>The next Ford-class aircraft carrier is facing a two-year delay that will leave the Navy with ten carriers for about a year, USNI News has learned.
>The future USS John F. Kennedy (CVN-79) will now deliver in March 2027, according to the Navy’s Fiscal Year 2026 budget justification documents. The carrier was supposed to deliver this month, according to last year’s budget plans.
>“The CVN 79 delivery date shifted from July 2025 to March 2027 (preliminary acceptance TBD) to support completion of Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) certification and continued Advanced Weapons Elevator (AWE) work,” reads the latest FY 2026 shipbuilding budget book.
>Those two technologies – the system used to catch aircraft landing on the carrier’s deck and the weapons elevators that move ordnance through the ship – are new systems incorporated into the Ford class. A spokesperson for General Atomics, which makes the AAG, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
>“The Navy is exploring opportunities for preliminary acceptance of the vessel prior to formal delivery and is coordinating closely with stakeholders to ensure the fastest possible transition to fleet operations and a combat-capable carrier,” a Navy spokesperson told USNI News in a statement.
>A spokesperson for HII’s Newport News Shipbuilding, which builds the carriers, said the company is applying lessons from building the lead ship to the successive ships in the class.
>USS Nimitz (CVN-68), the oldest aircraft carrier in service at 50 years, is scheduled to retire in May 2026, meaning the Navy’s inventory will dip from 11 to 10 carriers for nearly a year before JFK delivers.
I hope this won't affect the construction of USS Enterprise (CVN-80):
https://news.usni.org/2025/07/07/carrier-john-f-kennedy-delivery-delayed-2-years-fleet-will-drop-to-10-carriers-for-1-year

>>63955156 (OP)
They'll make a new one it's okay
I'll sign up to serve on it too

>>63955156 (OP)
Don't worry guys I got a feeling the US Navy will keep the upper the hand over the PLAN (People's Liberation Army Navy)

>>63955156 (OP)
Why the fuck are they testing new tech when they're expecting a war in the next 5 years? Shouldn't they be prioritising getting hulls out above all other considerations?

>>63955205
America expects to last at least until the 2300s. Have to keep ahead of adversity to survive that long. It's lessons we learned from the Sumerians

>>63955205
We've been expecting war in the next 5 years for well over 50 years at this point

>>63955181
Oh no, the carrier gap is shrinking. Now we only have 7 more CVs than China

>>63955308
They have 2 more under construction right as we speak, so the gap will soon be just 5, and if they continue to build more Type 076 "escort carriers", the gap will be completely gone by 2030s

>>63955350
Oh no, not the escort carriers. If only we had our own escort carriers, sadly the US is dumb and only builds big carriers

>>63955361
Except that US LHA's aren't CATOBAR unlike the Type 076

>>63955388
>Can’t into VTOL aircraft
>cut your usable deck space in half to service less fighters and make it impossible to have landings and take offs at the same time
>and sacrifice hangar space aswell

Masterful gambit sir

Hah, I see the american mic is still dancing on the grave of JFK - the man who resisted them.

It's the same kind of irony as seeing people wearing che guevara merchandise

>>63955388
Yep that's what the big box is, not just pure copium

>>63955399
>>63955463
Can America Class LHA's take off AWACS?

>>63955485
Can China's?

>>63955491
Yes, because the Type 076 has both EMALS and arresting gear unlike the America Class LHAA or any other LHD with VTOL aircraft carriers

>>63955529
can they take off AWACS though?
you didn't answer his question.
do these things even have the hangar space or elevator size for it?

>>63955156 (OP)
Isn't that illegal since there's a law that mandates 11 active carriers?

>>63956139
It can because the Type 076's EMALS is the same one from Type 003

>>63955181
>People's Liberation Army Navy
>Liberation Army Navy
>Army Navy
Well which one is it? Are the bugmen retarded?

The US is going to have to scuttle half their carriers, fill the reactor cores with concrete and sink them to the bottom of the ocean in a few years to meet treaty obligations

>>63956244
No, it can't. The only AWACS it can launch are helicopter based ones. The flight deck is too short, CATOBAR systems or not for fixed-wing AWACS. The EMALS claim is just that, a claim. We have seen no proof of it being installed. Until it is, it cannot launch AWACS.

Btw, even AI knows this. So are you dumber than AI? Rhetorical question.

>>63955163
kek

Should I start learning mandarin?

>>63956354
You haven't seen nothing yet

>>63956244
you didn't answer my question, go ahead and compare the elevator size of one of these with those of an actual supercarrier.
>but it has emals
nonsequiter, that doesn't mean it's capable of operating AWACS

>>63956411
DO NOT LEARN MANDARIN
you will forever have to deal with the chinese.
learn japanese instead, they have way more doujins you can translate.

>>63956354
china has been a continental power for millenia. So much so that the word for army is the same as military

>>63956420
im not into cp
I just don't want to go on a ccp death march

>>63956464
>CP
doujins are not CP, my retarded newfag fren.

>>63956411
You're just asking for the screenshot, aren't you?

>>63956354
It's bad translation, the literal translation would be People's Liberation Military - Navy branch

>>63956471
>t.

>>63956416
Why are asians like this? Nips were doing the same thing way back when.

>>63955156 (OP)
>delivery date shifted from July 2025 to March 2027
And I'm sure there won't be any further delay

>>63956775
>WAAAAAAH
cry more, newfag
anime website now and forever

>>63956464
Nigger what? That's not what doujin means you blithering mongoloid

>>63956392
>too short
maybe too short for you limp dick """carrier""" The 076 is massive

>>63956775
Didn't realize my doujin with the 32 year old office lady was somehow cp, fucking reddit-browsing pearlclutcher

>>63955181
We can only realistically deploy like 1/2 of our carriers in a Taiwan conflict. So it would be 5-6 carriers vs their 3-4?

>>63957298
Along with Japan's two. Possibly a UK one joining if there's enough warning. And the F-35Bs can also go off the LHDs.

>>63957334
no france?

>>63957334
Sure, but would it be an immediate response from Japan/UK in Taiwan conflict? Or even just rising of conflict? I doubt it.

>>63957346
And if Japan were to get involved, China's network of ground missile launchers can easily target everything in Japan. So Japan has to measure their response on whether Taiwan is worth it militaristically or whether they will just support in soft diplomatic ways through sanctions (self harm)

>>63955156 (OP)
And I, for one, welcome our new insect overlords

>>63956354
It's literally a case of lost in translation

>>63955181
except that PLAN has significantly less AOR than USN and the only way US can win naval battle against china in its own backyard is to drag both Japan and Korea to join in

>>63955156 (OP)

Ahhh -- that's my utterly dysfunctional Navy.

>>63955308


> Why yes, I do think all 10 carriers are instantly deployable at any moment. That's how it works in my vidya games.