Greetings, and welcome to the World Affairs Board!
The World Affairs Board is the premier forum for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include military and defense developments, international terrorism, insurgency & COIN doctrine, international security and policing, weapons proliferation, and military technological development.
Our membership includes many from military, defense, academic, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today?
I don't know if it was intentional or not, but you conveniently left this part out when you quoted the other sections.
" Ship Donation Contracts
w
46 of 47 ship museum donation contracts allow Navy to terminate in
the event of a national emergency and retake title/ownership.
–
Extremely unlikely Navy would ever exercise this option.
w
47 of 47 ship museum donation contracts allow Navy to terminate if
the Donee fails to perform its obligations under the contract.
–
Highly unlikely Navy would ever exercise this option. Rather, Navy would
work with the Donee regarding the Donee’s responsibility to dispose or
transfer the vessel.
w
18 of 47 ship museum donation contracts allow Navy to terminate if
the vessel becomes a hazard to navigation or public health & safety.
–
Highly unlikely Navy would ever exercise this option. Rather, Navy would
work with the Donee regarding the Donee’s responsibility to dispose or
transfer the vessel. "
So basically the Navy still retains the right take a museum vessel back in a National emergency for re-activation, even though it's extremely unlikely. Also note that even though the title and custody of the vessel is transferred, the Navy still "calls the shots" in regards to almost all decisions or changes regarding the donated vessel. In effect the vessel is still under U.S Navy guardianship and retains final say.
The Cape Fear Bridge center section is on tracks. Not the North Carolina's. But you knew that.
Du-oh!
I read "bridge", and we were talking about ships, so I just assumed we were talking about the North Carolina's bridge!
"There is never enough time to do or say all the things that we would wish. The thing is to try to do as much as you can in the time that you have. Remember Scrooge, time is short, and suddenly, you're not there any more." -Ghost of Christmas Present, Scrooge
So basically the Navy still retains the right take a museum vessel back in a National emergency for re-activation, even though it's extremely unlikely. Also note that even though the title and custody of the vessel is transferred, the Navy still "calls the shots" in regards to almost all decisions or changes regarding the donated vessel. In effect the vessel is still under U.S Navy guardianship and retains final say.
Which also illustrates how screwed up the whole system is! (or most of)
Look at the few exceptions to that, ie: USS Slater (OK, I'm biased) or LST325!
Both ships belong to the vets that saved them and restored them! The Navy has no say!
One is in better shape, more completely restored and more functional than the rest!(guess)
The other is real close, but also "haze gray and underway" (the other one) :)
The former will be sailing again soon if the vets have their way! (try and stop them)
Another irony is it seems the active Navy has more use of one of them than any other! (good guess)
Funny thing is these ships could be activated real cheap and serving quite quickly in the event of an "unimaginable" national emergency! So, who has it right??
I don't know if it was intentional or not, but you conveniently left this part out when you quoted the other sections.
So basically the Navy still retains the right take a museum vessel back in a National emergency for re-activation, even though it's extremely unlikely. Also note that even though the title and custody of the vessel is transferred, the Navy still "calls the shots" in regards to almost all decisions or changes regarding the donated vessel. In effect the vessel is still under U.S Navy guardianship and retains final say.
As far as Iowa's contract with the Navy:
4. Historic Preservation
(b) Prohibition. No construction, alteration, modification or any other action shall be undertaken or permitted to be undertaken on the Vessel without the prior consultation with the California State Historic preservation Officer (SHPO). The Donee shall afford the SHPO thirty days to review the comments on the Donee's proposed plans. If the California SHPO fails to respond within thirty days, the Donee may proceed with the undertaking...... The Donee shall provide the Navy with a contemporaneous information copy of all Donee written communication with the SHPO made as part of the historic preservation consultation process described in Article 4.
Gun Grape wrote: "There are lots of things I left out. No Shit. its a 20 slide presentation. The Navy can take back all but the Texas in case of National Emergency."
Well now, seems I may have been closer to being correct on this (Museum Ship Donation Regs) than originally thought. I'm also guilty of not reading thru the entire set of slides. Thanks, Tom for pointing this out!
Gun Grape wrote: "There are lots of things I left out. No Shit. its a 20 slide presentation. The Navy can take back all but the Texas in case of National Emergency."
Probably because the Texas was the first and was pretty thoroughly demilitarized. They stripped the ship of everything, even going so far as to replace the 40mm with 1.1" mounts as well as removing all the directors and any other usable equipment. Even cut her prop shaft and struts were cut off and blanked off. The Texas would serve no purpose, even in a SHtF scenario. Add to that the long standing neglect damage to the ship, I wouldn't want to even attempt to fire one of the turrets for real...
Comment