See Inside The Most Expensive Military Weapon Ever Made: Navy’s USS Gerald Ford
- Posted on January 4, 2012 at 1:49pm by
Buck Sexton
- Print »
- Email »
Question: What do you get when you combine a massive, super-advanced aircraft carrier with some of the best fighter planes on the planet?
Answer: 100,000 tons of U.S. diplomacy.
Meet the USS Gerald Ford.
The Gerald Ford will be the lead ship of the Gerald Ford Class, which is an update to the Nimitz Class Navy Aircraft Carriers that have given the U.S. sea and aerial dominance around the globe for decades. It’s also slated to be the most expensive weapon ever created at around $11.5 billion– far and away the Navy’s most expensive warship.
Given recent Iranian provocations regarding the Persian Gulf and its threat to close the Straits of Hormuz, the possibility of a deteriorating Iraq in the wake of the U.S. withdrawal, and the climate for another Arab-Israeli conflict, the need for “4.5 acres of mobile and sovereign U.S. territory” has perhaps never been more apparent.
Business Insider has put together some slides that show the design of the ship, and below you can also see some of the state-of-the-art fighter planes and missiles that will make the USS Ford the most tactically dominant naval vessel ever built.
Above is a 2004 artist’s rendition of the USS Gerald R. Ford, three years before construction began in 2007. Its design improvements include a larger flight deck, a new propulsion plant design that requires fewer personnel to operate and maintain, and a new smaller island that has been pushed aft.
Technological advances have led to the development of an Electromagnetic Aircraft Launching System, (EMALS) and Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) which will allow 220 aircraft to be deployed each day.
Above is a cross-section sketch that gives a good overview of the Ford’s planned construction.
Of course, an updated multi-billion dollar carrier needs to have billions of dollars of the most advanced fighter planes on earth to transport and deploy.
FA-18 Super Hornet:
The Super Hornet is the aerial work horse of the U.S Navy’s fighter plane fleet. It is a twin-engine carrier-based multirole fighter aircraft, with an internal 20 mm gun and configurations of either air-to-air missiles and air-to-surface weapons.
The Super Hornet first flew in 1995, but full-rate production began in September 1997 to replace the somewhat outdated F-14 Tomcat (made famous in the movie “Top Gun”).
The fighter is basically a new plane in comparison to the original FA-18 hornet. The original intent was to use the Super Hornet until the the F-35C Lightning II could come online. But given the amount of service– and success– the Super Hornet has seen, it is likely to be a staple of aerial naval warfare for years to come.
Here is a video of the FA-18 Super Hornet taking off from a Carrier and doing a fly-by, courtesy of the US Navy and Airboyd.tv:
F-35C Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
F-35C can be fired from the deck of a carrier by the EMALS system. Beyond that, it is a major upgrade over previous stealth aircraft technologies from a maintenance standpoint because it can survive much more hostile environments and is therefore able to operate from an aircraft carrier at sea.
The F-35C weapons system is also reconfigurable, which means “the internal weapons bay can set up all air-to-ground ordnance, all air-to-air ordnance or a blend of both. A missionized version of the 25 mm GAU-22A cannon is installed or removed as needed.”
When stealth is not required to execute a mission, the F-35C external pylons are loaded with ordnance, which means the airframe has a total weapons payload exceeding 18,000 pounds.
Here is a video of the F-35 getting launched by EMALS:
E-18 Growler
The Growler is a specialized version on the F/A-18 used for electronic warfare that entered service in 2009 will be deployed along with the Ford Class Aircraft Carriers.
The Growler reportedly can perform defensive and offensive electronic jamming functions, suppression of enemy anti-aircraft measures, and “non-traditional electronic attacks.” As fighter planes and bombers increasingly become unmanned, the electronic warfare functions of the E-18 Growler will only increase in importance on the modern battlefield.
And of course, in a pinch, its still an FA-18 platform, and can therefore perform traditional shoot-and-scoot and escort duties .
Raytheon’s RIM-162 Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile will be used to protect the Ford from attacking missiles and aircraft. It provides self-defense battlespace and firepower against high-speed, highly maneuverable anti-ship missiles.
Think of it like a more nimble version of the Patriot missile, fired from the deck of a Carrier.
