Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ask An Expert- Battleships

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Pacfanweb
    replied
    With regards to the North Carolina, I don't see why they haven't towed her to dry dock already. That was what the plan supposedly was ten years ago. They had the money, and estimated it would be 8-12 million total....permits, getting her out of her berth, etc.

    Now they're saying they need 15 million to do the cofferdam thing. I don't get it. And that's not a cofferdam like the Alabama has, what they've been doing it welding one to a section of the ship's side, repairing that one section, then removing it and going to the next spot. It's ridiculous, in my opinion. Ship hasn't been out of the water in over 50 years. Take her to Norfolk, get her high and dry, and do it right.

    I do know there's been some disagreements on how to do things there in the past few years. I experienced that myself, as I was supposed to restore an old Jeep the ship had in storage for years. They were all set for me to do it, I went and got it, and when I started working on it some new guy started making waves about spending the money elsewhere. He was outvoted until I found the engine had issues, then they ended up sticking it back in storage. So I'm not certain everyone is on the same page down there at all.

    Leave a comment:


  • bbvet
    replied
    I usually peruse this forum weekly to see if anything interesting is being discussed re. battleships and was quite surprised to read this current discussion devoted to the state of material readiness of our four IOWA museums.

    Both Rusty and DSWO have both pointed out the obvious - the ships are going nowhere anytime soon; and have also pointed out WHY. What I find interesting in this discussion is that most of the public (and I include myself) have very little knowledge of the rather detailed (and to a lesser degree) and undisclosed tenets of these donation agreements between the Navy and the individual ship caretaker groups.

    I have often wondered why reunion groups (just to name one type of visitor) gathering on one of the museum ships are fed, not from a functioning galley, but catered meals brought aboard the ship. Personally, for the money, I would much prefer the Navy Chow to the junk catered in, but that's neither here nor there. The reasons were quite correctly stated in the foregoing discussion and I'm glad to have had that tidbit of info passed on. I'm also appreciative for Rusty mentioning that IOWA has put into service one or two of the smaller galleys aboard IOWA.

    In discussing the material condition of the ships and how they are individually maintained, I would refer to a comparison between CASSIN YOUNG (Nat'l Park Service) and KIDD (private caretaker group) - KIDD is in what could be described as almost IN COMMISSION condition due to the many years of work replacing equipment, refurbishing systems, and an overall plan of action that puts the ship into a pristine condition other museum ships can only envy. While I've visited both ships, KIDD simply is IMHO, simply maintained to a much higher degree than CASSIN YOUNG. Not faulting NPS, but the goal set by the caretaking group of KIDD is beyond the scope of that NPS is willing to commit to. Looking at the battleship museums, I've been on board NEW JERSEY (DUH :slap:), ALABAMA, and NORTH CAROLINA (DUH 2). One size does not fit all. I think from reading this discussion (and overall Battleship thread) that IOWA is probably in better hands than the others. I don't see much interest here in NC to do more than show what they've currently got. Hell, they can't even agree that she NEEDS the drydock overhaul after 56 years in the mud. (it's much easier to waste money for a political campaign than spend the same dollars maintaining a historical asset!) ALABAMA wasn't all that impressive either; but given the extreme weather situations she been put through in the last few years they have their hands full. NEW JERSEY is, well, I guess in good hands although I've received less than an enthusiastic response to my requests for actual drawings/plans for my model project. Perhaps Rusty could enlighten me as to whether NJ has the same level of Plan Office as does IOWA. The NJ volunteer group has an online newsletter which points out the immense value of that group aboard ship. Having never been on board MISSOURI I can only speculate that her condition is being maintained at a similar level - I do get occasional photos of her from the modeling forum and members who have visited her and provided current, detailed pix.

    Each group seems to operate their given ship to whatever overall goals they've set, not to an overall standard and as such, that would probably present a big problem IF something occurred that required their return to service.
    Last edited by bbvet; 10 Apr 15,, 12:37.

    Leave a comment:


  • 85 gt kid
    replied
    Originally posted by desertswo View Post
    And then there's me.

