The America’s Next Super Aircraft Carrier - USS John F. Kennedy

[@DarthLink1986]

You're video sucks.... Wtf is your audience? You're not telling us anything that we couldn't learn in a 5 second Google search 🤷👎

[@ARandomULTRAKILLFan]

pin of shame?

[@WhatsMyAgeAgian]

the video is actually pretty accurate compared to a lot of videos that detail information on other ship's cost/information/capabilities. The animations were decent and the videos gathered was relevant, all together it was a well done video.

[@MJHdesproj]

Well - for starters me, not to mention, well, YOU. Womp womp womp

[@calebleuciuc670]

crazy how the us navy is the second biggest air force in the entire world

[@ckvt1337]

and the army aviation and marine corps are 4th and 5th largest 😮

[@1ycan-eu9ji]

The US navy would get completely dominated by the Chinese airforce, no contest lol. China already has a fleet of near 300 J-20s, each comparable to an F22, already mass producing them at a rate of ~100 a year, good luck with your extra numbers.

[@d1vania]

Except it’s not 😂

[@thalmoragent9344]

​@@ckvt1337 Whats the 3rd?

[@thalmoragent9344]

​@@d1vania Then what is?

[@WFox-zs3oe]

15 years to build a boat seems wild

[@raidenj1295]

In 15 years china can build 4 carriers

[@greatesteverog]

@@raidenj1295and they’re all shit

[@badmoth242xl3]

@@raidenj1295yeah, roughly equivalent to the Kitty Hawk class at best, which was built in *checks notes* 1960.

[@raidenj1295]

@@badmoth242xl3 does the kitty hawk have dual band radar, EMLs, 5 gen air wing?

[@kinkarcana1293]

Its a test bed for new carrier features.

[@KappaClaus]

Thank god you are our allies. Makes me sleep well at night USA. Love from Norway

[@sgt.grinch3299]

We need 200 new frigates to protect these magnificent ships.

[@stephen7701]

how about we get 40 built thats planned and not take 12 years just to build the first 1 not due until 2029!!

[@rileyh2675]

I think they should like promote you or something.

[@petru-alexandrudragusin7124]

What about swarms of marine drones? Look only on how effective they are in the Black Sea in the Ruso Ukrainian conflict

[@STURYANPHUAYEWLIANG]

@@petru-alexandrudragusin7124 Marine drones are coastal defence, pretty useless in a blue water setting. Plus, they offer no meaningful protection from the threats the carrier will be facing, which are missiles.

[@dandar4843]

No we don’t. They have an air wing. And a carrier group. Those are their protection.

[@TechMil]

The U.S Next Super Aircraft Carrier

[@kjererrt7804]

a super mass grave to be more precise.

[@raidenj1295]

@@kjererrt7804super coral reef 😂😂

[@stussymishka]

@@kjererrt7804 nah this boat is the maker of mass graves lol

[@huaiyuechen]

I can't wait for this ship be drawned as a anime girl in a few years

[@giftybrown2410]

Kansen go crazy

[@wellsilver3972]

in a few years? you think it takes a few years to draw an anime girl???

[@F40M07]

He’s saying when it comes out

[@loadingnewads]

Kennedy: Let me see what are my new americans doing…. wow, 😮

[@wellsilver3972]

@@F40M07 do you think they are gonna wait?

[@laskey2175]

A moving city.

[@kjererrt7804]

a moving cemetery

[@greatesteverog]

@@kjererrt7804that’s your mothers mouth you’re talking about

[@kjererrt7804]

@@MichaelTaylor-yb6gt exactly. but most likely it will break in two due to the kinetic impact.

[@loadingnewads]

A moving town to be more precise.

[@BRUH-nw9hh]

@@greatesteverog Daaaamn

[@Tuanesto]

American Military making the world look primitive, but our cities and infrastructure are primitive compared to other 1st worlds 🥰

[@edwardfitzhugh4212]

Not in Northern Virginia 😂

[@narwhalito]

primitive compared to what country?

