User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 2:20:01 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: "We don't have the shipyard capacity." Perhaps one of the most important little bits to come out in all of this. I'm going to guess that for this ship to be rebuilt, it would have to take the place of other shipyard work. So, what would we take out of the Naval and commercial pipelines for this to have yard space? Likewise, while there are likely some of the electronics assets out there, pulling them from "stores" would deplete/disrupt availability for active fleet repairs/availabiltiy, or require, upping ongoing, if any, procurement activity. Never underestimate the power of pork spending If there is some house committee member who needs some support and has a shipyard in his district that can handle a ship this size, they’ll find a way to it there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 2:20:24 PM EDT
[#2]
I am still hung up on the tank capacity of that beast.
15 million pounds of fuel, lots and lots of internal hull volume loss to tank size... How is a nuclear plant not a no-brainer? Even with shielding it can't approach the weight of the fuel alone. Less volume of equipment, more area for planes and stuff. Does a nuke carrier displace less due to theoretical weight savings? Would it be correspondingly faster? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 2:22:10 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Aker has at lease one of the two drydocks fully refitted with modern equipment, not sure about the other. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Time to fully reopen the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard Aker has at lease one of the two drydocks fully refitted with modern equipment, not sure about the other. They should reopen Charleston. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 2:23:00 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: They should reopen Charleston. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Time to fully reopen the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard Aker has at lease one of the two drydocks fully refitted with modern equipment, not sure about the other. They should reopen Charleston. All Navy Yards should be reopened. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 2:26:07 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Time to fully reopen the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard Much of the former base is now business park, including the HQ of Urban Outfitters. The Aker shipyard area is open and running. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 2:26:56 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I am still hung up on the tank capacity of that beast. 15 million pounds of fuel, lots and lots of internal hull volume loss to tank size... How is a nuclear plant not a no-brainer? Even with shielding it can't approach the weight of the fuel alone. Less volume of equipment, more area for planes and stuff. Does a nuke carrier displace less due to theoretical weight savings? Would it be correspondingly faster? Quote HistoryQuoted: I am still hung up on the tank capacity of that beast. 15 million pounds of fuel, lots and lots of internal hull volume loss to tank size... How is a nuclear plant not a no-brainer? Even with shielding it can't approach the weight of the fuel alone. Less volume of equipment, more area for planes and stuff. Does a nuke carrier displace less due to theoretical weight savings? Would it be correspondingly faster? https://www.cbo.gov/publication/41454?index=12169 Similarly, a fleet of nuclear LH(X) amphibious assault ships would become cost-effective if oil prices grew at a real annual rate of 1.7 percent, implying a price of $140 per barrel of oil in 2040about the same price that was reached in 2008 but not sustained for any length of time. A fleet of nuclear LSD(X) amphibious dock landing ships would become cost-effective at a real annual growth rate of 4.7 percent, or a price in 2040 of $323 per barrel. The amount of energy used by new surface shipsparticularly those, such as destroyers, that require large amounts of energy for purposes other than propulsioncould also be substantially higher or lower than projected. Employing an approach similar to that used to assess sensitivity to oil prices, CBO estimated that providing destroyers with nuclear reactors would become cost-effective only if energy use more than doubled for the entire fleet of destroyers. The use of nuclear power has potential advantages besides savings on the cost of fuel. For example, the Navy would be less vulnerable to disruptions in the supply of oil: The alternative nuclear fleet would use about 5 million barrels of oil less per year, reducing the Navy's current annual consumption of petroleum-based fuels for aircraft and ships by about 15 percent. The use of nuclear power also has some potential disadvantages, including the concerns about proliferating nuclear material that would arise if the Navy had more ships with highly enriched uranium deployed overseas. CBO, however, did not attempt to quantify those other advantages and disadvantages. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 2:29:45 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I have been expecting nasty looking water to show by now. I'm glad to see very little if anything bad has gotten into the water. There was a bunch of bright green shit flowing out of the starboard side yesterday, Looked almost antifreeze bright. My first guess would be that bright yellow/green primer used on aluminum coming from drums that either ruptured in a blast and getting rinsed overboard from the firefighting water or it was being dumped to avoid it from being additional fuel for the fire. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 2:32:29 PM EDT
[#8]
Fuel is most commonly held in tanks outside the water tight hull.
