PDA

View Full Version : A City at Sea



Dreadnought
21 May 08,, 17:53
This thread will be dedicated to the utility of the battleships the unique qualities they bring when at sea or on station. We may even add WWII era cruisers both CA and CL alike to this thread at some point or a varient of the USN classes to include all nations Navy's if they so fit the catagory.

Missles,Guns and Bombardment will not be a topic on this thread and it is not wanted since so many threads exist with that as a topic. If this is what you wish to discuss then please utilize one of the other threads in this forum and there are plenty.

On Friday May 23 USS New Jersey (BB62) will commeriate her 65th Anniversary of her first commisioning here in Philadelphia. Upon her commeration they will open the "City at Sea" tour. This is a below decks tour featuring other aspects of the ship outside the norm of gunnery and weapons systems such as Machine shops (all of them),Medical,Dental,Post Office, Helo Ops,Ships Stores,Damage Control,Barbers,Chapel,Taylors,Brig,Laundry and ofcrse the mess decks.

We can include engineering in this thread (for all ships mentioned) as well however her engine spaces are not open as of present but will be in the future. If you have experience on other ships or these please share what you know all are welcomed.

If you are going to post, in the topic section please fill out what the post relates to that way all other members and viewers understand the post.

Thanks in advance.

Ytlas
21 May 08,, 20:39
Missles,Guns and Bombardment will not be a topic on this thread and it is not wanted since so many threads exist with that as a topic. If this is what you wish to discuss then please utilize one of the other threads in this forum and there are plenty.

On Friday May 23 USS New Jersey (BB62) will commeriate her 65th Anniversary of her first commisioning here in Philadelphia. Upon her commeration they will open the "City at Sea" tour. This is a below decks tour featuring other aspects of the ship outside the norm of gunnery and weapons systems such as Machine shops (all of them),Medical,Dental,Post Office, Helo Ops,Ships Stores,Damage Control,Barbers,Chapel,Taylors,Brig,Laundry and ofcrse the mess decks.


If you are going to post, in the topic section please fill out what the post relates to that way all other members and viewers understand the post.

Thanks in advance.

Gee whiz, after all the terms you set forth, I feel like hijacking the thread on the first post......

Do chickens see in color?

What is cRusty's annual expenditure on pencils?

Is Grasshopper going to be talked into having a large wedding?

Does Dread really have 6 toes on his right foot?





Is there still a print shop?

Is the tour going to include the Chief's Quarters and Mess, since you're going right by there.

Dreadnought
21 May 08,, 21:13
Gee whiz, after all the terms you set forth, I feel like hijacking the thread on the first post......

Do chickens see in color?

What is cRusty's annual expenditure on pencils?

Is Grasshopper going to be talked into having a large wedding?

Does Dread really have 6 toes on his right foot?





Is there still a print shop?

Is the tour going to include the Chief's Quarters and Mess, since you're going right by there.

I cant stop laughing! Your killing me Pal.:biggrin:

Dreadnought
21 May 08,, 21:14
The infomercial on the below decks experience (briefly)

YouTube - Battleship New Jersey (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLrQriWF1_s&feature=related)

Dreadnought
21 May 08,, 21:16
Does Dread really have 6 toes on his right foot?
Seven, they call me Lucky seven Sampson (helps hold the ropes better):biggrin:

Do chickens see in color? So long as they dont see the axe coming im not worried.:P

What is cRusty's annual expenditure on pencils? Unknown to this date but he's not that expensive on erasers.;)

Is Grasshopper going to be talked into having a large wedding? Not on my watch, Not on my ship.
:)
Does Dread really have 6 toes on his right foot? (see above;)

Ytlas
21 May 08,, 22:13
So..... it's a 7:14 second video on You Tube about the "Below Deck Experience" yet there's less than 1 minute of showing pictures and clips of "Below Decks."

Are you guys going to have the people sign a waiver so in case they smash their shins or crack their forehead, they won't sue your organization?

I had a working partner on the Jersey for a while. They put her with another mechanic for a few days and she fell down one of the ladders to Broadway and permanently screwed up her back. She was very athletic, a javelin thrower in high school (or was it a Junior College?), and still managed to fall. cRusty probably knows her from Plan Files, where she eventually ended up. On the Misery, they changed out the ladder (years ago) to a more safe version, to the spot of surrender and that's out in the open.

Gun Grape
22 May 08,, 00:19
This thread will be dedicated to the utility of the battleships the unique qualities they bring when at sea or on station.

Great idea for a thread




On Friday May 23 USS New Jersey (BB62) will commeriate her 65th Anniversary of her first commisioning here in Philadelphia. Upon her commeration they will open the "City at Sea" tour. This is a below decks tour featuring other aspects of the ship outside the norm of gunnery and weapons systems such as Machine shops (all of them),Medical,Dental,Post Office, Helo Ops,Ships Stores,Damage Control,Barbers,Chapel,Taylors,Brig,Laundry and ofcrse the mess decks.


For a thread about "unique qualities" you have named things that are on every ship that I have ever spent at least a month on. That would be 12 amphibs. From LSTs to LHDs.

So what are those unique qualities and the utility that only Battleships bring to the fleet? :confused:

Michigan_Guy
22 May 08,, 00:47
Nothing, like everyone on here says battleships are bad, they never did a thing ever. :rolleyes:

TopHatter
22 May 08,, 00:53
So what are those unique qualities and the utility that only Battleships bring to the fleet? :confused:

They're slightly faster than your average 'phib?

More survivable?

:)

Gun Grape
22 May 08,, 01:42
They're slightly faster than your average 'phib?

More survivable?

:)

But faster and more armored are not things that are unique to the BBs.

And the things that Dreadnought listed are found on just about every ship.

And Michigan Guy, I don't hate battleships. They just don't have a place in the 21st century Navy. Nor was there a place for them in the late 20th century.
They have been OBE

Blademaster
22 May 08,, 01:50
I like BBs but GunGrape is right. It simply cost too much to build a BB and to maintain it. The guns are outranged by ship seeking missiles and torpedoes and submarines w/ its torpedos are BB's biggest Achilles heel.

I would support building a ship that has great artillery range but is not such a golden goose that you don't let it go into combat for fear of it being sunk.

gunnut
22 May 08,, 05:00
So what are those unique qualities and the utility that only Battleships bring to the fleet? :confused:

Rolling barrages of 16" shells that bring wonton destruction to a large area without the use of B-52s?

:biggrin:

Basically carpet bombing without the bombers. Always a good show.

TopHatter
22 May 08,, 05:24
I'm a BB fan but I don't believe that they'll ever be reactivated. Just getting that out there


But faster and more armored are not things that are unique to the BBs.

What is more armored than battleship?? I mean, seriously?

Besides, your statement was "For a thread about "unique qualities" you have named things that are on every ship that I have ever spent at least a month on. That would be 12 amphibs. From LSTs to LHDs."

So please show me an amphib is anywhere in an Iowa's league when in comes to speed and armor. ;)

After all, doesn't LST mean Large Stationary Target? :))

Gun Grape
22 May 08,, 11:58
What is more armored than battleship?? I mean, seriously?

Nothing. So we will both agree that they have thicker armor than any other ship in the US Navy.

So what do you do with that? Send her places without escorts? Or send her places where the rest of the group will receive heavy damage to protect her?



