zanl188
Posts: 3443
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:05 pm

USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:14 pm

The last of the Nimitz Class ships commisioned today...

http://bushcommissioning.com/

When will the new carrier class start commissioning?
Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
 
AirRyan
Posts: 2398
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:57 am

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:15 pm

Bush 41 should have been the name for the next generation of US CVN's, not G. Ford who wasn't even a Naval Aviator.
 
zanl188
Posts: 3443
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:05 pm

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:36 pm



Quoting AirRyan (Reply 1):
Ford who wasn't even a Naval Aviator.

Neither was Nimitz.... Submariner & destroyer officer as I recall...
Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
 
AirRyan
Posts: 2398
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:57 am

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Sat Jan 10, 2009 8:41 pm



Quoting ZANL188 (Reply 2):
Neither was Nimitz.... Submariner & destroyer officer as I recall...

Obviously there is no set standard when it comes to naming USN vessels (Vinson, Stennis, etc.) but Admiral Nimitz was the Fleet Admiral of the Pacific Forces that won the second world war against the Japanese so I can understand that decision very easily.

However, not to belittle Ford's four years of Naval service, as he did serve in combat operations, but his Naval career was no more stellar than supervising an anti-aircraft battery on an aircraft carrier (and then riding his ship through Halsey's typhoon) - there are many a fine Naval Aviators (only Naval Aviators can serve as Captain on an aircraft carrier) that could have been the namesake for the entire next generation of the most advanced nuclear powered aircraft carrier ever constructed.

Sure, G. Ford should have his name on a USN vessel, but not the entire class of next generation carriers if even a carrier in the first place, an AEGIS cruiser would have been just fine.

Personally, I think the already soft modern Navy got even softer and capitulated the naming honor in correlation to Ford's passing just three weeks prior.

As a die-hard Chevy V-8 fan, I scoff at the notion of a big old nasty Ford emblem somewhere on the ship and subsequent vessels - a sign of quality, my ass - what a joke!

While I think John S, McCain III will get his name on one of these new CVN-78's, he should have been the name bearer for the entire class - Naval Academy alum, Naval Aviator, 5.5 years in a POW camp, and retired from the Navy after some nearly 27 years of service.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6678
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:23 pm



Quoting AirRyan (Reply 3):
While I think John S, McCain III will get his name on one of these new CVN-78's, he should have been the name bearer for the entire class - Naval Academy alum, Naval Aviator, 5.5 years in a POW camp, and retired from the Navy after some nearly 27 years of service.

Since they are now honouring folks while they are alive, it will have to be a ship and not a class, a new class of carriers are decades away, same for submarines, since the Zummalt class destroyer seems to be on hold, how about a new low cost frigate?
 
DiamondFlyer
Posts: 2153
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 11:50 pm

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Sun Jan 11, 2009 1:28 am



Quoting Par13del (Reply 4):
a new class of carriers are decades away

Huh? I believe that the 1st of the Gerald R. Ford class CVN's is to be laid down this year. I'm not real up to speed on military things, but, I know that we've got a new class of CV's on the way, and they look like they're going to be good ships.


-DiamondFlyer
From my cold, dead hands
 
UH60FtRucker
Posts: 3252
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 9:15 am

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Sun Jan 11, 2009 1:54 am



Quoting AirRyan (Reply 3):
Sure, G. Ford should have his name on a USN vessel, but not the entire class of next generation carriers if even a carrier in the first place, an AEGIS cruiser would have been just fine.

Personally, I think the already soft modern Navy got even softer and capitulated the naming honor in correlation to Ford's passing just three weeks prior.

This is just another example of the sh*tty legacy Rumsfeld left.

The USS Gerald R. Ford had a lot to do with the fact that both SecDef Rumsfeld and VP Cheney worked closely for the past president, and publicly pushed for the naming of the next carrier, after their old boss.

SecDef Rumsfeld, being the sleezy bastard he is, ended the debate by publicly announcing the carrier's new name, at President Ford's funeral. Which pretty much shut the door on any doubts the Navy had, since they surely couldn't retract such a statement, made at such a touching moment.

God I hate that guy.

Quoting Par13del (Reply 4):
a new class of carriers are decades away

2015.