It is on the small size for using nuclear power. Remember that at least TWO reactors are pretty much a requirement. 'One is none and two is one' is the operative problem. Some of the larger fixed wing carriers have multiples above two. Details about this are generally classified. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 2:36:23 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Much of the former base is now business park, including the HQ of Urban Outfitters. The Aker shipyard area is open and running. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Time to fully reopen the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard Much of the former base is now business park, including the HQ of Urban Outfitters. The Aker shipyard area is open and running. I know but there is still a decent Navy presence there, mostly Admin type folks. You probably don't need much back if you were to reopen it and move all the rusting hulls out of the way |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 2:40:29 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I know but there is still a decent Navy presence there, mostly Admin type folks. You probably don't need much back if you were to reopen it and move all the rusting hulls out of the way I'm not sure about that. My dad worked at PNSY from the time that he got back from Vietnam to his retirement. At the time of his retirement, the only folks going to be left there were a small number to take care of the mothball fleet and they were civilians. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 2:41:23 PM EDT
[#11]
Quoted: Never underestimate the power of pork spending If there is some house committee member who needs some support and has a shipyard in his district that can handle a ship this size, they’ll find a way to it there. Philly is Democrat. Pelosi and Feinstein had great shipyards at Mare Island and Hunters Point. Navy closed em and they both made a fuckton of money off the navy closing the Bay Area bases. Charleston maybe in non democratic hands. Dunno. But we are hurting in our industry capacity to build ships and repair ships. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 2:43:06 PM EDT
[#12]
Quoted: I am still hung up on the tank capacity of that beast. 15 million pounds of fuel, lots and lots of internal hull volume loss to tank size... How is a nuclear plant not a no-brainer? Even with shielding it can't approach the weight of the fuel alone. Less volume of equipment, more area for planes and stuff. Does a nuke carrier displace less due to theoretical weight savings? Would it be correspondingly faster? Nukes displace almost double. Enterprise displaced 96,000 tons with airwing embarked. She drafted 38 feet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 2:47:38 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I misremembered some details, but the CO did make the comment regarding possibly losing her or considering evacuating the crew. THAT made an impression on us on LINCOLN and we modelled several major DC drills on the GW incident. So I could be confusing our mainspace drills with the GW details. Was there another ship fire with a spill into the shaft alley? Either way, she had a major, difficult to control fire. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: That’s overstating it a bit. It wasn’t a main space fire, wasn’t in shaft alley, and they didn’t almost lose her. It was started by smoking in an AC&R space whose exhaust went to the aux boiler exhaust and supply space (where the fire started), accentuated by improper storage of rags in a fan room and compressor oil in a nearby space. It was primarily a ventilation and cableway fire, which is why it took them 12 hours to put out. We were still dealing with the electrical effects of it several years later when I checked on board. And the CO and XO were fired. I misremembered some details, but the CO did make the comment regarding possibly losing her or considering evacuating the crew. THAT made an impression on us on LINCOLN and we modelled several major DC drills on the GW incident. So I could be confusing our mainspace drills with the GW details. Was there another ship fire with a spill into the shaft alley? Either way, she had a major, difficult to control fire. The GW fire was a mess. We (CVN-74) were doing workups during the time of the fire. If I remember right they CODed some of our firefighting gear to them. One of the big things that changed right after the GW fire was to start checking all ventilation duct, every single day. Big problem on the GW was dumb-asses putting trash and cig butts into the ventilation ducting. For those that don't know, each work-center has a certain section of the ship to check then report to DC Central every day. Basically things like, are these valves leaking, is the ventilation leaking, does this fan-room need work done? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 2:49:47 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think the cost benefit tradeoff is about $140 a barrel or something to go to nuke on those things. https://www.cbo.gov/publication/41454?index=12169 Thanks for the info. I know nukes are more expensive but that is not as much of a beta as I thought it would be. The logistics of running a giant ship loaded with planes and people has to be an immense challenge. All I know about boats is from boats I can usually lift myself. Even then, I know full well that boats = broken shit. I can see why sailors are a superstitious lot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 2:52:33 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Is that countdown legit or click bait? Judging by the ridiculously photoshopped flames on the thumbnail and the still-standing main mast, clickbaity as hell and nowhere near live. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 2:54:35 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Much of the former base is now business park, including the HQ of Urban Outfitters. The Aker shipyard area is open and running. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Time to fully reopen the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard Much of the former base is now business park, including the HQ of Urban Outfitters. The Aker shipyard area is open and running. The navy still uses it to store mothballed ships (you can see them on Google maps satellite view. You can even see the JFK); it's the associated office buildings that are the business park. They could start using the actual drydock more or less immediately if they had to. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 2:54:44 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Judging by the ridiculously photoshopped flames on the thumbnail, clickbaity as hell. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Is that countdown legit or click bait? Judging by the ridiculously photoshopped flames on the thumbnail, clickbaity as hell. The CBS-8 feed is excellent. It's an actual helicopter with real people on board. The air still has a hint of burning plastic smell but it's pretty clean and getting better. Live from the air over sunny San Diego, home of the Fish Taco |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 2:56:46 PM EDT
[#18]
This is a Tri-Wall.
