Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Railguns

[adv1701]

Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

I grew up on cruise ships and saw pictures of two of them being scrapped on the beach. No appreciation for history anymore.They were the last two pax ships built in the us you think a merchant marine school could use them or something. They will probably preserve Enterprise at Norfolk.

 

[philbob]

Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

god i hope so

 

[arch101]

Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

The battleships could make for tremendous platforms for shore-bombardment railguns. As unlikely the prospect is, a stipulation of their donation as meuseum ships was that they NOT be altered in any way as to make a 20-month recomissioning impossible. Unlikely but...
As for the Big E, she could be deactivated and her reactors removed just like the Nautilus, which is a museum ship in Conn. Savannah is also currently having her reactors removed in preparation for her new life as a museum ship.

 

[estrea]

Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

Yes, I know Norfolk was her last Home Port. Which was where I was thinking of beginning. She was also part of the Pacific Fleet and her Home Port at that time was San Francisco. (If my father's memory is correct. He's 74.)

 

[John Picard]

Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

estrea said:
Yes, I know Norfolk was her last Home Port. Which was where I was thinking of beginning. She was also part of the Pacific Fleet and her Home Port at that time was San Francisco. (If my father's memory is correct. He's 74.)

The 'E' was part of PacFleet in the late-1980's; however, the Navy has made a practice of homeporting even numbered carriers on the west coast, and odd numbered on the east coast.

Either way, that thing is a turd and needs to be scrapped. Good lord, it's about the 4th or 5th US Naval vessel to bear the name

 

[The Squire of Gothos]

Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

How much armour could a slug from such a weapon penetrate? I'm guessing anything that floats is vaporised pretty easily, so we're not going to see a return to battleships.

 

[Gaseous Anomaly]

Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

John_Picard said:

estrea said:
Yes, I know Norfolk was her last Home Port. Which was where I was thinking of beginning. She was also part of the Pacific Fleet and her Home Port at that time was San Francisco. (If my father's memory is correct. He's 74.)

The 'E' was part of PacFleet in the late-1980's; however, the Navy has made a practice of homeporting even numbered carriers on the west coast, and odd numbered on the east coast.

Either way, that thing is a turd and needs to be scrapped. Good lord, it's about the 4th or 5th US Naval vessel to bear the name

There were 7 ships total bearing the name Enterprise. However not all 7 have United States Ship as part of the name.
Here you go.
I disagree; the big "E" should not be scrapped. It's an important part of our naval history.

 

[John Picard]

Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

Gaseous Anomaly said:

John_Picard said:

estrea said:
Yes, I know Norfolk was her last Home Port. Which was where I was thinking of beginning. She was also part of the Pacific Fleet and her Home Port at that time was San Francisco. (If my father's memory is correct. He's 74.)

The 'E' was part of PacFleet in the late-1980's; however, the Navy has made a practice of homeporting even numbered carriers on the west coast, and odd numbered on the east coast.

Either way, that thing is a turd and needs to be scrapped. Good lord, it's about the 4th or 5th US Naval vessel to bear the name

There were 7 ships total bearing the name Enterprise. However not all 7 have United States Ship as part of the name.
Here you go.
I disagree; the big "E" should not be scrapped. It's an important part of our naval history.

I'll bite. What makes it so "special"?

 

[FordSVT]

Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

The Big E was the first nuclear powered carrier and the first such carrier to be involved in combat. It has a unique reactor, rudder and hull design, and it's served your nation in nearly every major combat operation the US has undertaken since the 1960s, including the entirety of the Cuban missile Crisis and six operations in SE Asia in the 60s and 70s and several deployments in the Gulf region. She was near the Persian Gulf on 9/11 and took part in the Afghanistan missions immediately after. The first operational F-14 launched from and landed on Enterprise. The last operational A-6 intruders flew from Enterprise. She has logged more nautical miles than any other US Carrier in history.

Enterprise was even a tracking platform for Friendship VII, America's first manned orbital space mission.

But to be honest, the fact that the Enterprise is called the Enterprise and we're posting on a Star Trek board should be enough of a reason to be sentimental about the ship.

 

[philbob]

Wow...schooled by a canadian
unfortantly the Enterprise has been schedualed for dismantaling in 2013...hopefully some one with money and resources decides to open his hart and make her into a mueseum

 

[StarCruiser]

Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

The Big E was the first nuclear powered carrier and the first such carrier to be involved in combat. It has a unique reactor, rudder and hull design, and it's served your nation in nearly every major combat operation the US has undertaken since the 1960s, including the entirety of the Cuban missile Crisis and six operations in SE Asia in the 60s and 70s and several deployments in the Gulf region. She was near the Persian Gulf on 9/11 and took part in the Afghanistan missions immediately after. The first operational F-14 launched from and landed on Enterprise. The last operational A-6 intruders flew from Enterprise. She has logged more nautical miles than any other US Carrier in history.

Enterprise was even a tracking platform for Friendship VII, America's first manned orbital space mission.

But to be honest, the fact that the Enterprise is called the Enterprise and we're posting on a Star Trek board should be enough of a reason to be sentimental about the ship.

Only one response - AMEN!!!

 

[USS KG5]

Wow...schooled by a canadian
unfortantly the Enterprise has been schedualed for dismantaling in 2013...hopefully some one with money and resources decides to open his hart and make her into a mueseum

The question to ask is can she be made into a museum - as I stated up thread once decommissioned she will be a huge radiation hazard, how long is her shielding going to last when they shut down the reactors, would they leave that much fissile material in the hands of a museum? Could they remove the reactors without basically destroying her anyway?