[@loadingnewads]

@@narwhalitoSingapore? the comment was referring to countries with clean streets, good sanitation and no trash on the ground. Additionally new and refreshed infrastructures

[@jdavidblais]

@@narwhalitocanada

[@brycekapitzky4279]

Ok but Singapore has an authoritative government. Do you want democracy or autocracy? & Canada has a $2t economy. They may have some beautiful buildings. But our economy is literally 10x+ larger than theirs.

[@adrianbarreto4225]

Its so hard for people to comprehend scale much larger than ourselves. But Aircraft carriers man, they are larger than life. it is unbelievable that they can even float. It truly is a marvel of technology.

[@gideonpaulgalvan]

Americans people shoud thank your Government because there a willing to spend money to build for your protection and also from his allies God bless Amercia from 🇵🇭Philippines

[@kjererrt7804]

you live in poverty over there in the philippines. you think the american people can afford this crap? with all the homeless and drug addicts they got? it will be sunk anyways.

[@michaelrch]

This isnt for "protection". Its to pour taxes in to the pockets of the shareholders and execs of the defence contractors, and to fuel the US empire under whose control you live.

[@tariktaskin8289]

Ofc you think we should thank them because it’s not your tax money being spent on it. We spend more on our military than the next 9 countries combined. Stfu and if you’re so grateful send money yourself to the US military because we don’t have a choice. We ofc need a strong military and some spending is necessary but not nearly to the extent or waste we do.

[@kjererrt7804]

@@tariktaskin8289 your money is being paid to the PRIVATE owned MIC. this is why the budget is so huge. big money and less than satisfactory products. what do you need a strong military for? destroying small countries that pose no threat to US? this is what carriers are actually good for. nothing else.

[@CyrusJ]

USA is the greatest country in the world…every country spends people’s tax money or country’s wealth to military…

[@valentino1005]

The guy who managed to convinge them to name the ship USS Enterprise must be so happy and proud of himself 😂

[@ConnorEdelstein]

I'm not sure if this was a reference to Star Trek or not but it might actually be just a renaming of an old carrier. During WW2 one of the first carriers the US Navy put out was the USS Enterprise and I believe it sank in the Battle of Midway during 1942. This might be a remembrance to that, or it could be that the admiralty has a preference for Star Trek, either way.

[@valentino1005]

@ConnorEdelstein Well I wasn't aware of the other ship named the same but thanks for sharing this info that's surely interesting. But it would be funny if the ship was named after the spaceship in star trek :))))

[@Gorilder]

it's named after the Grey Ghost CV-6 USS Enterprise; which was the most decorated vessel in WW2.. though the USN has had ships named "Enterprise" back to the revolutionary war where there was a Continental navy sloop named.. you guessed it "Enterprise" So, it wasn't a hard sell.

[@ConnorEdelstein]

@@Gorilder Wow, didn't know that, thanks for the tip.

[@techietisdead]

@@ConnorEdelstein The USS enterprise is a name carried by many ships, the first one being one of the first USN vessels ever in the 1700s

[@ricardoantonio5085]

Back and forth arguments here for how great or how stupid this country is. The truth is that 75.4% of the people in other countries would choose to live here if not in their own.

[@KindaGross]

weird I read it was 75.364567687656% of the worlds population.

[@Karthagast]

"The truth is that..." you are fabricating your "truth" like crazy, LoL. 75.4% of the people??? What "people"? You and your friends?

[@Hyper599]

r/shitamericanssay

[@AndrewLambert-wi8et]

THIS CARRIER WILL COST MORE THAN 13 BILLION USA DOLLARS.

[@Across_Media]

costs will increase every year.

[@NotMeJustborrowed]

A perfect example would be movie called War of Archimedes, This are only mock up expenditures, surely some of it will go straight to their pockets.........

