipped carrier. Again, this increases the effectiveness of the UK carriers.

Landing on a carrier using V/STOL is much more reliable than with arrestor gear, meaning less reserve fuel has to be carried and there is less disruption to operations than with catapult systems. Again, this increases the effectiveness of the carriers when conducting operations.

The RN had a lot of operational experience with V/STOL jet fighters (using Hawker Harriers), so they could be pretty confident of their operational analysis when they said the way to go was V/STOL, not catapults. The RN invented the carrier steam catapult, so it's not like they didn't know all the pros and cons of those.

One of the options for the new carriers was to buy the US EMALS system. It looks now like the UK would have been in a very bad position if someone had convinced the government to go for that option as it would have ended up with an orphan system.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Also the primary role of the HMS Old-Queen and HMS Before-He-Got-Promoted were as travelling sales demos for BAe-Thales-Etc.

So keeping the sticker price down while also enabling sales of the BAe-Thales-RR version of the F35 was worth $$$/£££

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps, but the F35B is a useless and low capability aircraft.

[ChrisC]

I'd accept the B being classed as having lower capability (if VSTOL capability itself isn't deemed important in its own right) than the A or C variants, perhaps, but to dismiss it as merely being of low capability in general reeks of a negatively biased assessment. Is it perfect? No. Is it exactly what we need and ought therefore to have invested such significant sums of money in buying and supporting? Debateable. Is it low in capability? Absolutely not.

Similarly, useless? No.

[disillusioned fanboi]

Very wierd design choice

If the UK was convinced on using VSTOL, then the 2 carriers they built are way, way oversized. They could have build 4 smaller carriers for the same price.

Also, the UK wants to use "Shipborne Rolling Vertical Landing (SRVL)" instead of the vertical landings the US uses, so I'm not sure about some of the advantages you cite.

If they made a CATOBAR carrier they could have used the same airborne radar instead of glueing a radar onto the side of a helicopter.

So honestly I don't think the UK carriers are the result of a mature informed choice, more like the result of the project being put through a pinball machine.,,

[R Soul]

They could have build 4 smaller carriers for the same price.

And had twice as many carriers that didn't have enough supporting frigates, minesweepers, etc.

The Royal Navy can't do this for the two deeply flawed carriers they currently have.

[ChrisC]

Re: Very wierd design choice

The QE class was designed to meet the requirements of the RN. The same RN who'd spent the past 40-odd years gaining first hand experience of both peace and wartime VSTOL operations from flat tops, and who therefore might be reasonably expected to have at least some level of clue as to what works and what doesn't work...

So if they felt that larger decks would make for a better operating experience, who are we to argue? There may well be a bit of willy-waving at play here in wanting to have some big capital ships again to impress their counterparts around the world, but there's enough evidence publically available to suggest that the larger deck area and other aspects of their generously proportioned design genuinely DOES make a positive difference to operations, such that criticising them as being even just way, let alone way, way, oversized, is almost certainly well wide of the mark.

[I ain't Spartacus]

Re: Very wierd design choice

disillusioned fanboi,

Quite an impressive post, in that everything in it is wrong:

If the UK was convinced on using VSTOL, then the 2 carriers they built are way, way oversized.

"Steel is cheap, and air is free". The bigger you make your ships, the easier they are to upgrade (the plan was to operate these carriers from 2010 through to 2060. So much upgrading to be expected. The number of sorties you can generate from a carrier is pretty much determined by the physical size of your flightdeck. The design study for the carriers determined that the original idea of a 40,000 tonne carrier was too small, and that going up to 50,000 tonnes added 10% to the cost for an extra 40% of sorties per day (up from 60-100). They ended up going even further to over 60,000 tonnes, because they weren't able to sufficiently armour the magazines on 50k tonnes - and they wanted extra stability built into the design - so that they could add heavy things on the top later, without the ship being at risk of rolling over.

They could have build 4 smaller carriers for the same price.

Definitely not. Smaller ones would have been cheaper, but you might have got 3, not 4, for the same price. Also crew numbers don't go down much on ships this size. QE has lots of automation, so the crew is 650, about the same as the Invincibles, despite being 3 times the size. But a smaller ship would still need 450-500 - so for 4 ships that would be 2,000 crew used (instead of 1,300) to probably generate the same number of sorties. Plus double the operating costs and fuel costs.

Ship's crew doesn't include air crew (and their maintenance / ops crew), but the squadron's pretty much come as a package, so those numbers wouldn't change much.

Also, the UK wants to use "Shipborne Rolling Vertical Landing (SRVL)" instead of the vertical landings the US uses

Not instead of. As well as. SRVL allows a plane to carry more stores back. If you're just carrying air-to-air missiles, it's probably fine. If you want to carry heavy anti-ship missiles, or lots of ordnance for ground support missions, you don't want to have to dump it into the sea, if you've not used it and want to land. SRVL was used/tested with Harrier as well, so it was always in the plan, to increase the capability of the aircraft.

If they made a CATOBAR carrier they could have used the same airborne radar instead of glueing a radar onto the side of a helicopter.

I don't know how much Crowsnest cost, but I'm certain it was cheaper to transfer it from Sea King to Merlin (plus update it) than it would have been to buy the US E2D Hawkeye. The French are paying $2 billion for 3 E2D's - that's not even enough for 24 hour coverage for one air group - let alone pilot training time. We have 2 carriers. If we'd bought 4, then we'd need to spend $8 billion just for 2 per carrier.

This and the $1.3 billion France are paying for the EMALS catapult and arrestor gear on their next carrier are more than the cost of a single QE class ship!

So honestly I don't think the UK carriers are the result of a mature informed choice

That's obviously a silly comment. They were doing design studies for 15 years before settling on what they bought. They decided on STOVL, and invested in F-35, before they even bought the carriers. Due to the process they'd been through. They had experience from the Falklands war, when there were several days when a CATOBAR carrier wouldn't have been able to carry out flying operations, and so for both budgetary reasons, and expected uses, they settled on STOVL, but building them big enough to have the option to go CATOBAR in future.

By the way we also had the EMCAT system under research, while the carrier program was ongoing, which was the UK version of EMALS. Because they deliberately built the carriers big, this also left engineering space to retrofit some kind of steam generation system in order to be able to go for catapults, if electro-magnetic didn't work out.

Nuclear had been ruled out very early on grounds of cost, and not being able to dock in certain allied countries. Plus we don't have a reactor big enough, and using multiple submarine reactors (as the US did with Enterprise) was a maintenance and operational nightmare. France's Charles de Gaulle is only a 40,000 tonne carrier, and cost about the same as one of ours, allowing for inflation - and France already had a nuclear plant available due to Foch. PANG, which is going to be about the same size as a QE, is due to cost €10-12 billion - so allowing for inflation about 150% of what we paid to get 2.

[Wellyboot]

Re: Very wierd design choice

The Navy may well have preferred 3 or 4* 50,000 ton carriers instead but the treasury only allowed the Navy to build two carriers, so they went as big as possible while still fitting through the dry dock gates.

These ships have a 50 year design life, by the time they’re scrapped many things that are sci-fi now will be common place in the way pocket sized computers with global video conferencing facilities were pure sci-fi in 1976. Home 3D printers may well have moved on from printing plastic ornaments to full function electronic devices in 50 years.

