HII Unveils New Video of U.S. Navy's Next Supercarrier USS John F. Kennedy (CVN-79) Dead Loads Tests

Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII) recently announced that its Newport News Shipbuilding division (NNS) began topside testing the electromagnetic aircraft launch system (EMALS) on the aircraft carrier John F. Kennedy (CVN-79).
First integrated into the USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78), EMALS replaces the steam catapults currently used on the U.S. Navy's Nimitz-class aircraft carriers.
Video/Thumbnail Credit: Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII)
Support us:
KZbin : @USDefenseNews
Facebook : / usdn.official
Instagram : / us_defensenews
If you have any problems viewing this Video, please report it here: [e-mail]

[@ricdale7813]

Without a perfectly working Catapult launcher the CV is essentially worthless. Congrat's people of the US and US NAVY. Another astounding feat in Naval aviation.

[@allieversaid]

I'm glad they figured out the EM launch. An upgrade worth the growing pains.

[@troywalker8078]

One of my favorite stories from WW2 is the Doris Miller story. Can't wait to see CVN-81!

[@paoloviti6156]

I find that it great that soon the new carrier will be finally be delivered to the Navy after fixing all the issues that is required. Cool 👍 😎

[@LocateA]

I am thankful for the protection and security provided by the US Navy.

[@timothychung4811]

What protection security. More like an invasion of a killer.

[@nicholasmaude6906]

Those dead-load carts would make for a wild ride.

[@barcrrt850]

Proud to be an American!!!

[@ssgtmole8610]

Proud to waste TRILLIONS on this excrement? How many schools? How many homes? How many hospitals? How many teachers would get an actual living wage? Instead of this war profiteering grift and fear mongering. Sad to be a human. We can do better.

[@srsykes]

Do you have any idea what it takes to keep up these old ships? In the early 70's I served in the engineering department of one of these old ships. An old WWII cruiser, what a nightmare.

[@ioanbota9397]

I like this powerful aircraft carrier

[@markzerkle1899]

On Google Earth, you can see the Kennedy at the fitting out pier with the decommissioned Enterprise at the pier next to her. See 04:26.

[@richardgreen1383]

This video claims the USS John F. Kennedy (CV-67) served the nation for over 50 years. She was commissioned in 1968 and de commissioned in 2007. That's 39 years. I was stationed with VS-24 in Norfolk when the Kennedy was being outfitted and actually flew aboard the Miss Caroline (the Kennedy's C-1 COD) when the designated Aviator aboard the Kennedy needed another Aviator to fly with him on a couple of flights. From the time construction started until the break up of the Kennedy was over 50 years. Otherwise a very good video.

[@331SVTCobra]

Kennedys and their claims.... JFK claimed he was on station during the Battle of Blackett Strait.

[@Starphot]

I served aboard the old JFK as well from 1972-1975. We had two C-1 Traders aboard. One was called Caroline One, the other was called Caroline Two. There was an 8 x 10 photo of Miss Caroline signed with a caption thanking all for the tour on the C-1 Squadron's admin window. When my tour was over, I left in a C-2 Greyhound out of Sigonella Sicily. I was attached to squadron VA-34 doing maintenance on A-6 intruders.

[@artetridimensionale]

is possiible to defend the carrier with the energy shield invisible, I think is absolutly possible you have invest time for this shield alternatively a system which once intercepted the missile's trajectory fires a series of missiles on different layers at different heights which create a shield, alternatively instead of shooting the laser directly from the ship to shoot devices at height which close together generate a sort of hammer laser between them that is capable of protecting against missiles, Is it possible to launch a series of devices into the air that together generate a laser shield?

[@Railofthemidwest]

The new ( CV. 79 ) next to the first ( CVN 65 ) looks very good

[@user-fz9el4ky1f]

Can I live on that for the rest of my life? Malibu, CA..Christine Lavin

[@user-gf3lw5pi4t]

How many years is the Kennedy late 5 ,10

[@alfredoberiajr9011]

SOLE SUPERPOWER OF THE AMERICA ALL OVER THE WORLD❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤

[@xman7211]

🇺🇸👍💪👊

[@jimfrazier8611]

Am I the only one who thinks that orange test sled needs a General Lee paint job?

[@nicholasmaude6906]

I wonder if there will be a Ford-class CVN called the Arizona?

[@alexandergroppe448]

Doubtful since the name is now forever associated with a national grave and park.