The new Ford Class Carriers are currently being assembled in Newport News, Virginia. This 15-ton piece of a side-shell unit was the first slab of steel cut for the carrier during a 2005 ceremony:
The first keel assembly is put in place by cranes:
According to BI, this “945-ton superlift section of the carrier contains a diesel generator room, a pump room, an oily water waste pump room, 16 complete tanks and 18 partial tanks:”
This stern section was among the largest of the 162 sections that make up the carrier:
When it is finally complete, the Ford will be even bigger than the Nimitz Class USS Theodore Roosevelt, pictured above.
The USS Gerald Ford is set to join the U.S. Navy’s fleet in 2015, and is slated to replace the current USS Enterprise, ending her then 50-plus years of active service with the United States Navy.
(h/t Business Insider)
Popular Stories
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 584 Comments
‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 413 Comments
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 411 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 374 Comments
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 368 Comments
Faith
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 411 Comments
Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 413 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
- President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 368 Comments
- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 151 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 302 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 411 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (245)
right-wing-waco
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 3:19pmQuestion: Where can a US Navy aircraft carrier group go.
Report Post »Answer: ANY PLACE IT WANTS TO!
teamarcheson
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 6:05pmAny Place You Want It To Sink?
I am beginning to think that will advances in Naval weapons, a carrier could end up becoming man made reefs off someone’s coast.
Lets hope our smoke free gay Navy knows what its doing in 2011 with 1940s weapons systems.
Report Post »Puddle Duck
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 8:41pm1940′s weapons sysytems ? That’s a crock of shite mate…
Report Post »Maxim Crux
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 3:18pmWe could have had quite a few of these had our congress and president not stolen the money
Report Post »ChiroRef
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 5:03pmWith the decom of CVN-65 (Enterprise), this marks the first time in US history we don’t have an active duty Enterprise (to my knowledge). I wish they would change the name on this from the Ford to the Enterprise, just for history and consistency’s sake.
Report Post »Mtremblay
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 8:04pmChiroff I am a Big E sailor former and I agree and keep pointing this out. It is a sad day
Report Post »john koenig
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 8:40pm@Chiroref….I agree we need the name Enterprise to be on one of these ships. Unfortunately, the second ship of the Ford class has already been designated as John F. Kennedy.
Report Post »We need to get away from political naming. Assuming a class of ten ships, the remaining eight should be: Enterprise, Saratoga, Intrepid, Constellation,America, Eagle, Kitty Hawk and Ranger (Independence is already taken by one of the new littoral ships.)
teamarcheson
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 8:54pmDOES ANYONE REALIZE A CARRIER CAN EASILY BE SEEN AND TRACKED FROM A ORBITING SATELLITE?
The bigger the carrier the easier it is. I hope our smoke free and gay Navy knows what its doing?
Report Post »grannyrecipe
Posted on January 5, 2012 at 6:38amTo CHIROREF
Report Post »I have similar sentiments as I was an ABE3 on The Constellation in 1985 which hosted the F18′s first deployment. The U.S.S Constellation was the second ship commissioned by the US Navy and the first to be deployed and first to engage and defeat an enemy. There have been four versions of the “Connie” over the centuries, the last being in 1960 but has now been decommissioned. It would be a shame if we didn’t keep the Naval tradition alive by naming a new carrier by the same name, keeping “America’s Flagship” in the fleet.
billford38619
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 3:11pmI served aboard he USS Kitty Hawk in 68. I throught it was big. I would love to see this one up close. As far as being a target………….It can defend itself any time and any where……
Report Post »CS Lewis FAN
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 3:11pm….and we’re concerned when China buys an old rusty Soviet version at the Siberian Flea Market????
Report Post »Carriers: China 1, USA 11 (active)
Nukes: Iran 1 (maybe), USA 1,950 (active)
I’m seeing a trend here.
GoodStuff
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 3:39pmRuPaul kook alert!
Report Post »Lord_Frostwind
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 4:36pm“Walk softly and carry a big stick.” Remember, it doesn’t matter if you are using a sword and your enemy has a rusty shank, if you underestimate him he can still slit your throat with it.
Report Post »noproblems
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 4:52pmRuPaul for sure. Will be an asterisk to this election as he was last time
Report Post »billford38619
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 3:09pmI served abourd the USS Kitty Hawk in 68. I throught it was big. I would love to see this one up close. As far as being a target………….It can defend itself any time and any where……
Report Post »billford38619
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 3:06pmI had the honour to serve on the U.S. Kittyhawk… this was the biggest ship for my eyes. I would love to see this one up close. This is one ship (target) that can defend itself any time…. anywhere…!
