Hey everyone, welcome back to My Weird Prompts. I am Corn, and I am sitting here in our living room in Jerusalem with my brother. It is February twenty-third, twenty-six, and the view outside is quiet, but the world feels anything but.
Herman Poppleberry at your service. It is good to be back at the microphones, Corn. There is something about the winter air in Jerusalem that makes you want to dig into some heavy-duty engineering and global strategy.
It really does. And today we have a prompt from Daniel that feels very close to home, literally. He is asking about Carrier Strike Groups, specifically in light of the USS Gerald R. Ford being in the region. For those who have not been following the maritime traffic in the Mediterranean and the Red Sea over the last year, the Ford is currently one of the most visible symbols of American power. It has been making waves, both literally and figuratively, as a stabilizing force—or a target, depending on who you ask.
It really has. And Daniel is hitting on a fundamental question that a lot of people have when they see photos of these massive ships. You see this one hundred thousand ton behemoth, the most advanced warship ever built, and then you see it surrounded by five or six other ships, plus submarines you cannot see, plus a constant halo of aircraft. It feels almost counterintuitive. If the Gerald Ford is so powerful, why does it need a whole neighborhood of bodyguards just to go for a swim? If it is the apex predator of the ocean, why does it travel in a pack?
Exactly. It is like seeing a heavyweight champion walking down the street with five other guys protecting him. You wonder, can he not handle himself? But as we dive into this, I think we will see that the carrier is less like a single fighter and more like a mobile heart or a brain. If the heart stops, the whole body fails. So, Herman, let's start with the basics. What exactly makes up a Carrier Strike Group, or a CSG, as the military loves to call it? Give us the ingredient list for this multi-billion dollar recipe.
Right, the acronyms never end. A standard Carrier Strike Group is a modular organization, but it usually follows a specific recipe designed for what they call "all-domain" dominance. At the center, of course, you have the aircraft carrier. Currently, that is either a Nimitz class or the newer Gerald R. Ford class, which is what Daniel is asking about. Then, you have the escort. This usually includes one Ticonderoga class guided missile cruiser. These are the heavy hitters for air defense, though they are getting older and being phased out for more destroyers. Then you have Destroyer Squadron Two-Two, or DESRON, which usually consists of at least two or three Arleigh Burke class guided missile destroyers. These are the workhorses. They do everything from hunting submarines to knocking down incoming ballistic missiles.
And those are just the ones we see on the surface, right? I imagine the "neighborhood" extends below the waterline too.
Precisely. Usually, there is at least one Los Angeles class or Virginia class nuclear-powered attack submarine prowling ahead or beneath the group. Their job is primarily to make sure no enemy submarines can get close enough to fire a torpedo at the carrier. They are the silent sentries. And finally, you cannot forget the logistics. There is almost always a supply ship, like a fast combat support ship, that carries the fuel, food, and ammunition to keep the whole group running for months without needing to hit a port. It is a self-contained city that moves at thirty knots.
So it is an entire ecosystem. But Daniel’s question is really about the necessity of it. Why can the Ford not just go out there with its own missiles and its own sensors? It is huge. It has the dual band radar. It has evolved Sea Sparrow missiles and the rolling airframe missile systems for self-defense. Why is that not enough to keep it safe?
That is the thirteen billion dollar question, Corn. The best way to think about an aircraft carrier is as a mobile, floating airfield. Its primary weapon is not the ship itself; it is the seventy-five or eighty aircraft sitting on its deck. Now, an airfield is a very large, very flat, and very vulnerable target. Even if the ship is built to take a hit—and the Ford is incredibly resilient—even a small amount of damage to the flight deck can render those eighty aircraft useless. If you cannot launch or recover planes, you are just a very expensive target. The carrier is an offensive platform, but it is a glass cannon in terms of its operational mission. If the runway is cracked, the mission is over.
So the escorts are there to ensure the runway stays open. It is less about the ship sinking and more about the ship staying functional.