Propulsion and material technology also may have rendered catapults obsolete by 2076, I'd go as far as saying there's a non zero chance of transforming robots that can fly, drive or walk depending on the circumstances (size TBD).

*Pretty much guaranteeing 1 or 2 are always ready to go and more UK yards are able to work on them.

[Anonymous Coward]

The F35B … the most useless, ineffectual and expensive warplane ever. Both they and the 2 grossly expensive aircraft carriers are symptomatic of everything wrong with *financially out of control Defence Procurement in the UK. They are both also largely obsolete on (late and problem strewn) arrival.

* yet they want more money!!!

[EvilDrSmith]

"With cats / traps, there's a whole panoply of aircraft types that can be bought off the shelf and operated fulfilling a lot of diverse roles"

Not so much, really.

As far as tactical jets go, the choice goes from one (F-35B) to three: F35C, F/A18 or Rafale. The MiG29K is hardly a viable option politically, plus it's fundamentally a 1980's design, so obsolescent, and Indian Navy experience with the '-k' seems to be that it's almost a one-use airplane - they tend to break on landing back on the carrier. The SU-27 derived aircraft in Russian (SU-33) and Chinese service seem to be a bit more robust, but are equally obviously not a realistic option, and are also fundamentally upgrades of a 1980's airframe.

Of the three aircraft that could be selected, F/A18 entered service in the early 1980's - the latest version is a considerable upgrade, but it's obsolescent. If you have it, you might keep using it, but you are not sensibly going to be switching to this type and expecting it to be fit for service for decades to come.

So: Vstol: your choice is F35B. Cats n traps: your choice is F35C or Rafale (and Rafale is good).

As for support types - mostly there is only one cat-n-trap option: whatever the USN uses: so Hawkeye (AEW); Greyhound (CoD), etc. Thus, more options that helicopter only, but not a lot more options.

[disillusioned fanboi]

Hawkeye is important

The French aircraft carrier "Charles de Gaulle" was built for the Rafale, but they forgot about the Hawkeye. As it turned out, the runway was 4 meters too short. So back to the shop for a 400 million euros of retrofit. Not having an eye in the sky significantly reduces the effectiveness of a carrier task force.

Looks like the UK will put a radar on a helicopter. It just looks silly.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Hawkeye is important

Why did the runway need 4 gas meters?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Hawkeye is important

Randomly I happened to watch a YouTube video on the C130 Hercules yesterday ….and saw it could land on a carrier too.

[Wellyboot]

Re: Hawkeye is important

The first take off afterwards, no cargo, minimal fuel, carrier going flat out into the wind was a real squeaky bum moment.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Hawkeye is important

Tweaking the engines or reducing take off weight seems like a more pragmatic and cost effective way forward unless a simple runway extension was not viable (seems like an afternoon A Team task)…. if you can’t get your requirements right.

[Jason Hindle]

Re: Hawkeye is important

I think the current plan is for a radar-equipped fixed-wing drone that can fly higher than a helicopter (which matters when you're in the eyes-in-the-sky role). For now, it's the Merlin and the so-called Crows Nest.

[Wellyboot]

Re: Hawkeye is important

Helicopter AEW is a 80% good enough system, it goes up high and can see a long way.

The UK will eventually put radar on drones designed for STOL operations from the very long deck the QEs have and then refuel them in flight from other drones.

[Anonymous Coward]

Or instead 10,000 drone swarm ships.

[Like a badger]

As far as tactical jets go, the choice goes from one (F-35B) to three: F35C, F/A18 or Rafale.

Well yes. If the military planners either don't plan ahead to commission a new design, or pre-select the winner. British military procurement is a litany of failed "winner picking" and not planning ahead. The service life of the Invincible class was easily forseeable, the realistic service life of the Harrier likewise.

[Ken G]

I think it depends what you want to use them for.

Carriers are about projecting force at long distances. Where are Britain realistically going to do that? You're not going to get into a pissing match with India or China, you're not going to fight the US no matter what you do, nor attack Russia on your own. For the latter, with allies, you can use land bases. The same for Middle Eastern attacks. That leaves Africa or South America. You don't need or want to send in F-35's against Yemen, Sudan or Argentina.

If you really wanted, I think you could get a cheaper EMALS that handles up to 10t and build aircraft to use that. HAL are still building BAe Hawks and the Goshawk exists. Presumably that wouldn't be too hard to recreate for pilot training and a GosHawk 200 version for attacking people who don't have a near-peer air force. Leonardo got part way to building an M-346N if you wanted something more modern.

Mind you, if you were doing that you could put them on cheaper carriers, converted French Mistral class assault ships or copies of the Chinese Type 076 helicopter dock and you would probably want to supplement the manned aircraft with fast jet drones like the Turkish Bayraktar Kızılelma or Anka 3.

[The Man Who Fell To Earth]

1954

The first steam catapult was put on a US aircraft carrier in 1954, because propeller fighters didn't use them. Trump's next EO is to mandate the US Navy go back to propeller fighters.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: 1954

Sadly the Fairey Swordfish would fall of the DOGE 'Enola gay' filter.

Suggestions for a suitably testosterone laden name for the old stringbag?

[Steve Davies 3]

Re: 1954

sadly no.

Emperor Trump wants the carriers to look more like battleships. He loves battleships (the real thing, not the game). His move will cost the Pentagon hundreds of billions of dollars and that's not including the 'Trump Class' Battleships he wants built ASAP.

I hope that the next POTUS cancels all this doodling of a demented toddler.

There is an excellent post on all this on the Meidastouch youtube channel.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: 1954

With the kind help of Kimi I had a go at envisaging the next generation of US carriers:

https://ibb.co/35vLDP5T

[UCAP]

Re: 1954

Looks a bit too modern for Trump

[Zzx Tty]

Re: 1954

It is missing the large solid gold figurehead of Trump at the front.

[Anonymous Coward]

on the good ship Venus

"The figurehead was two whores in bed pissing on his penis"

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: on the good ship Venus

I see we have someone who knows nothing about Punk or the Sex Pistols

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: 1954

Why the Secretary of the Navy even providing lip service to the orangade twatwaffle baffles me.

Just have an Ensign "design" up the next tr-tr-trump folly and when his idiotness asks for plans, bring out the plans and say it's in the works ... "Sir"

bloody wankers, all of them

[CrazyOldCatMan]

Re: 1954

Why the Secretary of the Navy even providing lip service to the orangade twatwaffle baffles me

Because the SoN owes his job to the Orange turd? Who is notoriously thin-skinned about even the appearance of disagreement among his minions with his oracular [1] pronouncements..

[1] In the sense of the Ancient Greek ones. Women who spends days in an atmosphere laden with psychoactives then give of a whole spiel of gibberish speech for lesser mortals to decipher. Although, with Trump, it wouldn't be women because that would involve in acknowledging them as powerful people..

[Mishak]

Hasn't he also ordered Air Force One to be upgraded

To include realistic prop sounds when in flight, like the jet on Airplane had?

[iron]

Up next

Replacing the reactor with a nice clean coal powered steam engine.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: Up next

What's wrong with banks of oarsmen ?