 It's a big fucking cardboard box. It does not have a pallet attached to it, it does not have a plastic top or a bottom, it is not a three piece unit, it's one big fucking cardboard box.    Most Navy squadrons dumped the tri-walls for ISU-90's. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 2:57:51 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm not sure about that. My dad worked at PNSY from the time that he got back from Vietnam to his retirement. At the time of his retirement, the only folks going to be left there were a small number to take care of the mothball fleet and they were civilians. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I know but there is still a decent Navy presence there, mostly Admin type folks. You probably don't need much back if you were to reopen it and move all the rusting hulls out of the way I'm not sure about that. My dad worked at PNSY from the time that he got back from Vietnam to his retirement. At the time of his retirement, the only folks going to be left there were a small number to take care of the mothball fleet and they were civilians. There's a couple contracting offices there, an HR regional office, some regional recruiting office, plus a couple of propulsion (I think) tech shops there. I mean it's not even close to what it was but it's not like they'd have to build from scratch. ETA from Wiki: As of 2010, navy activities there include Naval Support Activity Philadelphia, the Naval Surface Warfare Center Ship Systems Engineering Station, Naval Facilities Engineering Command Mid-Atlantic Public Works Department Pennsylvania (NAVFAC MIDLANT PWD PA) and the Naval Inactive Ship Maintenance Facility (NISMF), which stores decommissioned and mothballed warships and auxiliary naval vessels |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 3:00:13 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: All Navy Yards should be reopened. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Time to fully reopen the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard Aker has at lease one of the two drydocks fully refitted with modern equipment, not sure about the other. They should reopen Charleston. All Navy Yards should be reopened. Yep. Unfortunately, that will never happen. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 3:01:20 PM EDT
[#21]
There are 6 dry docks in Yokosuka, a couple of really big ones too. I thought the Japanese shipyard workers from SRF did a great job on the ship. Especially compared to the guys in SD.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 3:04:55 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Nukes displace almost double. Enterprise displaced 96,000 tons with airwing embarked. She drafted 38 feet. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I am still hung up on the tank capacity of that beast. 15 million pounds of fuel, lots and lots of internal hull volume loss to tank size... How is a nuclear plant not a no-brainer? Even with shielding it can't approach the weight of the fuel alone. Less volume of equipment, more area for planes and stuff. Does a nuke carrier displace less due to theoretical weight savings? Would it be correspondingly faster? Nukes displace almost double. Enterprise displaced 96,000 tons with airwing embarked. She drafted 38 feet. That isn’t really an apples to apples comparison, the Enterprise was more or less a theory to practice prototype with no similar conventional counterpart running 8 submarine sized reactors. A better comparison is the Belknap and the nuclear cruisers built around the same time... in this case you had 2 versions of the same basic design, one nuclear/one conventional and displacement was very similar depending on which of the Nuke cruisers you look at. Nuclear ships are much more difficult to build, but they do bring a lot to the table. Your next limitation really becomes how much food you can bring. But everything is more complicated throughout the life of the ship from maintenance to the 2 years it takes to train/qualify an operator. I’m all for it, but i don’t see the Navy heading that way. As for the 1vs2 plants question. One is sufficient on submarines where the consequences of dropping the plant can be much more severe. Losing propulsion on a sub is a pretty big deal. I would be curious what a single A1B would be capable of in some of the smaller ships. -Mike |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 3:06:11 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The navy still uses it to store mothballed ships (you can see them on Google maps satellite view. You can even see the JFK); it's the associated office buildings that are the business park. They could start using the actual drydock more or less immediately if they had to. I drive by it all of the time, most of the ships there have been there a loooong time. I haven't looked to see if there's anything in Aker's drydock lately. When I was a kid, I watched Saratoga, Forrestal, Independence, Kitty Hawk, Constellation and JFK go through SLEP there. One of my most vivid memories as a young boy was going into a hangar at PNSY where an F-4 and an A-7 were sitting because they were crane-offloaded from the Saratoga and my dad getting yelled at for us being there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 3:19:14 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: https://cdn.dvidshub.net/media/thumbs/photos/2006/6239734/1000w_q95.jpg It's a big fucking cardboard box. FIFY |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 3:20:26 PM EDT