Besides, your statement was "For a thread about "unique qualities" you have named things that are on every ship that I have ever spent at least a month on. That would be 12 amphibs. From LSTs to LHDs."

So please show me an amphib is anywhere in an Iowa's league when in comes to speed and armor. ;)

My point was that everything that he listed is common on other ships. Not something that the Battleship alone can claim.

I've touched on the armor but since you mentioned speed a few questions.

How fast can a battle group travel? As fast as its slowest member.

If the Iowas were part/leading a SAG with Burkes and Tycos will they race off and leave the group behind? No. What good is that extra speed?

Dreadnought
22 May 08,, 14:05
So..... it's a 7:14 second video on You Tube about the "Below Deck Experience" yet there's less than 1 minute of showing pictures and clips of "Below Decks."

Are you guys going to have the people sign a waiver so in case they smash their shins or crack their forehead, they won't sue your organization?

I had a working partner on the Jersey for a while. They put her with another mechanic for a few days and she fell down one of the ladders to Broadway and permanently screwed up her back. She was very athletic, a javelin thrower in high school (or was it a Junior College?), and still managed to fall. cRusty probably knows her from Plan Files, where she eventually ended up. On the Misery, they changed out the ladder (years ago) to a more safe version, to the spot of surrender and that's out in the open.

I believe they will have some boundry on the tour such as age (i dont think anybody under 16) and ability since in some cases they will have to navigate quite a few ladders in some close spaces (they modified a few ladders to help aid people in descending below decks) and always watch your overhead. We even had a few guys bang their heads on the tram beam when stepping over the knee knockers in the shop areas when we walked it for the first few times.
Its always a good guide to keep one hand on the beam while passing through the main corridor that way you know its there and not directly over your head.

The hatches are roped and have netting built into the flange bodies of the hatch housing so if incase of a fall near a ladder there is safety in mind.

Dreadnought
22 May 08,, 14:25
Great idea for a thread




For a thread about "unique qualities" you have named things that are on every ship that I have ever spent at least a month on. That would be 12 amphibs. From LSTs to LHDs.

So what are those unique qualities and the utility that only Battleships bring to the fleet? :confused:

Grape, What is meant by this is that most people when they think of these ships all they think of is guns armor and speed but what we want to show is that there is more then just this and helps give them a closer look into a sailors/officers life aboard a battleship and what the other parts of the crew do in their daily routines its not that they are they only ones that bring this quality but its hardly ever expected that they can almost as well as any other well suited ship in the fleet. However having these qualities aboard made them that much more attractive to put to sea with a battle fleet or even leading one for that matter. (Such as in testing the theory Battlegroup Romeo)

Some of the figures I will post as far as relating to some areas (medical etc) are quite surprising and are never much mentioned in any of the books for the Iowas it would be more expected of a hospital style ship or a Carrier they always focus on the main aspects of the ships but never the much overlooked ones.

Just for an example how many ships in the modern battlefleet (outside the carriers and hospital ships) could say dispense pharmacutical medicene (not life threatening) on a daily basis or make a pair of glasses or do dental work and fixtures of all kinds for any member of the crew or crew of another ship while still at sea. Or take xrays and have an 18 bed hospital facility onboard including ICU unit. They have also conducted many medical operations aboard them through the past including but not limited too her captain as well. (J. Edward Snyder)

I know that the majority of modern USN ships have some kind of an infirmary aboard but not likely on this scale. I will post some figures over the weekend for you too look at. I think you will be surprised at some of these numbers and the short period of time in which this took place. Alot of these numbers will come from her last deployment during WestPac (1986) I believe.

Ytlas
22 May 08,, 16:14
I believe they will have some boundry on the tour such as age (i dont think anybody under 16) and ability since in some cases they will have to navigate quite a few ladders in some close spaces (they modified a few ladders to help aid people in descending below decks) and always watch your overhead. We even had a few guys bang their heads on the tram beam when stepping over the knee knockers in the shop areas when we walked it for the first few times.
Its always a good guide to keep one hand on the beam while passing through the main corridor that way you know its there and not directly over your head.

The hatches are roped and have netting built into the flange bodies of the hatch housing so if incase of a fall near a ladder there is safety in mind.


They had a Family Day or something like it at LBNSY in late 1995. I was in San Diego at the time and couldn't make it, but over the next week I was finding beige hard hats and safety glasses everywhere. The guests were issued these items for a tour somewhere in the yard.

Have you guys thought about hard hats for the guests? They can be sterilied and reused for each tour. Some extra linings would be needed for the hats that get "totaled out" by people with "greasy kid stuff" in their hair.

After 2 years in the yard I got used to wearing my hard hat full time mainly to keep all the dust out of my hair. I do remember banging my hard hat against some things a few times so it saved me a few bumps on my head.

When I'd go to San Diego to work on a ship, I'd feel totally out of place without a hard hat and wearing tennis shoes instead of the steel toed boots.

Dreadnought
22 May 08,, 17:36
They had a Family Day or something like it at LBNSY in late 1995. I was in San Diego at the time and couldn't make it, but over the next week I was finding beige hard hats and safety glasses everywhere. The guests were issued these items for a tour somewhere in the yard.

Have you guys thought about hard hats for the guests? They can be sterilied and reused for each tour. Some extra linings would be needed for the hats that get "totaled out" by people with "greasy kid stuff" in their hair.

After 2 years in the yard I got used to wearing my hard hat full time mainly to keep all the dust out of my hair. I do remember banging my hard hat against some things a few times so it saved me a few bumps on my head.

When I'd go to San Diego to work on a ship, I'd feel totally out of place without a hard hat and wearing tennis shoes instead of the steel toed boots.

Not sure how that is going to work out as far as liability goes I assume they would have already needed to address this matter. I would expect a wavier and for anybody going below to heed the warnings and consider their own physical limitations before blindly signing the waiver. People will have to assume some responsibility after all we cant fail safe against every situation only plan for it and how to react to it once it happens. Hopefully never, but that is wishfull thinking.:redface:

RustyBattleship
22 May 08,, 18:22
.

When I'd go to San Diego to work on a ship, I'd feel totally out of place without a hard hat and wearing tennis shoes instead of the steel toed boots.

I know the feeling well. Even when my wife and I took the Mexican Riviera cruise on the Pacific Princess, I felt naked without my hard hat and boots, even on a luxury ship better known as "The Love Boat".

After we boarded in Acapulco and got all set up in our stateroom, I couldn't help myself but go out on the pier and walk up and down doing a hull inspection. When waking up the first morning (while still in Acapulco) I opened the drapes and the Norton Sound was just outside our porthole (she was on her way to Pascagoula to have a VLS system installed).


Later had a very good technical conversation with the ship's chief engineer about bow thrusters, cathodic protection and fin stabilizers.

However, there were a couple of other distractions. One was my wife in a black bikini, another was the red-headed wife of a couple from Oregon we met also in a black bikini and and out of the corner of my eye (later fully opened retina) was a young brunette in a one piece swimming suit but with a leopard skin design. That was in between Bloody Mary's in the morning and Martinis at night (or early the next morning).

Now THAT you would not find on a Navy ship.

Ytlas
22 May 08,, 20:37
However, there were a couple of other distractions. One was my wife in a black bikini, another was the red-headed wife of a couple from Oregon we met also in a black bikini and and out of the corner of my eye (later fully opened retina) was a young brunette in a one piece swimming suit but with a leopard skin design. That was in between Bloody Mary's in the morning and Martinis at night (or early the next morning).

