The biggest strength of this channel is its constant use of subject matter experts. Listening to them talk is such a pleasure, and it is easy listening.
I thought it was funny when he pointed out that the lower catapults on the 'stealth' carrier would result in unacceptable noise levels in the hangar and the expert kinda looked like he hadn't even thought of that. But yeah, I know he did, he just looks that way all the time. This is the face of a man who has spent a lifetime calculating all the avenues of his every step.
I agree as well. I'd add that the biggest strength of the country is men (and women) like these two Gents who spent their professional lives "protecting and defending" . The intelligence and professionalism of both men is evident in every word and gesture. Our service academies put a very high gloss on their graduates. You can hear the "loud and clear" timbre of the professional briefer in the voice of Ward's guest. Its not a stretch to imagine either of them with stars on their shoulders.
@@Athens8677 One of my students last year was watching Ward's videos while we were waiting for class to start as other students showed up. We ended up talking about his aviation career goals. Give the kids a little credit!
@@fhecrewdavid Too right ....... And what percentage of kids can ever make it into flight training or command roles anyway? What matters is that the brightest and best - the guys you will *need* - are inspired. *That* is what this series (& things like the 'Aircrew Interviews' series) deliver. Mooch is a Top Bloke.
Greetings from Colorado! I think mooch would also give a lot of credit to Tom Clancy who, in the 1980s had a tremendous impact and influence on the public, the military and Congress. Regardless, here's to mooch and all the other warfighters who find a way to speak truth. Toward and all these journalists and storytellers, thank you for your continued service to the enlightenment of the world and the people in it.
@@Athens8677 Don't know, my opportunities were shit out of HS but I managed to get myself into USN Aviation and was aircrew when Top Gun came out. I wore the same flight suits as Maverick, and suddenly I was a lot better looking.
@@keithwalter1241 I did not serve but I like to think that was able to support those who did. We also made steam valves used in the engine rooms of both carriers and Virginia class submarines.
Thanks for your work. I am proud of my engineering cohorts who actually designed many of these systems. There are many flaws that had to be overcome and many have come and gone, but the effort is more than most people realize.
Pure gold. To listen to the first Programme Manager for the Ford Class is a huge privilege. Thank you Captain Manvel and thanks as always, Ward. You're an excellent interviewer Ward. Far too many interviewers on mainstream media as well as social media are in love with the sound of their own voice. Ask the question. A single question. Then shut the h*ll up and LISTEN. Listen for the nuggets that will inform the follow on questions. It ain't rocket science. Yet 99% of interviewers do it wrong. And a huge opportunity is lost.
Finally, someone who speaks truthfully about CVN-78’s problems, and who was ultimately responsible. We need similar interviews with folks in DD(X) and LCS - it’s long past time that those who tried their best to meet impossible demands stop shouldering the blame for our politicians’ reckless decisions.
BUT now, it's less problems and more forward thinking because they knew well ahead of time that it would be challenging. My impressions of the Ford-class might change. (Of course, i am still curious about the day-to-day functions of AIMD, being a career AIMD employee)...
Blame Donald Rumsfeld. Instead of incremental improvements where the US military, particularly the navy have done thus far; he wanted a super high tech military. We got things like the F-35, the Future Combat Systems, Littoral Combat Ships, Zumwalt, and Ford-class. All of these suffered so many issues. the F-35 thankfully turned out to be a good aircraft despite its troubled start. I suspect Ford-class would follow a similar path. It is promising enough that it will likely work out and be a world beater like the F-35, but the troubled development will mar its reputation. the FCS program led to no where although the US army had learned lessons from it. The Zumwalt and LCS is absolute failures and a lot of its design lessons aren't going to be applied on the next class of ships anyways. Perhaps they learned something else from it, but its a very expensive lesson even if so.
The Zumie as a ship is fine. The Zumie’s guns are fine. Had she not had her balls cut off by reducing the number of ships built to the point that the ammunition was cost prohibitive it would’ve been fine. In fact, now that we’ve done away with the guns on her and really all the ships, soldiers and Marines conducting amphibious assault will have very little in terms of cost effective fire’s support. Unless the Marines park a couple Triple 7’s on the deck of the LHA. (Which is something that they have practiced doing with the HIMARS.)