[@w.m.e.cantinoobtrader1334]

China would or russia would build it for 2 billion dollars.. in usa labour cost is too high then atleat 50% need to be a profit for company

[@dennisestradda9746]

@@w.m.e.cantinoobtrader1334haha tofu steel Chyna and smoke stack ruskiland

[@Thepaug2409]

@@w.m.e.cantinoobtrader1334 Thats why russia has, lemme see here **checks notes** ah yes, one that doesn't work and China has **checks notes again** ah yes, one that isn't done yet and 2 that weren't even made by them.

[@davegallo8166]

The original "big John" is still waiting to be scrapped at Philadelphia Navy Yard

[@pfc_church]

I love these videos. I think we can do something about military budget but until we have something change in large scale warfare this is really the only deterrent we need. We can scale back everything else but these carrier groups and we still have the largest military in the world and largest modern air force. If you could get f22 (or whatever the next gen air to air platform) off the deck of these it would be rap.

[@deviantfoxyswag3161]

As a someone once said, we have money for war but no money for our own people in need.

[@timmilder8313]

this generates much of our standard of living. Gotta keep everyone else in line.

[@jager898]

I would rather have Russia and China in check. Think more of the future and not now.

[@Thepaug2409]

Yeah and what about the thousands and thousands of job this ship generates? the value of the ship gets invested back in the country, not everything is solved with public housing.

[@rolandjosef7961]

There will always be people in need. Some of these people are just too lazy to move. I agree that the Govt should help poor people in need as long as laziness is made a crime. There is no excuse not to thrive in America when immigrants coming here are doing well.

[@someonetooknuggets]

Ironically war creates a lot of jobs which is what people need.

[@SamVeale]

With tech moving as fast as it does, it will be outdated before it even gets commissioned. Crazy build timeframe. Interesting to witness the difference drone warfare will play in the navy over the next 10 years.

[@claytonbigbsy3880]

Spreading freedom! God Bless!

[@stephen3143141]

😂

[@Karthagast]

I'll assume you are being sarcastic, LoL.

[@MichaelTaylor-yb6gt]

It's floating coffin of freedom. Yay!

[@The1MkII]

If nuclear reactors are good and safe enough for strategic assets like aircraft carriers, why aren't we powering our cities with them more? Why are we not prioritizing lowering cost and deployment time of nuclear power plants at the same rate we are improving our military tech?

[@DmitriVanderbilt]

Cost and time. A traditional nuke plant is like building an aircraft carrier, funnily, both costs billions and take many years to construct. The nuclear industry is also hampered by tight regulatory and national security controls; other energy sectors do not have these impediments and are easier and cheaper to undertake in (they also provide returns on investments much quicker than waiting 10 years for a nuclear plant to be up and running). Next-gen nuclear technologies are trying to address these problems; SMR and similar technologies hope to bring costs down by improving the "manufacturability" of reactors vs existing plants which are like building a bespoke design every time (due to location and land constraints). Small reactors the sir of, say, a standard shipping container, would open up use in a lot more areas, drastically expand the market, and bring down costs - but again, they are subject to extreme regulatory restrictions and most companies are still in infancy or preliminary stages. Fusion is also a hopeful Avenue for the future, but installations like ITER are again huge and expensive and take eons to build. The private sector is working on smaller, more agile solutions, but as always fusion seems "20 years away" as it has been since the 60s.

[@The1MkII]

@@DmitriVanderbilt Appreciate the response, I am excited to see the implementation of SMRs as the start to roll out, and hope regulations can be lessened (reasonably so) considering our desperate need for alternative energy sources to our current system. Considering time and cost are the main limiting factors, I think we can improve upon those as a species not just a nation if we really put our hearts and minds to it. Considering the US spends $800B+ on it's military empire annually, I don't think cost is really the limiting factor here...

[@Wh0isTh3D0ct0r]

2:43 That's a blueprint picture of CV-67, not CVN-79.

