Gerald R Ford vs Fujian Type 003 - Which Aircraft carrier is better?

Gerald R Ford vs Fujian Type 003 - Which is better?

Gerald R Ford vs Fujian Type 003 - which is better?
China added another carrier to its fleet in June 2022, the most technologically advanced one yet: the Type 003 Fujian. It's a real showstopper, but how does this Chinese carrier stack up against the US's top dog, the USS Gerald R. Ford? The Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier, named after the 38th US President is the current crown jewel of the US Navy. Launched in 2017 after a decade of construction, it's also the most expensive warship ever built, clocking in at an inflation-adjusted cost around $15 billion. This behemoth stretches 1,106 feet long, with a flight deck width of 256 feet, providing ample space for launching and recovering aircraft. It displaces a staggering 100,000 tons when fully loaded….In 2022, China launched the Fujian aircraft carrier. This is China's first carrier equipped with electromagnetic catapults for aircraft launch. This fancy new tech lets them launch a wider variety of planes carrying heavier payloads. The name "Fujian" follows a cool tradition of honoring Chinese provinces. While the exact price tag is under wraps. It stretches 1,033 feet in length and displaces 85,000 tons when fully loaded. The Ford-class carrier is powered by two massive A1B nuclear reactors. These things are like the heart of the ship, pumping out enough energy to push the warship it over 30 knots, which is pretty darn fast for something its size – we're talking flying across the ocean at 35 miles per hour! This extended range is likely due to a combination of a massive fuel capacity and potentially a fuel-efficient electric propulsion system. The Ford-class boasts a capacity of up to 90 aircraft. A typical carrier air wing might include F-35 Lightening II, FA-18 Super Hornets, E-2D Advanced Hawkeyes, EA-18G Growlers, helicopters, and even UAVs and combat drones. Prioritizing crew comfort, this supercarrier features upgraded living quarters, enhanced fitness facilities, and ergonomically designed workspaces. With a crew of approximately 2,600 sailors, it hosts about 700 fewer personnel than its predecessor. To effectively operate this complex warship, a crew of roughly 2,700 personnel will be on board. These missiles can take down supersonic speed maneuvering anti-ship missiles with a range of 27 nautical miles. If something sneaks past the big guns, the carrier's got these 2 cool launchers armed with Rolling airframe missiles. These small infrared guided missiles can shoot their targets within 5 nmi. The Fujian is a force to be reckoned with, though a bit smaller than the US giant. Still, it packs a killer punch. It can carry 50-60 aircraft including J-15 fighters, potentially stealth J-35, and early warning aircraft.
For detailed conclusion, watch the video.

FOLLOW us on Social Media:

► Special Boat Service vs Seal Team 6

►Marine Raiders vs Navy SEALs

► SAS vs Delta Force - Which is better?

► Russia’s KA 52 Alligator vs Eurocopter Tiger

► Army Rangers vs Green Berets (Special Forces)

Playlists
► Special Operation Forces

Credits
1) US DOD
2) US Navy
3) Chinese Navy
All content on Grid 88 is presented for only educational purposes. The appearance of US DOD doesn’t imply or constitute the respective entities or this channel’s endorsement.

#USSGeradRFord #FujianType003 #AircraftCarrier

[Tim-turbo-o]

There is no doubt that almost most Chinese military fans will objectively admit the huge gap between Chinese aircraft carriers and American aircraft carriers. Both Chinese military fans and various experts of the Chinese Navy are seriously learning from the US Navy. The US Navy is currently the undisputed absolute king in the world, and it is not shameful to emulate the best.
But there is a part of controversy. ① China's Fujian aircraft carrier will not have the global deployment of long-distance combat needs like the United States. It will operate within the second island chain at most, so it is not an absolute major problem that it is not a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier for the time being. ② Even if it is a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, does it not need to replenish fuel, ammunition and personnel supplies for carrier-based aircraft after a long period of operation? Do other warships in the same formation also need to replenish ship fuel, ammunition and personnel supplies? It just has more space to load more fuel and supplies, not really "unlimited".
However, the Fujian ship will be the second strongest conventional-powered aircraft carrier in the world except the US Navy. Three electromagnetic catapults, J-35 stealth carrier-based aircraft, J15T, KJ-600 early warning aircraft... Just 12 years ago, China did not have an aircraft carrier.
Some people have been laughing, and some people have been making progress.

[au]

Nice presentation. My bet is on Ford....

[mikebuck]

Our worst aircraft carrier is still better than China’s best.

[edwingan]

Compare again when the Fujian is in service

[MatthewWilson-vlqc]

Phalanx System, Still, Our Best close defense Weapon .at Sea

[Paulftate]

Don't care for the hype .... I have heard that a ocean going tug has to follow the China carrier around for in case of an emergency

[berniejacque]

I would choose the Ford any time over the Chinese carrier. No one has the history or great aviators in this kind of combat. We as the U.S. navy are the true masters of the sea.