Exactly. It is about defense in depth. Imagine a series of concentric circles around the carrier. The outermost circle is hundreds of miles out, patrolled by the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye. That is the plane with the big rotating dish on top. It sees everything. It is the "quarterback" of the sky. If an enemy plane or missile enters that circle, the carrier knows about it instantly. The next circle is the outer air battle, where the F-35Cs and F-18s intercept threats. But if something gets through those planes, you need the surface ships.
And that is where the cruisers and destroyers come in with the AEGIS combat system. I have heard that name a lot in news reports lately, especially with the intercepts in the Red Sea.
Right. The AEGIS system is incredible. It can track hundreds of targets simultaneously and coordinate the defense for the entire group. If a destroyer sees a missile, it can share that data with the cruiser, which might be the one to actually fire the interceptor. They work as a single, distributed sensor network. The carrier is the prize, so the escorts act as the shield. They are literally designed to soak up the attention and the threats so the carrier can focus on its one job: launching strikes. Think of the destroyers as the offensive linemen in football. Their job is to block so the quarterback—the carrier—can throw the long pass.
That brings up a great point from Daniel’s prompt. He asked how much of the strike group's assets are dedicated to protecting the carrier versus conducting offensive missions. If you have three destroyers and a cruiser, are they just sitting there waiting to be shot at, or are they contributing to the fight?
It is a dynamic balance. In a low-threat environment, those destroyers can go off and do their own thing—chase pirates, conduct "freedom of navigation" operations, or strike land targets with Tomahawks. But in a high-threat environment, like what we have seen recently with anti-ship ballistic missiles being fired from coastal batteries, the majority of the surface ships' vertical launch system cells—those are the tubes that hold the missiles—are filled with interceptors like the Standard Missile Two, Six, or Three. Their primary mission becomes air and missile defense. However, the offensive power of the carrier’s air wing is so massive that the escorts do not really need to be the primary offensive punch. One carrier air wing can generate more sorties in a day than many small countries' entire air forces.
I want to dig into that air wing for a second, because Daniel mentioned the Growler and the Hawkeye. We talked about the EA-18G Growler in a previous episode, and it is a perfect example of this offensive versus defensive split. Is the Growler there to protect the ship or to help the strike?
It is both, and that is what makes it so fascinating. Defensively, a Growler can jam the radar of an incoming anti-ship missile or an enemy scout plane, making the carrier group invisible or at least very confusing to look at on a screen. Offensively, the Growlers fly ahead of the strike fighters to blind enemy air defenses so the F-35s can get in and drop their payloads without being targeted. The Ford is actually a huge leap forward here because of the EMALS, the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System.
Right, instead of the old steam catapults. I remember you being very excited about that when the Ford first launched.
Oh, I was. Steam catapults are powerful but they are violent. They put a lot of wear and tear on the airframes, and they have a "minimum" weight they can launch. EMALS is like a railgun for planes. It is smoother, it can be adjusted for different weights, which means you can launch lighter drones or heavier, fully loaded fighters more efficiently. The Ford is designed to have a thirty percent higher "sortie generation rate" than the Nimitz class. That means more planes in the air, more often, with less maintenance. In a real war, the side that can get more "metal in the air" usually wins.
So the tactical advantage of the Ford specifically is just the sheer volume of power it can put into the sky. But Daniel also asked about the command and control, the C-2 infrastructure. I imagine that with all these ships and planes and different branches of the military involved, the communication must be a nightmare. How do you stop everyone from talking over each other?
It is a masterpiece of complexity, Corn. The Gerald Ford is essentially a floating headquarters. On a carrier, you have two main command centers for the group. You have the ship’s bridge, where the Captain of the ship sits. He is responsible for the ship itself—the navigation, the safety, and the crew. He is the "driver." But then, you have the Flag Bridge. That is where the Admiral, the Commander of the Carrier Strike Group, sits.