[@Onurb1982]

@across Media great video, but the use of graph where the Y axel is not proportional just to enhance results in the main line of the video, don’t make many sense.

[@Across_Media]

Video still on improvement.

[@franzmuller53]

this video seems to have been written by a kid or crappy Ai as well...

[@franzmuller53]

@@Across_Media low effort Ai crap

[@Across_Media]

@@franzmuller53 Thanks

[@sgt.grinch3299]

The price of sovereignty is high. The human cost and financial burden is great, but if you never had to engage the enemy, you’re lucky. America exists because strong men do dirty jobs. Weak people cause hard times. Hardcore men solve hard times.

[@LordEmperorHyperion]

No, strong man does what is right for their country by not building more weapons, but solving problems with the current US system, and for their fellow men, weak man seek to preserve the status quo.

[@RK-cj4oc]

​@@LordEmperorHyperion If you dont build weapons it will be far worse for the US. Stop being delusional.

[@charleyzacharia9878]

Russia doesn’t even have reliable aircraft carrier , they have one and it’s really old , it breaks down a lot, technically they don’t have it . In the meantime China I believe they have 2 and building the third one , If I’m mistaken but they have never been tested These facts tell you how superior the US aircraft carriers are

[@kimloonyong6599]

Technology wise US aircraft carriers are better. China have 3 aircraft carriers and are building the fourth. Latest news i heard it was they launch drone carrier instead. Much smaller in size than conventional carrier.

[@claytonbigbsy3880]

From what I have read the Russians and Chinas are not trying to compete with the US carries but instead have opted to build a massive amount of nuke subs, which currently outnumber the US by a decent amount if the article is factual.

[@WhiteHoodMaster]

And France 😉

[@charleyzacharia9878]

@@WhiteHoodMaster and Thailand 🇹🇭

[@raidenj1295]

Chinese carriers have undergone training and testing for years 😂😂

[@bigarmydave]

Someone is making an absolute fortune off the back of these.......These should not cost 13+ billion $.

[@Across_Media]

We never know.

[@aucontraire1986]

Off the back of the tax payer.

[@Whoukell-r4c]

@@aucontraire1986 Bro, you're dumb if you think we don't need to spend money on defense. If we don't, the US is done.

[@theravenkingsix2835]

its wild to see that I just saw a video about china spending a similar amount on infrastructure, lets see who pays off better at the end

[@tomdarco2223]

Right On Go Army!

[@Slylilthiccy]

They killed him so they could name their fancy boats after him

[@ericcuellar404]

The fact other nations have a hill to help planes take off, tells you everything you need to know

[@helicalactual]

God speed to her and her crew!!!

[@Robot_GEANT]

People when america makes new weapons: imagine how many houses could be built with that kind of money ! People when russia makes new weapons: how can russia’s economy still grow faster than the one of the country’s sanctioning it ? (I’ve seen both those comments)

[@scottwolf8633]

Since the, "War on poverty", at least 22,000,000,000,000 dollars have been stolen, I mean, "Redistributed", to those that refuse to make the effort to rise above their poverty. Not to mention the latest wave of invaders, whoops, "Newcomers", that the left require the Taxpayers to foot the bill for everything.

[@DakuJTenshi]

In all honesty, I'm surprised the building of these is more confidential. We have private ship yards and warehouses. Im surprised tbeyre built out in the open

[@blakesusice7837]

It’s assembled out in to open. They build the pods then assemble them. Look up how there built

[@cocomarsh1]

of course it'll have f-35s

[@kamilkachnic7360]

13B is not so much if you consider USA has to pay 1T per year for interest on its own debt.

[@MrMrMrMrT]

Hopefully it’s doesn’t get taken out prematurely.

[@siphotheguy1870]

I hope it doesn't get assassinated

[@craigr.h.laurent240]

WHY THE ANNOYING DIN OF BACKGROUND "MUSIC" IN THIS CHEAPLY PRODUCED VIDEO?