[@francofava8818]

❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤💛💚💛💚

[@anthonybush607]

We need to get back to twelve active carriers and associated Air Wings. We also need a second carrier shipyard.

[@ssgtmole8610]

We need to go to the stars and discover there was no reason for all this fear.

[@goldnugetgaming1766]

Enterprise looks pretty good for getting retired in 2012

[@nicholasmaude6906]

It does and given the historic nature nature of CVN-65 the US government should be spending the needed money to preserve it NOT scrap it (Which is a disgraceful act of vandalism).

[@user-fz9el4ky1f]

Schmoopy,Schmoopy in Malibu,California wants a free ride..My hair is blonde now

[@mikestewart4752]

Meanwhile the Fujian has cracks on its deck. 😂😂😂

[@halimtalafuka9946]

. 2:45

[@user-fz9el4ky1f]

Anyone have a ship for Galaxy to live on in Malibu,CA..( Christine Lavin)

[@halimtalafuka9946]

. 3:08

[@Jermo7899]

I like the new look. Very sleek. It looks like it has 2 launchers. Anyone know if that’s true?

[@paulmorissette5863]

Four.

[@Jermo7899]

@@paulmorissette5863 really. four electromagnetic catapults. That’s next level stuff

[@paulmorissette5863]

@@Jermo7899 Yes. All modern USA carriers have 4. Even the steam catapults.

[@robertburton6409]

There will be four catapults when finished. I servedbon the USS Oriskany. 1960 to 1964 was a good ship. Last of carriers built during WW2 COMMISSIONED for the Korean War. Survived 8 torpedoes in starboard side. 8 days later was in dry dock hunters point. 90 days later was back on the line. That one and newer are near impossible to sink. Oriskany was sunk in gulf of Mexico, intentionally, is now a man made reef, 22 miles south of Pensacola, Florida.

[@robertburton6409]

Two on bow, two on angle deck, at slightly different anglesvto esch other. Can launch. 4 aircraft in 1 minute just seconds apart. I was an aircraft controller on the Oriskany, CVA 34

[@halimtalafuka9946]

. 3:18

[@johnnynephrite6147]

those new stealth orange fighters dont fly to well.

[@user-je4pi4te6g]

เขาคงคิดว่าเขาเล็กจนสัตรมองไมเห็นเขาไชหรือไม้....

[@halimtalafuka9946]

2:07

[@halimtalafuka9946]

2:17

[@halimtalafuka9946]

. 2:29

[@jaredpaul2225]

USS Gerald Ford super aircraft carrier 💪💪

[@SeanChYT]

They should put some wings and jet engines on that thing so it didn't have to get wet each time.

[@25mfd]

why was this class named after ford... it should have been named after kennedy... "kennedy class aircraft carrier"... that sounds better

[@bob1505]

[that] Ford was a very good man too.

[@MrSheckstr]

The nimitz class was almost named the Kennedy class CV 67 almost went nuclear during construction but it was decided NOT to use the nuclear reactors that the Enterprise uses

[@kerentolbert5448]

Bet some Republican propose one be named Trump.

[@25mfd]

@@kerentolbert5448 The USS Donald J Trump

[@kerentolbert5448]

@@25mfd That would be the height of an insult to the nation and everyone like myself who severed in the Navy.

[@user-gf3lw5pi4t]

Are aircraft Carrie’s the USS Arizona on Dec. 6 1941

[@user-fz9el4ky1f]

My name is Christine in Malibu. I colored my hair blonde. I want to live on a boat!!

[@edwardcronin943]

the old decommissioned JFK served more tan fifty years but was decommissioned in 2007? what’s wrong with this math coupled with history

[@scottlink183]

Laser anti missile, antiaircraft, antidrone and antiship is needed now! Where is it?! W

[@johnstark4723]

It's going to be there, all in due time.

[@melbournechugging2999]

Let's hope Boeing,Ford ,Chevy are not involved building this carrier 😂

[@thomasferrari6465]

Don't decommission a lot of these old aircraft carriers.They still can get used.They cost too much the build to take too much money.They can get turned into drone carriers or something else same with the submarines People will always probably comment on something about this cause. They're too old but something to think about. If we were at war, they would get used but with a rich mentality, instead of trying to get a couple more years out of them.