[that one in the corner]

Re: Up next

That could lead to a shortage of kettle-drum players to beat out the rhythm; emergency timpani training courses may be set up by arranging live accompaniment to showings of "2001: A Space Odyssey".

[Paul Herber]

Re: Up next

I'm sorry, Donald. I can't do that.

[Steve Davies 3]

Re: Drums

the Trump dictatorship has declared that musical instruments are a threat to national security.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FguneWZrQcM&pp=ygUabXVzaWNhbCBpbnN0cnVtZW50cyB0aHJlYXQ%3D

Is there no limit to the madness of King Donald?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Drums

Wait until he runs for a third term; the world really will have to deal with The Madness Of Donald The Third.

[ravenviz]

Re: Drums

At least that could provide an alternative for the rhyming slang “going for a Richard”!

[Ken G]

Re: Drums

I don't think he's going to run.

He's just going to sit there and cancel any election results.

The 22nd amendment only says no-one can be elected to a third term, not that they can't serve one.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Drums

BFD. Constitutional niceties won't matter. The Trump appointed justices on the Supreme Court will do whatever the mango moron tells them to do. Just like they did in the ruling that gives the fuckwit-in-chief (and his cronies?) retrospective immunity from prosecution.

[CrazyOldCatMan]

Re: Drums

He's just going to sit there and cancel any election results

And California, Oregon, Washington State (plus a few more of the western states), New England, New York (and the rest of the north-east US seaboard) all declare secession from the USA and dare the (t)rump to do anything about it.

And the rest of the world points and laughs.

[Bebu sa Ware]

Re: What's wrong with banks of oarsmen ?

If you look at the seating arrangements on a trireme you can observe that the lowest oarsmen literally have their heads stuck up someone's bum. Given beans and other legumes were likely a big part of the 5th (BCE) century Athenian diet, being that lowest ranked oarman must have been fun.

Of course even today anything involving politics, money, the military and their intersection, invariably involves heads up arses.

Don't naval nuclear reactors still make steam to drive turbines ? I think the Royal Navy used steam turbines from 1900 until after WW1 including the Dreadnoughts(?)

Surprised that the Floridian Einstein didn't mandate giant elastic bands.

[regiducks]

Re: What's wrong with banks of oarsmen ?

Follow the money ...

Someone is going to make a killing on the company stock who makes the steam catapults.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: What's wrong with banks of oarsmen ?

> Surprised that the Floridian Einstein didn't mandate giant elastic bands.

The Navy couldn't take that seriously, it is obviously a giant wind-up.

[Wellyboot]

Re: What's wrong with banks of oarsmen ?

Yes, the nuclear sub fleet is steam powered, just using spicey hot metal instead of oil or coal as fuel.

Oil fired steam turbines (on ships) were still in Royal Navy use into the 1990s on HMS Bristol, she had both steam & gas turbines (COSAG)

[jake]

Re: What's wrong with banks of oarsmen ?

Iowa and New Jersey, the US battleships, each had 8 oil-fuled boilers producing a total of 158.000 KW (212,000 shp) into the '90s.

[I ain't Spartacus]

Re: What's wrong with banks of oarsmen ?

Yes, the nuclear sub fleet is steam powered, just using spicey hot metal instead of oil or coal as fuel.

The Royal Navy have tried coal powered submarines. It didn't go so well. I give you the WWI K class submarine - and the brilliant Youtube naval historian who can tell you all about them Drachinifel via YouTube

None damaged in combat. 8 (or was it 9) sunk or seriously damaged in training accidents. In some cases sunk with the loss of all or part of the crew, then refloated and repaired.

[regiducks]

Re: Up next

Extra rations for all the men !

Yah !

The bad news is that the Captain's wife will want to waterski after rations.

Awe ....

[Groo The Wanderer - A Canuck]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with old technology that does the job; the problems arise when engineers insist on "fixing" something that isn't broken in the first place.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Except steam catapults are rather rough on your very expensive aircraft so you need special heavier expensive naval versions.

They are slower to cycle and they struggle to launch aircraft of very different weights and can't launch light UAVs at all

They need a lot of plumbing and pipework, which needs a lot of skilled maintenance and Hegseth saw a film where all plumbers are Italian and spend all their time jumping from platforms, and he disapproves of moustaches.

Really catapults are totally unnecessary. The US navy should follow the Royal navy and return to tried and tested systems. The Fairy Swordfish has an exemplary record against enemy battleships, (2nd only to the Japanese Kate), and required little more than a headwind and a flask of tea to take off.

[thedarkstar]

"required little more than a headwind and a flask of tea to take off."

Don't forget the rather nice moustache that the RAF chaps are fond of.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

I understand the blue suits now allow Lady Biggles and so the moustache requirement has been (slightly) relaxed.

Banter is of course still mandatory..

[Phil O'Sophical]

Streamlining

Lady Biggles

With padded bras for better take-off acceleration?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Streamlining

They're more aerodynamic.

[CrazyOldCatMan]

Re: Streamlining

With padded bras for better take-off acceleration?

Or what in my innocent foil-fencing days were called 'donkers'. Apparently, it hurts when the tip of a foil/epee hits the sensitive bits so ladies fencing jackets had an inside pocket in the appropriate place for an appropriately-curved [1] hard plastic cup to be inserted.

Much like a cricketers box but with a different location.

[1] They came in a variety of sizes.

[Paul Herber]

More understandable than:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK33sl64YNw

Innit.

Awrigh'.

[Anonymous Coward]

Fleet Air Arm, if you please.

[UCAP]

Don't knock the Swordfish - a floatplane version of one of those launched from HMS Warspite performed the world's slowest divebombing attack and managed to sink a U-Boot.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

It sank the entire Italian fleet and effectively the Bismarck. If it had also been given the chance against the French at Mers el-Kébir it would have beaten the record of the Japanese

[CrazyOldCatMan]

It sank the entire Italian fleet

Watched by a very interested Japanese Naval attaché who, apparently, took comprehensive notes. Which they put into use at Pearl Harbour.

[Anonymous Coward]

Steam cats break all the time... Even when they don't break, they wear out pretty quickly and become expensive to fix. Quite often one of the reasons old RN carriers were retired was because the catapults were beyond redemption (i.e. even if everything else on the ship was in good condition, the ship was still essentially useless).

Plus, you have to define "broken". In terms of tons launched per day on average (a measure of availability, throughput), I'd expect EMALS to be way ahead of a steam catapult. War fighters aren't interested in nostalgia (at least, not when they're actually having to fight a war), and a better more reliable catapult is part of the equation that adds up to a better overall impact. And, as the idea is to win a war (it's no good coming in at second place), one should never be attracted to the "ain't broke / don't fix" approach; that's a way of ensuring one loses. Winning is all about flying more, carrying more, and hitting more.

[BoHu]

Yeah, gotta keep fingers and toes crossed those steam pipes work better than the toilet's VCHT piping on there ...

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Or you could simplify the system and combine the two ?

It does mean that flight operations have to be synchronised with the galley serving Brussel Sprout curry for dinner

[Anonymous Coward]

Eat faster, guys. The Russians are coming.

[regiducks]

Shit on a shingle and double helpings of broccoli and beans.

Might as well and weld my ass to a plane and fly home.

