Readiness and Care of Vessels in Inactive Status (1945)
Found this on YouTube today. It deals with the layup process of inactive ships, circa. 1945. Some of the details may have changed, but probably 75% accurate to what is done to a mothballed ship today....
View ArticleRe: Readiness and Care of Vessels in Inactive Status (1945)
I don't think any ship is mothballed today with the intent to ever bring it back. If the ship has similar systems to active duty units, they are stripped down for parts immediately. If not, they stay...
View ArticleRe: Readiness and Care of Vessels in Inactive Status (1945)
There's the argument that any war where we take losses serious enough to require mass activation of obsolete ships would be over long before the ships could be crewed...plus they would probably be...
View ArticleRe: Readiness and Care of Vessels in Inactive Status (1945)
Many of the ships being mothballed in 1945 were less than 5 years old and still "state-of-the-art"... in January 1950 the USN had 6 Essex-class carriers in active service, the other 18 were in...
View ArticleRe: Readiness and Care of Vessels in Inactive Status (1945)
In general, the USN decided it wanted to go all-Aegis, all-VLS and all-gas turbine; anything with old radars, launch rails or steam got the axe. The major exception was the OHPs, whose Mk13 launchers...
View ArticleRe: Readiness and Care of Vessels in Inactive Status (1945)
FreshAirSnipe wrote:There's the argument that any war where we take losses serious enough to require mass activation of obsolete ships would be over long before the ships could be crewed...plus they...
View ArticleRe: Readiness and Care of Vessels in Inactive Status (1945)
IcelofAngeln wrote:In general, the USN decided it wanted to go all-Aegis, all-VLS and all-gas turbine; anything with old radars, launch rails or steam got the axe. The major exception was the OHPs,...
View ArticleRe: Readiness and Care of Vessels in Inactive Status (1945)
Hi, I was wondering where the statement that the DD 963 class still had 10 – 15 years of service life left in them comes from. Looking around on the internet I came across this paper...
View ArticleRe: Readiness and Care of Vessels in Inactive Status (1945)
FreshAirSnipe wrote:Found this on YouTube today. It deals with the layup process of inactive ships, circa. 1945. Some of the details may have changed, but probably 75% accurate to what is done to a...
View ArticleRe: Readiness and Care of Vessels in Inactive Status (1945)
FWIW the Spruance I was on from 99-02 was well worn. When we managed to pass INSURV on our 2nd attempt, the CO told us that we were the first 963 to pass it in over 5 years. Although that could be...
View ArticleRe: Readiness and Care of Vessels in Inactive Status (1945)
OSCSSW wrote:FreshAirSnipe wrote:Found this on YouTube today. It deals with the layup process of inactive ships, circa. 1945. Some of the details may have changed, but probably 75% accurate to what is...
View ArticleRe: Readiness and Care of Vessels in Inactive Status (1945)
FreshAirSnipe wrote: I do agree that at least some of the younger VLS boats could have been preserved, as others stated it was an obvious push for the Z-boats. We even knew that the ship was scheduled...
View ArticleRe: Readiness and Care of Vessels in Inactive Status (1945)
FCNoVa: not all that comparable, since all other "post-WWII destroyer classes" means in effect the Forrest Sherman/Adams group, based really on an enlarged Gearing plan- and the Adamses still hung...
View ArticleRe: Readiness and Care of Vessels in Inactive Status (1945)
As a naval buff, I did get a grin out of sailing around in a 'destroyer' with a displacement larger than most WW2 CAs. The AD I was on approached WW1 BB displacement. Interesting how ships keep...
View Article