CVN-78 should sail in 2015. The contract has already been signed and approved, and Hampton Roads has already begun initial construction. The Big E should be replaced when the USS Ford enters the fleet.

-UH60
Your men have to follow your orders. They don't have to go to your funeral.
 
johns624
Posts: 1239
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:09 pm

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:08 am



Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 5):
Huh? I believe that the 1st of the Gerald R. Ford class CVN's is to be laid down this year. I'm not real up to speed on military things, but, I know that we've got a new class of CV's on the way, and they look like they're going to be good ships.

Well, if the next class is the Ford-class, the next class that could be named after McCain IS decades away...
 
UH60FtRucker
Posts: 3252
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 9:15 am

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:47 am



Quoting Johns624 (Reply 7):

Well, if the next class is the Ford-class, the next class that could be named after McCain IS decades away...

Or they could do a subset, just as there are Roosevelt and Reagan subsets of the Nimitz class.

And if they did name a ship after John McCain, would that be the first time there two ships named for father and son?

USS John S McCain DDG-56, and USS John McCain CVX?

-UH60
Your men have to follow your orders. They don't have to go to your funeral.
 
desertjets
Posts: 7570
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2000 3:12 pm

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Sun Jan 11, 2009 3:10 am



Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 8):
And if they did name a ship after John McCain, would that be the first time there two ships named for father and son?

USS John S McCain DDG-56, and USS John McCain CVX?

Don't forget Adm. McCain Sr. had a destroyer named after himself -- DL-3


I would have preferred if the Navy would have continued to use destroyers for naming people. So many old, retired carriers had great names that I would like to see again. Save the politicking for the tin cans.
Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
 
UH60FtRucker
Posts: 3252
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 9:15 am

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Sun Jan 11, 2009 3:20 am



Quoting DesertJets (Reply 9):


I would have preferred if the Navy would have continued to use destroyers for naming people. So many old, retired carriers had great names that I would like to see again. Save the politicking for the tin cans.

I agree. It unfortunately seems as though Washington politics, is becoming more important in the naming of ships, than age-old naval tradition.

I would love to see the return to names like "Intrepid" "Wasp" "Langley" "Independence" and one of my favorites, "America". Although, with that being said, I didn't mind when the Navy named CVN-76, after President Reagan.

-UH60
Your men have to follow your orders. They don't have to go to your funeral.
 
studedave
Posts: 463
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 4:21 am

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Sun Jan 11, 2009 3:30 am



Quoting AirRyan (Reply 3):
As a die-hard Chevy V-8 fan, I scoff at the notion of a big old nasty Ford emblem somewhere on the ship and subsequent vessels - a sign of quality, my ass - what a joke!

Then you're gonna wanna stay away from this ship~ USS Ford (FFG 54).
It is currently based at Naval Station Everett, Washington...

http://www.ford.navy.mil/default.aspx
Classic planes, Classic trains, and Studebakers~~ what else is there???
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6678
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Sun Jan 11, 2009 3:51 am



Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 5):
Huh? I believe that the 1st of the Gerald R. Ford class CVN's is to be laid down this year. I'm not real up to speed on military things, but, I know that we've got a new class of CV's on the way, and they look like they're going to be good ships.

Johns624 already answered, but to clarify, the next class of CVN has already been named, so if a class is to be named after Sen. McCain it will be decades away when the Fords come up for replacement.

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 8):
Or they could do a subset, just as there are Roosevelt and Reagan subsets of the Nimitz class.

I know there are difference is virtually all the subsequent Nimitz class ships, never knew they actually recognized some of them as a sub-fleet. If thats the best they can do for him then so be it, but I think I would prefer a class just for him, it is probably sentimental that they want it to be a carrier, how about a new class of amphibs for the Marines and their F-35's, thing with the Brown Water Navy is that a class of major ships could be 4 vessels.

Just a thought.
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13200
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Sun Jan 11, 2009 3:53 am



Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 5):
Huh? I believe that the 1st of the Gerald R. Ford class CVN's is to be laid down this year. I'm not real up to speed on military things, but, I know that we've got a new class of CV's on the way, and they look like they're going to be good ships.

The contract has gone out, $5.4 Billion IIRC, One of the new features of the new Ford Class are electromagnetic catapults. The Navy just constructed one at Lakehurst NAES and it will begin testing soon, no more steam shots.