So the Admiral is not commanding the ship; he is commanding the group.
Precisely. The Admiral is looking at the big picture. He is talking to the destroyers, the submarines, the aircraft, and even satellite intelligence back in the states. The Ford has been built with an incredible amount of fiber optic cabling and bandwidth to support this. It acts as a central hub for what the military calls Joint All Domain Command and Control, or J-A-D-C-Two. This is the future of warfare. It is about connecting every sensor to every shooter.
Which basically means everyone talking to everyone in real-time.
Right. It is not just the Navy. You might have Marine Corps F-35Bs landing on a nearby amphibious assault ship but being directed by the Hawkeyes from the Ford. You might have Army units on the ground in a nearby country requesting close air support. The Ford is the brain that processes those requests, identifies the targets, and assigns the right asset to the job. It is a multi-branch coordinator. It can even take data from an Air Force satellite and feed it directly to a Navy destroyer's missile system. It is the ultimate "router" for the military.
It sounds like a lot of responsibility for one ship. If you take out the Ford, you are not just losing a ship; you are losing the entire command structure for that region. That seems like a massive vulnerability.
That is exactly why the escort is so heavy. It is the "center of gravity." If the Ford is taken out of the equation, the destroyers and cruisers still have their own radars and missiles, but they lose that massive umbrella of air power and that central processing hub. The tactical advantage of a carrier is that it is sovereign American territory that can move thirty miles an hour. You do not need "basing rights" or permission from a foreign government to launch a strike from the Ford. You just move it to international waters and you are ready to go. It is a four-and-a-half-acre piece of the United States that can show up off your coast in a few days.
That is a huge point. Land bases are great, but they are fixed. Everyone knows where they are, and they are subject to local politics. But I have to ask, Herman, is this still viable in twenty-twenty-six? We hear so much about "carrier killer" missiles, like the Chinese D-F-twenty-one-D or hypersonic weapons that move so fast they are almost impossible to intercept. Does the CSG model still hold up against those?
This is the central debate in naval circles right now. There is no doubt that the environment is getting more dangerous. Long-range "anti-access and area-denial" systems, or A-Two-A-D, are designed specifically to keep carriers far away from a conflict zone. If a carrier has to stay one thousand miles away to be safe, its planes might not have the range to reach the target.
So then what? Do you just have a very expensive ship sitting in the middle of the ocean doing nothing?
Well, that is why the tech is evolving. That is why we are seeing longer-range drones and the M-Q-twenty-five Stingray, which is an unmanned aerial refueler. It can launch from the carrier, meet the fighters halfway, and give them the gas they need to reach those distant targets. And on the defensive side, the Navy is looking at laser weapons and high-power microwave systems to shoot down those hypersonic missiles. The Ford was built with a massive increase in electrical power generation specifically to support these future "directed energy" weapons.
I remember reading that. The Ford produces about three times as much electricity as the Nimitz class. Why do you need that much power just to run a ship?
Because lasers require an insane amount of juice. If you want to shoot down a missile moving at Mach five with a beam of light, you need a massive capacitor and a huge power plant. The Ford’s nuclear reactors are designed to provide that. They knew that in twenty or thirty years, they would need that power for lasers. So, while the threat is increasing, the carrier is not just sitting still. It is an arms race. The CSG is the ultimate expression of that race. It is a "system of systems." You cannot look at the carrier in isolation. You have to look at the way it integrates with the destroyers, the satellites, and the electronic warfare planes.
It is interesting, Daniel mentioned the news about the Ford being at sea for eight months and the issues with the sewage system. It reminds you that despite all this high-tech wizardry, it is still a city of five thousand people living on top of a nuclear reactor. It is a human story as much as a technical one.
It really is. The human element is the most complex part. You have nineteen-year-old kids who are responsible for moving multi-million dollar jets around a pitching deck in the middle of the night. You have technicians maintaining some of the most complex electronics in the world while living in cramped bunks. The logistics of just feeding five thousand people three or four times a day while in a combat zone is mind-boggling. You need thousands of gallons of fresh water, tons of food, and a way to manage waste.
