Texas got another $25 mil from the last legislative session in 2015. That money will be used for more structural repairs which are scheduled for next year. This work is important whether Texas goes to drydock or dry berth. She has to be able to support her own weight out of the water. There's some pictures of her framing on http://battleshiptexas.org/restoration/
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
USS Texas
Collapse
X
-
Texas has closed indefinitely, due to flooding.
http://m.chron.com/news/houston-texa...#photo-3058556
Comment
-
-
-
Here's a thread of a bunch of pics taken yesterday - show a lot of very depressing detail.
http://imgur.com/a/5YAdB
Water is the ultimate solvent, given enough time....
Eric
Comment
-
It's a sad fact that the Iowa's are headed for this same fate. At least 1 of the museums needs to make plans to get their ship out of the water. Big cost up front but a saving in the long run. Otherwise, come the end of the century, there'll be no battleships left. With their careers over and their crews gone for good the water is no longer their home but their enemy. A dryberthed battleship would make a much better museum anyway without the water hiding half its mass.
Comment
-
Building a permanent dry dock and then maintaining for a 45k+ ton warship would be incredibly expensive, it would have to be huge! I could see the maintenance bills digging deep into any organization's operating budget. How about permanently encasing it in concrete much like the Japanese Mikasa? Budget permitting, I'd never do it, but as things get more expensive, this is an alternative that would keep the ship 'afloat'. There'd be corrosion issues as water seeped between the hull and the concrete 'berth', but it'd never sink....
Comment
-
Originally posted by Gun Boat View PostIt's a sad fact that the Iowa's are headed for this same fate. At least 1 of the museums needs to make plans to get their ship out of the water. Big cost up front but a saving in the long run. Otherwise, come the end of the century, there'll be no battleships left. With their careers over and their crews gone for good the water is no longer their home but their enemy. A dryberthed battleship would make a much better museum anyway without the water hiding half its mass.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JCT View PostBuilding a permanent dry dock and then maintaining for a 45k+ ton warship would be incredibly expensive, it would have to be huge! I could see the maintenance bills digging deep into any organization's operating budget. How about permanently encasing it in concrete much like the Japanese Mikasa? Budget permitting, I'd never do it, but as things get more expensive, this is an alternative that would keep the ship 'afloat'. There'd be corrosion issues as water seeped between the hull and the concrete 'berth', but it'd never sink....
With the ship out of the water you would no longer need to drydock for cleaning/painting of the hull. More importantly you reduce hull corrosion levels to pretty much zero and completely put a stop to the inevitable ingress of water into the hull. Plus you allow visitors to tour beneath the ship.
Without a crew perpetually maintaining the ship and limited museum budgets each of the Iowa's will follow the path of the Texas. A slow deterioration til the point where it's no longer economically viable to maintain.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ArmorPiercing88 View PostActually the Iowa hulls are in great shape. Iowa and Wisconsin particularly, since they were in reserve status for so long. Missouri just got a dry docking, and the New Jersey is in fresh water.
The New Jersey being a fresh water is a plus though.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Gun Boat View PostIt's a sad fact that the Iowa's are headed for this same fate. At least 1 of the museums needs to make plans to get their ship out of the water. Big cost up front but a saving in the long run. Otherwise, come the end of the century, there'll be no battleships left. With their careers over and their crews gone for good the water is no longer their home but their enemy. A dryberthed battleship would make a much better museum anyway without the water hiding half its mass.
I don't agree with not dry docking them first, but it's not my call.
But...those ships aren't in danger of going anywhere all this time later under the care of museum staff. The Iowas (so far) have had much better care.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Gun Boat View PostThey are in good shape but they're simply no match for water and time. Look at the Missouri and the bow flooding she suffered before her drydocking. I'm pretty sure a lot of the problems she had were only band aided as costs limited what could be done. It's thousands of dollars just for the drydock time alone.
The New Jersey being a fresh water is a plus though.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Pacfanweb View PostMissouri had $18 million in repairs when she was dry docked, including replacement of hull plates and a $1,000,000 dehumidification system intalled. I think she's in pretty darn good shape and will remain that way indefinitely.
That's the flooding I was referring to but I really don't know the severity of the problem. I don't have a source but I'm sure I read that due to only being able to afford a limited number of very expensive drydock days the museum couldn't attend to every issue they had.
I think my pessimism comes from working on old cars and seeing what rust does and how it hides. Rust seems to do its best work where nobody can see it. In the video above the hull below the water line is totally rust covered. I understand there'd be a lot of fouling contributing to the color but there's definitely rust there. The flood effected compartments would have been cleaned but I reckon they'd now be full of little rust nests. On ships that big there is no way they'd get to every bit of rust hiding in seems etc and if you don't get every bit of it it continues munching on steel. I'm not sure how long the hull coatings are supposed to last but I couldn't see it being more than 5 or so years of 100% protection. All it take is a pinhole. Everyday the steel in the ships goes through expansion and contraction cycles that, after enough time, upset even the best coatings.
With a metal ship floating in sea water you're never preventing corrosion you're controlling it - even in service. They may be fine for the next 30-40 years but rust is called cancer for a reason. Metal that has rust can seem ok but all of a sudden it turns malignant and is everywhere. On battleships sized chunks of steel when that happens you need a naval shipyard and the federal reserve at your disposal.
It would be nice if they were still around in 100 years time but that may be unrealistic. In my mind if they're left in the water that can't happen.
Comment
-
Article talking more about the flooding and how it was addressed.... I haven't seen any recent status information, but the prognosis can't be good. I hadn't thought about downflooding when the ship started to list and the draft changed.
https://www.houstoniamag.com/article...viirc.facebook
Eric
Comment
Comment