Now THAT you would not find on a Navy ship.

Yeah, that's a little different than passing the short female chief with her anchor tattoos on her forearms.



After we boarded in Acapulco and got all set up in our stateroom, I couldn't help myself but go out on the pier and walk up and down doing a hull inspection. When waking up the first morning (while still in Acapulco) I opened the drapes and the Norton Sound was just outside our porthole (she was on her way to Pascagoula to have a VLS system installed).

Got a couple of stories of female sailors and the Norton Sound but not appropriate for this forum.

RustyBattleship
23 May 08,, 00:25
Got a couple of stories of female sailors and the Norton Sound but not appropriate for this forum.

Yeah, I know. Her "official" nickname of "Snortin Norton" was unofficially changed to "The Love Boat".

This lead to spending gajillions more of taxpayer dollars to provide separate living spaces and separate sanitary spaces between male and female crew members on ALL classes of ships, including COMBAT ships.

Ytlas
23 May 08,, 02:00
Yeah, I know. Her "official" nickname of "Snortin Norton" was unofficially changed to "The Love Boat".

This lead to spending gajillions more of taxpayer dollars to provide separate living spaces and separate sanitary spaces between male and female crew members on ALL classes of ships, including COMBAT ships.

I'd forgotten about the "Love Boat" name.

A co-worker and I were ripping amosite (purist form of asbestos) off piping on the APL 2. On our break we'dwalk down the pier to the Norton Sound and get some sodas from the machines on the fantail. That afternoon the officer and enlisted on quarterdeck watch were females. As a brand new female sailor was escorted on, one turned to the other and made a very provacative statement. They'd forgotten we were behind them waiting for our turn to cross the brow. We just smiled at them and walked off.

Dreadnought
02 Jun 08,, 14:11
Post #16. Some of the figures I will post as far as relating to some areas (medical etc) are quite surprising and are never much mentioned in any of the books for the Iowas it would be more expected of a hospital style ship or a Carrier they always focus on the main aspects of the ships but never the much overlooked ones.

Some stats from her 1988 WestPac Tour.

Med Reports:
Examined: 2,244
Treated: 7,402 outpatient.
Admitted: 304 to Hospital Ward
X-Rays: 1,003
Crafted 376 pairs of eye glasses.
Immunizations: 3,127
Major surguries: 14
Lab tests: 4,389

Dental:
Patient visits: 4,559
Extractions: 269
Root Canals: 49
Restorations: 2,479

Shipwreck
02 Jun 08,, 16:58
USS Carl Vinson (CVN-70), 2005 Deployment Statistics (source (http://www.vinson.navy.mil/Press_Releases/2005/JUL_05/31JUL05%20USS%20Carl%20Vinson%20returns%20from%20d eployment.html))

Medical
109 Operating Room Cases
290 Surgical procedures
5,569 Pharmacy scripts
7,500 vaccination immunization shots given.
34,461 Patient contact visits

Dental
8,159 patient visits
2,730 dental fillings
170 root canal treatments completed, 587 tooth extractions
1,823 simple dental cleanings
3,157 complex dental cleanings

TopHatter
02 Jun 08,, 18:43
Crew Complement of USS Carl Vinson: approx 4800

Crew Complement of USS Iowa: approx 1800


Length and Beam of USS Carl Vinson: 1040 feet x 134 feet

Length and Beam of USS Iowa: 887 feet x 108 feet


Tonnage of USS Carl Vinson: 97,000+ tons

Tonnage of USS Iowa: 58,000+ tons

Gun Grape
03 Jun 08,, 04:18
Just for an example how many ships in the modern battlefleet (outside the carriers and hospital ships) could say dispense pharmacutical medicene (not life threatening) on a daily basis or make a pair of glasses or do dental work and fixtures of all kinds for any member of the crew or crew of another ship while still at sea. Or take xrays and have an 18 bed hospital facility onboard including ICU unit. They have also conducted many medical operations aboard them through the past including but not limited too her captain as well. (J. Edward Snyder)


I couldn't find any usage stats but here is what various classes that I've sailed on had for medical

Wasp Class LHD-1

Wasp has medical and dental facilities capable of providing intensive medical assistance to 600 casualties, whether combat incurred or brought aboard ship during humanitarian missions. The corpsmen also provide routine medical/dental care to the crew and embarked personnel. Major medical facilities include a 46 bed hospital ward, a 14 bed ICU,four main and two emergency operating rooms, four dental operating rooms, x-ray rooms, a blood bank, laboratories, and patient wards. In addition, four battle dressing stations are located throughout the ship, as well as a casualty collecting area at the flight deck level. Medical elevators rapidly transfer casualties from the flight deck and hangar bay to the medical facilities.

They can also prescribe various prescription medications and fill them at the pharmacy. They can also give immunizations and booster shots.

The Dental Department provides primary dental care and emergency capabilities to the ships crew and embarked troops. Consisting of three treatment rooms, LHD-1 has the most extensive dental support capability of any combatant in the world.

length and beam = 844x106ft
Crew = 1,075 (+ up to 1600 Marines)
Displacement= 40,500 Tons

Tarawa class LHA-1

two primary and two secondary Operating Rooms, a seventeen bed Intensive Care Unit and a forty eight bed Primary Ward. There is also a 250 bed overflow ward in the troop berthing area immediately forward of Medical. There are two X-Ray suites adjacent to the Main Medical Triage area, a Pharmacy which currently stocks over 500 line items, a physical therapy room with whirlpools and sitz bath, and a Biomedical Repair Shop. Our laboratory is equipped with a chemistry analyzer, coulter counter, automated blood gas analyzer and microbiology capability. With the two blood bank freezers, we can store 1,000 units of frozen blood at -85 degrees Celsius for up to 10 years, and can process six units every 30 minutes for emergency usage.

Length and Beam = 820X106ft

Crew= 960 (+ up to 1,900 Marines)

Displacement= 40,000 tons


LSD-41 and 49 classes

1 operating room, 8 bed hospital. 1 Surgeon and 1 dental officer can provide complete medical care.

Length and beam= 609x84Ft

Crew= 417 (+ 402 Marines)

Displacement=11,500 tons


LPD-17 ( I havn't sailed on one of these)

Two Operating Rooms
24 Person Hospital Ward
100 Casualty Overflow Capacity

Length and Beam= 684X105ft

Crew 440 (+690 Marines)

Displacement 25,000 tons

In addition all the ship classes listed above have Flag Staff accommodation's which would bump the total On board another 90+



I did not list the ship classes that have been decommissioned. But all the amphibs had at least 1 operating room . Except LSTs

RustyBattleship
03 Jun 08,, 05:20
Gun Grape

I was the structural project leader for 3 of the LHA's and did a special job on one of the LHD's.

You forgot one compartment on each of those ships in your medical list.

The morgue.

Yup. They do have them but we usually tried to work around them.

Gun Grape
03 Jun 08,, 05:25
Gun Grape

I was the structural project leader for 3 of the LHA's and did a special job on one of the LHD's.

You forgot one compartment on each of those ships in your medical list.

The morgue.

Yup. They do have them but we usually tried to work around them.