[AGrasshopperNamedNEWT]

The US has been using nuclear reactors in its ships and submarines for decades and hasn't reported a major problem yet. They've been in actual combat as well. Their pilots have extensive experience in take-off
Flight,
Weapons firing,
Bad weather conditions
Landing and rescue operations.
The doctrine that the entire US Military uses to train their personnel, upgrade or build new and more advanced weapons platforms is due to previous combat, humanitarian, and live training deployment
experiences.
They are the best because they have done it before. They know what to do to operate combat missions without cutting corners on safety.
If you think having 1, 2, or 3 US Aircraft Carrier groups conducting war in your area imagine if the USA ever decided to deploy 6 or 8 Battlegroups to your region. Now you know why The USA doesn't worry about a mass attack on our shores. You will have to contend with the Navy's 11 battle groups and the entire AIRFORCE. In case you don't know...They are two different combat entities that Excel in warfare. NAVAL AVIATORS & those of the US AIRFORCE are not the same War Fighters.
So imagine the sky humming with both groups in the air.
Ohh,
Did I mention that the US Army and
The Marines also have their own flying War Machines and Aviators.

Good Grief. The more you allow your mind to wrap itself around those facts the more you will realize that it will take more than one or 1 or 15 Chinese Aircraft Carriers to have a winning chance against the
US Military plus her Allies in NATO.

If you do happen to destroy an Aircraft Carrier the only thing you succeeded in doing is raising recruitment and guaranteeing your children's children will never be born.
(The US is vengeful and as long as the political heads stay out of it there will be destruction and death the likes the world has never seen)

[George-kot]

How good one carrier is over the other depends very much on the SUM TOTAL of everything a carrier task force has - from not only the technical aspects of the ship but also the flight deck, the efficiency of the crew, the experience of the ship's captain and his command, and so on. The machine, by itself, does not and cannot win any battle and there are so many examples of sea battle history that has shown that the superiority of a battle ship does not guarantee success. China itself has experienced a past history of failure in several sea battles against the Japanese.
In all situations, the Chinese either had an equal number of ships to the Japanese or in others, even superior battleships (constructed for China by Germany) but were defeated because the Japanese were better trained, better disciplined, and had more experience after their battle against the Russian Navy and destroyed the Tsar's pride and joy while showing the world at the time, the very first defeat of a European power by a rising Asian one.
Better weapons do not always win wars - especially if you don't have people with the superior ability to use them. Another example - everyone during WW2 knew that the U.S. Sherman tanks were no match for the German Panzers and yet, through skilful maneuvering and use of their tanks, the Americans were able to take advantage of certain known weak parts of the German tanks and defeated their columns. And finally, not to mention the German battleship, the Bismarck as well as the Japanese battleship the Yamato - both were huge behemoths of the ocean and a frightening sight to see that no other ship in the allies were able to match in firepower and speed. Yet, both were eventually sunk - through better seamanship (and a bit of luck).
An elephant, though larger than an ant, can be brought down by a swarm of fire ants and this is a lesson we should all learn - machin es alone, do not win wars.

[tailunghung]

Are you serious?
Will you compare a kitty with a lion?

[cooldude-bronst]

LOL, I think it's not fair, china's carrier should be compare with fishing boat, not with the Ford class😂

[kenethantiga]

Comparing china's aircraft carrier to US is an overkill for china's carrier itself. Nuclear vs conventional is far way different. Nuclear powered aircraft carrier can travel 25 yrs non-stop without the need for refuelling while conventional aircraft carrier can only last a month in full tank capacity, its a century far behind.

[Shark_boiiiii]

The Us just has more experience building and using carrier's than China
003 is definitely a formidable carrier but she's only China's 3rd where as the Us has been building carrier's for a century.

[MASMIWA]

Certainly with its twin nuclear reactors, the Ford is a more capable carrier. Having said that, the Achilles heel of the Ford has been its EMALS that so far has demonstrated a less than sterling performance of achieving only 15% of its design launch MTBF. Further, the Ford is having problems with its elevators and blast shields. The EMALS on the Fujian is just beginning its sea trial EMALS launches and no data is available on its durability. However, in its development phase, the EMALS system was installed in a ground simulation of the carrier and tested. There are no reports good or bad. The Ford uses an AC powered EMALS and the Fujian uses a DC powered EMALS.

The better comparison will be with the next Chinese carrier, number 4 which is said to be 100, , 000 tons and nuclear powered with EMALS. There are rumors that this carrier may be powered with twin thorium molten salt reactors and if used with a CO2 turbine, would create a much smaller package size than the Bechtel PWR reactors as used on the Ford. China has a developmental thorium MSR running in the Gansu Desert since late 2022 and the shipyard building the next carrier is said to be designing a MSR merchant ship. The keel has been laid and construction has started.

[Viper-MotoVlogger]

In my opinion, the Chinese propulsion system has yet to prove itself for reliability.

[MatthewWilson-vlqc]

So Far, Our Electromagnetic. Launch system, Does Not Work Reliably !

[KimalUtit-sdhl]

Sure 100 percent USS GERARD FORD THE BEST.

[unitedbyron]

Nuclear reactor in the ship more Dangerous

[i-on-u]

since no one really knows if the Fujian’s electro magnetic system works, ….for now, you should compare Fujian with Kitty Hawk class aircraft carriers. 😂

[axeldaval]

China has tje most number of nuclear reactors on earth, you really think they won't put one in this carrier 😂😂😂