Navy thread

[Llarry]

Originally Posted by M5Rick

That small gun at the bow end looks weak but deadly to enemy suicide boats or drones.
Heard there is a also new laser gun for knocking out suicide drones and missiles that's very cost effective when fired.

I think the small device in front of the bridge windows and behind the gun mounts is supposed to represent the future laser weapon. Death ray for the win!

[M5Rick]

Originally Posted by Llarry

I think the small device in front of the bridge windows and behind the gun mounts is supposed to represent the future laser weapon. Death ray for the win!

Would be a good place to mount it

[Boomer 2019]

Originally Posted by Llarry

A couple of shipyard photos of aircraft carriers:

1) The first three USN aircraft carriers all at the Puget Sound Navy Yard in 1929; from top to bottom: USS Lexington (CV2), USS Saratoga (CV 3) and USS Langley (CV 1).

2) The same shipyard (Bremerton, Washington) in August of 1955 busy converting carriers from straight deck to angle deck. I'm not sure which carriers are in the photo, except USS Midway (CVA 41), still with a straight deck, is in the middle.

There are 5 Carriers (3 Essex and 2 Midway class) and a Cruiser in the pic. That is the Yorktown CV-10 and the FDR CV-42 on the right. Of the other three, I think I can make out a 9 on the bow of the inboard ship which would make her the Randolph CV-19, but I'm not sure. All of the other three are definitely Essex Class though. I did a 5 month pre deployment work up aboard the FDR as part of the Air Wing back in 1969. I was coming from a Westpac aboard the Enterprise, and the difference in the two ships was night and day (and about 20 years). Everything about her just seemed awkward. I guess I was just spoiled. Truthfully the worst part was the culture change between the West Coast and the East coast Navy. Westpac was laid back, with minimal attention paid to what we considered nit picking regs. But the East Coast was gung ho on regs, and very by the book. It made work more difficult, and the Master at Arms were insufferable.

[Boomer 2019]

I would think that you would want your Death Ray mounted where it has a full 360 deg. rotation ability. If you suddenly found out that you need it, it would be a bummer to have to bring the ship about.

[M5Rick]

^ Problem with that is it would have to be too high up to avoid radar/aerial tower and other things. A quick slight turn and the ship would give it a large angle of strike without anything in the way of the laser being in the bow end of the ship if it wasn't already heading directly in that way.

[e61it]

Was in the Marine Detachment aboard USS Wasp (CVS-18) during the Cuban missile crisis. Assigned to helicopter shadowing Russian freighters and subs. Scary times.

[Llarry]

Originally Posted by Boomer 2019

I would think that you would want your Death Ray mounted where it has a full 360 deg. rotation ability. If you suddenly found out that you need it, it would be a bummer to have to bring the ship about.

If you had two mounts, it would certainly help.

[Boomer 2019]

Maybe a Death Ray isn't as nimble and quick to use as something like Sea Wiz. In which case from the time of detection to the time of employment allows for maneuvering. ??

[Llarry]

Over in the airplane thread I featured the Martin P5M (P-5), the last U.S. Navy flying boat.

The flying boat depended on seaplane tenders for support: fuel, maintenance and berthing if at remote locations. In World War II the USN bought a number of large (15,000+ tons) seaplane tenders (AV) and a larger number of small (2,500 tons or so) seaplane tenders (AVP). Since the Navy operated the P-5 until 1967, including during the Vietnam War, they kept seaplane tenders active for the same timeframe.

I believe the last AVP served until 1973, although it was no longer being used as a seaplane tender; the USS Valcour (AVP 55) was instead repurposed as a flagship (AGF 1) for Commander, Middle East Force. In those days, Middle East Force was a small command with a couple of destroyers deployed at any given time -- a far cry from today. The Valcour was painted white instead of gray in recognition of the hot temps encountered.

Anyway, here are the tender photos. While I don't know the lift capacity of the seaplane cranes, the P-5 weighed about 55,000 lbs empty.

[Llarry]

In the early days, U.S. Navy carriers had generous height in the hangar deck, and spare aircraft could be stored overhead. By the time, World War II started, this practice largely came to an end.

Here's a photo of a couple of SBD Dauntless dive bombers, with outer wings removed, stored overhead in the hangar bay of the USS Enterprise (CV 6), just before the practice was discontinued.

By contrast, the UK's Royal Navy carriers had less overhead height -- so much so that when the RN Fleet Air Arm obtained U.S.-built F4U Corsairs, they had to clip the wings slightly in order to fit into RN carriers. (Photo of British Corsair model attached; note clipped wings.)