And the fact that they have been out there for eight months. That is a long time. Usually, deployments are six or seven months. When you extend that, you start to see the strain on the crew and the machinery. Daniel mentioned the sewage system issues. On a ship that big, a plumbing failure is not just a nuisance; it is a health and morale crisis.
Absolutely. But that speaks to the commitment. The reason the Ford is here, why it stayed, is because of its role as a deterrent. Just the presence of a Carrier Strike Group can prevent a war from starting. It is a message. It says, "We are here, we are watching, and we have the capacity to respond to anything, anywhere, within hours." That psychological impact is hard to quantify, but it is one of the primary reasons the United States continues to invest in these massive groups. It is about the "unspoken" power.
It is the ultimate "big stick" policy. But let's look at the practical takeaways for a second. If someone is watching the news today, February twenty-third, twenty-twenty-six, and they see a Carrier Strike Group being deployed, what should they actually be looking for to understand what is happening? What are the "tells"?
Great question. First, look at the composition. If they are sending extra destroyers or a second carrier, that is a signal of high tension. Two carriers together, a "dual carrier operation," is a massive amount of firepower—we are talking about one hundred and sixty aircraft in one spot. Second, look at where they are positioned. Are they in a tight spot like the Persian Gulf, or are they staying out in the deep water of the Mediterranean? That tells you how they perceive the threat. If they are in deep water, they are worried about land-based missiles.
And look at the aircraft. If you see E-2D Hawkeyes and Growlers flying constantly, they are in a high state of surveillance and electronic readiness.
Exactly. And finally, understand that the carrier is the hub of a network. If you hear about a destroyer in the group intercepting a missile, that is the system working as intended. The destroyer is doing its job so the carrier can stay safe and keep its options open. The carrier is the "strategic" asset, while the destroyers are the "tactical" shield.
It is a fascinating look at modern power. It is not just about having the biggest gun; it is about having the best network and the best shield. It is about "distributed lethality." Herman, any final thoughts on the Gerald Ford or the future of the CSG?
I think we are at a turning point. The Ford is the first of its class, and it had a lot of "growing pains" with the new technology—the elevators, the catapults, the radar. But now that it is operational and proving itself in a tense environment, it is showing that the concept of a massive, mobile airbase is still the centerpiece of naval strategy. Whether it can survive the next generation of missiles is the big question, but for now, there is nothing else on earth that can project power like a Carrier Strike Group. It is the ultimate expression of industrial and technological might.
Well, Daniel, I hope that sheds some light on why that "massive warship" needs so many friends. It is a team sport at the highest possible stakes. It is not just a ship; it is a floating piece of national policy.
It really is. And if you are out there listening and you have found this deep dive into naval tactics interesting, or if you have your own weird prompts about military tech or anything else, we would love to hear from you. We love getting into the weeds of how things actually work.
Absolutely. You can reach us at show at my weird prompts dot com or through the contact form on our website, my weird prompts dot com. We also have an RSS feed there if you want to subscribe and never miss an episode. We have been covering everything from the physics of coffee to the logistics of nuclear carriers.
And hey, if you have been enjoying the show, a quick review on your podcast app or a rating on Spotify really helps us out. It helps other curious people find us and join the conversation. We are a small show, and word of mouth is everything.
We really appreciate the support. We have been doing this for over eight hundred episodes now, and it is the listeners like you who keep us digging into these topics. It is a privilege to be able to sit here and talk through these things with you all.
Thanks for the prompt, Daniel. It was a great excuse to talk about some seriously impressive engineering. I could talk about the EMALS system for another hour, but I will spare the listeners.
Maybe next time, Herman. We are available on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, and pretty much everywhere you get your audio fix.
This has been My Weird Prompts.
Until next time, stay curious.
Goodbye everyone.