Much better to have a morgue than to put the body in the reefer with the ice cream:)

Proyas
03 Jun 08,, 05:39
I just visited the U.S.S. New Jersey yesterday afternoon for the first time. It was my first time on a battleship, and let me just say "Wow." It took me 2 hours to go through the tour. I really learned a lot from it. 130 WWII-era antiaircraft guns replaced by just 4 modern Phalanx guns? Now that's what we call progress in military technology.

It would be nice to see the thing still active, but I bet there would be serious technical and logistical problems. Out of curiosity, what are some of the best arguments for putting these things back into service? What roles could they best fulfill today?

I don't see the point of praising the battleships because they are well-suited for medical support. After all, if the Navy needs a ship for such duties, why not just build a specialized hospital ship or convert some cheaper civilian ship for it?

Also guys, I've got another question: On the ship, I kept reading placards that boasted how thick the armor was. When I look at modern ships, they clearly don't appear to have hulls that are anywhere near as thick. Is this because we have figured out ways of building "smarter" instead of "bigger" with active protection systems and compartmentalized internal layouts? I'd really like to learn more about modern ship defensive systems.

Dreadnought
03 Jun 08,, 14:07
Much better to have a morgue than to put the body in the reefer with the ice cream:)

Then there are those who are also buried at sea if that is their final wishes. It wouldnt be the first time.:redface:

Dreadnought
03 Jun 08,, 14:23
I just visited the U.S.S. New Jersey yesterday afternoon for the first time. It was my first time on a battleship, and let me just say "Wow." It took me 2 hours to go through the tour. I really learned a lot from it. 130 WWII-era antiaircraft guns replaced by just 4 modern Phalanx guns? Now that's what we call progress in military technology.

It would be nice to see the thing still active, but I bet there would be serious technical and logistical problems. Out of curiosity, what are some of the best arguments for putting these things back into service? What roles could they best fulfill today?

*They could fufill basically any role the Navy wishes them to. It all depends on if the want to skip the manpower issue and the refits costs which today pale in comparison with some of the money they are wasting on the high dollar project cost over runs. They have served several different roles in the past. ie. (Bombardment, Escort and Battlegroup centerpiece). Actually it was mentioned in another thread that 5,000 men was too many for a modern carrier, It made me laugh when 1700 was deemed too many for a BB.

I don't see the point of praising the battleships because they are well-suited for medical support. After all, if the Navy needs a ship for such duties, why not just build a specialized hospital ship or convert some cheaper civilian ship for it?

*Perhaps you misunderstood we are not here to praise them just point out other things about them that are often overlooked as far as their capability.
Most books about them normally overlook the fact that there is more then just guns and missles.

Also guys, I've got another question: On the ship, I kept reading placards that boasted how thick the armor was. When I look at modern ships, they clearly don't appear to have hulls that are anywhere near as thick. Is this because we have figured out ways of building "smarter" instead of "bigger" with active protection systems and compartmentalized internal layouts? I'd really like to learn more about modern ship defensive systems.

*They havent armored a ships like that in a long long time, alot of metalurgist have gone out of business,steel mills have closed down, plus ships these days are built for for an offensive role rather then defensive role. Kevlar protection schemes and the like has replaced the heavy armor protection of warships and sensors galore have given them a far better heads up view of what dangers might be out there. They are lighter and in some cases faster and utilize newer main propulsion such as gas turbine and desiel powerplants.
But it is doubfull that even the newer ships could withstand the damage the battleships could endure and still press on.

*If per chance they were to scrap any of them (Hopefully not) IMO if they were smart all of that armor would be utilized to help better protect the troops transports, humvees etc or maybe even a new type of vehicle.

*By the way hope you enjoyed your stay aboard.:)

Proyas
03 Jun 08,, 16:51
*They havent armored a ships like that in a long long time, alot of metalurgist have gone out of business,steel mills have closed down, plus ships these days are built for for an offensive role rather then defensive role. Kevlar protection schemes and the like has replaced the heavy armor protection of warships and sensors galore have given them a far better heads up view of what dangers might be out there. They are lighter and in some cases faster and utilize newer main propulsion such as gas turbine and desiel powerplants.
But it is doubfull that even the newer ships could withstand the damage the battleships could endure and still press on.

*If per chance they were to scrap any of them (Hopefully not) IMO if they were smart all of that armor would be utilized to help better protect the troops transports, humvees etc or maybe even a new type of vehicle.

*By the way hope you enjoyed your stay aboard.:)
Isn't the New Jersey really fuel inefficient thanks to its heavy armor and old engine? Doesn't it totally lack the stealth design features of modern boats?

And yes, I enjoyed it tremendously.

Dreadnought
03 Jun 08,, 17:27
Isn't the New Jersey really fuel inefficient thanks to its heavy armor and old engine? Doesn't it totally lack the stealth design features of modern boats?

And yes, I enjoyed it tremendously.

Well for her displacement at full load (57,000 tons) she would carry approximately 2.5 million gallons of Naval Distilliate (Diesel) for the ship itself and additional 3000 gallons for helo ops at full load (8 boilers up at 33 knot or slightly better) approximately 4600 nautical miles wide open. Normal cruising (Boilers 4 up 4 down) improves mileage greatly and extends range.

Yes, she cant hide very well but when those ships go to sea they arent going to hide either to many eyes and now with internet its even more diffacult. There was a time or two where she hid extremely well and nobody knew where she was for days at a time except the higher ups had absolutely no contact with commercial shipping and radio silence with exception to one daily report.

Glad you did. :)

RustyBattleship
03 Jun 08,, 20:54
[QUOTE=Dreadnought;501691 *If per chance they were to scrap any of them (Hopefully not) IMO if they were smart all of that armor would be utilized to help better protect the troops transports, humvees etc or maybe even a new type of vehicle.
QUOTE]

When many of the older Battleships were cut up for scrap, the heavy armor belts were returned to the Navy. Also the armor made up for the Kentucky and Illinois was returned to the Navy.

The reason why is that the iron used in all that armor was mined before we set off the first Atomic bombs. Irradiation has contaminated all iron not coming out into the open air.

Therefore the armor panels, wiring tubes, etc. were turned over to research laboratories who built special astral receiving stations out of them to monitor cosmic radiation and Neurons since the iron in the armor was still "pure" and would not give false readings.

Dreadnought
03 Jun 08,, 21:05
[QUOTE=Dreadnought;501691 *If per chance they were to scrap any of them (Hopefully not) IMO if they were smart all of that armor would be utilized to help better protect the troops transports, humvees etc or maybe even a new type of vehicle.
QUOTE]

When many of the older Battleships were cut up for scrap, the heavy armor belts were returned to the Navy. Also the armor made up for the Kentucky and Illinois was returned to the Navy.

The reason why is that the iron used in all that armor was mined before we set off the first Atomic bombs. Irradiation has contaminated all iron not coming out into the open air.

Therefore the armor panels, wiring tubes, etc. were turned over to research laboratories who built special astral receiving stations out of them to monitor cosmic radiation and Neurons since the iron in the armor was still "pure" and would not give false readings.

Hello Mr. L.
I figured the armor to be returned to the Navy but never for the use that you describe above. Wow.:eek:

Gun Grape
04 Jun 08,, 04:18
Then there are those who are also buried at sea if that is their final wishes. It wouldnt be the first time.:redface:


The US Navy will not bury bodies of former military personnel at sea.

The person must be cremated. The Navy will scatter ashes from a Navy ship and provide the appropriate ceremony. No family members allowed though.