Sadly - it is likely the Big-E would just be far, far too expensive to preserve. Those eight reactors need careful disposal, once they are gone, maybe whatever is left of Enterprise will not be worth preserving?

 

[Timo]

How many warships can the nation afford to preserve anyway? (It's not as if Great Britain could afford to save even one - the Belfast was saved by a public donations campaign.)

When the Virginias and Californias were stripped of their reactors, they were rather completely torn to pieces from waterline up. Was that a necessary part of the process of removing the reactors, or was it always the intention to first dismantle the entire superstructure and then worry about what to do with the hulls?

Timo Saloniemi

 

[philbob]

Its not really how many ships can a nation preserves its how they should be disposessed of... I know the US dosent have the best record but any ship breakers we have take better they desrveed to be disnabtled better then if they were sent to Alaang...im just being sentiemental so bare with me

 

[Trajet]

Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

I thought the Royal Navy was transitioning away from a blue water navy to more coastal defense. Sad indeed if that is the case for a country with such a rich naval history.

Quite the reverse actually, the Royal Navy is in the process of re-equipping itself and transitioning from a North Atlantic focused ASW force back to a proper Blue Water Navy with substantially increased power projection capability and a focus on global expeditionary operations.

This has involved the largest continued British shipbuilding program since WWII - complete with 8 Type 45 Guided Missile Destroyers, 2 Queen Elizabeth class fleet aircraft carriers (one of which will be capable of embarking more aircraft than all 3 Invincible class ships combined), a new class of amphibious assault ships, the new Astute class SSN's and the development of a new generation of SSBN's to carry the UK's nuclear deterent. There is also R&D work being carried out on a possible successor to the UK's fleet of 20 or so Type 22/23 Frigates.

There was some concern when plans were announced by Tony Blair to remove certain portions of the surface fleet from active service in the short term to fund ongoing military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, but these concerns seem to be unfounded, as Gordon Brown has committed to ordering both the Queen Elizabeth class carriers and all 8 Type 45 Destroyers.

 

[USS KG5]

How many warships can the nation afford to preserve anyway? (It's not as if Great Britain could afford to save even one - the Belfast was saved by a public donations campaign.)

We could afford to save her EASILY - we are still the fourth largest economy in the world I believe. In fact we probably should have saved a battleship, either Vanguard or one of the KG5s.

BUT - politics came into it. You have to remember the British Empire was falling apart at the time, we were coming to terms with our worst excesses as an Imperial power and rebuilding from a war which we vowed the like of would never be seen again.

Under those circumstances devoting public money to preserving at great cost a symbol of Britain's Imperial power and warlike past was not a priority.

The USA is currently in the height of its Imperial pomp, and it is likely that a high priority will be to preserve ships like the BIG-E (as, if discussed, possible).

As technology fans, and in a lot of cases like myself, many of us are strong followers of the military, this is only a good thing for us.

 

[Trajet]

Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

The loss of the Sea Harrier FRS 2 currently leaves the RN with no effective fighter support, another Falklands would end very badly for the UK right now.

As far as I know, the retired Sea Harriers have been replaced in RN service with Harrier GR7A/9's from the Royal Air Force on both HMS Illustrious and Ark Royal. They'll remain in service until around 2015, when the first wave of the UK's variant of the F-35 is due.

That means that some of the first wave of F-35's could be operated from either Illustrious or Ark Royal, depending on which of those two vessels is decommissioned in 2014 following the commissioning of the HMS Queen Elizabeth. The final Invincible class vessel isn't expected to pay off until sometime after HMS Prince of Wales is commissioned, which is expected to be in 2016.

 

[USS KG5]

Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

As far as I know, the retired Sea Harriers have been replaced in RN service with Harrier GR7A/9's from the Royal Air Force on both HMS Illustrious and Ark Royal. They'll remain in service until around 2015, when the first wave of the UK's variant of the F-35 is due.

Correct - however the GR7/9 Harriers have no effective radar with which to detect potential threats and mount an effective CAP over the fleet. Basically in a Falklands scenario there is no way that the Harriers would be able to effectively intercept attacking aircraft, unlike the FRS2 with its excellent radar, developed based on experience in the Falklands.

That means that some of the first wave of F-35's could be operated from either Illustrious or Ark Royal, depending on which of those two vessels is decommissioned in 2014 following the commissioning of the HMS Queen Elizabeth. The final Invincible class vessel isn't expected to pay off until sometime after HMS Prince of Wales is commissioned, which is expected to be in 2016.

I suspect the Invincibles will find themselves quietly decommissioned a couple of years before the QEs eventually enter service (they are almost certain to be both overbudget and late by current standards).

The Royal Navy won the Falklands through luck and the excellent training of its people, much as the land battle was won. Hopefully despite persistant government efforts to belittle and under value the British military it will come out of the constant privatisations and reviews a strong and effective force envied the world over - as it is now...

 

[philbob]

Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

Any one see the Conti Cavour...it is the new flashship of the Italian fleet she is beauty

 

[Dayton3]

Re: Naval warfare in the 21st Century and the advent of Rail

The Enterprise was also faster than the later Nimitz class supercarriers.

And it was built in an amazingly short amount of time.

Finally, the only reason the Enterprise was a one ship class is because of the cost of nuclear power.

I don't see how anyone could call her a "turd".

She once survived 4,500 lbs. of bombs detonating on her deck.