[@Starphot]

You think so? These things are so worn down that they could not be used for anything else, much less a museum as the old JFK was slated for. For one thing, the old JFK had asbestos insulation that had to be taken care of such as removing. Building an object out of steel 1/5 of a mile long will stress over time with use, especially in storms at sea. I served on the old JFK when it was 4 years old and that ship went through more flight ops than the versions before it that she was in a class by herself. It had more revisions that these were installed in the Nimitz class after her. My uncle served on the Intrepid (CV-11) in the late 1950s. In 1973, the Intrepid spent more time in port for repairs than at sea, they had to decommission her. I saw her leave Rota, Spain to home for the last time. She is lucky to be a museum ship along the Hudson.

[@thomasferrari6465]

@@Starphot If we were at war, they wouldn't get scrapped, but just typical here in this country that everybody's rich and he just gotta keep spending this money like there's no tomorrow. It would have a use granted. Yeah, they're working out and beat up butt. Do you think spending billions of dollars constantly on these things is ideal? A lot of that money could help everybody in this country.

[@Starphot]

@@thomasferrari6465 Freedom has a cost. These ships being scrapped now lasted longer then their predecessors. It is not just the hulls, it is the internals such as the electrical, plumbing, machinery and the other things to keep ships operational wear out. The scrap metals and other materials gets reused for more ships, bridges, buildings and the other things. This lessens the energy and waste getting these things mined out of the earth. As for the ships recommissioned during WWII, these were mothballed due to budget cuts between the wars. When war was declared, these ships were available. Plus there was a bigger comparative budget just to build more ships and tanks during that war than there is now. We have plenty of ships and other military material as the mission to stay ready changed after Pearl Harbor. As for the needy, there is plenty. Just get rid of the waste and corruption associated with any money that is allotted for anything.

[@jessicacolegrove4152]

JFK will replace Nimitz which is 50 years old at this point. Also the Nimitz class ships reactor needs to be refueled every 25 or so years. This is a $4b process that involves cutting a large hole in the deck all the way down to the 2 reactors than carefully removing them and replacing them with new ones. Than the old reactor has to be shipped off for disposal while the ship has everything that was in that hole rebuilt.

[@Bigdangleebles]

Ships have a rough shelf life of say 30 years. Sea water does a lot of damage and the cost to repair is just too much it’s not worth it.

[@peterjaniceforan3080]

🇺🇸🫡

[@user-oo9vi1uw3c]

Nikki NATO Hi You Been Set Up Maybe

[@user-oo9vi1uw3c]

Mayday Mayday Mayday Ukraine Boss Looks Good It's Annoying!!!

[@timfremstad3434]

Do we need another ship named after a kennedy? Besides aquiring a fortune bootlegging, what did they actually do?

[@randybentley2633]

Whilst as has happened before Miller deserves a ship being named after him, it shouldn't be this ship. His Navy Cross was earned aboard a Battleship, as such his name should be applied to its modern equivalent, a Burke-class destroyer. The man after whom 81 should be named gave his last full measure of devotion whilst doing the very reason that carriers exist, being a Naval Aviator. Ens Jesse L. Brown is the sailor who should be this ship's namesake.

[@cruisinguy6024]

Most carriers are named after people that never served on a carrier. There’s no harm in naming one for Miller and quite simply there’s too many heroes too few carriers.

[@ramesseum3188]

So u want his name on a destroyer! lol aircraft carrier is more majestic

[@aurorajones8481]

3:00 Then why do the crew both operating the steam and pilots getting the business end prefer steam over this novel new tech? The Navy is pumping a narrative which on paper sounds nice but the facts on the ground prove counter. That to me is a clear flag. Im not saying something is wrong but something doesn't smell right and me personally if i had any clout id be looking into this. I get it the tech seems like it would be a no brainer and hearing that from crew and pilots was a shock to me which had me write this.

[@aurorajones8481]

Perhaps its just teething of a solid tech advancement which has not been ironed out yet. Add to that the crew and pilots not being used to the tech and how it works but still. Typically if something really works the crew is on board 100% experiencing the results first hand.

[@MrSheckstr]

It came down to trying to decide whether to go with a new system that didnt have the kinks worked of it yet. Or Go with steam on the Ford and then have to have a MASSIVE refit during its first long term dry dock service. It was decided to go with EMLs on the Ford after deciding that if needed the Nimitz could limp along for a few more years and the first few america class AA ships without well decks could be called to provide coastal defense should the situation require

[@richardyoung7581]

Obsolete. A few mini drones hit the flight deck and it becomes just another really big boat.