@@soonerfrac4611 No. Naval gunfire support is a dead concept. Experience in Iraq and Afghanistan showed even AGS's 100nmi range was not enough for many fire support missions, meaning the Navy had to rely on carrier-based aircraft to do most of their strikes. The reason the Navy canceled Zumwalt at 2 ships is because Congress, at the urging of the United States Naval Fire Support Association, passed a mandate in 1996 that mandated the Navy replace the Iowa-class battleships with a suitable naval gunfire support platform. Redesigning DD(X) to focus less on guns and more on missiles was considered violation of that mandate, and to ensure the Navy wouldn't try, Congress also canceled SLATACMS and SM-4, the two missile systems the Navy was pursuing as longer-range alternatives to AGS, in 2004. This, combined with a 2006 mandate that no surface combatant development funding would be authorized until BB replacements were procured, forced the Navy to buy a design that did not adequately meet their mission needs, and in turn, resulted in Zumwalt procurement being cut to just 2 hulls - one for each battleship still left in reserve. It was originally hoped that CG(X), which removed the AGSs in favor of 76-80 additional VLS cells (depending on the concept), could then be bought in larger quantities along with these low-cost land attack missiles. After the demise of those programs, some initiatives were made to convert other air-dropped weapons for ground launch, like JDAM or SDB, but it ultimately didn't matter as Congress forced Robert Gates to cancel CG(X) out of spite at being shown up by the Navy, and to save face. Oh, and by the way, that "no new surface combatant R&D" thing is also why the Navy bought the first 4 LCS as prototypes that were never intended to be warships - procuring them as warships would've violated the Congressional mandate.
@@GintaPPE1000 (1) Anybody linking traditional naval gun support and Afghanistan is saying something I find fundamentally unserious. There are goddamn mountains-real mountains-between the Naval Realm and anywhere in Afghanistan. (2) So what if Congress passed dumb rules, they can undo them just as easily. That they didn't doesn't really support your argument. (3) The whole LCS concept (in place of both Destroyers and Corvettes) was a fundamental disaster from day one. Bringing them up doesn't support your argument. (4) Missiles and Guns are not interchangeable, so I don't know how bringing up the interest in the former supports your point which is presumably about that latter. (5) Whether somebody is being an idiot about ammunition procurement does not affect whether a ship is a fundamentally solid platform or not.
I'll never forget my first encounter with the Stealth Carrier: I was 8 years old, in the grocery checkout line - There on the magazine rack was the Oct. 1998 issue of Popular Mechanics and on its cover - an Aircraft Carrier unlike anything I'd ever seen. It was a Stealth Carrier that looked exactly as the model that Capt. Manvel showed here. 24 years later and I finally get to see it come full circle! I always wondered what came of that design and why it was ruled out! So cool to see that it wasn't dreamt up in some magazine art dept looking to sell copies and that it was actually a legit navy design that was considered! Thank you Ward!!!!!! this was a fantastic episode for me!
That's funny, I was thinking the exact same thing, I remember buying that Pop mech issue just didn't remember the year. Interesting to hear the story behind it so many years later.
@Saint FluffySnow No joke. I still have loose fillings from the A-6 screech at full power in tension. The Tomcats were the cool show and louder, but the Intruder frequency was bone rattling.
I trained at A1W and served in the only nuclear fleet (so to speak) on DLG(N)-25. The Bainbridge. Helped with a hot restart in a war zone. Only allowed on Naval reactors.
Mooch I don't know where you find these guys but they're extremely entertaining and informative. What a great podcast on the background of the development of the Ford class carriers and the explanation of why it took so long.
Excellent video. I love when Ward Carol uses his connections to pick the brains of the retired geniuses who helped evolve the Navy. He asks key questions then shuts up and lets them empty their brains, that is a rare skill in an interviewer. He let the guests be the star. I would love if these interviews were an hour or more, like Joe Rogan does. Just make them as long as they need to be, don’t worry about a RU-vid algorithm.
I agree with you that Ward is a great interviewer. He asks good questions and then has enough sense to shut up and let his guest speak to the question. Most folks doing the interviewing just can't resist interrupting the interviewee with some silly question or comment that gets them off the subject. Drives me nuts when they do that.
@@Bellboy40 Lots of interviewers, it seems, are mostly concerned with promoting their channel by exploiting a marketable niche. Ward Carol is interested in explaining and promoting what he loves....Naval Air.
Mooch, I can say with confidence that you are utilizing your time in the Navy to provide us consumers with outstanding insight into Naval aviation matters. Thanks!
What a fantastic video Ward. I never knew that's how they develop these things and I've worked in Force Development.. Very cool to see it from the initial concept stage.
Very interesting interview! Always wondered why it took so long for the Ford class to get to sea. I just thought it had to do with the new catapult launch system. Never knew about all the other technologies being incorporated in the design. Well done as usual Ward! Keep up the good work.
Another great interview Ward! I am grateful to the people that show up at just the right time in our military. This is one of the best channels on RU-vid IMO.
Great interview again Ward! Capt. Manvel sound very credible, being long on facts and short on BS. As an electrical & controls guy I have some idea of how difficult it can be to incorporate a small number (never mind fifteen) of new and unproven design elements into an already complex project. The skill and tenacity required to complete the task while dealing with changing management direction and dynamic budgets has my sincere respect. 👍
Class is in session my friends! Glad to be here. CVN 70 for 9 years G3 and G5 Divisions. Also listening to Punks Fight on audible to and from work this week. Hoo Yah! and IYAOYAS!