Quoting DesertJets (Reply 9):
So many old, retired carriers had great names that I would like to see again.

I would love to see the Forrestal, Yorktown, Midway, Lexington and Coral Sea brought back, as well as Enterprise and Kitty Hawk names maintained. If another Carrier must be named after a President why not bring back the JFK.

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 10):
my favorites, "America".

Apparently that was what CVN-78 was to be named.

CVN-78 will sail in 2015, CVN-79 in 2018 and CVN-80 in 2021.

I would love to see the Navy go to a 12 Carrier fleet from the current 11 carriers, balance them six Atlantic and six Pacific.

Atlantic:
5 Norfolk
1 Mayport

Pacific:
1 Kitsap/Bremerton
1 Everett
2 San Diego
1 Pearl Harbor or Apra Harbor
1 Yokosuka
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
DeltaGuy
Posts: 3965
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2001 5:25 am

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Sun Jan 11, 2009 4:56 am

I think the name America should be brought back, both as a name of a flattop, and a class. Nothing more fearsome than knowing the America is off your shores.

DeltaGuy
"The cockpit, what is it?" "It's the little room in the front of the plane where the pilot sits, but that's not importan
 
sasd209
Posts: 381
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 4:32 am

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Sun Jan 11, 2009 6:17 am

I'd like Oriskany or Shangri-La brought back.  Smile

Bonhomme Richard should have been reserved for a CVN, IMO.
 
PC12Fan
Posts: 1976
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 11:50 pm

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Sun Jan 11, 2009 1:26 pm

Just when I think you've said the stupidest thing ever, you keep talkin'!
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6678
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:49 pm



Quoting STT757 (Reply 13):
I would love to see the Navy go to a 12 Carrier fleet from the current 11 carriers, balance them six Atlantic and six Pacific.

Based on the size of the regions, and unbalanced fleet deployment is more realistic. Everyone knows the significane of the D-Day landings of WWII, not many get into the details that the actual numbers of ships and men were dwarfed by similar action in the Pacific.

The Pacific is a much larger region requiring more assets, the Atlantic may still be "prestigious" but how many potential area's of conflict exist over the Atlantic?
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13200
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Sun Jan 11, 2009 7:27 pm



Quoting Par13del (Reply 17):
The Pacific is a much larger region requiring more assets, the Atlantic may still be "prestigious" but how many potential area's of conflict exist over the Atlantic?

Well the question is obviously which is the fastest transit to the Gulf, Norfolk or San Diego, Mayport or Bremerton?..
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
LMP737
Posts: 4810
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Sun Jan 11, 2009 9:05 pm



Quoting STT757 (Reply 13):
I would love to see the Forrestal, Yorktown, Midway, Lexington and Coral Sea brought back, as well as Enterprise and Kitty Hawk names maintained.

Speaking of the Coral Sea here's a picture of her in her final days.

< http://www.usscoralsea.net/images/ex4321.jpg >

Quoting STT757 (Reply 13):
I would love to see the Navy go to a 12 Carrier fleet from the current 11 carriers, balance them six Atlantic and six Pacific.

Atlantic:
5 Norfolk
1 Mayport

Pacific:
1 Kitsap/Bremerton
1 Everett
2 San Diego
1 Pearl Harbor or Apra Harbor
1 Yokosuka

The Navy plans to base a carrier at Mayport to replace the JFK. Of course they will spend about $500 million to build the facilities to support a nuclear carrier.

As neat as it would be to see a carrier based at Pearl Harbor I doubt it would ever happen. Not only would there be the expense of moving the carrier but the squadrons as well. With the current budget situation I also doubt there will be twelve carriers

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 10):
I agree. It unfortunately seems as though Washington politics, is becoming more important in the naming of ships, than age-old naval tradition.

Back in the day the Navy named its submarines after fish. Then Rickover decided to name attack subs after cities. Someone pointed out him the tradition of naming subs after fish. He replied in typical Rickover fashion "Fish don't vote".
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
studedave
Posts: 463
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 4:21 am

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Sun Jan 11, 2009 11:39 pm



Quoting LMP737 (Reply 19):
Speaking of the Coral Sea here's a picture of her in her final days.

