Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 51

Thread: USS Texas

  1. #31
    Contributor
    Join Date
    24 Oct 11
    Location
    Austin, Tx
    Posts
    338
    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/

  2. #32
    Senior Contributor surfgun's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Nov 09
    Location
    MD
    Posts
    1,413
    Texas has closed indefinitely, due to flooding.
    http://m.chron.com/news/houston-texa...#photo-3058556

  3. #33
    Regular
    Join Date
    18 Nov 09
    Location
    East Central Florida
    Posts
    28
    Shot of the current list...

    http://imgur.com/r/warshipporn/JN1OaWV

    Eric

  4. #34
    Senior Contributor surfgun's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Nov 09
    Location
    MD
    Posts
    1,413

  5. #35
    Regular
    Join Date
    18 Nov 09
    Location
    East Central Florida
    Posts
    28
    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

  6. #36
    Patron
    Join Date
    30 Jul 08
    Posts
    262
    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.

  7. #37
    Military Professional JCT's Avatar
    Join Date
    07 Apr 05
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    263
    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....

  8. #38
    Regular
    Join Date
    20 Feb 14
    Posts
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by Gun Boat View Post
    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.
    Actually 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.

  9. #39
    Patron
    Join Date
    30 Jul 08
    Posts
    262
    Quote Originally Posted by JCT View Post
    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....
    Not a dry dock as such. Like the plan for the Texas. Dig a big hole next to a body of water and lay foundations with intergrated keel blocks. Open the side adjacent to the water and float the BB in. Seal the hole off and pump out the water settling the BB on her blocks. Job done. It would be a significant initial investment but hugely beneficial for a museum ship that you want to be around basically forever. Costs would be basically earth moving and concreting. I reckon that you see a return with maintenance savings after 40-50 years.

    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.

  10. #40
    Patron
    Join Date
    30 Jul 08
    Posts
    262
    Quote Originally Posted by ArmorPiercing88 View Post
    Actually 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.
    They 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.

  11. #41
    Patron
    Join Date
    22 May 09
    Posts
    215
    Quote Originally Posted by Gun Boat View Post
    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.
    The Massachusetts, Alabama and North Carolina have been memorial ships for 50 years. None of them are sinking. NC might, if she wasn't sitting the mud. Massachusetts is the only one of the 3 floating, and she's fine. Fresh water. She was drydocked, also. Neither NC nor Alabama have been. Cofferdam around the 'Bama, one being built around the Showboat.
    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.

  12. #42
    Patron
    Join Date
    22 May 09
    Posts
    215
    Quote Originally Posted by Gun Boat View Post
    They 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.
    Missouri 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.

  13. #43
    Patron
    Join Date
    30 Jul 08
    Posts
    262
    Quote Originally Posted by Pacfanweb View Post
    Missouri 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.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWD-FEnW-ic

    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.

  14. #44
    Regular
    Join Date
    20 Feb 14
    Posts
    41
    I believe in fact Wisconsin and Iowa are required to keep the hulls in such a state that the vessels could be returned to service in an emergency, as unlikely as that is.

  15. #45
    Regular
    Join Date
    18 Nov 09
    Location
    East Central Florida
    Posts
    28
    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

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 4 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 4 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Go Dad, go Texas!
    By zraver in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 22 Jun 12,, 12:11
  2. SSN-75 Texas
    By Franco Lolan in forum Naval Warfare
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 24 May 05,, 05:07

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •