I’ve always wondered...
these ships are very expensive, and many of them look like they could still be useful, if only in rear guard assignments, in event of need
might it not be wiser for us to keep many of these ships in working order... (at some expense, of course, but still..) just in case that need develops?
perhaps some of them could be used in commerce or even tourism...if revenue is needed? or maybe not, but still keep them...??? such a huge investment, and certainly there must be good uses for these?
same for some old airplanes...the Berlin airlift could be repeated today (there or elsewhere) with older planes, not EVERY airplane has to be the very latest and fastest flyer in order to be useful
ok I don’t know what I’m talking about so I will sign off.
best,
fhc
It was cool seeing the USS Missouri fighting aliens in the “Battleship” movie.
I agree. I’m a navy vet and could never understand all those ships mothballed at the Philly Naval base. As expensive that ship building is, I’m surprised they’re not kept as a secondary defense. It’s not like they made a profit $1.
That was part of the reason that Ranger was kept in reserve as long as she was. But ships rot, even steel ones. Machinery gets way out of date, and must be maintained at certain minimal levels just so that they can be brought back into working condition in a reasonable period of time.
Then you have the physical limitations of the design itself. Catapaults that can’t launch the heaviest of modern aircraft. Arresting wire systems that have the similar problems and so forth.
Finally, these ships get scavanged for parts to keep their sisters in a higher state of readiness. So after a decade or so in reserve, they are little more than hulls.
50+ years of sitting in salt water is hard on a steel ship. Yes, they could be refitted, but with the expense involved in the long run it is better to replace them.