< http://www.usscoralsea.net/images/ex4321.jpg >

As a Sailor who made her last Cruise in '89- that was very hard to look at.
But thanks for posting it, anyway...
Classic planes, Classic trains, and Studebakers~~ what else is there???
 
LMP737
Posts: 4810
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Mon Jan 12, 2009 5:52 am



Quoting Studedave (Reply 20):
As a Sailor who made her last Cruise in '89- that was very hard to look at.

I feel the same way when I see pictures like this.

http://www.amarcexperience.com/AMARCArticleF14TomcatDisposal.asp
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
UH60FtRucker
Posts: 3252
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 9:15 am

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:45 am



Quoting LMP737 (Reply 19):
Speaking of the Coral Sea here's a picture of her in her final days.

< http://www.usscoralsea.net/images/ex4321.jpg >

While it is sad to see that... that photo offers a very interesting real-life cross-section of the internal structure of a carrier. Very fascinating.

Speaking of the Coral Sea, I didn't realize it served so late into history. And that sparked a question I had, what is the largest number of active carriers the US Navy has operated, at one time, post-WWII?

-UH60
Your men have to follow your orders. They don't have to go to your funeral.
 
LMP737
Posts: 4810
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:05 pm

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 22):
While it is sad to see that... that photo offers a very interesting real-life cross-section of the internal structure of a carrier. Very fascinating.

Here are the rest of the scrapping pictures of the Coral Sea. It gives you an idea of the complexity of an aircraft carrier. Check out the pictures of the four inch steel of the flight deck being cut into.

http://www.usscoralsea.net/pages/picsexcv43.html

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 22):
Speaking of the Coral Sea, I didn't realize it served so late into history. And that sparked a question I had, what is the largest number of active carriers the US Navy has operated, at one time, post-WWII?

Probably 1968 during the hieght of the Vietnam War and the Cold War. Around seventeen carriers of the Essex class were still in commision. Then there were the three ships of the Midway class. All four ships of the Forrestal class were in service along with the Kitty Hawk, Constellation, America and Enterprise. So that's twenty seven carriers, twenty eight if you include the JFK which was commisioned in September 1968.

[Edited 2009-01-12 08:37:15]
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
nomadd22
Posts: 1566
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:42 pm

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:34 pm



Quoting STT757 (Reply 18):

Well the question is obviously which is the fastest transit to the Gulf, Norfolk or San Diego, Mayport or Bremerton?..

Pearl.
Anon
 
AirRyan
Posts: 2398
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:57 am

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:46 pm



Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 6):
This is just another example of the sh*tty legacy Rumsfeld left.

The USS Gerald R. Ford had a lot to do with the fact that both SecDef Rumsfeld and VP Cheney worked closely for the past president, and publicly pushed for the naming of the next carrier, after their old boss.

SecDef Rumsfeld, being the sleezy bastard he is, ended the debate by publicly announcing the carrier's new name, at President Ford's funeral. Which pretty much shut the door on any doubts the Navy had, since they surely couldn't retract such a statement, made at such a touching moment.

God I hate that guy.

Wow, what our military could have been had for not the disservice of those two assholes.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...cs%2FPeople%2FC%2FCheney%2C%20Dick
 
studedave
Posts: 463
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 4:21 am

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:52 pm



Quoting LMP737 (Reply 21):
I feel the same way when I see pictures like this.

http://www.amarcexperience.com/AMARC...l.asp

Some of my H-3s are there too, trust me!!! (as are all of my A-6s, too!)
Classic planes, Classic trains, and Studebakers~~ what else is there???
 
windy95
Posts: 2658
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 1:11 pm

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Thu Jan 15, 2009 12:58 pm



Quoting AirRyan (Reply 3):
While I think John S, McCain III will get his name on one of these new CVN-78's, he should have been the name bearer for the entire class - Naval Academy alum, Naval Aviator, 5.5 years in a POW camp, and retired from the Navy after some nearly 27 years of service.



Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 8):
And if they did name a ship after John McCain, would that be the first time there two ships named for father and son?

USS John S McCain DDG-56, and USS John McCain CVX?