[Anonymous Coward]

"the ship was still essentially useless"

This may well explain why the MoD arranged for equally useless replacements: the two carriers that leak, don't have aircraft and have propellors that have a habit of falling off,

[Tron]

quote: as the idea is to win a war...

Ah, you misunderstand. The idea is to bag a very large contract from the government.

[Rustbucket]

It seems to me the problem is that your engineers are incapable of delivering the promised improvements, despite tons of money and years of extra development time.

[Not Yb]

Only a small part of the real problem

Tough 'delivering the promised improvements' when each new administration puts in it's own "change this thing" requests. There are no 'small changes' on a ship that size. Even changing the name can cost thousands, especially if the signs have been installed.

[Anonymous Coward]

Government procurement generally has very little real appreciation of risk. It's 1) the cheapest bidder wins the work, 2) it is assumed that the cheapest bidder knows what they're doing, 3) that the journey from TRL 1 to TRL 9 can be mapped out in time / cost in advance of trying.

None of these things are wise or true. But the whole timescale / cost planning of projects are generally based on them. The bigger problem is that the whole UK gov budget is based on these assumptions across the whole of gov. What it does is create an environment where there is no incentive for staff to remain in post to see out projects, because the system they work in is loaded against them succeeding.

[rg287]

The EM catapults require two crew to operate compared with 12 for steam. They’re objectively better, and you save space in the ship from the steam plant and plumbing to bring steam to the deck.

The US Navy is woefully inefficient - their ships have far more crew per unit displacement than European equivalents because they haven’t had the same recruiting issues and haven’t invested in automation for the surface fleet.

The Ford class carriers are an attempt to modernise operations and cut down on crew. Every crew member you cut also saves a bunk share, mess capacity, medical demand - this compounds when you then get to make your galleys smaller, shrink the cook teams, larders, freezers, heads and showers, etc.

Adding 10crew to a Ford carrier is not consequential, but if the emphasis is to go back towards old-style operation, then the Ford class literally can’t accommodate all the extra crew without stealing space from operational zones for bunk/messing/heads.

[Anonymous Coward]

Fewer crew, more space, much safer (steam pressure = explosions), smoother acceleration so less damage to airframes, and stronger so they can launch aircraft steam catapults simply can't.

Because they are solid state parts they're far more reliable. Yes you can't just weld a part to repair it but you can certainly carry enough spare parts in the space saved from the steam boiler room. You don't need to fly in a genius from MIT or any of the other nonsense Trump has come out with. You just need to train up the crew and Trump's annecote about a crewmember who was upset he couldn't just weld a fix is probably just someone who didn't want to learn something new.

Most of Trump's orders aren't on the basis of what's objectively better but simply that he thinks things were better in the 50s. Partly geriatric nostalgia? Largely because he cannot understand the newer tech himself and often assumes that means no-one else can either.

[Rich 11]

Trump's annecote about a crewmember who was upset he couldn't just weld a fix is probably just someone who didn't want to learn something new.

Trump's anecdote about a crewmember who was upset he couldn't just weld a fix is almost certainly just another self-serving Trumpian lie.

[retiredFool]

Turns out the reports about the morale of the crew of the Lincoln were true. They are sending in a new carrier and letting the Lincoln come home. So as usual Donald lied, the Lincoln was having issues, but that ahole didn't care. What a surprise, a sociopath without a heart. I really hope one of his service members in his security detail deals with the ahole. Heck just trip him as he exits Air force one would likely kill him when the 500lb blob hits the pavement.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

>Heck just trip him as he exits Air force one would likely kill him when the 500lb blob hits the pavement.

Have to wait until next year so that Vance qualifies for an extra 2 years

[retiredFool]

I'll take vance over trump. Vance could not get away with insulting service members the way trump does. vance couldn't get away with insulting our allies. vance couldn't get away with threatening to bomb oman just because they won't cooperate with king donnie. vance couldn't get away with cancelling some of the already scheduled military exercises with SK because donnie didn't think SK sucked his ass hard enough on iran. There is something about dumpie that silences the entire gop. Maybe he has footage of them doin little girls at his hotels. I don't know what it is, but it is. It is disgusting.

[Anonymous Coward]

Unlike Pence, Vance is no better than Trump. Perhaps he doesn't lie as often, but that's just one part of the damaging package that is a Republican administration. Pence at least enforced the election law as required.

[retiredFool]

You missed my point. Vance IS no better than trump. vance does not have whatever it is dumpie has that lets dumpie literally shoot someone on 5th ave in broad daylight with thousands of witnesses. Shockingly the supremes did just refuse to take his 5m defamation appeal against carroll, but they have not decided if they will take the 83m one. Like wtf supremes, wtf. Refuse it and let the woman move on with her life. Just like clinton got his pee pee sucked by monica, trump raped that woman. And the courts just keep re-raping her.

[SundogUK]

"Trump's annecote about a crewmember who was upset he couldn't just weld a fix is probably just someone who didn't want to learn something new."

Nope. Vendor contracts stipulate a lot of onboard equipment is vendor repairable only. Utter insanity from the DoD but predates Trump by years.

[Paul Hovnanian]

"but you can certainly carry enough spare parts in the space saved from the steam boiler room. You don't need to fly in a genius from MIT"

We need to fly in the parts plus a defense contractor's maintenance team. Because our military doesn't have the right to repair its own stuff. Or the supporting (company proprietary) documentation required.

[SundogUK]

They're not "objectively better" if they DON'T WORK.

[Not Yb]

But they do work. The Ford carrier was launching regularly, and faster than the steam cat carriers, during the Iran war.

[Anonymous Coward]

US ships have more crew because they're needed to run the junk food outlets on board. Somebody's got to sell the big bacs and bucket-sized coca-colas.

[Charlie Clark]

But there is something wrong with presidential micromanaging these kind of details. The US Navy is keen to replace the steam catapults which are expensive and difficult to maintain.

[SundogUK]

I doubt the President is micromanaging this but he is the only one who can issue the EO. Because, you know, he heads the executive.

[LogicGate]

See no bid contract on reflecting pool (Documentary below). This man micro-manages EOs whenever he sees someting on the TV at night or somebody offers a wad of cash.

https://youtu.be/GU_ID0asQ3M?si=P_R0E_FV9hHAe8DG

[Not Yb]

He probably saw a documentary about the Ford's teething problems back in the first administration, and has been going on and on about it ever since.

The Ford's catapults are actually doing quite well these days. Not perfect, but neither was steam.

[Anonymous Coward]

"But there is something wrong with presidential micromanaging these kind of details."

Why? He's brought about world peace, sorted out the Norks/Iran/Putin, fixed the US economy and trade deficit, covered the White House in bling, won every golf tournament and chose the interior decor for Air Force One, making billions from graft and corruption as he did all that. He's got plenty of free time on his hands to redesign his navy's warships.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

And remember he brought peace to FIFA ending the world football war

[CrazyOldCatMan]

And remember he brought peace to FIFA ending the world football war

Looks to have broken out again..

[Anonymous Coward]

He also knows that magnets don't work in water!

[Steve Davies 3]

There are more important things for the USN

to work on,

How about providing proper food for those on those super carriers?

How about providing clean showers?

Oh, and moral is at an all time low. because of the length of deployments, lack of sleep and just about everything else.