[#25]
Double
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 3:23:22 PM EDT
[#26]
sounds like they're cutting a hole in the side of the ship?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 3:34:47 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Actually worked to our advantage. Saratoga was so robust she survived the war and was used at Bikini for Nuke tests. She survived those too if I recall and was finally sunk by a US submarine for target practice. SARATOGA survived ABLE but she sank after BAKER. She wasn't scuttled. There are pics on the net of her going down. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 3:36:39 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: sounds like they're cutting a hole in the side of the ship? What for ? To make a direct plumbing tie-in to off-load the fuel ? I would imagine fuel transfer pumps and all that is needed to run them have been destroyed, but that's just a wild ass guess. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 3:39:20 PM EDT
[#29]
Quoted: That isn’t really an apples to apples comparison, the Enterprise was more or less a theory to practice prototype with no similar conventional counterpart running 8 submarine sized reactors. A better comparison is the Belknap and the nuclear cruisers built around the same time... in this case you had 2 versions of the same basic design, one nuclear/one conventional and displacement was very similar depending on which of the Nuke cruisers you look at. Nuclear ships are much more difficult to build, but they do bring a lot to the table. Your next limitation really becomes how much food you can bring. But everything is more complicated throughout the life of the ship from maintenance to the 2 years it takes to train/qualify an operator. I’m all for it, but i don’t see the Navy heading that way. As for the 1vs2 plants question. One is sufficient on submarines where the consequences of dropping the plant can be much more severe. Losing propulsion on a sub is a pretty big deal. I would be curious what a single A1B would be capable of in some of the smaller ships. -Mike |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 3:41:25 PM EDT
[#30]
Quoted: I drive by it all of the time, most of the ships there have been there a loooong time. I haven't looked to see if there's anything in Aker's drydock lately. When I was a kid, I watched Saratoga, Forrestal, Independence, Kitty Hawk, Constellation and JFK go through SLEP there. One of my most vivid memories as a young boy was going into a hangar at PNSY where an F-4 and an A-7 were sitting because they were crane-offloaded from the Saratoga and my dad getting yelled at for us being there. Good memory. The “mothballed fleet” or “ghost” fleet really exists to provide spare parts for the existing fleet. Time and necessity strip them down. When they are of no use.. they are sold to the breakers. Saratoga CV60 went for a dollar if I recall correctly. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 3:42:27 PM EDT
[#31]
Quoted: SARATOGA survived ABLE but she sank after BAKER. She wasn't scuttled. There are pics on the net of her going down. Good stuff. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 3:47:38 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I am still hung up on the tank capacity of that beast. 15 million pounds of fuel, lots and lots of internal hull volume loss to tank size... How is a nuclear plant not a no-brainer? Even with shielding it can't approach the weight of the fuel alone. Less volume of equipment, more area for planes and stuff. Does a nuke carrier displace less due to theoretical weight savings? Would it be correspondingly faster? Besides the aforementioned fuel cost/benefit issues there's also reams of bureaucratic headaches that come with nuclear propulsion. Not allowed in certain ports, requires very specialized equipment to work on. Also, can you imagine the media panic that we would be seeing right now if that thing had 2 reactors onboard? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 3:53:01 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What for ? To make a direct plumbing tie-in to off-load the fuel ? I would imagine fuel transfer pumps and all that is needed to run them have been destroyed, but that's just a wild ass guess. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: sounds like they're cutting a hole in the side of the ship? What for ? To make a direct plumbing tie-in to off-load the fuel ? I would imagine fuel transfer pumps and all that is needed to run them have been destroyed, but that's just a wild ass guess. Either ventilation or to gain access to some part that's still on fire that can't be reached from inside. They're likely trying to let some heat out or some water in. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 3:53:49 PM EDT
