World Affairs Board - View Single Post

Dreadnought · 09-04-2007, 22:34 PM

I understand completely what you are saying as I work for a museumed Iowa class ship.
The context this was put into was for a major catastrophy happening. Ships have been used as power plants BB's and Cruisers many times in the past history shows this to be true and not for towns but cities but im not sure of a CV ever doing this but the set up should be primarily the same. As far as the depth goes for intaking boiler feed water most major rivers that traverse shipping trade have plenty of depth for such purposes and water barges can provide potable as well. Steam technology is on the decline and has been for quite some time but very reliable none the less and not as dangerous nor expensive as having one of the nuclear ships standing by. Its not like you would need a full set up for power two maybe three max boiler wise and if its a retired carrier it wouldnt require the water intake that a nuc would. It would make more sense to have the steamer (retired) do this instead of having a nuclear carrier sitting at bay when it should either be in "stand by" status or out with its group.We dont need to be in the business to man it like its going to sea with a full air wing just manage those that would give care and serve food and any country we decided to do that for would supply the non plant related personell such as medics,kitchen etc. Hell,let NATO and Red Cross people run it, the military manage the power plant,water works and landing ops. These are just ideas mind you opinions vary on carriers in reserve. I have a good friend serving on Ike (CV69) and was supposed to go out cruising on her a few weeks back but alas the paperwork wasnt on time. Cheers

09-04-2007, 22:34 PM	#57 (permalink)
Dreadnought *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 05-12-05 Posts: 5,796 Country:	I understand completely what you are saying as I work for a museumed Iowa class ship. The context this was put into was for a major catastrophy happening. Ships have been used as power plants BB's and Cruisers many times in the past history shows this to be true and not for towns but cities but im not sure of a CV ever doing this but the set up should be primarily the same. As far as the depth goes for intaking boiler feed water most major rivers that traverse shipping trade have plenty of depth for such purposes and water barges can provide potable as well. Steam technology is on the decline and has been for quite some time but very reliable none the less and not as dangerous nor expensive as having one of the nuclear ships standing by. Its not like you would need a full set up for power two maybe three max boiler wise and if its a retired carrier it wouldnt require the water intake that a nuc would. It would make more sense to have the steamer (retired) do this instead of having a nuclear carrier sitting at bay when it should either be in "stand by" status or out with its group.We dont need to be in the business to man it like its going to sea with a full air wing just manage those that would give care and serve food and any country we decided to do that for would supply the non plant related personell such as medics,kitchen etc. Hell,let NATO and Red Cross people run it, the military manage the power plant,water works and landing ops. These are just ideas mind you opinions vary on carriers in reserve. I have a good friend serving on Ike (CV69) and was supposed to go out cruising on her a few weeks back but alas the paperwork wasnt on time. Cheers __________________ Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.