Speculation: What can Humaniti offer the Loroi?

[Karst45]

Turning at very high speeds can be perilous, if the ship is not designed for it.)

The Fast and The Furious 8: Pacific Drift

SpoilerShow

i would love to see below deck how all the plane are clusterd in (yes in) the side of the wall.

[fredgiblet]

They weren't. This is only done during shakedown cruises where the ship is practically empty.

[Arioch]

I do notice one F-18 perched precariously on the flight deck, though.

[wasp609]

i wonder if the loroi would like bacon.

[GeoModder]

Now I want a sci-fi race that pours immense amounts of wealth and resources into building giant spacecraft that they can race around the solar system. Who can slingshot orbit drift the best?

You mean... like the Soia tonsillat?

[GeoModder]

I do notice one F-18 perched precariously on the flight deck, though.

I'm used to seeing a fair amount of planes on a carrier deck, so wonder what's going on here. Did the air group got downsized? Is there a large mission in progress? Or did all the other deck-based planes take a dive?

[Zakharra]

I do notice one F-18 perched precariously on the flight deck, though.

I'm used to seeing a fair amount of planes on a carrier deck, so wonder what's going on here. Did the air group got downsized? Is there a large mission in progress? Or did all the other deck-based planes take a dive?

They weren't. This is only done during shakedown cruises where the ship is practically empty.

[Arioch]

Yeah, current carriers don't sail out of port with more than a handful of aircraft on board; the air wings do their own workups separately and fly out to the carrier at sea.

[fredgiblet]

The pilots are the first ones home since they fly to a land base before the carrier docks.

[GeoModder]

Later this week, I'll be visiting the USS Midway. Probably I'm going to be impressed by the size of the ship until I hear somebody talk about the latest class of super carriers.

[fredgiblet]

Honestly the Midway isn't that much smaller than the Nimitz or Gerald R Ford classes. It's certainly smaller, but only by a bit.

[GeoModder]

Honestly the Midway isn't that much smaller than the Nimitz or Gerald R Ford classes. It's certainly smaller, but only by a bit.

I sometimes wonder why Nimitz -and Ford class ships are so much more massive then earlier 'classic'-propelled carriers like the USSMidway, or the Forrestal class, while those were only a bit smaller. They're about 40,000 and 20,000 ton less massive, respectively.

[discord]

geo: might be some *shock* armoring involved.
since outside dimensions don't seem to change all that much, not 25% much any way... either less empty space, and that is pretty stupid on a carrier or insanely much larger propulsion aka nuke plants which could make sense on a battleship to accommodate future energy hungry weapon systems....but the only explanation that fits the bill in my opinion is armor.

although on second thought, i think a serious rethinking in design might be a culprit....the gerald seems more....solid compared to forrestal which seemed more sleek, it also explains how a increase from 60.000 to 100.000 only results in a 10% increase in draft, there is a good picture of the lower hull of the gerald on wikipedia, dang that is some flat bottom.

[Arioch]

The nuclear reactors themselves and their shielding might be part of it.

[dragoongfa]

The Nimitz Class had an increase in tonnage mainly due to the HUGE nuclear reactors, which later proved themselves inadequate to support the electricity demands of the new electronic systems that were incorporated.

The Ford class has smaller, lighter reactors that produce far more power (3 times more iirc) but the tonnage stays the same because of all the new toys that have been added (including some armor for the Russian/Chinese carrier killer missiles). The heavily automated systems of the Ford also weight a lot but they may prove themselves cheaper in the long run due to the lower crew requirements.

[GeoModder]

That explains it then. Thanks guys.

[JQBogus]

Does a Nimitz's reactors weigh more than a Forrestal's steam generating plant plus a full load of fuel for it, though?

Forrestal's full loaded displacement is 80,000 tons, while its 'standard displacement' is only ~60,000 tons. Traditionally, the 'standard displacement' of a ship is its displacement fully loaded for war (as in with all weapons, munitions, supplies & crew aboard) but without the weight of the ship's fuel & boiler water. This would mean that Forrestal carried 20,000 tons of fuel & water. I know that an Iowa class BB carried 9-10,000 tons of fuel (2.5 million gallons) and it was a lighter ship with a smaller power plant. It isn't impossible that Forrestal between its greater size and possibly longer range, carried twice that.

[Nemo]

geo: might be some *shock* armoring involved.

The Midway class actually had 6 inch armor belts that were removed in their 1980s refit to increase freeboard. And they're working on giving the Ford class shields rather than armor plating. Well, they call it "dynamic armor". Use of electromagnetic fields to disrupt a shaped charge warhead's ionized plasma jets. I say raise the shields.

Does a Nimitz's reactors weigh more than a Forrestal's steam generating plant plus a full load of fuel for it, though?

I don't have the exact numbers on hand but remember aviation fuel in your figures. Virtually any savings made replacing the ship's fuel with a nuke would have gone to thirsty jet engines. And of course the power plant itself is much heavier as well.



I think the numbers involved are a bit deceptive. It looks like a very small increase in size between the Midway and the Nimitz class. 968 feet in length to 1040? Both close enough to round to 1000 and not bat an eye right? 33 to 37 foot draft? 113 to 134 beam? Psshaw, they're almost identical! Why, its only about a 10% increase in size! Or is it...

Check my math. 968x33x113 yields 3,609,672 cubic feet at the waterline for the Midway while 1040x37x134 yields 5,156,320 cubic feet. A rough 43% increase in volume at the waterline alone.

[discord]

nemo: remember here, ships are NOT cubes, at least if they are any good ships.

[JQBogus]

I was thinking fuel for the aircraft would be considered part of munitions & stores, not ship's fuel, and thus be included in the 'standard displacement'

You're right, though, about any savings in weight being eaten up by carrying even more jet fuel and bombs. Nimitz apparently carries twice the jet fuel and half again the munitions as Forrestal.