[#34]
Quoted: Besides the aforementioned fuel cost/benefit issues there's also reams of bureaucratic headaches that come with nuclear propulsion. Not allowed in certain ports, requires very specialized equipment to work on. Also, can you imagine the media panic that we would be seeing right now if that thing had 2 reactors onboard? I think the real answer is.... Marines. Marines and Nuclear shit don’t pair well. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 3:54:09 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What for ? To make a direct plumbing tie-in to off-load the fuel ? I would imagine fuel transfer pumps and all that is needed to run them have been destroyed, but that's just a wild ass guess. beats me, heard via the radio sounds like the controller didn't know why either, just that he'd gotten the word that they were going to |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 3:55:01 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think the real answer is.... Marines. Marines and Nuclear shit don’t pair well. bet ya $20 you can't draw a dick on the back of the reactor 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 3:57:04 PM EDT
[#37]
I just looked at the Cabrillo camera and the smoke is significantly reduced.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 4:01:26 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: bet ya $20 you can't draw a dick on the back of the reactor you would have marines sitting on the overboard discharge isolation valves where there are hotspots... oh wait that was just the mechanics. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 4:02:16 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think the real answer is.... Marines. Marines and Nuclear shit don’t pair well. Yeah... That sounds terrifying. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 4:03:38 PM EDT
[#40]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 4:37:03 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: bet ya $20 you can't draw a dick on the back of the reactor https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/383325/image_jpeg-1503743.JPG I’ve spent a lot of time regretting going MA, but I don’t regret going MA over nuke at least.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 4:39:22 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeah... That sounds terrifying. When the pier puppy was at Subbase Bangor, to run the acoustic range, some of the base marines decided to fuck with one of our sonargurls at the EM club, sent her back to the boat with a fat lip. What they failed to realize is that the pier puppy had a detachment of seals and divers that rode around with us, with their stupid sexy hot pants. We and they considered themselves part of the crew, so they took it personally. Or at least it made a good excuse to get a quick workout... I still remember one of the Seals chasing a marine across the lawn with a mop as fast as he could. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 4:44:53 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think the issue was the A4’s were getting ready for an alpha strike and the seats had to be armed by the Plane Captain as part of final check. The seats were Douglas Types not the Martin-Bakers. But yes they were Zero-zero. McCain wouldn’t have been able to arm the seats. That’s why no pilots ejected that day. Plane captains do not arm ejection seats. Plane captains should remove the safety pins from the seat prior to a pilot strapping in to the seat, but they do not arm the seat. The arming of the A-4’s ESCAPAC ejection seat is completed by the pilot after the canopy is closed and prior to the removal of the aircraft’s tie down chains (when on a ship). Confirming that the “headknocker” is up and the seat is armed was part of the take-off checklist. At least that was my experience flying TA-4s out of NAS Meridian and off of the KENNEDY. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 4:45:07 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I am still hung up on the tank capacity of that beast. 15 million pounds of fuel, lots and lots of internal hull volume loss to tank size... How is a nuclear plant not a no-brainer? Even with shielding it can't approach the weight of the fuel alone. Less volume of equipment, more area for planes and stuff. Does a nuke carrier displace less due to theoretical weight savings? Would it be correspondingly faster? Nuke maintenance is horrifically expensive. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 4:46:28 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Fuel is most commonly held in tanks outside the water tight hull. It is on the small size for using nuclear power. Remember that at least TWO reactors are pretty much a requirement. 'One is none and two is one' is the operative problem. Some of the larger fixed wing carriers have multiples above two. Details about this are generally classified. Nope. All CVNs have two. Enterprise was the only exception, she had 8, but they were sub reactors. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 4:46:46 PM EDT
[#46]
