Este sitio web utiliza cookies. Al usar y seguir navegando por este sitio, estás aceptando su uso.
Descartar
¿Sabías que el rastreo de vuelos de FlightAware se sostiene gracias a los anuncios?
Puedes ayudarnos a que FlightAware siga siendo gratuito permitiendo que aparezcan los anuncios de FlightAware.com. Trabajamos arduamente para que nuestros anuncios sean discretos y de interés para el rubro a fin de crear una experiencia positiva. Es rápido y fácil whitelist ads en FlightAware o por favor considera acceder a nuestras cuentas premium.
Descartar
Back to Squawk list
  • 20

EMALS Carrier Launch System Delivered

Enviado
 
Futuristic electromagnetic launch system for the new carrier USS Gerald Ford delivered for installation on the newest carrier. First of it's kind to be installed. Developed right here in Lakehurst at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst in New Jersey. (www.app.com) Más...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


chris13
Chris Bryant 0
I love the fact that they're finally getting rid of the old steam catapult systems and going to a system that amusement parks have been using for years to launch roller coasters.
The only thing I don't get: why are we naming a carrier after the only man to hold the office yet never be elected???
indy2001
indy2001 0
Anyone who lived through the Watergate crisis remembers Gerald Ford as a welcome relief from the paranoid Richard Nixon. Only a terrible economy, most of which he had nothing to do with, kept him from being re-elected. Looking back, I'm sure many people today regret voting for Jimmy Carter instead. Actually, naming an aircraft carrier after Ford makes perfect sense, since he led the fire crews that saved the USS Monterey (after Admiral Halsey had ordered her abandoned). All in all, a fitting tribute.

And just because a technology has worked in amusement parks doesn't mean it is ready for the Navy. When a catapult fails in the middle of the ocean, you need to understand its workings completely to be able to repair it. Shutting down a roller coaster for a day or two is a nuisance; doing the same to an aircraft carrier is unthinkable.
chris13
Chris Bryant 0
Indy, thanks for the lesson about President Ford. I did not know that about him. I well remember Watergate and the process that brought Ford into the presidency. I don't think the economy was that much of a leading factor into his loss. I think his pardon of Nixon, his (overblown) clumsy moment, and a nation tired of 8 years of a Republican in the White House were bigger factors.

As far as my understanding of carrier air operations, you're talking to the son of a 21-year Aviation Boatswain's Mate (plus 3 years as a contractor on the F/A-18 program in the mid-1980s). Just as the Navy went from hydraulic cats to steam cats, it's time to go to a newer, more powerful, and probably more reliable technology.
pcreece1
Paul Reece 0
I hope that all fo the other new and improve systems get delivered on time as well. Considering the the age of our Carrier fleet, we can not afford to have this new technology hold up the carrier program like it has helpd up the LHD-8 and LPD-17 classes. Granted Most of that failure has came in the form of poor workmanship and not failure of the theory. We can not have another class of ships sailing around five years after completion still fixing initial manufacturing defects.

Entrar

¿No tienes cuenta? ¡Regístrate ahora (gratis) para acceder a prestaciones personalizadas, alertas de vuelos, y más!