Stoic one
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 4:26pmOK! So you are enthusiastic. Got it. My father served on subs. I had a couple of tours as a child. I thought those were impressive, and saw carriers up close at the docks in San Diego and Pearl Harbor. Our Navy is so COOL, and deadly.
Report Post »The Sergeant Major
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 6:01pmBillFord Thank you for your uniformed service to our nation. No bravado, just facts. Blue skies Shipmate!
Report Post »look73
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 6:14pmhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Kitty_Hawk_(CV-63)
Al año siguiente el pobre Kitty Hawk volvió a ser sorprendido durante unos ejercicios, esta vez por un submarino chino que asomó a la superficie ante el estupor de sus tripulantes.
Poco después lo dieron de baja y reemplazaron por el (más moderno?) CVN-77 Uss George H. W. Bush, igual de vulnerable a los modernos misiles antibuque rusos.
Report Post »GERATMO
Posted on January 5, 2012 at 4:00pmWhen I was about 13 I went to sea on the Kitty Hawk with an uncle who served on it. IT was an experience I will never forget.
Report Post »lukerw
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:56pmNice Target… can’t miss!
Report Post »Arshloch
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:49pmWish we would have had that deck back when.
Report Post »rich43068
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:48pmCorrection: CVN-71 is not the USS Nimitz, it’s the USS Theodore Roosevelt as pictured.
The USS Enterprize was refit in mid 90‘s with two reactors replacing the 8 from the initial design which also totally gutted the ship’s engine rooms and much of the hull.
Report Post »BigDadio
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 3:01pmYou are correct on the CVN-71 info. But I’m pretty sure the Big E still has 8 reactors. EM1 Nuke 1984-1987
Report Post »rich43068
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 3:32pmYup 8 reactors, sorry with a total of 200,000 hourse power … still the fastest combat naval vessel in the world I am pretty sure. Our XO CVN-71 became the CO of CVN-68 during the overhaul.
Report Post »USAMEDIC3008
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 4:00pmUSS Enterprise
Report Post »Not a nimitz class
She is in a class all Her own
Mtremblay
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 8:02pmRich you are incorrect. The Big E, USS Enterprise still has 8 reactors. It did refuel in the early 90[s but its reactors remain at 8. I served on board from 2005-2008
Report Post »Mtremblay
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 8:09pmYes the Big E remains and even after this one and the Big E is decom she will still be the fastest. It is not only the HP, it is also she is not flat bottomed. I cant tell you though when she was taken up over 35 knots or so during sea trials and high speed turns, she would shake like an earthquake!LOL
Report Post »DesdemonasCrew
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:46pmSounds like someone has a real H@rdon for Adm. Mullins. And what is with the obsession with pregnant sailors?
Report Post »Go Navy!
Arminianism
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:34pmCome on, $11.5 billion? I know its an amazing machine but thats a little ridiculous. Was it built by union members because that would at least double the price and take twice as long to build…. Just another example of governments inability to spend wisely…
Report Post »Blackhawk1
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 3:50pmYes it was built by Union members. Almost all ships built are by Unions, that’s why they cost 2 or 3 times more than they should.
Report Post »goke84
Posted on January 6, 2012 at 12:10pmYes, sadly the unions are strong in the shipbuilding community… They ruin everything!
Report Post »stacknef
Posted on June 6, 2012 at 9:02pmAny of them leak or sink because of shoddy workmanship?
No, because they are well made precision instruments built by highly skilled steel workers, steam fitters, electrians, plumbers, welders, carpenters, architects, truck drivers , crane operators, shipyard workers, lunch wagon people, cafeteria workers, sanitation, power, etc etc etc….
You must admit that they these ships are worth much more to our nation than union wages.
Report Post »garbagecanlogic
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:33pmThis is what they will use to make “fish food” out of iran’s baby navy.
The U.S. Out Of The U.N.
Report Post »The U.N. Out Of The U.S.
SpankDaMonkey
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:25pm.
Why did we build this?
It will never be used to TOTALY DESTROY, any of our Enemies…………
Besides with DADT gone and the GLBT Crowd in charge, I bet they paint it PINK……….