    In all sincerity having been aboard Iowa with Dick here I don't mind throwing my dos centavos in. I didn't do a pre-Light Off Exam as I would have done on the old PEB, but from what I saw, it is my opinion that she could be made ready for underway in less than one year, albeit probably not with a mixed gender crew. Also I won't attest to combat systems readiness, as she may not be a full up round in that regard; but get steam up and her away from San Pedro? Yeah I could do that with the right kind of help. Right now in my opinion it is not the material condition of these ships that is the long pole in the tent, but the personnel requirements. See there are no more Boiler Technicians and very few Machinists Mates, and don't even say something like convert a bunch of Gas Turbine techs because everyone knows they all wear lace on the cuffs of their coveralls. You need real Black Gang and not a bunch of glorified flight line weanies. Just sayin'.
    Well Captain, Rusty and her crew has already got one head converted to a gender setup so give them time . Glad to hear she's looking good though and if it came to it and they needed her and a crew I'd volunteer in a heartbeat......Just gotta ignore my medical history :slap:.

    Leave a comment:


  • desertswo
    replied
    Originally posted by RustyBattleship View Post
    Well said Captain though I didn't include you in the list as you would be our hole card. But when Gas Turbines came out in the Spruances and Perrys, I found their crews to be pretty knowledgable and many of them had a multi-tasking attitude (like me) about them. But that was back over 30 years ago. So since designs and other improvements have been made to operate those turbines more safely, perhaps the type of crewmen that operate them now have been selected based upon a "one interest only" personality than in the "olden" days.
    Dick, I once had to cross the pier to show the Chief Engineer of USS John Young (DD 973) how to punch the sea life and other assorted gunk out of one of their main engine lube oil coolers. We and John Young had deployed together as a two ship Surface Action Group (SAG), and we were sort of joined at the hip accordingly, and I was acting not only as Chief Engineer of my own ship, but sort of as a DESRON material officer as well.

    Anyway, when I say "I" went across the pier, I really meant just that. I wouldn't allow my engineers to do it because they had enough to deal with on our side of the pier, but more to the point I did it to impress upon this young man (I was his senior by one pay grade and five years or so in age and experience) that he really needed to get down in the weeds a bit so that he could make informed decisions about his plant and its equipment. All that said, can you imagine a bunch of senior petty officers and CPOs not having a clue about how to go about something so simple? Well that was your GS rating circa 1988. You are correct in that the original rating members were pretty good because they were all former Enginemen and had learned a thing or two before joining the new rating. As they began to grow their own however, this insidious idea that the shipyard or tender or IMA was going to do everything for them started to creep in . . . along with the lace cuffs.

    Leave a comment:


  • RustyBattleship
    replied
    Originally posted by desertswo View Post
    And then there's me.

    In all sincerity having been aboard Iowa with Dick here I don't mind throwing my dos centavos in. I didn't do a pre-Light Off Exam as I would have done on the old PEB, but from what I saw, it is my opinion that she could be made ready for underway in less than one year, albeit probably not with a mixed gender crew. Also I won't attest to combat systems readiness, as she may not be a full up round in that regard; but get steam up and her away from San Pedro? Yeah I could do that with the right kind of help. Right now in my opinion it is not the material condition of these ships that is the long pole in the tent, but the personnel requirements. See there are no more Boiler Technicians and very few Machinists Mates, and don't even say something like convert a bunch of Gas Turbine techs because everyone knows they all wear lace on the cuffs of their coveralls. You need real Black Gang and not a bunch of glorified flight line weanies. Just sayin'.
    Well said Captain though I didn't include you in the list as you would be our hole card. But when Gas Turbines came out in the Spruances and Perrys, I found their crews to be pretty knowledgable and many of them had a multi-tasking attitude (like me) about them. But that was back over 30 years ago. So since designs and other improvements have been made to operate those turbines more safely, perhaps the type of crewmen that operate them now have been selected based upon a "one interest only" personality than in the "olden" days.

    Gosh, I've been retired THAT long? Not really as I'm still with the Battleships and I wish we could have gotten the Ranger as well.

    When I mentioned safety of the turbines, I'm referring to many design changes we had to do with the first ones that came out. Intake trunks needed improvements to prevent nasty things from being sucked into the turbine (which at that time only had a thin net at the bottom of the trunk that caught a piece of broken off weld metal one of our enginers found on one ship he inspected) and exhaust trunks had to have sections of their plating replaced with a higher grade to take the high heat better than the standard grade of plating.