[@johnstark4723]

lol, you are truly clueless and uneducated. I would suggest that you look up the videos on sinking the carrier USS America. 4 weeks of bombs, missiles and torpedoes couldn't sink her so that finally sent in demolition teams to set charges. Oh, and drones won't faze that deck as it is armor plated.

[@mikezhang2351]

😢

[@kevinkern4661]

Should have stayed with the steam catapult

[@Hey_MikeZeroEcho22P]

Yeah....... and we should Still have horses for Calvary Charges...... Old and Out-of-Date.

[@stargatetitanx]

yep i think there could be a weakness in the new launch system

[@KILLKING110]

​@@stargatetitanxyou are literally advocating for keeping a system that can only be somewhat adjusted to different aircraft weights when the new system is lower maintenance and can be adjusted to each planes weight

[@markbrisec3972]

Rust bucket... Just look at the Russian aircraft carrier Kuznetsov and her sleek lines without the hint of rust, even when she's resting her bones at the maintenance pier in one of the Russian massive, efficient northern shipyards... And then you see JFK, rusting away while just a few workers that have decided to stay on the job after not being payed for the last 6 months, are playing with the carrier catapult by throwing orange carts into the river with it... Sad sad story of the US Navy.

[@rodshoaf]

Russian ships are trash compared to just about every other modern navy... Ukraine has proven that... Oh and the Kuznetsov is out of action again due to lack of maintenance... It also hasn't launched a plane in years due it can't even get up to cruising speed and has to be towed everywhere it goes. as for calling a carrier a rust bucket... while it is STILL under construction and hasn't received it's paint or deck coating yet... clearly shows you're an idiot or a troll

[@KILLKING110]

You mean the Russian aircraft carrier that's already nearing retirement due to numerous fires and constant load on the nuclear reactor along with poor maintenance

[@n3v3rforgott3n9]

HAHAHAHA good joke.

[@johnstark4723]

You need to get off the crack

[@DrinkTheKoolAid62]

So tasteless naming an aircraft carrier after the one president murdered by his own MIC

[@ssgtmole8610]

Why are we wasting money on this overpriced death machine? Defund the department of offence (war department).

[@tomkelly6216]

Troll’s already!

[@ssgtmole8610]

@@tomkelly6216 Humanist. People before fear, anger, and weapons. Move all the capital to social services and we can have better healthcare in america and no more homeless.

[@drksideofthewal]

@@ssgtmole8610 Objectively correct, but you'll find that most of the people under these videos, who are too chicken shit to join the military themselves, have zero regard for human life, American or otherwise, as long as the weaponry is sufficiently cool.

[@edkrach8891]

We need a military for our national defense.

[@ssgtmole8610]

@@edkrach8891We have a military to protect the foreign trade deals that capital hoarders get into. "... to the shores of Tripoli," is in the hymn because the Tripoli-tans would raid american merchants and enslave their sailors. No need for a standing navy if you have no foreign trade to speak of. Sure, it was nation against nation back then, but we should be able to get past that level of human ignorance these days. Nations are made up polities. No need for national offense if all humans are willing to communicate and seek a common cause. We are still living with people who love "Divide and rule." Bleah!

[@nihilmiror6312]

Today the carrier is just a big, easy to hit, target. Best of luck. 🙏🇦🇺🦘

[@zacklewis342]

Easy to hit? Name one that has taken a hit since WWII.

[@bob1505]

@@zacklewis342 Easy on the hubris. It'll can easily happen in a hot shootin' war. It is a big sea and given that scale a big ship is a small target [relatively]. Let's hope it doesn't get successfully targeted. Remember, Sweden successfully targeted one of our carriers in a war game using diesel electric subs. (WWII technology).

[@johnstark4723]

You need to get educated. You clearly have zero knowledge of carriers or their defenses. You also are clueless about the Navies missiles used to defend carriers.

[@bob1505]

@@johnstark4723 No need to get hot under the collar. This is a little like the existence of God. You can't prove it one way or another, nor can I. Only time will tell. Please remember too we are both Americans. I hope we don't loose a single carrier. War gaming (by our military) has indicated we could loose as many as three carriers defending Taiwan. That may be the price this country has to pay. The missiles you mention are marvels of technology but they only need to miss (hitting a bullet with a bullet) once for us to experience a great loss. There is a reason the Phalanx CWIS is there to back up the longer range defense [missile] systems. Once the shooting starts nothing is certain. This is not the attitude of a defeatist. It is the attitude of a realist that wishes to be certain the goals are worth the risk.