If they are going to name a carrier after any McCain it should be the current senator's grandfather Adm John Sidney "Slew" McCain. McCain was a pioneer of aircraft carrier operations who in 1942 commanded all land-based air operations in support of the Guadalcanal campaign. And in 1944–45 he led Halsey's Fast Carrier Task Force. His operations off the Philippines and Okinawa, and air strikes against Formosa and the Japanese home islands, caused tremendous destruction of Japanese naval and air forces in the closing period of the war. He was on the Missouri for the signing and died shortly after of an heart attack after spending some two years on the Bridge of the Carriers.

This is the McCain that should have a Carrier named after him
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 9963
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Thu Jan 15, 2009 2:14 pm



Quoting Windy95 (Reply 27):
This is the McCain that should have a Carrier named after him

The problem is that McCain wasn't a politician.
 
AirRyan
Posts: 2398
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:57 am

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Thu Jan 15, 2009 4:39 pm



Quoting Windy95 (Reply 27):
This is the McCain that should have a Carrier named after him

Wow, it's so obvious that Gerry Ford was the logical choice for the entire new class of next generation aircraft carriers.  Yeah sure

We the People have to take the money out of politics and that's the only way we are going to take our country back - we've lost our tail-rotor and we're spinning hard left into the dirt.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 6020
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Thu Jan 15, 2009 6:49 pm



Quoting STT757 (Reply 13):


Pacific:
1 Kitsap/Bremerton
1 Everett
2 San Diego
1 Pearl Harbor or Apra Harbor
1 Yokosuka

Pearl is too expensive to operate out of and everything to support the ship must be brought in.... by ship (OK, there's the squadrons and I'm something else may be brought in by air).
Kind of a silly idea, which is why the Navy decided to not station a carrier there anymore. Consolidating carriers down to two or three ports makes an awful lot of sense, particularly since it removes duplication of surrounding support facilities.
And as a resident of San Diego I say: Bring 'em on! (We could certainly support a fourth one too!  Silly )

Quoting Nomadd22 (Reply 24):
Quoting STT757 (Reply 18):
Well the question is obviously which is the fastest transit to the Gulf, Norfolk or San Diego, Mayport or Bremerton?..

Pearl.

Not at all, first they would have to sail from San Diego or Bremerton to get to Pearl then depart Pearl. Going direct would be much faster!  tongue 

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
 
LMP737
Posts: 4810
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Sat Jan 17, 2009 5:02 am



Quoting Tugger (Reply 30):
Pearl is too expensive to operate out of and everything to support the ship must be brought in.... by ship (OK, there's the squadrons and I'm something else may be brought in by air).

Add to that where would you put the squadrons and the families? Kaneohe is packed in preety good and Barbers Point is no longer an NAS. I'm not sure the island of Oahu could handle the influx of thousands of dependents either
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
fraspotter
Posts: 1972
Joined: Sat May 08, 2004 8:12 pm

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Sun Jan 18, 2009 6:39 pm



Quoting STT757 (Reply 13):
Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 10):
my favorites, "America".

Apparently that was what CVN-78 was to be named.

I remember hearing and reading awhile ago that CVN-78 America (back when it was still to be called the America) was to have parts of the World Trade Center wreckage melted down and used for part of the hull. With CVN-78 now named after Ford, is this still planned to happen?
"Drunk drivers run stop signs. Stoners wait for them to turn green."
 
zanl188
Posts: 3443
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:05 pm

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Sun Jan 18, 2009 6:52 pm



Quoting FRAspotter (Reply 32):
I remember hearing and reading awhile ago that CVN-78 America (back when it was still to be called the America) was to have parts of the World Trade Center wreckage melted down and used for part of the hull. With CVN-78 now named after Ford, is this still planned to happen?

You might be thinking of LPD-21 USS New York.

http://www.ussnewyork.com/
Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13200
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Sun Jan 18, 2009 6:59 pm



Quoting LMP737 (Reply 31):
Add to that where would you put the squadrons and the families? Kaneohe is packed in preety good and Barbers Point is no longer an NAS. I'm not sure the island of Oahu could handle the influx of thousands of dependents either

Well if not Barbers point then Hickam, Kaneohe Bay's runway is closed for repaving and the P-3 Squadrons are operating from Hickam.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
LMP737
Posts: 4810
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Mon Jan 19, 2009 4:43 pm



Quoting STT757 (Reply 34):
Well if not Barbers point then Hickam, Kaneohe Bay's runway is closed for repaving and the P-3 Squadrons are operating from Hickam.