RustyBattleship
04 Jun 08,, 06:30
The US Navy will not bury bodies of former military personnel at sea.

The person must be cremated. The Navy will scatter ashes from a Navy ship and provide the appropriate ceremony. No family members allowed though.

That is absolutely correct. The cremains of my step-father, Michael John Malia, veteran of the First World War and a survivor of a U-boat attack had his cremains scattered at sea from the USS Constellation. They sent us photographs of the ceremony, name of the urn bearer and a letter of condolences from the President (Jimmy Carter at that time).

Unfortunately, all those records were lost when an over-zealous "helper" cleaning out her house threw them away.

Dreadnought
04 Jun 08,, 13:56
The US Navy will not bury bodies of former military personnel at sea.

The person must be cremated. The Navy will scatter ashes from a Navy ship and provide the appropriate ceremony. No family members allowed though.

Absolutely agreed. Failed to mention the cremated part though. Thought it was a known. My bad.

Shipwreck
04 Jun 08,, 21:22
USS Wisconsin (BB-64) (http://www.amazon.com/Uss-Wisconsin-Bb-64/dp/1563112590/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1212610370&sr=8-1), Turner Publishing Company (January 1997) :


Page 26 : During Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm, Wisconsin clearly illustrated the flexibility and utility of America's modernized battleships.

With a fuel capacity of more than two million gallons, Wisconsin resurrected her WW2 role as an "armored oiler", providing over one million gallons of fuel to more than a dozen different United States and allied surface combatants. She also provided technical assistance, medical and dental services, electronics repair, motor rewind and machine shop support for boath coalition and United States forces, thus easing the burden on dedicated repair and logistics ships.

Additionally, throughout her first four months on station, Wisconsin was actively involved in the detailed planning and liaison efforts, both ashore and afloat, which would put together the procedures and plans to support naval operations during hostilities. Wisconsin drove the planning of Tomahawk and gunfire strike, naval gunfire support, Kuwait amphibious precursor and remotely piloted vehicle operations.

Proyas
05 Jun 08,, 03:01
USS Wisconsin (BB-64) (http://www.amazon.com/Uss-Wisconsin-Bb-64/dp/1563112590/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1212610370&sr=8-1), Turner Publishing Company (January 1997) :
But the problem with that is the U.S. Navy could also buy some cheap civilian ship with a whole lot of internal space and also use it for refueling, medical stuff, and launching cruise missiles at targets 1,000 miles away. Why also lug around all the big guns and armor of the battleship?

Dreadnought
05 Jun 08,, 17:47
But the problem with that is the U.S. Navy could also buy some cheap civilian ship with a whole lot of internal space and also use it for refueling, medical stuff, and launching cruise missiles at targets 1,000 miles away. Why also lug around all the big guns and armor of the battleship?

One major problem with doing that is (been mentioned before) a task force is only as fast as its slowest ship.

Proyas
05 Jun 08,, 18:47
One major problem with doing that is (been mentioned before) a task force is only as fast as its slowest ship.
They can't upgrade the engines of the civilian ship?

Michigan_Guy
06 Jun 08,, 13:23
Why upgrade a civilian ship and replace it's engines when you already have a battleship that has all that stuff in place and can easily keep up with the task force?

Proyas
07 Jun 08,, 04:04
Why upgrade a civilian ship and replace it's engines when you already have a battleship that has all that stuff in place and can easily keep up with the task force?
There are probably a lot of logistical issues that go along with operating the battleship instead of the upgraded civilian ship.

RustyBattleship
07 Jun 08,, 05:57
Well, there have been a lot of times we have used civilian ships for Merchant Marine transport of troops, supplies, tanks, ammo, C rations, you-name-it. We do upgrade these ships to a certain point. That point being what is the biggest gun you can put on it that the crew can handle.

Even today, MARAD ships can generally safely transit the Straights of Jakarta or steam along the south coast of Mindanao without fear of being attacked by pirates or terrorists to rob them of their cargo and payroll in the Captain's safe.

Because of all the cargo ships in the world, only MARAD ships are allowed - er - ordered to carry weapons on board up to and including the Mah-Deuce.

I have done inspections of civilian ships for their vulnerability to such attacks. But the World Maritime Commission will not allow them to carry weapons unless the owner wants them to. All they have for defense are fire hoses.

Well, except for one company I know of. He uses Rotweilers as his guards. Never has lost a ship yet.

Shipwreck
07 Jun 08,, 11:46
One major problem with doing that is (been mentioned before) a task force is only as fast as its slowest ship.

Battle Group Romeo, 12 May 1986.

Ship astern of New Jersey is Wabash (AOR-5).

Wabash's max. speed is ~20 knots.

Proyas
10 Jun 08,, 18:40
OK, let me point out I'm just playing the Devil's Advocate here in an attempt to learn why the battleships are decommissioned. I'd be proud to see them active as well, but I know there are usually cost or performance reasons for decommissioning something, and I suspect there must be a good reason for not using the battleships. OK, they are fast, well-armed and versatile, but completely non-stealthy. There have to be more weaknesses to explain the situation.

Dreadnought
10 Jun 08,, 18:54
OK, let me point out I'm just playing the Devil's Advocate here in an attempt to learn why the battleships are decommissioned. I'd be proud to see them active as well, but I know there are usually cost or performance reasons for decommissioning something, and I suspect there must be a good reason for not using the battleships. OK, they are fast, well-armed and versatile, but completely non-stealthy. There have to be more weaknesses to explain the situation.

Actually Poyas, If you have enough opposing congress members and you hold up the welcome idiot sign they will come out of the woodwork as to the reasons not to put them back in service but almost every single complaint does have a reply or report. Its just a very argumentative point to a very select few audience wise that makes the decision.The costs could be consumed and the manpower supplied if they really wanted to.;)

RustyBattleship
10 Jun 08,, 18:57
There have to be more weaknesses to explain the situation.


Only one weakness. Congress. The same weakness that made us lose Viet Nam. The same weakness that caused us to be undermanned and underarmed prior to Pearl Harbor. The same weakness that stopped our manned moon missions (which are starting up again for mineral mining).

Don't forget, most congressmen are lawyers with a gift of gab. They can ramble on for hours on a subject they know absolutely nothing about.

glyn
10 Jun 08,, 19:53
Battle Group Romeo, 12 May 1986.

Ship astern of New Jersey is Wabash (AOR-5).

Wabash's max. speed is ~20 knots.

So that wasn't the Wabash cannonball!

Proyas
11 Jun 08,, 05:47
OK, so why did Congress decide to kill the battleships?

Dreadnought
11 Jun 08,, 14:18
OK, so why did Congress decide to kill the battleships?

Probably a whole rash of reasons. Namely if the ships dont go to their (congressman) represented states for refit or they dont share in the profits from refit (statehood) then they dont want them in service. There is always a private agenda in the background. If the cost (refit) is high then this minimizes their "pork" allowance and they dont want any parts of that because then they must renig on promises made behind closed doors to state officials,union officials and all of the others that throw money to tip the dancing congressional lapdancer.

I'm certain they would use the "oil" excuse these days as fuel is getting more expensive, They would have to plan ahead to get some of the experience needed to teach the skills again and they would have to entice their experienced to come out of retirement although many probably would and several are probably still serving today.