[@moose5.9]

Technology is great til it doesnt work. You need manpower and efficiency

[@CausticLemons7]

Which is why no one has depended on tanks, ships, airplanes, helicopters, radars, electronic communications, digital sensors, and more for literally decades or longer.

[@snap4585]

The irony is that JFK was known more for his humanitarian actions as opposed to military actions

[@DoNotDisseminate]

This is only 25% of the size it should be !

[@papatoushrew]

Do you have a source on this? Want to read about the origibal specs.

[@jedidiahhawthorne596]

If larger, then it will be too big for the Panama Canal

[@thanotorious7561]

sources links?

[@yowlolstfu6759]

Americans are lucky they have these in their arsenal. Unlike us being bullied af by China and we can’t do anything.

[@slappaheaux2175]

Anyone else find the irony with the military industrial complex naming a carrier after a president they assassinated?

[@hammadulhaq1640]

shhh you're not supposed to say that

[@bingrijper4203]

Love how america call it Humanitarian assistance :D

[@GauntletKI]

Save the enterprise as a museum!

[@piotrmontgomerytv7786]

Exactly

[@jeffreymcurtis]

It would cost at least $5 billion to do that!

[@GauntletKI]

@@jeffreymcurtis no it wouldn't

[@jeffreymcurtis]

@@GauntletKI First of all they need to cut 8 holes from the flight deck down to each reactor then pull those reactors out. Second of all have you seen any pictures of her lately? And everything that was on top of her island has been removed, and both of her anchors have been transferred to other carriers! And lastly where would she be docked if made into a museum? Do keep in mind that she is more than 200 feet longer than an Essex class ship!

[@paulsmith1981]

They are building a floating museum.

[@kevin2028]

It is absurd that it has been delayed this long with so many cost overruns. Our congress is asleep at the wheel. This is what happens when you shrink the number of military companies receiving government contracts to build our weapons system from guns to jets to ships. It is basic supply and demand economics. If you have only a few companies that can carry out work like Shipbuilding and fighter jets, then it's going to cost you more. Ukraine has proven that you need a lot of attritable systems. 13 Billion for one ship that takes 30 years to build just won't cut it. This kind of shit leaves us very vulnerable in a peer-to-peer conflict. The only thing we have working for us is how inept Russia and China are at the moment. Too many companies in the defense industry were allowed to consolidate and merge, and this is the result; all our weapons systems are absurdly expensive, and if we got into a shooting war with China, which is currently acting like a bag of dicks, we'd be in trouble.

[@claytonbigbsy3880]

Can we please use the same reactors to power our cities?

[@dannyzero692]

You better vote for people who are willing to do it

[@nekopop8159]

We already have nuclear reactors. But the ones used on those ships are probably smaller and more compact to save up space.

[@STURYANPHUAYEWLIANG]

In emergency situations they do, but the city power grid is expected to be able to survive on its own.

[@ankursahu269]

Please increase your warships sized please sir

[@gregc2069]

Aircraft carriers will soon be a thing of the past , they can't defend against hypersonic anti ship missiles

[@kalmurphy5254]

At the rate the United states is going they won't be able to afford it 😂😂

[@CRSForester]

Peace thru Strength! #America

[@paulsmith1981]

This white elephant is indefensible against modern missile systems. Even old missiles could be fired on mass to simply overwhelm its defences. If its a incoming hypersonic missiles forget about it. It should be called "The obsolete as launch class"

[@garthhancock3373]

$13 billion starting, another $10 to 15 billion for whatever other costs, and climbing, but hey pushing close to $35 trillion in debt. What could go wrong?

[@nanky432]

Call me crazy, but I would have preferred a couple more modern submarines which are safe from modern ballistic missiles and can patrol unnoticed under the ocean.

[@kjererrt7804]

you are not crazy. carriers are obsolete.