But with Donald Trump in charge .... He's more concerned about building his copy of the Brandenburg Gate than the USN.

[ComputerSays_noAbsolutelyNo]

Re: There are more important things for the USN

The tremendous Brandenburg Gate de Trioumphe. It's the best, everybody says so.

[Bebu sa Ware]

Brandenburg Gâteau de Triomphe

After the DC Reflecting Pool cockup I would not be surprised if the cretin ended up with two millon tonnes of Eton mess plonked in the middle of Columbia Island.

Apparently Gateau Triomphe is a thing albeit from the home of the " cheese eating …" (you know the rest.)

Perhaps it ought to be Battenberg Gâteau de Triomphe.

[Judge Mental]

Re: Brandenburg Gâteau de Triomphe

I hear he wants to rename Washington to Trumpton.

[Rich 11]

Re: Brandenburg Gâteau de Triomphe

All he has to do to achieve that is to block up the sewers and the city will want to rename itself.

[that one in the corner]

Re: Brandenburg Gâteau de Triomphe

> I hear he wants to rename Washington to Trumpton

Of course; he heard the lyrics and realised they were all about his Great Vision of Modern Warfighting. All together now: Pew Pew Barney McGrew...

[retiredFool]

Re: Brandenburg Gâteau de Triomphe

A friend just recently toured spacex facility, you know the town that elon owns. She saw statues of leon around town. That is just sick. Narcissism and sociopath, what a combo.

[MacGuffin]

Re: There are more important things for the USN

And the Jeffrey Epstein Memorial Dance Hall

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: There are more important things for the USN

…and fleet of Candy dispensing vans…

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: There are more important things for the USN

Deploy the child catchers.

(still creepy as hell)

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: There are more important things for the USN

Child catcher

Back in the day, my younger sister freaked in the cinema and hid for the rest of the movie.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: There are more important things for the USN

>But with Donald Trump in charge

I though the Fox News host was in charge of the military?

The one who insists that only manly men with no body hair can be in uniform, and they need more testosterone to make them more manly and they need to be shirtless to show off their manly tattoos and do push-ups for him to demonstrate how many they are.

[Steve Davies 3]

Re: Pushups

Is part of the Tate Cult signature. Two members were outside the Miami jail and did half pushups in honour of their saintly leaders who were so rudely incarcerated in the jail.

[Scene it all]

Re: There are more important things for the USN

That musclebound Fox host guy can't manage to do a single chinup properly. I have seen schoolkids able to do it. Female schoolkids.

[Annihilator]

Re: There are more important things for the USN

To be fair, I could do a chin-up a kid. You've got much less mass and much less distance to lift. Granted your arms weren't as strong, but the square-cube law says that it's easier as a kid - your muscles only increase based on surface area of muscles, vs volume of your body mass.

[retiredFool]

Re: There are more important things for the USN

The food thing comment I thought might be just a common complaint until I saw a photo a mom got from her son on the Lincoln that TMZ published. https://www.tmz.com/2026/08/18/mom-of-sailor-on-uss-abraham-lincoln-explains-horrifying-conditions/#continued It really does look like dog food. And mom is a trumper. How is that even possible when she sees her own flesh and blood getting the short end?

[retiredFool]

Re: There are more important things for the USN

To the thumb down, look at the photo and tell me you'd eat that. My dog gets better. And my dog is not defending the nation.

[Anonymous Coward]

Common sense?

What have they done with the real DJT?

This one's done something sensible and mandated a return to proven technology.

The REAL DJT would have insisted that the catapults were Ivermectin powered and the operators work with a UV lamp up their ass.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: Common sense?

The DJT that declared the entire US navy would be replaced by a single big beautiful bomb-magnet battleship?

That would be bigger and better and more covered in white gold paint than any other white gold elephant ever built by a crazed dictator who eventually ended up shooting himself in his own bunker

[Anonymous Coward]

No changes shall be made without the approval of the secretary of defense

Easy enough to get approval from Hegseth, just put a swastika on it. Maybe some skulls too.

[You aint sin me, roit]

Re: No changes shall be made without the approval of the secretary of defense

And some crosses. Lots of crosses.

[Anonymous Coward]

Sir Humphrey Wouldn’t Even Break Sweat

He’d be able to keep such an order bogged down in planning, review, inquiry, testing for years, certainly long after the fools in charge move on. If an arcane, slow moving and complex procurement system is ever to have any advantages, now is the time to shine.

[Charlie Clark]

Re: Sir Humphrey Wouldn’t Even Break Sweat

Yes, but the US civil service is much more political and many layers of staff, even if they are experts in the field, are routinely chopped and changed. Trumpty Dumpty excels at this and has largely got rid of those who know how things like procurement – a real problem in the federal United States – work. Instead he favours handing contracts to people he's met, whether or not they have any experience in the field.

The State Department is basically tumbleweed and crickets and the CIA has had those troublesome foreign agents removed to help combat "domestic terrorism". America will soon no longer be able to defend its interests in the Pacific especially after the inevitable next storm trashes Guam again.

[jake]

Remember, kiddies, this is the same Trump who ...

... insists that magnets don't even work over (or in) water (varies).

He also claims that nobody knows how they work, if they are in fact working.

[just4this]

Re: Remember, kiddies, this is the same Trump who ...

He's obviously a fan of The Insane Clown Posse.

https://image.slidesharecdn.com/ignitetorontopresentation-100905110947-phpapp01/75/Fucking-Magnets-How-Do-They-Work-How-Thinking-Like-The-Insane-Clown-Posse-Can-Inspire-Innovation-1-2048.jpg

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: Remember, kiddies, this is the same Trump who ...

>He also claims that nobody knows how they work

they just can't easily explain it

[Bebu sa Ware]

Re: nobody knows how they [magnets] work, if they are in fact working.

If they didn't "work" they wouldn't be magnets just bits of metallic alloy hence magnets by definition, work but with magnetism just stuffing about with semantics won't get you very far.

I wouldn't overthink Trump, he obviously got a "donation" from the chaps who used to make the steam catapults, ostensibly to be used for the Arch or Ballroom — the money not the catapults.

[DS999]

This won't happen

Oh they'll spend millions "drawing up plans" but the orange pedo will likely die before his term ends, or even if he hangs on has only two years and a handful of months left. So they know they won't have to actually change anything.

[Tom Chiverton 1]

Re: This won't happen

Why would he leave when he's grafting all this money?

[Groo The Wanderer - A Canuck]

Re: This won't happen

Because the US Constitution makes it very clear that no more than two terms are allowed - despite the idiot's claim that he's found a way to "get around" that. Most of his "getting around" things involves doing it knowing full well the courts and houses are utter twat-waffles about enforcing the Constitution.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This won't happen

The Constitution.

How quaint.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This won't happen

I'm now more worried about who's next.

Junior, Ivanka, Barron, Tiffany or Eric ? Or will it be Jared, JD or Pete?

[R Soul]

Re: This won't happen

All of the above. Obviously.

[Paul Herber]

Re: This won't happen

A politburo needs more than one ...

But who will be The Glorious Leader? It's obvious to me. I'll be The Anointed One!

[R Soul]

Re: This won't happen

They'll sort it out between themselves in a cage fight*. An MMA cage was conveniently left on the White House lawn IIRC.

