In the United States, field tests of an updated version of the deck system for the aircraft carrier Gerald Ford


In the United States, another series of tests was conducted on a modernized version of the deck system - the aerofinisher and electromagnetic catapult for the aircraft carrier USS Gerald Ford (CVN-78). We are talking about an improved system, which was initially tested in 2016 (AAG). At that time, the tests were not recognized as successful due to fixed problems during the development of landings for carrier-based fighters with a short time interval.


General Atomics reports that the AAG (Advanced Arresting Gear) system has been refined. To test its reliability, tests were conducted at the Laihurst test site (New Jersey, USA). General Atomics President Scott Forney called the tests "stress tests."

From his statement:

Five F / A-18E / F aircraft for two tested the reliability of the updated Advanced Arresting Gear system. At some stages of the test planes landed literally every minute. It was a drill test during a conditional operation with frequent sorties.

According to the president of the American company, the system has shown the ability to work effectively in extreme conditions.

Forney:

We gave AAG a great reserve for its operation on the aircraft carrier “J. Ford”. We used technology with three heavy-duty cables.

The company notes that the idea of ​​creating an improved mechanism for stopping aircraft on deck and an electromagnetic launch system designed for a new aircraft carrier is to allow it to launch and receive more aircraft, while creating less load on the aircraft than in the version of the steam catapult.

General Atomics notes that they expect the aircraft carrier to go to sea to test the updated version of the AAG and electromagnetic catapult in real conditions.

Earlier it was reported that the system, servicing take-off and landing of aircraft on the "Ford", allows for flights every 15 seconds.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

35 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Amateur 4 January 2020 07: 57 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    And it was thought that they launched an EM catapult. But it turns out only the system of finishers, which they have been working fine already since 1911, and of the modern type since 50 Twentieth century.
    1. Avior 4 January 2020 09: 20 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      Yes, it seems the article says otherwise. They did something with the catapult too
      1. Amateur 4 January 2020 09: 23 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        They did something with the catapult too

        Respected! Or you can ask to copy from the above article a quote about the catapult.
        1. Avior 4 January 2020 09: 29 New
          • 4
          • 1
          +3
          . In the United States, another series of tests was conducted on a modernized version of the deck system - the aerofinisher and electromagnetic catapult for the USS Gerald Ford aircraft carrier (CVN-78).

          creating an improved deck stop mechanism and an electromagnetic launch system for the new aircraft carrier is to allow it to launch and receive more aircraft

          carrier launch at sea to test the updated version of the AAG and electromagnetic catapult in real conditions

          Am I misunderstood something? You explain your idea, otherwise the article clearly states that they upgraded both the catapult and the air finisher
          1. Amateur 4 January 2020 09: 33 New
            • 1
            • 4
            -3
            The article everywhere says "planes landed ..", etc. And on the catapult "it is planned, will be, is intended," etc. Either the author of the article could not intelligently express his thought, or "the holidays are continuing"
            1. Avior 4 January 2020 09: 38 New
              • 4
              • 1
              +3
              The article clearly states that it was the system that modernized - the aerofinishir and the catapult.
              You have some other look at the Russian language, it seems smile
              But the tests of the catapult are not really described
              Threat the word "planned" in the text did not find at all. Like "will be"
              And “intended” does not mean future time at all
              hi
              1. Amateur 4 January 2020 09: 43 New
                • 1
                • 4
                -3
                Respected! Especially for you:
                The amateur (Victor) 6 Today, 07:57
                I thought they launched an EM catapult. But it turns out only the system of finishers, which they have been working fine already since 1911, and of the modern type since 50 Twentieth century.

                And this is from you:
                But the tests of the catapult are not really described

                So what are we arguing about?
                1. Avior 4 January 2020 10: 29 New
                  • 2
                  • 1
                  +1
                  About the text of the article and about it
                  You do not confuse
                  The details of the tests are not described in the article, but it is emphasized that it was the modernized system- and finisher and catapult that were tested at the training ground
                  In the USA, another series of tests was conducted on a modernized version of the deck system - the aerofinisher and electromagnetic catapult

                  And further on further tests at sea, similarly written
                  They are expecting the aircraft carrier to go to sea to test the updated version of the AAG and electromagnetic catapult in real conditions.

                  It seems Russian is written in white and what you argue about is unclear
                  It’s not my fault that you saw in the article “planned” which was not there and because of this you misunderstood the text
                  I see no reason in a further empty argument
                  You can consider that the article had the word “planned”, I won’t interfere with you, your business
                  hi
    2. Blackmokona 4 January 2020 16: 05 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      EM catapult has been working for them for a long time
  2. Thrifty 4 January 2020 07: 59 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    Obanyki, in the photo you can see, he crossed the double solid! ! wassat Well, where is our hydro-traffic police? ?? lol
  3. bessmertniy 4 January 2020 08: 04 New
    • 1
    • 2
    -1
    We would care about them. winked
    1. Boa kaa 4 January 2020 12: 59 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: bessmertniy
      We would care about them.

