Quote:

Originally Posted by Dreadnought We should not need to revive them for any reasons outside of a major catastrophy (Flood/Earthquake/Sunami etc.) or perhaps worst case screnario War. We should be smart enough to keep them in reserve since they can offer many other services besides warfare. If needed the could be revived very quickly as far as power generation goes. Consider it a mobile Red Cross station. We wouldnt require the props to spin but the generators onboard could generate significant power to say a flood ravaged city/cities power grids etc. The hangars could be operating rooms the boilers providing heat/power, Birthing for the homeless and displaced. The mess and spaces affiliated for ready made kitchens. The flight deck for construction/demolision machinery basing and air operations for helo support.They can provide permamnent housing until some level of normality is restored. Plus they can carry all the stores needed in these times. Just tow in place and moore. Not that simple but reasonable as far as timing. It would be times such as this they would be well worth their cost to have in storage and somewhat prepped.

• The conventional plants are old, very old and require specialized knowledge to run - knowledge that is on the outs in today's gas turbine or nuclear power plant navy.

• The losses incumbent in transferring power from ship to shore are significant - that at least, is what I recall from a similar conversation with our reactor officer when I was on IKE. Losses are exacerbated with a conventional plant which requires a constant intake of water to make the steam, to run the turbines, to generate the electricity, etc. Pierside, the water is usually not deep (or clean) enough to support sustained operations of a conventional plant. That is why you see some pretty hefty electrical cables running to ships pierside - they are providing shore-power to the ship so the plant can go cold.

• An aircraft carrier is an industrial facility with all the hazards incumbent thereto. If one is concerned about providing a sea-based shelter for displaced refugees, troop transports or passenger liners would provide better "hotel" services (HVAC, potable water, sanitary) as well as requisite safe areas for bedding. Word of warning - expectations and long-term useage must both be closely managed. Case-in-point: post-Katrina use of cruise ships. And that doesn't even begin to address the whole access issue...

• There is a good reason a carrier complement runs over 3,000 personnel - a hefty percentage are directly involved inthe safe, efficient operaiton of this floating industrial facility. There is no reason to believe that those requirements would be any less on a carrier as envisioned above. Sure, you won't need a bridge crew, for example, but you would need a central operations center to conduct oversight of the running of the vessel - and that would likely come from the bridge crew (or at least require the same #s). Want to use it as a medical facility? Ramp up those numbers even more for medical personnel.