Another one would be the upkeep of the ships while not at sea and many others. However had they given it the forthought they could have minimized their costs. Its not rocket science its planning ahead a not wasting money on other questionable projects.

Shipwreck
11 Jun 08,, 14:23
OK, so why did Congress decide to kill the battleships?

Congress DID NOT.

Shipwreck
11 Jun 08,, 14:28
Senator John McCain, 28 April 1995 :


I expressed concern about the removal of the [battle]ships from the Navy's inventory in the absence of an adequate naval gunfire support replacement.

[...]

I stand by my position that striking these ships is an imprudent and premature measure to engage in at the present time.

Shipwreck
11 Jun 08,, 14:30
Public Law 104-106, 10 February 1996 :


The Secretary of the Navy shall list on the Naval Vessel Register, and maintain on such register, at least two of the Iowa-class battleships that were stricken from the register in February 1995.

Shipwreck
11 Jun 08,, 14:38
Probably a whole rash of reasons. Namely if the ships dont go to their (congressman) represented states for refit or they dont share in the profits from refit (statehood) then they dont want them in service.

Homeporting a battleship and her escort was a significant source of revenues back in the 1980s - early 1990s.

See for instance The Iowa Class Battleships (http://www.amazon.com/Iowa-Class-Battleships-Missouri-Wisconsin/dp/0806983388/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1213191345&sr=1-1) by Malcolm Muir, page 123 :


The Iowa, and the six other ships of her surface action group, would bring to the New York area 3,600 permanent jobs and perhaps $500 million for the local economy over the life of their deployment.

Dreadnought
11 Jun 08,, 15:03
Homeporting a battleship and her escort was a significant source of revenues back in the 1980s - early 1990s.

See for instance The Iowa Class Battleships (http://www.amazon.com/Iowa-Class-Battleships-Missouri-Wisconsin/dp/0806983388/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1213191345&sr=1-1) by Malcolm Muir, page 123 :

I can agree somewhat along those lines but the thought of either Iowa or New Jersey going to the New York area or Bayonne was a very bad decision and certainly would not have brought the revenue they imagined and would have been the worst decision ever for either ship.

Shipwreck
11 Jun 08,, 15:56
I can agree somewhat along those lines but the thought of either Iowa or New Jersey going to the New York area or Bayonne was a very bad decision and certainly would not have brought the revenue they imagined and would have been the worst decision ever for either ship.

A decision made by John Lehman (spit, puke, gag :mad:), as part of the grandiose 600-ship Navy boondoggle. :rolleyes:

Total cost for the US Taxpayer was estimated to be around $400 million in 1991, i.e. ~$650 million in FY08 USD. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

ArmchairGeneral
11 Jun 08,, 16:18
The same weakness that stopped our manned moon missions (which are starting up again for mineral mining).


What the...? What minerals have they found on the moon that would be cost effective to mine? If the dang thing were made entirely of platinum it would still be too expensive to mine.

Dreadnought
11 Jun 08,, 16:30
A decision made by John Lehman (spit, puke, gag :mad:), as part of the grandiose 600-ship Navy boondoggle. :rolleyes:

Total cost for the US Taxpayer was estimated to be around $400 million in 1991, i.e. ~$650 million in FY08 USD. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Reasoning:
Politics. The USS Iowa or USS New Jersey had they gone to the "New York Area" would not have mixed well with the funding (what there is) for the USS Intrepid Museum. Statistics have shown having two such ships in the very same area but not together as such in other areas would not have bode well for tourism and the funding would have either been split or political favoritism would have taken place. The ships recieve limited amount of funding in their museum status. Much is recieved through grants and donations. USS Intrepid being an aircraft carrier is one hell of alot of upkeep and so would be either of the two Iowa class battleships. Alot of politics between the owner and the city took place just to put her there. (We both know it wasnt for free). So one of the two is going to suffer material condition from lack of funding.

Why should it be one of the Iowas or in this case the New Jersey (Americas most decorated battleship)?

If you would like to see money wasted hows about when they towed Iowa to California under the presumption of her having a home. Instead she had the carpet yanked out from under her and the towing funds disgracefully wasted.
That alone I would approximate at a minimum of 1.5-2 million alone.

RustyBattleship
11 Jun 08,, 17:31
What the...? What minerals have they found on the moon that would be cost effective to mine? If the dang thing were made entirely of platinum it would still be too expensive to mine.

It was highly touted on a TV special of the reasons we are going back to the Moon. It appears that everywhere we landed an Apollo crew and picked up Lunar rocks and dust, there were high levels of Tantalum Hydride (aka Ta Hydride). Supposedly this could be used as a power source and even replace nuclear reactors.

Not being a nuclear scientist, I can only take their word for it.

But a good secondary reason is to use the Moon (with its gravity only 1/6 of Earth) as a good jumping off station for missions to Mars.

ArmchairGeneral
11 Jun 08,, 17:39
I have heard people talk about mining the moon for Helium 3 for nuclear fusion, but it seems to me that the transportation costs would be absurd.

Dreadnought
11 Jun 08,, 17:53
It was highly touted on a TV special of the reasons we are going back to the Moon. It appears that everywhere we landed an Apollo crew and picked up Lunar rocks and dust, there were high levels of Tantalum Hydride (aka Ta Hydride). Supposedly this could be used as a power source and even replace nuclear reactors.

Not being a nuclear scientist, I can only take their word for it.

But a good secondary reason is to use the Moon (with its gravity only 1/6 of Earth) as a good jumping off station for missions to Mars.

The New NASA series "When we left the Earth" should prove pretty good. I hope it is atleast as good as "From the Earth to the Moon".

Shipwreck
11 Jun 08,, 21:29
Reasoning:
Politics. The USS Iowa or USS New Jersey had they gone to the "New York Area" would not have mixed well with the funding (what there is) for the USS Intrepid Museum. Statistics have shown having two such ships in the very same area but not together as such in other areas would not have bode well for tourism and the funding would have either been split or political favoritism would have taken place. The ships recieve limited amount of funding in their museum status. Much is recieved through grants and donations. USS Intrepid being an aircraft carrier is one hell of alot of upkeep and so would be either of the two Iowa class battleships. Alot of politics between the owner and the city took place just to put her there. (We both know it wasnt for free). So one of the two is going to suffer material condition from lack of funding.

I am talking about the 1980s-early 1990s period, i.e. the last time when the Iowas were active, in commission.

You're talking about the late 1990s, i.e. after they had been decommissioned and decision was made to donate USS New Jersey as a museum.

A museum doesn't generate 3,600 jobs and $500 million in revenues. A battlegroup does.


If you would like to see money wasted hows about when they towed Iowa to California under the presumption of her having a home. Instead she had the carpet yanked out from under her and the towing funds disgracefully wasted.
That alone I would approximate at a minimum of 1.5-2 million alone.

Hundreds of millions were wasted in the Staten Island Homeport boondoggle :rolleyes:, and John Lehman (spit, puke, gag :mad:) is responsible for that. :rolleyes:

As for towing USS Iowa to California, there was no room for yet another battleship museum on the East Coast anyway.