      And why do we also need THEIR concerns? belay
      We have enough of our own! laughing
      1. bessmertniy 4 January 2020 13: 07 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        I mean, a couple of decent aircraft carriers wouldn't hurt. wink Aren't you amigo? repeat
  4. Thrifty 4 January 2020 08: 18 New
    • 3
    • 6
    -3
    In words, when this monster was lowered into the water, a lot of things also lied! And then the sores fell, as if from a cornucopia! Now, they again decided, along the way, with the solution of problems and fairy tales, to tell which aircraft carrier is swell? ???
    1. Boa kaa 4 January 2020 13: 12 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: Thrifty
      what is this swell aircraft carrier

      He certainly has problems, but they will finish them ...
      And such "swell" plan to have as many as 11 units!
      Nah ... no matter how my colleagues would convince me, without the R-27K (or Khinskaya D-21D) type of ball, it will be difficult for us to play in the same sandbox, even if there are "circus" illusionist acrobats.
      The problem is that the carriers of the Circus IT should go to the line of the task, and in wartime, under the dominance of the enemy in the sandbox, it will not be easy ...
  5. rocket757 4 January 2020 08: 34 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Bring technology to mind.
    So we need to calmly, thoroughly, reliably do what should and will be what we need!
    1. Boa kaa 4 January 2020 13: 22 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: rocket757
      Bring technology to mind.

      Wise thoughts of a mature brow! yes
      Please note: they put all of their 9 AVMs to be repaired ... Go away, they insisted that the United States was doing badly, and the Navy General Staff said: “Technical preparations are underway for something bad, because ALL 9 AVMs will be repaired and ready to perform the task in the specified area of ​​the oceans, and not off the coast of Florida!
      Therefore, our bosses flinched and decided to conduct a State Council on the Navy ... And they see the antidote in DA and PLA with Zircons, and they are still silent about our NK (EM-KR class) and AVM (DMZ ships!) Like fish on ice!
      1. rocket757 4 January 2020 14: 38 New
        • 0
        • 2
        -2
        A sane person who knows geography and history will justifiably notice that the AUG is the power unit of the colonial fleet, which is UNTIL to steer in our direction, for objective reasons.
        The only topical question is, whom do the whale whales intend to smash if they intend to? Or they just want to boost their industry, on the eve of the elections, at the same time scare the faint-hearted.
        The world is now so tense and armed that to expect a serious batch .... no, not beating.
        1. Boa kaa 4 January 2020 16: 26 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Quote: rocket757
          AUG is the power unit of the colonial fleet, which in our direction DO NOT steer in our direction, for objective reasons.

          1. Victor, your mistake is that you look at the AVM as a "ship", not a "floating airfield"! Therefore, AVIATION (the main strike force) with long-range cruise missiles and anti-ship missiles you are out of brackets ...
          2. Now imagine a couple of AVMs with a full set of aircraft approaching the Barents or Norwegian seas after the SSBN strike on priority objects (there will be no airfields and naval bases) and the range of objects, F-18E / D, guarding the Berks with a strategic ax! or ALCM type with a launch range of up to 3-700 km, a nuclear warhead with a capacity of up to 4 kt and unified guidance systems. And now - a compass in hand and outline the reach of our objects ...
          In short, they would not be needed; the Yankees would not have built them.
          1. rocket757 4 January 2020 16: 42 New
            • 0
            • 1
            -1
            I love science fiction, but .... what is good about Crimea, Japan and others like that? This is an unsinkable airfield! However, in an extreme situation there everything can be leveled with sea level \ okayana.
            Karma in the men of our family, guard the borders of our homeland. First land, then air. Look at American, enemy, aircraft "through the sight" and ...
            1. Vladimir_2U 5 January 2020 08: 50 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              It is strange to compare the Crimea and Japan. And how will the most beautiful Crimea in the Barents Sea or Vladivostok, for example, help?
              1. rocket757 5 January 2020 10: 35 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                And what can the AUG do in the Barents Sea or in the Sea of ​​Okhotsk?
                Unlike the islands, only the boule, boule, drown. All sane people understand this, so such fantasies do not occur to anyone.
  6. The comment was deleted.
  7. Evil Booth 4 January 2020 09: 51 New
    • 2
    • 6
    -4
    it’s a tinkerdog’s naked ass, similar to the arliberka on Ford 2 Rome and 2 phalanxes, ito does not pull granite in terms of warhead mass or target speed, Rome was completely induced manually like ptrk (!) for decades. on ships, dead zones of air defense turrets will create sectors of 120 degrees or more. not. it’s not even that any number of c400 with shells with c300v4 and tori and a dozen beech3 will be destroyed immediately by one AUG and that f18 flies further mig31 causing contactless attacks on c500. not! and it’s not such a trifle that the RCC strike can be delivered simultaneously with the nuclear submarines and the Air Force from one side and not at different times at the same time, after 10 out of 1 it flies 20 then out of 11 it flies 100 ... NO !!! not about the fact that behind the AUG, a little more than a hundred are vulnerable to the ktaer .. the question is that 1000 planes can do at all if the current for Kosovo took 3 planes and 2 months with a grouping of a hundred thousand “persons” in the garret. Threat when you start into a duplex, all this splendor will blow bubbles .... the phalanx lacks speed in terms of performance characteristics in Rome warheads such that 500 such p1 fly further without damage ... what’s a hundred km and XNUMX. they are just a little sorry)) even against small salvo. Yes, and there will be nothing to guard tankers, and without them, aircraft will board the deck after a week of rare flights.
    1. Avior 4 January 2020 10: 37 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      on Ford 2 Rome and 2 phalanxes, ito ito does not pull granite in terms of warhead mass or target speed, Rome was completely induced manually as