* As defined by the post-Trump constitution.

[DS999]

Re: This won't happen

I'm now more worried about who's next

Cults aren't transferable. At least not unless you have many years to fully consolidate power and eliminate ALL dissent, North Korea style. So Trump could tell all his followers to vote for Don Jr (or whoever) but it isn't going to have the same effect. Oh maybe if there's a crowded field Trump's endorsement carries enough weight to win the nomination. But whoever is chosen won't have the mindless devotion Trump enjoys, or the brainwashed idiots who watched the Apprentice and really believed Trump as a genius businessman.

If he tries to push his son it is just another Jeb Bush / Hillary Clinton situation in the minds of a lot of voters, which a large majority have shown a clear distaste for.

[Cruachan]

Re: This won't happen

"If he tries to push his son it is just another Jeb Bush / Hillary Clinton situation in the minds of a lot of voters, which a large majority have shown a clear distaste for."

He'll deny he ever said it if he anoints one of his spawn as a successor (he won't, because he thinks he can stay in power) but one of the many lies he ran on was ending political dynasties and having multiple members of the same family in power. Running against Hilary was probably a big boost for him from that POV, the combination of the air of nepotism and her general unpopularity with a lot of people

[[e-mail]]

Re: This won't happen

Scientology and the "Latter Days Saints" a.k.a. Mormons are still around.

[DS999]

Re: This won't happen

Those aren't cults of personality, that's a complete different thing. If Scientology had been built as a cult of personality around L Ron Hubbard it would have died with him.

There will be something called "MAGA" that exists after Trump's (hopefully soon) demise, but since it is a concept rather than a true organization it'll splinter and crumble as different people like Tucker, Don Jr, Kirk's widow and others all claim ownership. They'll claim to have the right to direct what "MAGA" stands for, set its political agenda, make endorsements, and so forth which currently have all been under Trump's sole control.

Scientology succeeded because it was set up to survive Hubbard's demise. Trump has no interest in setting up such structures for MAGA to exist as an organization that outlives him, because that would require giving him some control over it today.

Look at what happened to the "Tea Party" the republican bomb throwers created from their anger that a black man had been elected president. There was talk about making it a real political party (just like Tucker has talked about creating some sort of "America First" party) but the problem with such breakaways under the current voting system in the US is that you basically hand power over to your opponents so as with the Tea Party it'll be all talk. So some republican politicians claimed to be part of the "Tea Party" while running as republicans, but once Trump came along and took over the "angry that a black man become president" mantle no one talked about the Tea Party anymore. That's what will happen to MAGA / America First, something else will come along a few year after Trump's death and inflame the hard right's anger and ignite a new movement that will cause them to forget all about MAGA. Probably something born out of a combination of white nationalism and Christian nationalism if I had to guess. But like the Tea Party, they won't have a Trump cult.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: This won't happen

.> no more than two terms are allowed

Didn't the house declare that a day lasted forever to get around some time limit in a vote?

Just have the supreme court declare that the founders meant his 4year term to be 4 galactic years.

[the spectacularly refined chap]

Re: This won't happen

Didn't the house declare that a day lasted forever to get around some time limit in a vote?

Just have the supreme court declare that the founders meant his 4year term to be 4 galactic years.

Sadly although this was clearly meant sarcastically it is close to the truth. The US Constitution references a "time limited" copyright protection, but after repeated Mickey Mouse extensions it was seriously proposed that a "forever, less a day" limit would fit the bill.

[Paul Hovnanian]

Re: This won't happen

Problem solved. Trump can't have another term because Disney owns the eternal rights to anything "Mickey Mouse".

[xyz]

Re: This won't happen

President Donald "Lame" Duck. Mickey Mouse is a professional compared to the orange ego.

[Rich 11]

Re: This won't happen

Why would he leave when he's grafting all this money?

He's not going to be given any choice. After 20th January he becomes redundant. When Vance takes over the presidency next year the two years it'll give him won't count as a full term, so Thiel's puppet has the opportunity to get 10 years in office. The only questions are whether Trump will be removed via the 25th Amendment or he will die (one way or another) in office, and whether the Republican undermining of elections will be sufficiently well advanced after two to ten years to achieve Thiel's aim of replacing American democracy with a system more amenable to the new owners' desires.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This won't happen

I wish he would hurry up.

[the spectacularly refined chap]

Where's Lewis Page?

Pity he's no longer on here. Despite his constant U-turning, basically to oppose anything defence-related the government does, even when it changes its mind, he was a huge fan of EMALS. When the UK decided not to adopt it for the new carriers it was obviously a disaster, even though it was already years late, didn't work, and massively over budget.

Try to do your best Nelson Muntz impression:

Ha-ha!

The ovens on our carriers work too, and our sailors can have fresh bread.

[IGotOut]

Re: Where's Lewis Page?

Don't forget the "Buy everything from the US" mentality. Yeah, about that.

[R Soul]

Re: Where's Lewis Page?

The ovens on our carriers work too, and our sailors can have fresh bread.

That they have no aircraft is a mere detail.

I'm sure even the MoD could have provided floating bakeries for far less than the cost of those two white elephants.

[midgepad]

Re: Where's Lewis Page?

Which mission do you feel they need more aircraft for?

[the spectacularly refined chap]

Re: Where's Lewis Page?

The ovens on our carriers work too, and our sailors can have fresh bread.

That they have no aircraft is a mere detail.

Come on, we do have standards here.

You can't send British air crews out without a bacon butty breakfast. It wouldn't be proper.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Where's Lewis Page?

Lewis writes for the grown-up press these days: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/authors/l/la-le/lewis-page/

[rg287]

Re: Where's Lewis Page?

Lewis writes for the grown-up press these days:

And by “grown-up” we mean “kids grown up, left home and now sliding into dementia”.

I had a look at my gran’s copy of the Telegraph the other day and it seems to have become a parody of a broadsheet. Conspiracy pushers on Facebook are less alarmist than some of the articles. Not Lewis specifically - don’t think I saw anything of his on my skim through, but the publication as a whole… rage bait from cover to cover.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Where's Lewis Page?

It's still better than the Grauniad or the i.

[Steve Davies 3]

Re: the Grauniad or the i.

surprisingly, the Guardian is well respected amongst serious journo's in the USA. A lot of their in-depth articles about Trump and his bunch of clowns are way better than the US MSM who in the main, cow down to Trump in case he sues them for $10B each.

I was watching C-Span a few months ago (that day, I wasn't watching paint dry) and one Senator quoted extensively from a Guardian article when questioning a US Treasury minister. The minister was way out of his depth and clearly failed to hold up Trump's end.

However, I have to admit that the last time I read an UK paper was in 2019 when I picked up a copy of the 'I' on a train. It wasn't Daily Mail rabid that's for sure but it was downmarket from what the old Indy would put out.

[Phil O'Sophical]

Re: the Grauniad or the i.

surprisingly, the Guardian is well respected amongst serious journo's in the USA

Not that surprising, given (as you say) the home-grown alternatives. It's always thought of itself as targeting the "intellectual left", somewhat akin to the French Libération, but while champagne socialists still have some influence in France ("la gauche caviar"), it's waning in the UK. The Grauniad is also really badly written.