SteaminDemon
12 Jun 08,, 06:43
Hundreds of millions were wasted in the Staten Island Homeport boondoggle :rolleyes:, and John Lehman (spit, puke, gag :mad:) is responsible for that. :rolleyes:


Shipwreck, it was wasted because of all of the politics involved in stopping the further construction of the base. David Dinkins and other democrats were the ones responsible for wasting the millions of dollars that were already invested, because they hyped it up as something horrible, "nukeport" and any other reason they could find to close the base. But you blame Lehman for that though:rolleyes:. They must have forgotten about the Brooklyn Navy Yard that turned out many ships and employed many people as well while it was operational. Staten Island would have been a great place to call home for many sailors as well as bring with it more jobs. The Brooklyn Navy yard was New Yorks port (and Staten Island would have been the new one), now they have none. Staten Island has been used by the Navy though.

One more note, thank Mr. Bloomberg for driving out more businesses from the Brooklyn Navy Yard.

Dreadnought
12 Jun 08,, 18:21
As for towing USS Iowa to California, there was no room for yet another battleship museum on the East Coast anyway.


That is true but look at the condition she is in now. The class flagship (and as you add the gunnery champion) doesnt deserve to be in junkyard row. Had they sent her back to Philly it would have been much easier on her upkeep in the basin and she wouldnt look so forelorn as she would be pierside instead of the end row as in Suisan. The tow fee could have been used on her upkeep instead of being wasted.

Shipwreck
12 Jun 08,, 19:24
That is true but look at the condition she is in now. The class flagship (and as you add the gunnery champion) doesnt deserve to be in junkyard row.

Straight from the horse's mouth (so to speak :biggrin:) :


The East and Gulf coasts already have an overwhelming monopoly of Battleship museums. There is none on the West Coast. Actually only two Aircraft Carriers (the Hornet in Alameda and the Midway in San Diego).

As for MARAD's capabilities of maintaining the ship, they are extremely limited by small budgets, lack of personnel and this is normally not their job. However, extra measures are being taken to have the ship in somewhat of a decent condition for turnover to a museum.

This is because many people screamed to high heaven about the Navy's total lack of care when Iowa was anchored off of Rhode Island for a couple of years with NO dehumidification power and NO cathodic protection.

When she was moved to Benecia, several organizations (including myself when I was registered as Dreadnaught Consulting) bugged the hell out of Bremerton (INACTSHIPFAC for all of west coast mothball fleets) and they made sure power was run out to her for D/H and installed over-the-side Impressed Current Cathodic Protection anodes.

The ship still shows damage from her Rhode Island "abandonment" such as leaf plugged deck drain piping that filled full of water, froze in winter bursting the pipe and running water down into the compartment below when Spring came.

This is all fixable and even MARAD does some patching here and there when they can with what materials they can afford.

Dreadnought
12 Jun 08,, 20:30
Well I guess 1 out 4 condition wise isint so bad but such a waste over pure politics and ********.

Shipwreck
12 Jun 08,, 20:55
The tow fee could have been used on her upkeep instead of being wasted.

Cost to the Navy (and therefore to the taxpayers) of maintaining both battleships in reserve was approximately $1,500,000 per year, of which >2/3 went for USS Wisconsin and <1/3 for USS Iowa.

The FY2000 Defense Appropriations Bill provided $3 million for towing USS Iowa to Suisun Bay.

Shipwreck
12 Jun 08,, 21:04
Had they sent her back to Philly it would have been much easier on her upkeep in the basin and she wouldnt look so forelorn as she would be pierside instead of the end row as in Suisan.

USS Des Moines was kept in the Reserve basin at Philadelphia Naval Shipyard, and after the Navy pulled the plug off, this is what she looked like :

Dreadnought
12 Jun 08,, 21:22
I've been aboard Des Moines on more then one occassion (actually 3) so were a few I work with. The interior of the ship looked nothing like the exterior of the ship and they pulled the plug on her long ago before the tied her up by the tandem bridge (thats a sure sign the ship is leaving the yard). Des Moines also hadn't moved (outside the basin) in over 40 years.

USS Boulder (LST) is now tied up where Des Moines was before she left for the breakers.

Shipwreck
12 Jun 08,, 21:55
I've been aboard Des Moines on more then one occassion (actually 3) so were a few I work with. The interior of the ship looked nothing like the exterior of the ship

USS Des Moines, CIC, June 2006 :

Shipwreck
12 Jun 08,, 22:41
Shipwreck, it was wasted because of all of the politics involved in stopping the further construction of the base.

NO.

From GAO report NSIAD-91-158 entitled NAVY HOMEPORTS : Expanded Structure Unnecessary and Costly (June 1991) :


Page 4 : A previous Navy study indicated that, based on a 600-ship fleet, the annual operating costs of the new homeports could be 44 percent greater than the costs for accommodating the ships at existing ports.


Page 31 : In our 1986 report, we stated that the Navy’s $188 million estimate to establish initial operating capability at Staten Island did not identify costs for all essential basic operations and quality of life projects to improve morale and increase retention. This has proved to be the case. At the time of our current review, the total identified cost to develop Staten Island was $398.7 million.

At the risk of repeating myself : hundreds of millions were wasted in the Staten Island Homeport boondoggle :rolleyes:, and John Lehman (spit, puke, gag :mad:) is responsible for that. :rolleyes:

Dreadnought
13 Jun 08,, 14:12
I have a question. Several times users of this /these threads have posted from GAO reports and they were considered null and void by members here and some that just drop into these threads what makes this instance any different then those.

Shipwreck
13 Jun 08,, 15:16
I have a question. Several times users of this /these threads have posted from GAO reports and they were considered null and void by members here and some that just drop into these threads what makes this instance any different then those.

Do you have an example ?

Dreadnought
16 Jun 08,, 21:42
Many examples that had much to do with reactivations and preservation costs etc. They are here in the battleship threads.

Shipwreck
17 Jun 08,, 15:17
Many examples that had much to do with reactivations and preservation costs etc.

Reactivation costs (from GAO-05-39R) :


To reactivate two Iowa class battleships to their decommissioned capability, the Navy estimates costs in excess of $500 million.

This does not include an additional $110 million needed to replenish gunpowder for the 16-inch guns because a recent survey found that it is unsafe.

In terms of schedule, the Navy’s program management office estimates that reactivation would take 20 to 40 months, given the loss of corporate memory and the shipyard industrial base.

Preservation costs (from GAO-06-279R) :


Cost factors involved in sustaining the battleships in inactive ship status include the cost of contractor support to maintain the ships for such things as preservation painting, interior dehumidification, and maintaining the fire and flood alarm systems.

The Navy currently incurs expenses of about $1.5 million per year to sustain both battleships in inactive status. Of this amount, about $1 million covers additional annual preservation maintenance and ongoing paint preservation work on the Wisconsin. The ships are inspected twice a year to document electrical, safety, hull and general ship conditions. In addition, the deck of the Iowa must be repaired to ensure its safety. According to Navy officials, this would cost about $1.6 million spread over two fiscal years.

Michigan_Guy
18 Jun 08,, 03:20
Does the Navy still maintain the Wisconsin? I thought it was fully handed over to a museum society.

Personally, it's sad but I think within a year the navy is going to decide to scrap the Iowa.

RustyBattleship
18 Jun 08,, 04:20
So far the Navy still has a toe-hold on the Battleships (as well as the Super Carriers). In their "donation" letter they state that in case of National emergency where the ships may be needed, the recipients CANNOT reactivate the main machinery spaces, navigation equipment or the galleys.