[Llarry]

Imperial Japanese Navy battleships seemed to have an awful lot of height to their superstructure -- likely for better fire control for the guns -- giving rise to the term "pagoda". Here's the battleship Fuso.

Here's another, better quality photo of Fuso from 1933. She was modernized 1937-1941 so would've looked different in WWII. She was sunk by the U.S. Navy in the Battle of Surigao Strait, October 25, 1944.

Fuso was originally commissioned in 1915 and was armed with twelve 14-inch guns in six turrets.

[Lady Jane]

Originally Posted by Llarry

Imperial Japanese Navy battleships seemed to have an awful lot of height to their superstructure --

Who needs a crow's nest?

[Llarry]

Originally Posted by Lady Jane

Who needs a crow's nest?

If you were a fire control sailor up at the top of that in a heavy sea from abeam, I can imagine that being up that high would be difficult. Down at main deck level, the ship is rolling but up that high you are being slammed from side to side.

[Llarry]

Another look at the forthcoming U.S. Navy missile frigates (FFGs) of the Constellation class: These ships will be about 70% as large as a missile destroyer and are projected to cost a billion dollars each, which is about half the cost of a DDG. They are based on an Italian/French design with some modifications and the first ship, the Constellation (FFG 62) has already begun construction. Fincantieri/Marinette Marine of Wisconsin has a contract to build the initial 10 ships of the class; a total of 20 FFGs is planned. There is some potential for further purchases.

The Navy plans to homeport the first 12 ships of the class in Everett, Washington as part of the Pacific Fleet. Interesting...

Austal USA, a U.S. subsidiary of an Australian company, has recently completed a new assembly building at their Alabama yard. Austal is known for their aluminum-hulled ships, such as littoral combat ships and expeditionary fast transports, but their Alabama yard is now capable of building steel-hulled ships as well. Whether a second shipyard might be needed is an open question, but Austal USA is clearly hoping for some more business.

The attached Congressional Research Service report on the new FFGs is a bit of a slog but raises some interesting points. For instance, the FFGs will be half the price of a DDG but have 33% of the vertical-launch missile tubes; how much would it cost to slightly lengthen the design and install 48 launch tubes? I also note that the speed of the FFG is slightly less than optimum when operating with a carrier strike group but fixing that would likely be a bit too expensive.

[Llarry]

An interesting visual comparison of three Enterprises.

[Llarry]

I'm puzzled by this photo. I was aware that CVN 80, the future USS Enterprise, was in the water, but Wikipedia says she is not to commission until 2028. Perhaps this is a photo of the lead ship of the class; I don't see an "80" anywhere.

[Lady Jane]

Originally Posted by Llarry

I'm puzzled by this photo. I was aware that CVN 80, the future USS Enterprise, was in the water, but Wikipedia says she is not to commission until 2028. Perhaps this is a photo of the lead ship of the class; I don't see an "80" anywhere.

Isn't that the USS Gerald Ford CVN-78...?

[Llarry]

Originally Posted by Lady Jane

Isn't that the USS Gerald Ford CVN-78...?

It may be; I googled the Enterprise, but we all know how reliable that technique is. Now that you mention it, I know the Kennedy is in the water (but still under construction) and the Enterprise is not. Oops!

[Llarry]

Originally Posted by Lady Jane

Isn't that the USS Gerald Ford CVN-78...?

I googled the Enterprise, but we all know how reliable that technique is. Now that you mention it, I know the Kennedy is in the water (but still under construction) and the Enterprise is not. Oops!

Here is a photo of what will become the Enterprise -- this one dates to fall of 2022. I don't think it would float very well...

[Weather Man]

I'm a retired Air Force MSgt, but my son is the NFO Wizzo in the back of an EA-18G at initial training at Whidbey Island NAS, WA. He is now fully qualified and stationed at Fallon NAS, NV. Bonus points if you noticed his front seater was not US Navy on that flight!

[Llarry]

Originally Posted by Weather Man

I'm a retired Air Force MSgt, but my son is the NFO Wizzo in the back of an EA-18G at initial training at Whidbey Island NAS, WA. He is now fully qualified and stationed at Fallon NAS, NV. Bonus points if you noticed his front seater was not US Navy on that flight!

An Aussie!

(I think your son is an EWO, not an WSO; does he call himself a Wizzo?)

[Weather Man]

Originally Posted by Llarry

An Aussie!

(I think your son is an EWO, not an WSO; does he call himself a Wizzo?)

I call him a Wizzo and he laughs every time I do. But yes, he is a EWO.