This is a document, and it's of historical importance. That's really how good this is. Way beyond mere "content"! A century from now, when the last of the Ford class carriers is finally retired, clips from this interview will be used in the many eulogies to the end of that era which, for us, is just beginning. That's almost a given, and it's testament to the strength of Captain Manvel's realized vision. In other words: amazing.
Great stuff Ward! I love hearing about how design decisions are made, etc. A good 10 years ago or so I was on the USS Midway museum and got to talk to a BAE (I think it was BAE) who was working on EMALS and it was fascinating to hear about that development. A big thank you to Captain Manvel!
As a civilian, a I want to thank every vet every engineer, every welder-fitter-layout man-inspector-electricion and so on, who has had a part in keeping us safe and at the pointy end of the stick! Good work all!
@@TYLERNAVYGUY excellent! My older brother served on the Roosevelt, (Rosey-Rust-Bucket)! Back in the early seventys. Another brother served on USS Saint Paul, heavy cruiser in the late 50's. I love naval history!
I thank you guys too since it's much easier to thank and support you guys than it is to actually look after you when you have PTSD after coming home from a warzone with damaged body and minds.. I guess being on a ship or jet is different than being up front and center as a grunt in a contested city with landmines and IED everywhere and sniper can end you anytime of the day for months/years on end, or having to have the nice images in your mind forever of dead kids and humans which you had to end yourself, or your buddies brains leaking out or limbs hanging off by fhe skin only. But yeah. Thank you again for doing all the hard work and making the sacrifices that normal people would never make and for defending global capitalism/trade/banking/corporations, US global hegemony/domination, and special interest groups that don't actually care about normal US civilians or defending or making the US itself better. Soldiers die or get PTSD? They don't care, they think grunts are suckers and equivalent of a private army of slaves for them. The higher ups only make it there because they kept their mouth shut and know how to play the game and who's ass to kiss, while the good ones die or are broken in mind or body and forgotten on the side of the road as a homeless drug addict. But we all support and thank them everyone we are forced to remember them once in a decade or two for a few seconds.. I believe "ol gimley eye" Major General Smedley Butler, the most decorated marine of all time said it best.. WAR is a RACKET.
Geez, closing the loop with people that have been through serious emergencies on carriers and using those inputs to help drive design specs. WHAT A CONCEPT. Very interesting. I got a kick out of the super stealth version. Great idea, next to impossible to do, and make usefully functional. And yeah, get a guy like Wolfowitz, that's done no such work before and hand it to him. Now THAT is SOP. I think a lot of people were sticking pins into Rumsfeld dolls, and Rice, and Bush II, frankly. Iraq I made perfect sense and was done pretty well. Iraq II was a disastrous idea.
Thank you for continuing to bring quality subject matter to your channel, Ward. It's always informative, entertaining, and pertinent. Always time well spent! Your expert guests are a blast. Keep it coming!!
Very cool video! My dad was an A4 pilot on the USS Hancock, so I have always loved aircraft carriers. Man, what incredible advancement there has been in this new Ford class. As a side note, I really hope that we will see a new Enterprise. :)
Excellent interview of this gentleman. I will admit I was blissfully ignorant at the number of new systems going into the Ford. I was dismayed by how long it took to work the ship up to where it was deployable. No I completely understand or at least better understand why it took so long. What's incredible is the ship is only using one third of its power capacity as it stands right now. That's freaking incredible.
I felt exactly the same way after viewing the video. This video explains the hardships of new untried systems and the delays now seem reasonable. Could not have said it better than John Rodrigues. USS America SEAOPDET 1989-91, IM3 Div.
As one who flew off the Essex class, compared to the Ford Class, they start to resemble the Langley. Amazing what 80 years of technology had given our carriers. Keep up to good work on your videos.
I hope the Navy has cloned the Captain or found a way to extend his life another 100 years. All of this knowledge in one person. I hope he has found a way to pass this information down. Great interview Mooch!
Nice interview. A good look into the Ford class and how it got into "trouble." But Capt Tal explains why it was the right decision at the time. Excellent information. The Stealth story is priceless but indicates the depth of the team and Adm Boorda's charge to be bold...
Having been in the laboratory at NNS while the Ford was under construction, I am very aware of a lot of the new technology that was on the Ford. We had some real fun testing one of the concepts, the use of the fire pumps to shift ballast rapidly.
It's good to know that alternative development strategies like voodoo dolls work in naval planning. Great presentation, I learn more here than most anywhere else. Thanks Ward!
Another great video, Ward! It was interesting to see the seeds of a major acquisition. The bugs will be worked out of the Ford class CVN's, and I think they will serve this country proudly for a long time to come. BZ to you and CAPT Manvel!