[@dev-df9kx]

@@kjererrt7804 no they aren't

[@dev-df9kx]

@@kjererrt7804 until you realize they can detect the submarines and can be used as fighter jets launchpad

[@kjererrt7804]

@@dev-df9kx what submarines what jets wtf are you talking about

[@dev-df9kx]

@@kjererrt7804 you said carriers are of no use, i just told their uses

[@jesusvargas531]

A moving target for hypersonic missiles

[@jkaine394]

These can easily be kept out of range of hypersonic missiles, and has aircraft to defend it.

[@ScentlessSun]

The so called hypersonic missiles Russia and China use follow ballistic trajectories. They are very interceptible. They aren’t cruise missiles.

[@ROFLtheWAFL]

And hypersonic missile launchers are slow, land-bound targets for stealth attack cruise missiles.

[@Registered_Simp]

AEGIS + SM-2IVA/SM-3/SM-6 says hello

[@MAC_CUACHIN]

AMERICA🇺🇲

[@djtomoy]

it’s main enemy? the grassy knoll

[@alexx8882]

I don't know why you guys complaining about the money . The wars in Irak and Afghanistan cost you nearly 6000 billions . Compare to that this is nothing

[@PrimalFlexing]

dude f35 on a carrier, jesus Christ lol

[@jasonfairbanks4714]

Please use the correct blueprints! You are showing Enterprise elevations and plans!!!!

[@surgeon9039]

And it takes 2 hypersonic missiles to destroy it

[@davestevens4193]

No americans available to do the voiceover?

[@Across_Media]

We are looking for something different.

[@supagirusupagiru9932]

34 trillion usd debt and counting.

[@leoAguilar-kx1pj]

All country have a debt 😂

[@supagirusupagiru9932]

@@leoAguilar-kx1pj not all country have biggest debt in human history

[@jg5875]

Agreed our national debt is exceptionally high. Can’t ignore it….at some point need to start paying it down and running surpluses

[@Henry-xu5jg]

@@jg5875that’ll never happen

[@RK-cj4oc]

​@@jg5875The US is paying debt every year. It is why so much is loaned to the US.

[@Retroscoop]

Why in fact again a JFK and not a Nixon or USS Carter ?

[@aldine_KSP]

No ai voiceover

[@Across_Media]

?

[@therearenoshortcuts9868]

don't get sniped............. what if the Chinese builds a hypersonic missile... and name it "the Oswald"?...

[@scottwolf8633]

In the '80's, a full dust up with ivan at sea, The Boat had a projected lifespan of 7 hours. We used to joke rather macabrely that post deployment of Our weapons load the smart move was to locate any land to punch out over. Never Again Volunteer Yourself

[@STURYANPHUAYEWLIANG]

In the 80's when the soviets had an actual functioning military.

[@kevin3434343434]

And all it takes is one missile to sink...

[@STURYANPHUAYEWLIANG]

Nope lol, one well aimed missile to mission kill, not sink. It is incredibly hard to sink even ww2 vessels, and damage control is far more advanced than before. Anyway good luck getting that one missile through the several layers of defence the carrier has through her escorts. Hundreds of SAMs, and decoys.

[@raidenj1295]

@@STURYANPHUAYEWLIANGso 2 missiles ?

[@ManufactureBelief]

@@STURYANPHUAYEWLIANG and hypersonics..

[@alanocarlossur9440]

What ever happened to naming carriers after battles? Like Yorktown, Saratoga, or Lexington. Or maybe Wasp or Hornet. They've named one after Gerald Ford for crying out loud. One of the next to be built will be named after Doris Miller whose claim to fame is that he was a black guy at Pearl Harbor. Not to take anything away from his actions, but 2000 sailors died at Pearl harbor and none of them have a carrier named for them. At least they are bringing back Enterprise.

[@jc441-i3q]

I agree, I prefer warships to be not named after people but have names like "Warspite", "Hornet", "Avenger", "Vanguard" etc. Also I wish they started painting female mascots on bombers again.