    Well, that's enough for now. I get off track too easily and this is a BATTLESHIP board and many of the ship classes mentioned above have either been given to foreign countries, sunk as fishing reefs or cut up for scrap.

    But as for the boiler fed Battleships are concerned, I don't think you would have much problem finding people who would burn the midnight oil digesting the Tech Manuals and inspecting each valve, pipe flange, burner, boiler tube, etc. explicitly before first light off. Even if you are "Black gang", you are a crewman of a BATTLESHIP and for most BB crewmen I have known, they are proud of that title.

    Leave a comment:


  • desertswo
    replied
    Originally posted by RustyBattleship View Post
    Let's put one thing straight here: I am a founding member of the Pacific Battleship Center and their Naval Architect. Because of some medical problems this past year I haven't been aboard as often as I would like to. But I personally know the dedication of our crew and volunteers and you can rest assured that Battleship is VERY well taken care of.

    I spent 39 years at the Long Beach Naval Shipyard. I hired in as an Apprentice Shipfitter in September of 1954 and retired as a Naval Architect in February of 1994. In the 1980's I was assigned to be the structural Configuration Manager for the modernization of all four Iowa class Battleships. So I know pretty much about how the ships are built, why they were built that way and how to keep them fit.

    Well, at least structure wise and armor wise. Compartment arrangement wise (which was also one of my requirements as Configuration Manager) I'm also pretty good at and even my wife has been aboard helping me take measurements and develop any improvements we can do aboard the ship. But in the field of Mechanical items, Electrical work or Electronics I know the experts to call on who I used to work with at LBNSY and they are all willing to go aboard and see what can be done and offer advice. For electrical and electronics I can call on Bill *** and/or Ray **********. For compartment arrangements I can call on John ***** and/or Anthony *********. For metallurgical concerns I can call on Dan *****. For heating and cooling I can call on Stan *******. For machinery and propulsion I can call on Nat ******. Even for structural modifications, I have all my drawings reviewed by Larry **** before issueing to the ship. Larry used to be one of my supervisors and has a Masters Degree in Naval Architecture.

    Please note the above that I'm leaving out the last names of our experts to maintain their privacy. I goofed on this once before with a document I wrote and he's bugged me (justifiably) about it ever since.

    So don't you worry about the Iowa. The same can be said of her three sisters. We have an excellent manageral staff to keep things straight. So if there is any problem, our staff can handle it. If you don't think they can ---- well, let's just say you do not want to go through me (and/or with a couple of other people I know). Well, especially if it's with any sort of anger or vindictiveness. I much prefer boring you to death with speeches of ship histories, UFO sightings, Monster legends and how to drive an M41A1 tank.
    And then there's me.

    In all sincerity having been aboard Iowa with Dick here I don't mind throwing my dos centavos in. I didn't do a pre-Light Off Exam as I would have done on the old PEB, but from what I saw, it is my opinion that she could be made ready for underway in less than one year, albeit probably not with a mixed gender crew. Also I won't attest to combat systems readiness, as she may not be a full up round in that regard; but get steam up and her away from San Pedro? Yeah I could do that with the right kind of help. Right now in my opinion it is not the material condition of these ships that is the long pole in the tent, but the personnel requirements. See there are no more Boiler Technicians and very few Machinists Mates, and don't even say something like convert a bunch of Gas Turbine techs because everyone knows they all wear lace on the cuffs of their coveralls. You need real Black Gang and not a bunch of glorified flight line weanies. Just sayin'.

    Leave a comment:


  • ArmorPiercing88
    replied
    I wasn't implying the museum staff wasn't qualified...I was just curious if they're trying to keep the ships in any kind of FUNCTIONAL state, or just to ensure they last as long as possible as museums. For example, I heard the Iowa is subject to recall until 2020, but the New Jersey is not? That would mean the New Jersey museum staff could do stuff that the Iowa staff could not, right?