Report Post »ken john
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:45pmlmao
Report Post »NOBAMA201258
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:54pmHow about pink and a sheep pen ,by 2015 things will probably be a lil’ weirder than now if we are still here
Report Post »Kiba
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:23pmOh great, just what we need, another floating brothel. Seems like a lot of money for something to conduct ‘social experiments’ on and provide a living for sailors who become pregnant while out to sea on ‘maneuvers’. I dont even know why our Naval ships even have self-defense systems on board considering that if an Irainian (or anyone else) john-boat pulled up and said “get your a$$ out of here” our ship would turn around and go full-steam the heck out of there! Our Navy has been made a fool of countless times simply because the top-brass guys are so liberal they wouldnt fire a shot at something if they were sinking our air craft carriers, just a bunch of desk-jockys who look good in their uniforms. Like that goofy chicken **** Admiral whoever that always pals around with Obama, Admiral Mullins or whatever. What a joke of a commander.
Report Post »Doctor Nordo
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:31pm“Our Navy is a joke”
Tell that to Baghdad.
Report Post »garbagecanlogic
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:32pmAnd your term of service was served in what branch? Thats what I thot, you served it in mommies basement while playing video games in your little girl pull ups. When you grow up and have mentality above that of a 4th grader, come back and converse.
The U.S. Out Of The U.N.
Report Post »The U.N. Out Of The U.S.
Kiba
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 5:19pmOh yea, they really fought back now didnt they? Pretty easy to launch missles on a stationary target when they aint launching any back. I happen to love the Navy and all the stuff they have and realize that out Navy alone is more than most countries entire military but Im talking about the CRAP that goes on anymore with them, and now they want to put females on subs? Oh yea that is really gonna advance our combat rediness isnt it? I’ll stick to what I said for now. And I do remember not long ago when a couple of Iranian PT (or whatever) boats ran off a ship of ours like shivering cowards, as our Naval leaders are.
Report Post »GeneTracy
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:23pmThe U.S.S.Gerald Ford should be more than adequate to deal with China’s Russian built aircraft carrier “Varyag……
Report Post »BIGJAYINPA
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:34pmI just hope this thing is not just a BFT (Big Floating Target) the Navy had better be up to the task of keeping some towel-headed, camel copulating follower of the Psychotic Pediphile from sticking a cruise missle in her side. Or maybe one of those rice propelled a**holes that hold all of our debt……..Just sayin’
Report Post »hidden_lion
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 3:00pmNo need for a cruise missile, just a couple of hard rowing suicide bombers and a cheap rowboat.
Report Post »then you could say, “we SUNK 11.5 billion into that project.”
All bad-joking aside, it is nice to be able to move your base around the globe.
M 4 Colt
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 4:43pmGentlemen, lets not forget that this is not the first aircraft carrier that our navy has built. They are built with double hauls, water tight compartments, double and tipple redundant systems. On top of all of that is the training of the crews to handle fires and flooding on board. During WW11 our navy was able to save more then one of our carries after it was attacked, that had fires on board, flooding and listing hard over from flooding. Lets also not forget that one of our super carries the Forrestal was able to survive HUGE EXPLOSIONS and HUGE FIRES during the Vietnam war. Point being many lessons were learned so if they are hit by a cruse missile or two they will use their traning to save their ship.
Report Post »evilhatemonger
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:22pmCool ship.
Report Post »AMERICA4EVER
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:18pmI want one! Oh, I guess I am a co-owner.
Report Post »PROV1X
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:13pmI‘m shocked Obamy hasn’t canceled construction yet!!
Report Post »sWampy
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:17pmJust wait till the build the USS Obama, it will be a 100 trillion dollar boat made of balsa wood that lobs rat turds.
Report Post »TXPilot
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:20pmMaybe, he plans to just wait awhile, and have it renamed the USS Karl Marx?
Report Post »Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:21pmProv1x – give him time, once the unions have finished the job and are paid in full then he will order it sold for scrap or just up and give it to China.
Report Post »ginger100
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 4:15pmThe Unions will all be paid in yens after they collapse the dollar. They will have to spend their hard earned yens over in China. I will be riding thru the waste lands of America searching for gasoline with my liberal gay biatch chained up behind me searching out and destroying any liberal left alive who thinks they can control the gasoline.
Report Post »riverdog1
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 5:03pmswampy, try that line at osama bin laden. yeah thought you would soil yurself.