The i is definitely tabloid, pretty much a mouthpiece for LibDem/Green policies. All physical paper sales have fallen dramatically in the digital era, the Telegraph still sells about the same as the i and the Grauniad combined but all are far behind the big tabloids like the Mail/Sun/Mirror.

[rg287]

Re: Where's Lewis Page?

Guardian has certainly gone downhill since Rusbridger left. Viner is a decent editor, but doesn’t have Rusbridger’s teeth when it comes to the harder hitting investigative work.

Nonetheless, they’re broadly doing sensible journalism - the Graun isn’t running titles like ‘I’ve got more money than I can spend – how can I shelter it from the socialists?’. The Telegraph has gone from “sensible right” to looking like the Daily Mash LARPing as a right wing paper. Some of their material should go back to GOP headquarters and stay there.

[Phil O'Sophical]

Re: Where's Lewis Page?

I'm nore sure that "I haven’t dated for years and want to try again. How do I prepare for the storm?" or "life under the Taliban, how to fight back against AI, and … aliens", to pick two headlines from today's Guardian, are much better!

[rg287]

Re: Where's Lewis Page?

Ah well done. You thought I wouldn't look those articles up.

The first one is a lifestyle article about people going back to dating... Lifestyle is always a fluffy section in any paper.

The second one is a round-up of five articles from the week. The full title - which you truncated - is: "Five Great Reads: life under the Taliban, how to fight back against AI, and … aliens"... a round up of 5 articles from the week discussing women in Afghan, the risks around people being emotionally attached to AI, and a bit about the Fermi paradox... Also not an unreasonable fluffy weekend bit.

This is entirely different to sections such as news or consumer affairs - which you would expect to be a bit more rigorous - running ragebait and articles that are technically correct but also horrifically misleading.

[R Soul]

Re: Where's Lewis Page?

Headlines and dire non-stories like that can also be found in the Torygraph. But not in the Daily Heil - unless they can work in an angle on house prices

[CrazyOldCatMan]

Re: Where's Lewis Page?

And by “grown-up” we mean “kids grown up, left home and now sliding into dementia”.

AKA "The ToryGraph".

rage bait from cover to cover.

Yeah. Sounds like the right-wing parties generally. Not an original, workable thought between them.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Or more importantly: The UK's Newest Aircraft Carrier, Complete With Its Own Pub, Has Landed In America

[Bebu sa Ware]

Re: The UK's Newest Aircraft Carrier, Complete With Its Own Pub, Has Landed In America

For a moment I thought that UK carrier had flown to the US.

I was reading something last week that proposed flying aircraft carriers although not entirely novel — Wholigans will recognise the HMS Valiant and others, the flying carrier in Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow - curiously both were British.

The article didn't quite elaborate on exactly how one might keep 80,000 tonnes^† of carrier in the air for extended periods only just how wonderfully useful they would be (??for world domination??) but so would a 4L can of Cavorite.

_{† the weight (displacement) according to WikiP of the Queen Elizabeth class carriers}

[spireite]

Only a matter of time before he makes the ships steam driven, and then uses ICE to find illegals to stoke the boilers.

[David Hicklin]

But they are steam driven, they just use Nuclear reactors to create the steam rather than coal/oil firing boilers

[andy the pessimist]

peace?

All the aircraft carriers sail back to the us to get there EMALs replaced by steam things. Peace breaks out in the middle east.

Hadn't thought about the israelis. A reduced war capability?

Nurse can i have my dried frog pills.

[Bebu sa Ware]

"linear induction motor"

I remember seeing a demonstration of a linear motor on a late 1960s UK science television programme.

I would have thought they would have got it working in the subsequent 50 plus years. Not a lot of moving parts especially when you think of the development of internal combustion engines between 1900 and 1950.

I guess there are a lot of things the US could do 50 years ago but are now struggling due in part I suspect to an impoverished, unmotivated workforce.

I am certain the PRC could construct and supply a fully working EMAL in a few years (if they don't already have them) which I suppose is the core of the problem.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: "linear induction motor"

Chap demonstrated building a railway to Manchester in 1830, you'd think we could do it again in 2030

[Cruachan]

Re: "linear induction motor"

If people had listened to Brunel we'd have built all the old railways broad gauge and wouldn't have had the issues we do now.

[Rich 11]

Re: "linear induction motor"

Any good railway carriage needs to be at least eight sheep wide.

[Paul Hovnanian]

Re: "linear induction motor"

"building a railway"

Cost. Linear induction motors, as concieved of currently (sorry), have a stator (windings) on the track side. Which can be miles long and also involve a lot of commutation switching (solid state devices) along their entire length. The moving core can be simple iron bars (cheap), but is only the length of the object being moved.

Standard railways have the cheap part (steel rails) miles long and the expensive bits on the moving cars.

One could turn a linear induction motor around and lay the iron bars along the ground. But then you'd have to deliver electrical power to the cars. Most likely through a caternary wire (wires). And every time I bring this up with the Maglev proponents, they scream, "Yuk! Caternary looks ugly hanging in the air like that. Do not want!" Maglevs are a fashion statement.

[Paul Herber]

Re: "linear induction motor"

Maglevs sound like something Hungarian.

Nothing to do with eels or hovercraft either.

[Steve K]

Re: "linear induction motor"

In Zero-G it’s a Hungarian airline?

(With apologies to AManfromMars1)

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: "linear induction motor"

Vancouver's metro uses linear induction motors powered from 600VDC third rail.

The technology is able to cope with both "the wrong sort of snow" and "leaves on the line"

[rg287]

Re: "linear induction motor"

Of course, being a metro, it has an average speed of 25-30mph and a theoretical peak of 50mph. And it's a closed metro system with entirely dedicated, grade-separated tracks, so a third rail isn't an issue (no level crossings, and being newish, evacuation walkways were included at build-time. You wouldn't have passengers evacuating along the trackway in an emergency).

If you wanted higher speeds (e.g. mainline rail), you need more power. Getting more Watts to the train means increasing the cross-section of the third rail to handle more Amps, or increasing the voltage. If you increase the voltage then it becomes increasingly difficult to keep it insulated from the ground, which is why OHLE can be energised to 25kV but third rails are <1kV.

SkyTrain is neat, and linear induction can work - and does. But SkyTrain also isn't launching jets off a carrier nor trying to shift mainline Inter-City services at higher speeds. The peak forces and abuse levelled on the system are quite different. It's a good solution for metros. With adequate R&D, it's possible it could work for new-build mainline, but you lose any ability to interoperate with legacy lines that don't have the induction rail and really it's not going to be appreciably better than standard electric traction.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: "linear induction motor"

> But SkyTrain also isn't launching jets off a carrier

Not yet.....

[Not Yb]

Re: "linear induction motor"

If you're going to be a propagandist for the PRC, at least check current reports about the Ford's catapults. (Spoiler: they worked just fine recently).

[Christoph]

They've found a compromise

They couldn't settle the argument between EM and steam so they've compromised on Rubber Bands.

[JWLong]

Why Bullshit Changes, When Something Works?

Having hands on experience on shipboard steam systems in the USN, I call bullshit on the electric cats!

I spent 5 years in the USN, first as a boiler tech, then a boiler repairman, then as a boilermaker. These positions were inplace onboard USN aircraft carriers (USS Midway and USS Kittyhawk).