You would still have to find a place to build the hangars, support facilities, barraks etc. That's going to cost a lot of money to build those facilities. What would be even more expensive are the facilities needed to support a nuclear powered aircraft carrier.
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13200
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Mon Jan 19, 2009 5:41 pm



Quoting LMP737 (Reply 35):
What would be even more expensive are the facilities needed to support a nuclear powered aircraft carrier.

Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard already supports a large fleet of Nuclear Subs, I'm sure with some upgrades they could easily support a home port for a Carrier.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
LMP737
Posts: 4810
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Mon Jan 19, 2009 5:54 pm



Quoting STT757 (Reply 36):
Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard already supports a large fleet of Nuclear Subs, I'm sure with some upgrades they could easily support a home port for a Carrier.

You still would have to spend a lot of money to build the neccessary infrastructure. The Navy is talking about spending close to $500 million to upgrade facilites in Mayport to base anuclear carrier there. And don't forget about all the dependents that would flood Oahu. Land is at a premium there. Imagine the cost of building new housing, schools etc.
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13200
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Mon Jan 19, 2009 8:21 pm



Quoting LMP737 (Reply 37):
Land is at a premium there. Imagine the cost of building new housing, schools etc.

How cost effective would it be to establish housing areas with shoppettes and other smaller MWR etc facilities on other islands such as the Big Island and provide a shuttle operation to and from Hickam/Pearl Harbor. Children could attend local schools and military spouses could commute to work on the shuttle, something similar to the Janet operations from LAS to/from Groom Lake and Tonopagh.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
LMP737
Posts: 4810
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Tue Jan 20, 2009 5:17 pm



Quoting STT757 (Reply 38):
How cost effective would it be to establish housing areas with shoppettes and other smaller MWR etc facilities on other islands such as the Big Island and provide a shuttle operation to and from Hickam/Pearl Harbor. Children could attend local schools and military spouses could commute to work on the shuttle, something similar to the Janet operations from LAS to/from Groom Lake and Tonopagh.

It would probably be very expensive along with not being very pratical to running a carrier and the squadrons.
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
garnetpalmetto
Posts: 5351
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 1:38 am

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Wed Jan 21, 2009 10:04 pm



Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 10):
I would love to see the return to names like "Intrepid" "Wasp" "Langley" "Independence" and one of my favorites, "America".

Wasp is in use, albeit not as a CV - The present USS Wasp (LHD-1) was the lead ship of her class of amphibious assault ships that also has ships named Kearsarge, Essex, Boxer, and Bonhomme Richard - all proud USN names. Independence cannot be assigned as USS Independence will be the name given to LCS-2 and will be the lead ship of a class of littoral combat ships. America will also be returning to the fleet when LHA-6, the lead ship of the America-class amphibious assault ships is commissioned.

Quoting STT757 (Reply 13):
Yorktown

Now that the CG-48 Yorktown has decommissioned I definitely think the name needs to come back. Also once the current ships bearing the names are stricken, the names Constellation and Ranger need to be recirculated ASAP.

And on a side gripe, is it to much for one of the Virginias to be named for South Carolina? It's been a decade since CGN-37 was stricken - it's time for a new South Carolina to sail the seas.
South Carolina - too small to be its own country, too big to be a mental asylum.
 
fraspotter
Posts: 1972
Joined: Sat May 08, 2004 8:12 pm

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Wed Feb 04, 2009 9:34 am



Quoting ZANL188 (Reply 33):
You might be thinking of LPD-21 USS New York.

I think you're right. My mistake...  checkmark 
"Drunk drivers run stop signs. Stoners wait for them to turn green."
 
LMP737
Posts: 4810
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Wed Feb 04, 2009 1:34 pm



Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 22):
Speaking of the Coral Sea, I didn't realize it served so late into history. And that sparked a question I had, what is the largest number of active carriers the US Navy has operated, at one time, post-WWII?



Quoting LMP737 (Reply 23):
Probably 1968 during the hieght of the Vietnam War and the Cold War. Around seventeen carriers of the Essex class were still in commision. Then there were the three ships of the Midway class. All four ships of the Forrestal class were in service along with the Kitty Hawk, Constellation, America and Enterprise. So that's twenty seven carriers, twenty eight if you include the JFK which was commisioned in September 1968.