Food service can be done with the recipient's own equipment (micro-waves, vending machines, etc.). Navigation isn't really important except you have to have a special waiver from the Navy to activate the rotating motors of the RADAR antennas to make it look like they are active (you cannot hook up the waveguides, receivers or repeaters). Also a waiver must be gotten if you want to activate the emergency diesel generator rooms for electrical power to evacuate the ship in case of an outage from shore power.

What I find funny about it is that by omitting to mention it, you can reactivate the weapons.

That is if you can afford the ammo. For both the 5"/38 guns and 16"/50 guns you technically do not need a special BATF license as they do not use pre-fixed ammunition.

There have been some ships, mostly auxiliaries, that the Navy has turned over free of all restrictions. The Lane Victory, here in San Pedro, is such a ship and takes cruises to Catalina Island 2 or 3 times a year.

It was only up to a few years ago that the Massachusetts and North Carolina were fully released after NAVSEA stripped all usable equipment off of them for the Iowas. The Alabama was bought outright by the state (outbidding the scrappers) so they can do what they want with it.

dundonrl
24 Jun 08,, 17:12
Gun Grape

I was the structural project leader for 3 of the LHA's and did a special job on one of the LHD's.

You forgot one compartment on each of those ships in your medical list.

The morgue.

Yup. They do have them but we usually tried to work around them.

yep.. if I remember correctly, it was up in the island, or there abouts (on the Essex) and could hold about 18 bodies..

Ytlas
24 Jun 08,, 20:40
yep.. if I remember correctly, it was up in the island, or there abouts (on the Essex) and could hold about 18 bodies..

On at least one LHA I worked on, they stored film in the "trays" (drawers?) because it was refrigerated and dark.

I think the LHA's might have room for about a dozen bodies, but there's always the reefers.

USSWisconsin
06 Dec 08,, 22:54
The battleships have traditionally had better recreational facilities than the smaller ships in the fleet (Carriers have features like this too), like a soda fountain, a library, a weight room, a TV station, and other features. Other counties have had other interesting features, the big Soviet Typhoons which had a little swmming pool, and the Vangaurd with a movie theater. I think that ships with features like these would be an assest to crew moral, and ease the discomfort of long at sea deployments.

RustyBattleship
06 Dec 08,, 23:00
The battleships have traditionally had better recreational facilities than the smaller ships in the fleet (Carriers have features like this too), like a soda fountain, a library, a weight room, a TV station, and other features. Other counties have had other interesting features, the big Soviet Typhoons which had a little swmming pool, and the Vangaurd with a movie theater. I think that ships with features like these would be an assest to crew moral, and ease the discomfort of long at sea deployments.

Then you have to pity the Chinese Navy. I watched a TV show about it a few years ago and all of the interior of their Destroyers is dedicated to the ship's purpose and not crew facilities. They have a place to sleep but have no galley or mess hall.

The show filmed the ship's cook preparing a day's meal out on deck and the crew ate wherever they could find a place to sit down.

TopHatter
06 Dec 08,, 23:20
The show filmed the ship's cook preparing a day's meal out on deck and the crew ate wherever they could find a place to sit down.

That would put them at around the same place the pre-war U.S. fleet was at, before the advent of cafeteria-style seating. (pioneered by USS Ranger CV-4)

USSWisconsin
06 Dec 08,, 23:49
If I were adding new recreational features I would consider a coffee house/internet cafe, a battle simulation/training/gaming system with multiple computer rooms to allow off duty crew members to practice/play/compete. I would remove the old CRT displays in the crew spaces and replace them with big HD flat screen monitors, and have a nice on board movie library and multi-channel closed circuit programming for the crew, including regular instructional videos. The crew library could be electronic, with compact LCD terminals in the berthing areas, and reading materials stored on disk in the ships servers.

It sounds like those Chinese Destroyers are pretty rough to serve on, at least their typical deployment areas frequently have warm and calm weather...

Johnny W
08 Dec 08,, 18:32
Then you have to pity the Chinese Navy. I watched a TV show about it a few years ago and all of the interior of their Destroyers is dedicated to the ship's purpose and not crew facilities. They have a place to sleep but have no galley or mess hall.

The show filmed the ship's cook preparing a day's meal out on deck and the crew ate wherever they could find a place to sit down.

They are rarely out for very long though. To the best of my knowledge, they don't do long deployments like the Western Navies do.

Dreadnought
08 Dec 08,, 18:46
If I were adding new recreational features I would consider a coffee house/internet cafe, a battle simulation/training/gaming system with multiple computer rooms to allow off duty crew members to practice/play/compete. I would remove the old CRT displays in the crew spaces and replace them with big HD flat screen monitors, and have a nice on board movie library and multi-channel closed circuit programming for the crew, including regular instructional videos. The crew library could be electronic, with compact LCD terminals in the berthing areas, and reading materials stored on disk in the ships servers.

It sounds like those Chinese Destroyers are pretty rough to serve on, at least their typical deployment areas frequently have warm and calm weather...

All sounds good except the internet cafe. Normally the USN dont like anybody transmitting messages from their ships. i.e. electronic tell tales that with the proper computer programs could figure out ones location while at sea. This is why cell phones, laptops and other have been restricted for quite some time pending the theatre and are constantly jammed just for that purpose while at sea. You wont pick up a signal until shes's within 30 or less from port.;)

USSWisconsin
09 Dec 08,, 03:35
All sounds good except the internet cafe. Normally the USN dont like anybody transmitting messages from their ships. i.e. electronic tell tales that with the proper computer programs could figure out ones location while at sea. This is why cell phones, laptops and other have been restricted for quite some time pending the theatre and are constantly jammed just for that purpose while at sea. You wont pick up a signal until shes's within 30 or less from port.;)

I hadn't thought of that ... Makes sense though. The Internet and cell phones hadn't caught on the last time I was on a ship. Perhaps they could have an intranet on the ship to make it seem like an Internet Cafe. The crew could post family pictures and have their own page and they could view selected content the Navy had downloaded for them.

Gun Grape
09 Dec 08,, 05:22
All sounds good except the internet cafe. Normally the USN dont like anybody transmitting messages from their ships. i.e. electronic tell tales that with the proper computer programs could figure out ones location while at sea. This is why cell phones, laptops and other have been restricted for quite some time pending the theatre and are constantly jammed just for that purpose while at sea. You wont pick up a signal until shes's within 30 or less from port.;)

Depends on what she is doing. We had internet access and sat phone service
since the mid 90s when deployed.

Granted at certain times the switch was turned off, but, no need to keep the plug pulled.

Its also been rumored that some high speed comm guys would tune into the sat TV signals and "Steal cable". For important things only, like the superbowl;)

TopHatter
09 Dec 08,, 05:48
Its also been rumored that some high speed comm guys would tune into the sat TV signals and "Steal cable". For important things only, like the superbowl;)

Ah yes, the days of unscrambled TV signals...a fountain of blessings for owners of a Big Ugly Dish.

Or sailors on warships with big freakin' mast-mounted satellite receivers :redface:

Dreadnought
09 Dec 08,, 14:57
Depends on what she is doing. We had internet access and sat phone service
since the mid 90s when deployed.

Granted at certain times the switch was turned off, but, no need to keep the plug pulled.

Its also been rumored that some high speed comm guys would tune into the sat TV signals and "Steal cable". For important things only, like the superbowl;)

My bust Grape. Left out the Sat phones.:redface:

Second comment absolutely agreed.:))