Catapults and Arresting gear are two totally different animals, arresting gear uses a big ass air cylinder with varible pressure set to the type of aircraft coming in, it has nothing to do with steam.

Steam catapults have decades of use/performance behind them.

The ship has a steam driven propulsion system, two reactors and four main engines, so there is no problem supplying the needed steam to operate the cats.

Why convert steam to electricity(loss of energy) to be use as a form of mechanical energy(loss of energy) to do a job a job that steam is very good at.

The steam catapults are very simple systems compared to the rest of the engineering/propulsion systems on board. They are easily adjusted to the weight of the aircraft being launched and have cycle times between aircraft in the seconds time frame. The highest maintenance factor componet is the actual steam cylinder on deck itself, and if it is properly maintained it causes very few problems and when it does it's easy to repair.

As usual, some ass-hat came up with this "Electronic Piece of Shit that doesn't work worth a Crap" as is standard for any large organization because "Change is Good!". When it comes to genertating large amounts of controllable energy you can't beat steam. Why do you think they still use steam in the propulsion system to this date and haven't converted it to an electric(motor) driven system on aircraft carriers. When these electronic systems go down(cats) it's time to park the ship at some repair facility for a duration of time that wasn't included in the original oversight of converting to "Electronic Catapults" for a good reason, they are to fucking hard to fix at sea because they are junk engineering/design/and build!

I don't like Heir rTrump, but I think he(or one of his admins) got this one right! Down vote me if you like, I don't give a fuck, I know what works in this instance, and it in hell isn't "electric", ask me how I know...........

[FuzzyTheBear]

How to say this politely ?

Trump is an imbecile .. if you have a more polite way to say it . let me know. Everything he touches turns to sh** . Everything. Name one decision he took that brought on any progress .. Vaccines . back 50 years , science ? let's defund , education ? close the board of education , social net ? who needs it ? Everything he does goes against and defies all logic. There's no progress , it's all backpedaling and goimg back to the misery democrats fought so hard to get rid of , against all republican interference. I am so fed up that i truly hope Iranians will get him and rid the world of this idiot.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: How to say this politely ?

>Everything he does goes against and defies all logic.

Depends whose side you think he's on.

You know how hard it is to get a Hero of the Soviet Union medal these days ?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: How to say this politely ?

Vlad will be presenting him with his Lenin Peace Prize sometime soon, though it will be renamed the Putin Peace Badge by then.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: How to say this politely ?

I thought we were allies with North Korea now?

The place where the next anointed Great Leader is a teenage girl - can't think why he suddenly wants to be best friends.

[NetMage]

Re: How to say this politely ?

Two NASA Director appointments.

[Vader]

If I was Iran I wouldn't try to kill him and corrupted family. They are doing a brilliant making the USA a Mickey Mouse country and irrelevant. Next the world needs to stop using the USA Dollar as the world currency.

[Anonymous Coward]

Hail to the Chief

to be played on the Musical Instruments that are a threat to National Security.

A poster mentioned this and got downvoted.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FguneWZrQcM&pp=ygUabXVzaWNhbCBpbnN0cnVtZW50cyB0aHJlYXQ%3D

Just one link to reports on the matter but what the hell, downvote this as well.

[JLV]

You know who else has been EMALSing?

China’s Type 003 Fujian.

Regardless of how well it works for them you can expect much national dick-waving and a swelling of national pride. And if they get it right - IF - EMALS are supposedly better in principle.

I’m torn between Trump making a good call on over complexity. And Trump’s “guts” providing the expertise while he wants to polish up a “Awww, shucks, common sense, old ways are best: big beautiful steam. I’m just looking out for US taxpayers.” image.

[Fruit and Nutcase]

Trebuchet

I am bigly disappointed that the Stable Genius did not want the carriers to use trebuchet to launch aircraft. It would be the equivalent of his excellent idea to inject disinfectant as a treatment opton for Covid-19

[just4this]

powered

Steam catapult really does need the word 'powered' included.

As it is, it sounds like striped paint, post holes, left handed screwdrivers and lots of other shite that apprentices are often sent to the suppliers to pick up.

Unless they fire vapour into the sky to form clouds of course.

[Charlie Stross]

Nothing racist to see here

Of course it's absolutely a coincidence that the carrier Trump and Hegseth are trying to mess up to the point of non-viability is the first one to be named after a black enlisted seaman, Doris Miller, recipient of the Navy Cross, recommended for the Congressional Medal of Honor, and killed in action in 1943.

After all, Hegseth and Trump have form for removing memorials to black war heroes.

[Fruit and Nutcase]

Nimitz/Miller

CVN-68/CVN-81

That Wikipedia page has a picture of:

Admiral Chester W. Nimitz pins a Navy Cross on Mess Attendant Second Class Miller during a ceremony aboard the USS Enterprise (CV-6) at Pearl Harbor, on May 27, 1942.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nimitz_and_miller.jpg

There was also USS Miller (FF-1091)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Miller_(FF-1091)

[Tim Chuma]

Hopefully this will take so long to roll out it will not be implemented

Meanwhile the US Navy is ramping up the Arleigh Burke-class destroyers as they are short of actual support ships they needed. Still not as dumb as getting 7 mythical nuclear-powered submarines that will not be delivered until after I am dead and gut the countries finances so no health system which is want Trump wants as he hates universal health care.

[drankinatty]

The Downside to Civilian Military Leadership

Every once in a while you end up with a MORON than can't spell EMALS in charge, the orangutan tinting is just a perk....

[Locomotion69]

I think the "aircraft carrier" principle needs rethinking, given the position of aircraft vs drones in the "latest warfare experiences" (Gulf region, Ukraine).

[Anonymous Coward]

Given what conflict in the east is telling us about 21st century warfare

Why the hell would you want more really really expensive floating target practice for the enemy to sink ?

Big things that move slowly that you can't hide (I'd love to see a proposal for a stealth aircraft carrier) just seem to be asking for trouble (and a fearsome amount of money).

[Aldnus]

I seem to Trump dropped EM first time around for the reasons sighted as cost and reliability, then the next president who ever that was (he was so ineffectual no one rembers him anyway) reinstated it due to his mates lost revenue. and now the tech is failing no surprise, electricity and water dont mix well espicially salt water.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

>electricity and water dont mix well espicially salt water.

Which is why we have coal powered submarines

[WonkoTheSane]

Obviously

Dear Leader thinks that "beautiful clean coal" is needed to make steam for catapults.

What sensible USN folk should do is:-

1) Tell him they're going to do it, because he's a very stable genius

2) Wait 6 months

3) Take him to see the USS Midway museum in San Diego

[Softsuits]

The Drone Flail

Cargo lift support for Drone walls will be a thing. If survival of a Kinetic environment is a thing. Losing a launch base because you can't loft those packages fast enough in a steam cycle is less than optimal. However steam could be used to loft balloons. Standardized launch rails; adjustable is a thing. Show adaptability.

[Fruit and Nutcase]

USS Trump

Whenever that gets built, is going carry it's namesake's reputation...

Bond adversary: "Good evening Mr Bond, I've been expecting you."

USS Trump adversary: expects vessel to perform the TACO manoeuvre