      At ford
      . PU SAM ESSM and missile defense RIM-116

      I read and did not continue.
      You are confusing Rome116 with old sparrows, but it seems you don’t even know about ESSM
      And, I will tell you a secret, the main weapon against RCC is electronic warfare and traps
      1. Evil Booth 4 January 2020 10: 39 New
        • 0
        • 3
        -3
        wassat Earlier, the p500 was shot down manually and now by traps and some other essm, well, tell me how this essm coma is better. and the trap is better than a couple of dagger rockets. https://vz.ru/society/2017/4/17/866694.html the speed of the cannons in the AOG for a target of up to 2 m is half the RCC will be so ancient and the range of 1,5 km is ineffective as it hints at intercepting a half of 64 pieces ... well, ok, interference from interference even on torpedoes, even on anti-ship missiles falling into the water and going like torpedoes even on ballistic missiles on UAVs driven by an operator ... and finally clicked on the button and won like in a smartphone!
        1. Avior 4 January 2020 11: 38 New
          • 5
          • 1
          +4
          Man, your idea is not easy to understand, and superimposed on spelling, it’s just hard to read
          Would you at least split the post, or something
          In general, these questions have been discussed here more than once in detail, rummage in the old articles in the Armaments section at least the last six months, perhaps there will be answers to what you wrote
          hi
          1. Evil Booth 4 January 2020 13: 41 New
            • 0
            • 2
            -2
            laughing understood fellow repeat that’s the idea that the time of those bots is past the on-going one)) the aug doesn’t have anything and never has. Well, at least because of the volley it’s not what they thought in 24 and 48 missiles because of 2 apl)))) your + 3 in metal changes little)) right now, Iran pokes Panama’s drowning half of the aviks in the ports.
    2. Thrifty 4 January 2020 10: 43 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      Wicked booth, what was that? In simple terms, can you write a couple of phrases, what did you mean? ??? belay belay
      1. Evil Booth 4 January 2020 10: 52 New
        • 1
        • 4
        -3
        fool kremleboty atakue! fellow By the way, what will the AUG intercept the RCC? if there are 5 of them on board and the target’s speed is lower than the RCC’s speed and there can be not 24 but 48 missiles in a salvo ... and even save where there is nothing. if you understand that tone, it’s because you think a doshirak in yoo without getting up from the stool of snowden. wassat
  8. Professor 4 January 2020 10: 19 New
    • 4
    • 3
    +1
    Five F / A-18E / F aircraft for two ????? tested the reliability of the updated Advanced Arresting Gear system.

    request
    1. Thrifty 4 January 2020 10: 44 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      Professor, and there must be two aircraft for five tested. .. ??? lol lol lol
  9. Petrol cutter 5 January 2020 17: 46 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    In the photo "spars" - what is your torpedo boat! True, with such banks .... Probably all airplanes overboard tumble ...
    Well then. Maybe they do not fade.
    So then hardly he will drive. But the maneuver looks impressive. For which all the same, I love the military fleet.
    They probably said in the military that even went / went to circulation ... Although I could be wrong.
  10. Petrol cutter 5 January 2020 18: 07 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    By the way, (in revenge for the trials of capitalist ships) I want to bring to the attention of the masses who are interested. So to speak, pour the balm on the wounds, that in the near foreseeable future it is planned to test some new propulsion system. Do not confuse with motor! Which, if God gives, for a moment can solve some problems of increasing the speed of ships per capita.
    This is not read in magazines. Under this, real work is done. As my favorite author says, they further asked me not to disclose.
  11. The comment was deleted.