Report Post »JLGunner
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:06pmGod bless our Navy!!!
Report Post »Warphead
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:05pmThe Gerald Ford???? Isn’t he the president that kept falling down?
Report Post »RichNGadsden
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:09pmAka Chevy Chase.
Report Post »MeteoricLimbo
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:15pmIf you get your news from SNL yes, he was.
Report Post »NOBAMA201258
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:59pmWould you rather go with Jimmy Carter?
Report Post »Twinspeedr
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 3:21pmFord???? Why couldn’t this have been the USS Thomas Jefferson or USS John Adams? We are supposed to name them after REAL Presidents aren’t we?
Report Post »USNRET04
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 4:25pmNOBAMA, there actually is a USS Jimmy Carter. Its a submarine, fitting since he was a submariner.
Report Post »MeteoricLimbo
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:02pmCurious, the F-35C seems to have ailerons on the leading edge….someone was thinking out of the box
Report Post »DarthMims
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 3:19pmGood eyes, I never noticed them before. That has got to make that thing touchy-loose handling.
Report Post »VRW Conspirator
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 5:35pmif i remember right..the F35 was supposed to have a limited VTOL ability due to state of the art thrust vectoring engines and vents on its belly…they might have put them there to help compensate…
Report Post »proliance
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 8:01pmThose are either nose flaps or slats. If I remember correctly, nose flaps extend the forward edge of the wing creating a longer and smooth surface while slats extend out and create a gap between the slat and the wing.
Report Post »BONETRAUMA
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:02pmtake that iran and china!!!!
Report Post »hidden_lion
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 3:02pmexcept, now we are too broke to actually float this baby.
Report Post »Doctor Nordo
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:01pmAs a Navy vet who spent his time as a reactor operator on a Nimitz-class aircraft carrier, this ship has me drooling…
Report Post »macpappy
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:11pmI had the honor to be part of Nimitz’s first crew. Took her out for trials as a Quarter Master 2nd class
Report Post »MeteoricLimbo
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:16pmMy hat is off to both of you for your service. Thank you and God bless.
Report Post »Kiba
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:33pmThe problem is with morons like Admiral Mullins (or whoever ) the other people drooling on her is the young men and girls at each other aboard and guess what happens next? She goes home with child and he pays child support thanks to the great American social experiments at sea. And then it will sail to that chanel or straits of whatever that Iran is getting ready to block and the Iranians will say “get that ship out of here now!” and it will turn-around and head back out to sea full steam ahead! Thanks to our Progressive military leaders that pal around with Obama like that Admiral boot-licker.
Report Post »Doctor Nordo
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:34pmMACPAPPY
Cheers, brother! U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln here, Nuke MM2(SW).
METEORICLIMBO
Thank you very much. I absolutely do not agree with our overseas wars, but I am still proud to have served. And there really isn’t anything quite as awe-inspiring as an aircraft carrier in action.
Report Post »Doctor Nordo
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:35pmKiba, that really doesn’t happen very often.
Report Post »justangry
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:52pmI hear ya Doc. We deployed on the Roosevelt. These newer carriers are SWEET!! Then again, I swore I‘d never get on another boat that couldn’t be pulled by a pickup truck.
Report Post »Doctor Nordo
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 3:04pmHaha, yeah Justangry, I completely agree. These newer carriers are indeed sweet. Seeing them almost, with emphasis on the word “almost”, make me want to reenlist.
Report Post »BigDadio
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 3:04pmAhoy shipmates. Served on CVN-65 & am a plankowner on CVN-72 [EM1 Nuke] Builders & Sea trials are quite a trip!
Report Post »Steve Neiling
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 3:15pmUSS Carl Vinson–Nuke EM2. Yeah, this warship is awesome!
Report Post »Doctor Nordo
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 3:45pmGlad to see all my fellow nukes :D
Report Post »PrfctlyFrank
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:00pmDo Not mess with the US..
Report Post »SpankDaMonkey
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 1:59pm.
Report Post »Obama will prob give it away to Iran or China……….
King Troy
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:02pmyour in love with that man. im not even joking
Report Post »acalltoarms
Posted on January 4, 2012 at 2:09pmHe is not that smart; he will borrow money from China and pay them to take it. Of course we will be responsible for the maintenance and the upgrades!
Report Post »