[@folag]

Wanna know why it's been such a struggle to finish one large boat? Here's a little secret. . . the US no longerehas any shipyards of consequence. China now builds half of all new ships annually. Japan and Korea split the balance.

[@RickOravec]

Nope. All US sourced material, incremental funding and supply base delays move ships to the right. China has no effect on this

[@lyft4238]

Can't wait for the future USS Donald.J.Trump It's gonna be yuuge

[@flaneurfilms1940]

Big shiny target for DF-21

[@xyzaex]

lol try and your country is no more 🤣

[@hibatulwafi2523]

The US Navy is not as stupid as you

[@flaneurfilms1940]

@@xyzaex my country? I live in Brooklyn dummy.

[@scottwolf8633]

DF 21 splashed by the RIM 174.

[@raidenj1295]

Big coral reef for Taiwanese fish 😂😂

[@ryanmendoza1475]

Why same design of china carrier

[@dennisestradda9746]

Wtf 🤣 chyna copies everything

[@klephenthurry3284]

13Billion to defend Taiwan... Throwing our money away

[@jimgrif5998]

Corruption is going to break the American bank. There is no honor in the world.

[@francofava8818]

😍😍😍

[@KevinKragh-j9f]

Jay Creek

[@emp0rizzle]

Who the hell is John F Kennedy?

[@jc441-i3q]

He's an airport in New York City.

[@MatthewWilson-vl7qc]

You see the Launching of a Red Brick ! Im Not All In , on the New Electromagnetic ,Launch System , think wasent sorted at time of deployment , Understand Has potential ,but drain on Electric Systems of Ship ,Worrying ,And Consistency problems ?

[@DanniManni]

the fact that colleges and education and healthcare could be cheaper or even free if they didnt spend tax money on millitary

[@mikeplata3134]

Or if colleges and universities didn't price gouge the shit out of their students while paying their upper level administrators massive salaries.....

[@edwincolon3857]

Imagine!!!, how many houses you can build for the poorest people and how many meals we can buy for the hungry in this country with that kind of money 😢.

[@urosjovanovic3142]

Both things are important

[@radustana]

womp womp

[@markf37talon]

Imagine!!!, how many house would be destroyed and how many people would be starving, if China determines its capable of overtaking Taiwan.

[@TO-dl2gg]

Imagine if we stopped giving our money to everyone else we’d be more than able to do both ..Have carriers and take care of our less fortunate fellow citizens!!!!

[@tommypaget2294]

And then America will conquered by China?

[@1ycan-eu9ji]

China built 2.5 carriers in the time this one was built, at 1/10th of the cost

[@mikeplata3134]

None of China's aircraft carriers have the capabilities of US supercarriers. They are decades behind. Same with submarines.

[@1ycan-eu9ji]

​@@mikeplata3134 "decades behind" no they're not, the fujian is literally on par with a US supercarrier the only difference being that it's not using nuclear power. But if you knew anything about nuclear vs conventional, nuclear is not automatically better, conventional can indeed even be faster, what nuclear gives is range, which is not something that China is focusing on as their requirement is for the most part only east asia to the middle east, which can be achieved by conventional power. And regardless of that, the Type 004 which is currently under design for construction next is assumed to be nuclear powered anyways, which would very literally make it on par with a US supercarrier in every aspect except maybe the top size of a Ford class, it will probably be more nimitz sized, yet, they do have capabilities such as EMALS which the Ford class does not have (It's a Ford class feature in the US Navy), the Fujian has EMALs too

[@mikeplata3134]

@1ycan-eu9ji First off, don't talk down to me like I'm some simpleton. I realize that China's navy has a different mission than that of their American counterparts. The US Navy is the only navy capable of projecting significant power globally. The fact that China doesn't have a blue water navy isn't for lack of trying. China can't launch sorties at nearly the same rate. US carriers perform about 170 sorties per day, while Chinese carriers perform about a dozen. The US also has a massive advantage in experience and training as they've been operating carriers for almost a century. China needs more time to get their sailors on par with their new carriers. Chinese launch & arrest systems are severely limited in weight capacity. Which restricts the size of aircraft and the amount of fuel and armaments on their aircraft. Which reduces their capacities in combat range. US carriers have a significant range and firepower advantage. They can attack a target from much farther out. The Chinese carrier fleet still lacks overall range, experience, strength, and capability compared to the Americans. So yes, they are decades behind.