Quoted: Plane captains do not arm ejection seats. Plane captains should remove the safety pins from the seat prior to a pilot strapping in to the seat, but they do not arm the seat. The arming of the A-4’s ESCAPAC ejection seat is completed by the pilot by after the canopy is closed and prior to the removal of the aircraft’s tie down chains (when on a ship). Confirming that the “headknocker” is up and the seat is armed was part of the take-off checklist. At least that was my experience flying TA-4s out of NAS Meridian and off of the KENNEDY. Your description is better than mine. I simply meant the Plane Captain removed the pins that safe the seat. Your mileage is better than mine. Still explains why they didn’t eject. Thanks for squaring me away. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 4:47:36 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The GW fire was a mess. We (CVN-74) were doing workups during the time of the fire. If I remember right they CODed some of our firefighting gear to them. One of the big things that changed right after the GW fire was to start checking all ventilation duct, every single day. Big problem on the GW was dumb-asses putting trash and cig butts into the ventilation ducting. For those that don't know, each work-center has a certain section of the ship to check then report to DC Central every day. Basically things like, are these valves leaking, is the ventilation leaking, does this fan-room need work done? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: That’s overstating it a bit. It wasn’t a main space fire, wasn’t in shaft alley, and they didn’t almost lose her. It was started by smoking in an AC&R space whose exhaust went to the aux boiler exhaust and supply space (where the fire started), accentuated by improper storage of rags in a fan room and compressor oil in a nearby space. It was primarily a ventilation and cableway fire, which is why it took them 12 hours to put out. We were still dealing with the electrical effects of it several years later when I checked on board. And the CO and XO were fired. I misremembered some details, but the CO did make the comment regarding possibly losing her or considering evacuating the crew. THAT made an impression on us on LINCOLN and we modelled several major DC drills on the GW incident. So I could be confusing our mainspace drills with the GW details. Was there another ship fire with a spill into the shaft alley? Either way, she had a major, difficult to control fire. The GW fire was a mess. We (CVN-74) were doing workups during the time of the fire. If I remember right they CODed some of our firefighting gear to them. One of the big things that changed right after the GW fire was to start checking all ventilation duct, every single day. Big problem on the GW was dumb-asses putting trash and cig butts into the ventilation ducting. For those that don't know, each work-center has a certain section of the ship to check then report to DC Central every day. Basically things like, are these valves leaking, is the ventilation leaking, does this fan-room need work done? Yep. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 4:52:02 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: FIFY
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 4:54:09 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Never underestimate the power of pork spending If there is some house committee member who needs some support and has a shipyard in his district that can handle a ship this size, they'll find a way to it there. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: "We don't have the shipyard capacity." Perhaps one of the most important little bits to come out in all of this. I'm going to guess that for this ship to be rebuilt, it would have to take the place of other shipyard work. So, what would we take out of the Naval and commercial pipelines for this to have yard space? Likewise, while there are likely some of the electronics assets out there, pulling them from "stores" would deplete/disrupt availability for active fleet repairs/availabiltiy, or require, upping ongoing, if any, procurement activity. Never underestimate the power of pork spending If there is some house committee member who needs some support and has a shipyard in his district that can handle a ship this size, they'll find a way to it there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2020 4:54:25 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I am still hung up on the tank capacity of that beast. 15 million pounds of fuel, lots and lots of internal hull volume loss to tank size... How is a nuclear plant not a no-brainer? Even with shielding it can't approach the weight of the fuel alone. Less volume of equipment, more area for planes and stuff. Does a nuke carrier displace less due to theoretical weight savings? Would it be correspondingly faster? CVN is 200 feet longer and more than twice the displacement. 100,000 tons displacement for a CVN vs 45,000 for LHD. CVN holds 3 million gallons of jet fuel. Nuke would be bad idea for an amphib with a well deck because of seawater intakes, suck up a lot of shit in shallow water. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
Attached File