Correction, 1965 was the year the most carriers were operating post WWII.

http://www.history.navy.mil/branches/org9-4.htm#1965
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
gsosbee
Posts: 365
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 8:40 am

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Wed Feb 04, 2009 5:57 pm



Quoting Garnetpalmetto (Reply 40):
Now that the CG-48 Yorktown has decommissioned I definitely think the name needs to come back. Also once the current ships bearing the names are stricken, the names Constellation and Ranger need to be recirculated ASAP.

Also Enterprise once CVN-65 is retired.
 
Confuscius
Posts: 3568
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 12:29 am

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Wed Feb 04, 2009 7:38 pm



Quoting ZANL188 (Thread starter):
USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

The USS George H. W . Bush, as not to be confused with the other guy?
Ain't I a stinker?
 
BMI727
Posts: 11110
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Thu Feb 05, 2009 6:01 pm



Quoting AirRyan (Reply 3):
Obviously there is no set standard when it comes to naming USN vessels

Actually there is, kinda. Carriers are generally named after particularly distinguished people, Presidents etc., and things like that.
Cruisers are named after battles.
Destroyers are named after naval heroes.
Subs are named based on type. Almost all of the ballistic missile (SSBN) and guided missile subs (SSGN) are named for states. Almost all of the attack subs are named for cities and some states. Many of the upcoming ones are named for states. Previously, subs were also named for type of fish.
Also, years ago most battleships were named for states.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
ANZUS340
Posts: 37
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 2:30 am

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Fri Feb 06, 2009 3:56 am

There is no glory in most of these names. Carriers should be named after military heroes or famous battles as in the old days. The Ford, the Reagan-come on. Just as bad was naming an outstanding SSN the Jimmy Carter. America, we have lost our way.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6678
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Fri Feb 06, 2009 7:36 pm



Quoting LMP737 (Reply 37):
You still would have to spend a lot of money to build the neccessary infrastructure. The Navy is talking about spending close to $500 million to upgrade facilites in Mayport to base anuclear carrier there. And don't forget about all the dependents that would flood Oahu

My question would be why was Pearl Harbour removed as a carrier home port and when was it done, it could not have been a popular decision within the Navy or local civilian population especially when one considers the place in history Pearl has since WWII. The Navy is forward deployed in Japan rather than Pearl, was that accomplished by having the Japanese pay for it, and since it caused such a stink by replacing the Midway with a CVN, why upgrade there to handle a nuke boat when you could spend the money in Pearl, the Japanese people really do not want the nuclear carrier based there, irrespective of what the incumbent politician says, if they have an election and change their mind, what then?
Using your own facilities is always much better than beholding to someone else, especially when you do not have to.
 
dragon6172
Posts: 796
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:56 am

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Fri Feb 06, 2009 8:08 pm



Quoting Par13del (Reply 47):
Midway with a CVN

The Kitty Hawk was the last conventionally powered carrier stationed in Japan.
Phrogs Phorever
 
na
Posts: 9161
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 1999 3:52 am

RE: USS Bush / CVN-77 Commissioned

Thu Sep 10, 2009 2:46 pm



Quoting STT757 (Reply 13):
If another Carrier must be named after a President why not bring back the JFK.

Agreed

Quoting STT757 (Reply 13):
CVN-78 will sail in 2015, CVN-79 in 2018 and CVN-80 in 2021.

If true, the fleet will rise again to 13 or 14 carriers before the Nimitz is due for retirement in 2025.

Quoting Confuscius (Reply 44):
The USS George H. W . Bush, as not to be confused with the other guy?

That other guy will never ever have a big ship named after him. Maybe a sub, that would fit better.

That CVN-78, and even worse, the entire new class of the mightiest new warships ever for decades to come will be named after Ford is a mistake, foolish. Why not Franklin D. Roosevelt, or Ulysses S. Grant? These are Presidents and/or soldiers which have done a lot for the US and its armed Forces. I know these names are used by smaller ships currently, but those could be renamed.
Imho its a mistake to name the next carrier class after presidents anyway. Constellation, Independence were much better, undisputed positive names. And why not United States finally if America, sadly, will go to a smaller ship soon?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 2T2X1 and 8 guests