RAL's_pal?

I'm starting to wonder if all the large ships were backed into dry dock 1. I can remember a lot of ships being pushed back by a single "Mike" boat with maybe a tug on either side of the large ship. The "Mike" boat was probably only 20' long and 8'-10' wide, but it was just a square hull built around two very large V12 or V16 (I forget) diesels. I worked in Pollution Control for about 6 months on the yard craft and got to go out and be a deck hand on the small boats when it came time to move ships, roller logs, Yokos, steam barges, etc.

RAL's_pal?

I ruled out Pier E because a person can go on top of Bldg 303 or 318 and use a zoom lens to take a similiar picture instead of the hassle of getting a crane there. The only crane operational in that area was the one with the huge rubber tires and it was rarely used. Also, in the upper right hand corner of the picture, there is something out there, maybe some small barge or floats and since Pier E extends well past Pier 1, that stuff would be floating out in the middle of nowhere. If that stuff in the corner of the picture was part of the crane, I still stand by the Pier 1 comment. Lastly, if it was on the south end of E, the picture would have had to have been taken very early in the morning. Riggers, crane operator and photog on south end of Pier E very early in the morning?

Unfortunately I spent 2 months on a staging crew in 1991 (when my shop work got slow) and I know how long it takes to put up staging, and the amount of staging shown took a couple of days from start to finish. The staging people won't carry staging pipes, clamps or wood boards on board the ship, they require it to be lifted on board in an open tray. There's even staging around the optics, or whatever you call them, on the main gun.

As I remember, the ship came in very late in the day and I wasn't going to hang around after work to see it come in. I was working on Pier 3 on a CG and throughout the day, every time I came off the ship I'd look to see if it was in. The Misery came in during the morning to Pier E, west side and I had my little green Misery badge, #957 and went aboard as soon as the brows were put on.

The only way you're going to convince me of the location of this picture is if you can show the rest of the picture with the "Mole" in the background

RustyBattleship

When scanning and cropping the picture, I cropped it a tad too much. One of the smaller truck cranes was used to "swing" Sophie from the rounded end to the pointy end. Audie Bransford used those pictures as a basis for a portrait he made of the ship. But I had to go in and correct a lot of stuff because he didn't know what the modernized version would look like (good thing i'm a fairly good sketch artist - or used to be).

Will this pic satisfy your doubts?

Attached Images

BB 62 mole in bkgrnd.jpg (304.5 KB, 71 views)

__________________
Able to leap tall tales in a single groan.

RAL's_pal?

Damn, I'll concede that it's the south end of Pier E. I don't remember it being there. However, it's been there for a while.

Dreadnought

Love those pre mod pics of the past.

__________________
Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

Dreadnought

Took the pics you requested Mr. L. I have to download and then crop. I will post either tonight or tommorow for you viewing pleasure.

Dreadnought

As promised some pics of Mr.L's handy work on the life raft racks.

Attached Images

LiferaftRackdl.JPG (19.1 KB, 53 views)

Dreadnought

This view is from onboard looking outward. The remnants of the semi circular gun tub is outlined in the deck. The wall at the railing reflects the size of the plating around the 40mm Bofors quad mount. It affords the gun crew some measure of protection when manning the mount.

Attached Images

LiferaftRackdl2.JPG (34.3 KB, 53 views)

Silent Hunter

Since no-one's asked one for a while?

What was the first (and so far only) SSN to sink a ship in a war?

RustyBattleship

That was a British submarine sinking an Argentine Cruiser (ex USS Phoenix) in the Falklands war.

Sorry, forgot the name of the sub but it would be unfair to Google it.

Silent Hunter

Indeed. It was HMS Conqueror, sinking the General Belgrano.

Your turn.

RustyBattleship

Here's one and the answer is almost stupidly simple. But when a ship's displacement is given, such as 35,000 tons (which in turn gives you the weight of the ship) we use the long ton at 2,240 lbs per ton.

Why the long ton instead of the standard 2,000 lb ton?

RAL's_pal?

Stupidly simple for whom?

How about, because the Brits used the long tonne...?

RustyBattleship

There have been more complicated reasons given based upon the British "creation" of the long ton. But in Naval Architecture it is "pounding head against wall" simple.

Knaur Amarsh

Seawater weighs 64 lbs per cubic foot. 35 cubic feet of seawater weighs 2,240 lbs or one LONG tonne. Therefore when calculating the volume of a ship's hull below waterline, you merely divide the cubic footage by 35 to get its displacement tonnage. It is of extreme importance to know the exact cubic footage of each tank, void space and compartment below the water line so correct counterflooding can be done in case of a hole in the hull.

__________________
:-??