    Leave a comment:


  • RustyBattleship
    replied
    Originally posted by ArmorPiercing88 View Post
    So just to be clear, the New Jersey and the Missouri are under no restrictions whatsoever re: preserving any kind of readiness? The curators could fill the gun breaches with cement, or the engines could be left rot beyond repair, or if they wanted to they could cut the shafts, etc? Are the restrictions on the Iowa and Wisconsin still in place because they were the two designated ships in the 2006 defense authorization act? I thought I read a lot of quotes when the Iowa museum opened up that she remained subject to recall in a national emergency (which we know won't happen, but still that sounds different than the New Jersey and Missouri). Do the museum curators care at all about the material condition of the ship beyond appearance? I'd assume the ships are STILL able to be brought back to fighting shape (with fantasy funds/crew...and the NJ and Iowa less so), but that obviously won't last forever...
    Let's put one thing straight here: I am a founding member of the Pacific Battleship Center and their Naval Architect. Because of some medical problems this past year I haven't been aboard as often as I would like to. But I personally know the dedication of our crew and volunteers and you can rest assured that Battleship is VERY well taken care of.

    I spent 39 years at the Long Beach Naval Shipyard. I hired in as an Apprentice Shipfitter in September of 1954 and retired as a Naval Architect in February of 1994. In the 1980's I was assigned to be the structural Configuration Manager for the modernization of all four Iowa class Battleships. So I know pretty much about how the ships are built, why they were built that way and how to keep them fit.

    Well, at least structure wise and armor wise. Compartment arrangement wise (which was also one of my requirements as Configuration Manager) I'm also pretty good at and even my wife has been aboard helping me take measurements and develop any improvements we can do aboard the ship. But in the field of Mechanical items, Electrical work or Electronics I know the experts to call on who I used to work with at LBNSY and they are all willing to go aboard and see what can be done and offer advice. For electrical and electronics I can call on Bill *** and/or Ray **********. For compartment arrangements I can call on John ***** and/or Anthony *********. For metallurgical concerns I can call on Dan *****. For heating and cooling I can call on Stan *******. For machinery and propulsion I can call on Nat ******. Even for structural modifications, I have all my drawings reviewed by Larry **** before issueing to the ship. Larry used to be one of my supervisors and has a Masters Degree in Naval Architecture.

    Please note the above that I'm leaving out the last names of our experts to maintain their privacy. I goofed on this once before with a document I wrote and he's bugged me (justifiably) about it ever since.

    So don't you worry about the Iowa. The same can be said of her three sisters. We have an excellent manageral staff to keep things straight. So if there is any problem, our staff can handle it. If you don't think they can ---- well, let's just say you do not want to go through me (and/or with a couple of other people I know). Well, especially if it's with any sort of anger or vindictiveness. I much prefer boring you to death with speeches of ship histories, UFO sightings, Monster legends and how to drive an M41A1 tank.

    Leave a comment:


  • 85 gt kid
    replied
    Well they still have to adhere to Navy donation rules so no they have to place nice :D. But New Jersey did have a hole cut out of the barbette on turret 2 because the reactivation rules didn't apply to her anymore BUT she could still be repaired easily so I've heard. I guess though if SHTF and we really needed to the NJ and MO could be reactivated too but that would be one bad scenario.

    Leave a comment:


  • ArmorPiercing88
    replied
    So just to be clear, the New Jersey and the Missouri are under no restrictions whatsoever re: preserving any kind of readiness? The curators could fill the gun breaches with cement, or the engines could be left rot beyond repair, or if they wanted to they could cut the shafts, etc? Are the restrictions on the Iowa and Wisconsin still in place because they were the two designated ships in the 2006 defense authorization act? I thought I read a lot of quotes when the Iowa museum opened up that she remained subject to recall in a national emergency (which we know won't happen, but still that sounds different than the New Jersey and Missouri). Do the museum curators care at all about the material condition of the ship beyond appearance? I'd assume the ships are STILL able to be brought back to fighting shape (with fantasy funds/crew...and the NJ and Iowa less so), but that obviously won't last forever...

    Leave a comment:


  • RustyBattleship
    replied
    Originally posted by 85 gt kid View Post
    I don't know the circumference of them at their widest but even at 4 feet that would only be 2 gallons at most and granted what I would put on there isn't cheap but if someone came to me for something like that I could prob get it to them for like $50 total. To bad someone doesn't do that but atleast it can rust away anytime soon .

