Portsmouth Shipyard to Have Three Carriers at Once

So there will be two Atlantic carriers in service instead of one, assuming the Kennedy is discarded.

I think there's been a decision to extend Kennedy another year. Navy.mil recently had some pictures of her conducting trials after a refit (not a COH). There's DEFINITELY a big fight brewing over her, since retirement would take the active US carrier fleet down to 10 decks (remember that one of the nukes is always in a 3-year RCOH).

101 posted on 01/24/2006 3:42:20 AM PST by tanknetter

Yep the ship was done like her next older sister. They've almost decomed her once before which was part of the problem. The Pentagon {Clinton era} didn't give her proper maintenance funding and that resulted in the Captains getting the shaft over her readiness issues after 9/11. I've got a good guess as to the restriction but I won't say it.

My understanding is that America had major hull problems stemming from a decision in the Johnson Administration to use lower-quality steel in her construction - as a cost savings measure to allow funding to go to fighting the Vietnam War instead.

It should be pointed out that America's hull condition was so bad that she was the only stricken super carrier that couldn't be considered for donation as a museum (the America association website used to have a letter from the Navy stating this).

102 posted on 01/24/2006 3:59:13 AM PST by tanknetter

Portsmouth doesn't have enough manpower to handle three aircraft carriers. Why don't they send to Newport News or has some admiral got a thing for Newport News. Watch the schedule repairs slip and time port increase.

103 posted on 01/24/2006 4:14:15 AM PST by chas1776

My understanding is that America had major hull problems stemming from a decision in the Johnson Administration to use lower-quality steel in her construction - as a cost savings measure to allow funding to go to fighting the Vietnam War instead. It should be pointed out that America's hull condition was so bad that she was the only stricken super carrier that couldn't be considered for donation as a museum (the America association website used to have a letter from the Navy stating this).

I can dispel that with a time line. LBJ had little to do with AMERICA's construction as she was nearly finished at least outer hull whe he took office. The rumor comes from a so called change from CVN to CVA that as well was not done. She was planned, awarded, and keel was laid under IKE's term actually.

Award Date: 11/25/1960
Keel Date: 01/09/1961
Launch Date: 02/01/1964
Commission Date: 01/23/1965

Kennedy took office late January 1961 about 2-3 weeks before keel was laid. When keel is laid such changes as hull thickness or CVN to CVA are almost impossible as it would change all specifications and add time to the project in configuring the ships design. Kennedy was killed on November 23, 1963 not this is only 3 months from launch that means she's in the water and no hull alts can be done. LBJ had little to do with her.

But I do and so does at least one other AMERICA snipe remember seeing in Engineering Central plans that had CVN-66 with a line through them. My conclusion now is a printing shop foul up. These were copies of the original and rather than redraw they did an allowable line through. Most all AMERICA's construction was done before NAM really hated up.

The JFK has highly influenced by LBJ as she her Award Date: 04/30/1964 and Keel Date: 10/22/1964 .

The Kennedy 4 years junior to AMERICA is the sole KENNEDY CLASS CARRIER indicating significant hull changes.

I can tell you what happened to her it's in the congressional record. Starting in 1990 she was sent in three years on three six month deployments missing the 1 year overhaul and others as well. By the time for her third deployment came in August 1993 she was not actual fit for deployment and so a price was to be paid 7 months later at Pier 12 NOB when she had a boiler room explosion upon return. She had one more yard period , was deployed one more time, and decommed.

There is nothing in her history that would have compromised her integrity. I was involved in likely her second worse fire myself in the yards in 78. In 1989 she did have a JP-5 pump room explosion damage limited. The ENTERPRISE actually has a worse hull history than AMERICA.

I'm a member of USS AMERICA CARRIER VETERANS ASSOC so I know about the reports you speak of. The Navy was very tight lipped about her actual status and very resistant to any other plans from the get got except to either scrap her {which cost money EPA concerns etc} or sink her.

They sank her for research for the new class carrier they say. OK fine I buy that. But There was the CONNIE and several other CV's much senior that would have given the same data. She was the youngest next to JFK and the first to be scrapped of a about 5-6 decommed in that time.

This article excetpt below is sourced from here:
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/docs/940224-cr.htm
Please bear in mind the conditions were as stated BEFORE August 1993 just 8 months into Clintons term.

The America needs constant attention. Commissioned in 1965, it is showing its age. A month before leaving Norfolk, a senior enlisted crew member complained to his congressman: The ship was operating on only two of its six electric generators, without radar and unable to pump fuel. This would be its third six-month cruise in three years, and without the standard 18 months at home for repairs, salt water and full steaming had taken their toll.

OK I'll take a shot at this report and I can not find confirmation to it's accuracy but here is why it could have been true based on my personal experience from working on her Air Conditioning and Refrigeration Systems at an earlier time than this. No Radar comes from No Air Conditioning. The ships electronics and Air Wings Avionics are highly tempature sensetive. The Gyro would have been function due to an independent back up A/C unit. In short 2 of 6 generators means the 10 chillers she had were not operable enough to do the job. It took roughly 1500 amps a piece on starting current to start 6 of them up and 200 amps per chiller operational amperage. Three of the was 1200 amps start up and 150 running amps. One was {guessing quite a bit here as it was a new install when I left} 2000 amps start and 350 run. Besides the aircraft elevators we were the largest single piece of equipment draws on her electrical grid.

The fuel? I worked briefly in Fuel Oil Test Lab and won't comment to much but it does take pumps rather large ones as she got at crusing speed 6 inches per gallon.

So what happened? Mainly poor maintenance in general much like what KITTY HAWK and KENNEDY faced. It isn't the ships Captain fault that the DOD refuses to pay for or approved needed yard repairs. GOD help us indeed if they do the nuke carriers like this also.

I'm not arguing with you but there is not one report other than a few letters from the Navy that support hull problems. Be back in here later tonite :>}

104 posted on 01/24/2006 9:05:52 AM PST by cva66snipe

To: endthematrix

Here's a link to a at-sea WWII version of your photo:
http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/images/g290000/g294131.jpg

Looks like that term "Murderer's Row" applies to both photos.
(although, technically, I'd prefer "Killers' Row")

105 posted on 01/24/2006 9:14:29 AM PST by VOA

LOL!

What a practical thought.

106 posted on 01/24/2006 9:16:03 AM PST by Churchillspirit (Anaheim Angels - 2002 World Series Champions)

I want to add something else real quick. Another major factor in AMERICA's decomm and problems was the fact the AMERICA was caught up in downsizing that was taking place the exact same time we were at war just as it is happening now. What I mean here is over extending resources. The 1989-199? decomms were happening while Gulf War 1 was going on resulting in the three MEDs she otherwise would never have done that close together. The same problems and the same results are the rule today also. Flunked INSURV JFK, Failed LIGHT OFFS KITTY HAWK.

107 posted on 01/24/2006 9:32:56 AM PST by cva66snipe

Thanks! That is a great war photo!

108 posted on 01/25/2006 8:20:56 PM PST by endthematrix (None dare call it ISLAMOFACISM!)

To: endthematrix

109 posted on 01/25/2006 8:55:07 PM PST by VOA

110 posted on 10/02/2006 8:41:50 PM PDT by cva66snipe (If it was wrong for Clinton why do some support it for Bush? Party over nation destroys the nation.)

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794