Would enjoy a longer video and do a deep dive into the construction of the USS Ford, the new tech, the challenges, and what he might have done differently.
I was an AO3 aboard the USS Ranger CV-61 85 to 88. All ordnance had to go from below to the hanger. A direct transit from the assembly magazines to the flight deck would reduce time in transit and increase weapon security.
That last part got me thinking. Any ship you would want to mount high energy weapons on would have to have a comprehensive machine shop that, at the very worst, would be able to produce the weapon almost from scratch as long as the materials are available. That would have to be more true for rail guns, since the rails wear away as a side effect of firing them. You'd have to be able to change out the barrel safely and effectively with many spares on board, not counting the barrels in various stages of active refurbishment, before they could truly be deployed. And yes, I realize there are many security issues with that idea.
They are talking about pure energy systems, not projectile weapons like railguns or missiles. Lasers mainly, whether visible light or micrwaves or others. There are no projectiles to manufacture onboard.
@@grizwoldphantasia5005 You may need very precise lens cutting tools etc when you are talking lasers. Mechanical stuff like rail guns are going to be far easier then lasers and focused microwave emitters to maintain.
@@grizwoldphantasia5005 Fair enough, and apologies for causing confusion. My takeaway was about all high-energy weapons in general. For the most part, I wasn't even thinking about the manufacture of projectiles so much as producing/reproducing parts that get damaged by thermal warping or the odd successful attack - especially with tactical laser emplacements, which would be the most difficult to repair in terms of complexity alone. Tactical lasers and rail guns might one day be mounted on all vessels - including carriers - if any set of forthcoming threats warrants this. With that, the biggest concern should be the rate at which laser emitters can be replaced and refurbished, and how quickly and effectively rail gun barrels can be swapped out and torn down in order to replace the rails. No high energy weapon system could be complete unless emitters and barrels can be changed out in much the same way that a missile is reloaded into it's launcher. In a near-peer conflict, such a vessel would have to be as self-sufficient as possible, especially with rebuilding the business end of any advanced weaponry. Additionally, emplacements should be constructed such that changeouts are possible during combat operations, thus plenty of spares should be at the ready. It's easy to see how this could get in the way of a vessel's primary ops, unless the ship class is purposefully designed around this necessity. Hopefully, this could be done such that it doesn't rub the system manufacturers and service subcontractors the wrong way. Would it be a conflict of interest to designate members of the crew to be contractor representatives within narrow guidelines? I'm too much of an outsider to know if that even needs to be a concern. Those are just some of the thoughts that surfaced when directed energy weapons were mentioned.
@@grizwoldphantasia5005 Lasers are a horrible weapon system for a ship. Fog, clouds, rain and snow make lasers useless. I believe he is talking about dazzlers/jammers.
A great video, the most engaging of any I've watched here. Terrific insights from Capt. Manvel, and it gives a lot of context to the tribulations the Ford Class carrier have gone through.
Another great interview, you are allowing the guests room to express themselves nicely. One thought though, possibly having the table camera lower so it isn’t looking down on the subject so much.
Sir your channel is right on the money, your videos gives such an all encompassing insight into the subject covered. MANY THANKS to you and your guests ......oh also have a good Christmas and a Happy New Year.
Also with waiting is that carrier build programs get cancelled; and, you might not get those improvements implemented because of hulls being cancelled. Good presentation, thank you gentlemen!
This was an amazing interview. Well done to all that made it happen. There are smart people doing the best they can with our tax dollars, but they never get the credit they deserve, just the criticism. I hope you can do more interviews like this in the future.
Great interview and very informative Mooch. Capt. Manvel is one of those guys thinking on a level above most people. I had trouble following the logic of putting the island to the rear of the ship instead of forward or amidships.
I'm always blown away by my your great ablity to bring to your viewers these great senior Naval Officers that can give us content that we would never be privileged to. Another great show Commander Ward.
I was not sure what type of video this was going to be, but holy shit what an interesting trip down the rabbit hole. Such an interesting talk and I have no doubt that he would be a great guy to hang out with.
Excellent podcast, very interesting dive into carrier designs. Recommend a deep dive into the new chinese carrier, funny how everything they produce seems similiar to U.S. Navy designs.
I rode both the (old) Kennedy and Roosevelt in the 90s, also helped qualify the deck on the Stennis. Looks like the (new) Kennedy is going to be pretty bad azz.
I was just wondering if you ever met Captain Rodney Knutson? he was a Vietnam veteran and spent six years in prison in Vietnam. He was the captain of my ship the USS mobile in the mid 80s. I believe he was Reprimanded for beaching the enterprise Off the Florida coast.
Man ive been watching you for about 2 yrs and im pretty sure i was already Subscribed to you but i just Subbed again. This content is awesome. Thanks Mooch