[@mikeplata3134]

@@1ycan-eu9ji And the Fujian is ONE carrier on par with ELEVEN current US super carriers. The US also has the USS John F Kennedy, another Ford class, being delivered next year, with plans for the USS Enterprise and USS Doris Miller after that.

[@1ycan-eu9ji]

@@mikeplata3134 You are a simpleton though, "decades behind", in terms of technology? no, if you want to change the goalpost to numbers, then sure, but at the increasing pace of construction it won't take more than 15-20 years to catch up. " China can't launch sorties at nearly the same rate. US carriers perform about 170 sorties per day, while Chinese carriers perform about a dozen. " " about a dozen " first of all, no, and I don't know where you got that number from, second, while their sortie rate is lower, it's also because their first two carriers were ramp based and not catapult based, that's no longer the case for the Fujian or future carriers under planning and construction

[@Nick-tv5pu]

why is the script's grammar and the narrator's pronunciation so bad?

[@Across_Media]

Really?

[@Nick-tv5pu]

​​@@Across_Media sorry, but, yeah. Some pronunciations are off as well but that could simply be due to the narrator being unfamiliar with the subject material and it being the first/one of the first times they've encountered specific words. Granted, it's not like it's incoherent or anything, but it sounds like whoever wrote the material may not have English as their first language.

[@lifeovdeath]

It’s only strong against weak nations with no Air Force. Yemen has shown that even the most technologically advanced air defences can be beaten. Any conflict with a bigger more capable country will have these ships disabled within a few weeks if not days.

[@2lturbogto]

Au fond de eaux il vont plaire au poisson, avec les missile hyperboliques , glou,glou 😂

[@cwr8618]

We’re 33 trillion in debt. This is incredibly stupid

[@Doggiedogedog]

I think it’s more important to build more destroyers and frigates. If they add this they will thin out carrier escort ships overall

[@emilepierre1663]

Star destroyer*

[@haseebwaqar8980]

This is the reason for inflation & poor health care in US!

[@BobK58]

They can't think of a new name?

[@STURYANPHUAYEWLIANG]

Naming conventions exist.

[@BobK58]

@@STURYANPHUAYEWLIANG They can't think of a new name?

[@someonetooknuggets]

@@BobK58 why would they? they don't have to, creating a good name is hard anyways and you have to get people to agree with the name.

[@BobK58]

@@someonetooknuggets USS Richard Best. That wasn't hard.

[@bencris982]

It's powerful so long as it avoids the Houthis.

[@giacomogiacomo1194]

Never show up your stupidity in the comment section 🤣

[@georgiafan6618]

Take half of the billions we sent to Ukraine and make more of these amazing American ships! 🇺🇸🇺🇸 USA

[@GB-np9eq]

waste of money. could have spent that on fixing the housing crisis.

[@ahmadsaleh2819]

Humaterian assistant 😅😅😅😅

[@fortheorlingas117]

So sick

[@MeBarnson]

I am listening to a chatGPT script read by some AI voice right?

[@Across_Media]

🤣 to much listening Ai voice.

[@kjererrt7804]

we know these "humanitarian" operations throughout the world very well. no thank you but no.

[@togrul4302]

Hope it never sees a real combat.

[@abdswitch7810]

I think it’s only limited to ve ised against countries or groups who have no chance or retaliating… don’t get me wrong there’s nothing wring in showing strength… but I don’t think aircraft carriers will do well in the next world war…

[@kjererrt7804]

thanks god it's not built against russia. otherwise that would be such a waste of the taxpayer's money.