    Rusty:



    I sure someone has asked this before (might even have been me at one point) but why the restrictions on the galley and to an extremely lesser extent the propulsion systems? I mean for the most part the museum ships propulsion systems can't be re-activated because they're steam plants because of the obvious but what about the diesel subs? I heard of a few subs that have atleast one operational diesel onboard. The galley I figured was liability because of a fire but was still curious. I know some reactivate the smaller captains galleys and seem to have no problem though.
    The crew galley is sized to feed the ENTIRE crew and not just the enlisted men. So the longer it is NOT used, the better chance of it being reactivated quickly. There is no restriction on the smaller galleys. For example, when we towed the Iowa out of Siusun Bay, we activated the wardroom galley for breakfast. As the ship stands now in San Pedro, we have also reactivated the Chief's galley. The Captain's (and/or Admiral's) galley is basically on stand-by for special meetings in those spaces. Don't forget, the Captains stateroom was once President Roosevelt's quarters on his trip to the Teheran conference. So we have "reactivated" that stateroom in the manner it would have been when the President was on board.

    The order not to reactivate the engine rooms is really the most important restriction. To operate those boilers you have to open up the injection and discharge sea scoops at the bottom of the ship, re-pack bearings around the shafts, re-anneal and re-balance the propellers, reactivate the steering gear room, etc. etc. We can only do that with a properly sized drydock (where on the west coast they are all up in Bremerton since Hunters Point and Long Beach were sacrificed for container parking lots) and lots and lots of money. Donald Trump probably would not be interested since the ship is not in New York (he is a very devout New Yorker). Though I think he has a Golf Course in the Palos Verde Hills just above San Pedro. But since I'm not into "Cow Pasture Pool", I don't know if it's close enough for a wild drive to land in our parking lot.

    Leave a comment:


  • 85 gt kid
    replied
    OSPHO...............lots of OSPHO.

    Leave a comment:


  • surfgun
    replied
    . Here is the barrel at Lewes.
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • 85 gt kid
    replied
    Originally posted by surfgun View Post
    The 16" 50 barrel at former Fort Miles at Lewes, Delaware is sitting in its cradle and is desperate need of a coat of paint. The park has stuck some lumber in the muzzle and breach to keep the children from climbing into barrel.
    I don't know the circumference of them at their widest but even at 4 feet that would only be 2 gallons at most and granted what I would put on there isn't cheap but if someone came to me for something like that I could prob get it to them for like $50 total. To bad someone doesn't do that but atleast it can rust away anytime soon .

    Rusty:



    I sure someone has asked this before (might even have been me at one point) but why the restrictions on the galley and to an extremely lesser extent the propulsion systems? I mean for the most part the museum ships propulsion systems can't be re-activated because they're steam plants because of the obvious but what about the diesel subs? I heard of a few subs that have atleast one operational diesel onboard. The galley I figured was liability because of a fire but was still curious. I know some reactivate the smaller captains galleys and seem to have no problem though.

    Leave a comment:


  • RustyBattleship
    replied
    Originally posted by 85 gt kid View Post
    Rusty said the Iowa and Wisconsin cannot be modified as per the donation agreement. What was odd was the Volunteer coordinator told me the Navy wouldn't take them back but he probably wasn't privy to that info. Not sure on the Massachusetts although I swearIread why somewhere :Zzzzzz:. I still don't see how they thought that would be quicker.
    In all cases with all donated Battleships, there was always a restriction not to reactivate the main crew galley, the main propulsion machinery and the navigational equipment for navigating at sea. That last one is rather reduntant because you can't navigate anyway if you cant turn the propellers. However, after some time the Navy does release those restrictions as they already have with the New Jersey and Missouri.

    As for the Massachusetts, the Navy kept those restrictions on all those previously donated ships for a very long time. I know the person from NAVSEA who double checked that the restriction was still in place when the Mamie group called to ask if NAVSEA had any procedures written up of how to remove the propellers. To my understanding those restrictions have been lifted since then.

    Technically speaking, I think it is detrimental to leave the props on while in mothballs because the bronze works to build up cathodic corrosion on the hull. And bronze age hardens quite readily and on all reactivations (of ANY ship) the props have to be re-annealed or replaced with newer props. But, they would have to be removed PROPERLY in dry dock and not just have the shafts cut by divers.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X