It is currently Sun Oct 22, 2017 12:30 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 45 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Off Topic (Marine Preservation)--U.S.S. New Jersey
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 3:16 am 

Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 3:41 am
Posts: 3012
Location: Inwood, W.Va.
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/new_j ... -Yard.html


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Off Topic (Marine Preservation)--U.S.S. New Jersey
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 10:00 am 

Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2004 10:52 pm
Posts: 909
Hi,

I do not know why the battleships have such a claim in the minds of Americans. After Pearl Harbor, the battle ship was more or less reduced to costal defense/and heavy antiaircraft support for the Carriers.

I was surprised (c1981) when the four (4) fast carriers were recommissioned until I learned about the steaming time on the power plant. It's sort of like the 1472 day/10 year limit on steam locomotives. The battleships had low steaming times and cost less to recommission than to build a new missile frigget (SP?).

I've visited two or three and they are as interesting as looking a steam loco.

One other small point, when the Iowa class was recommissioned in 1981, no effort was made to change the mechanical computer that aimed the main guns. The computer technology of the time did not improve the mechanical computer for accuracy!

Doug vV


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Off Topic (Marine Preservation)--U.S.S. New Jersey
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 10:28 am 

Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 2:28 pm
Posts: 325
Doug-minor correction in your post-"I was surprised (c1981) when the four (4) fast carriers were recommissioned "-that would be the 4 battleships.

Interesting observation about recommissioning battleships would cost less than to build a new frigate? Source of that information? FWIW, the early 1980s was when the Navy was in the midst of building Perry-class guided missile frigates, the last of which was decommissioned only a few years ago. Given the mixed reviews of the new LCS (Littoral Combat Ship), and the fact that other navies continue to keep their Perry-class frigates in service, I wonder if the Navy could get more bang-for-the-buck by modernizing the Perry-class, several of which are being held in Philadelphia, ostensibly for transfer/sale to other navies.

John D
USS DeWert (FFG 45), once upon a time


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Off Topic (Marine Preservation)--U.S.S. New Jersey
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 12:19 pm 

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 4:49 pm
Posts: 92
Location: San Jose, CA
A friend and I toured the New Jersey about a decade ago. We paid a little extra to go with a tour who turned out to have served on the ship back in the day. It was worthwhile.

The planned improvements, such as the restaurant sound good; I don't recall many food choices in that part of Camden.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Off Topic (Marine Preservation)--U.S.S. New Jersey
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 3:19 pm 

Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2004 10:52 pm
Posts: 909
Hi,

Sorry, I did mean battleships instead of carriers.

Quote:
Interesting observation about recommissioning battleships would cost less than to build a new frigate? Source of that information?


The public justification was all over the media (TV, Radio, printed) about the cost of recommissioning a BB was about 2/3 or 3/4 of a new frigate. Hundreds of sources but I do not recall any off hand specifically. I'd call it common knowledge since it was told in so many places. 1981 was the end of my first year out of collage.

Also recall that the Comander-in-chief was Ronald Reagan. He recalled WWII and may have been pressing a reason to recommissioning the BBs.

They had to be upgraded to the New Jersey's Vietnam's upgrades before upgrading to Tomahawk missiles.

The conversion time may have been a factor also. The BB's from Vietnam to operations was (IIRC) 12 months and the frigates were about 24 months IIRC.

In all likelyhood, the truth and the smoke and mirrors were probably both used in the justifications. Just my guess.

Doug vV

P.S. some research on the topic - stories from the NY Times c1981.

http://www.nytimes.com/1982/04/11/magaz ... wanted=all

There are other options, ranging from diplomatic initiatives at the United Nations to a naval blockade, but the President decides on another course - one that Teddy Roosevelt might have chosen. He sends the battleship New Jersey. In 1981, inspired by upheavals in the third world and the sense that America needed stronger conventional forces to fight limited wars, Congress appropriated $237 million to return the 39-year-old New Jersey to the active fleet and another $88 million to start taking out of mothballs her sister ship the Iowa. The Reagan Administration also plans to seek funds to reactivate the Missouri and the Wisconsin, the other two Iowa-class battleships. The total cost for all four is estimated to run between $1.5 billion and $3.5 billion.

http://www.nytimes.com/1981/02/28/us/re ... eturn.html


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Off Topic (Marine Preservation)--U.S.S. New Jersey
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 4:03 pm 

Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 11:23 am
Posts: 205
Location: Sheboygan County, Wisconsin
Regarding the battleship in WW2, yes with the advent of the fast carrier and naval aviation, the old "gun club" and battleship were no longer what they had been.

There was however, one head to head confrontation between these types and that occurred at the Second Naval Battle of Guadalcanal in November on 1942. Admiral Willis Lee was one of the few at that time who accepted the new SG radar and also took the time to master it.

Thanks to good intelligence and the radar, Lee was able to have his ship, the Washington, engage the Kirishima and pounded the crap out of her. She sank the next day. The Washington suffered no damage at all.

I believe this is correct that after Pearl Harbor, the USN suffered not one more loss of a battleship while by the end of the war, Japan had not a one left.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Off Topic (Marine Preservation)--U.S.S. New Jersey
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 8:15 pm 

Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 11:45 am
Posts: 63
I find this to be a fascinating discussion, so hopefully as it is off topic, nobody will mind the post.

The Iowa Class ships were all in very good material condition when they were refurbished. Actually we had a huge number of capital ships at the end of WWII that were in almost new condition. Two Iowa class were never completed, and were eventually scrapped. (the bow of the Kentucky is on the Wisconsin) The Alaska class heavy cruisers/pocket battleships were the same way. Two completed, two more scrapped prior to completion. There was such waste, but that is what happens in wartime. Two carriers that were laid down were also not completed. The Franklin and the Bunker Hill, both heavily damaged late in the war, were repaired, but not re-commissioned. The Washington, South Dakota and Indiana were also scrapped after about 10 years in reserve. The older ships were either scrapped or used as target ships after various periods in reserve. One Japanese BB, the Nagato was used as a target ship in operation crossroads at Bikini Atoll, as well as BB's Arkansas, Nevada, and carriers Saratoga, and Independence.

As for the mission of the BB's, as was stated, the majority of the service that the 10 fast battleships saw during the war was in antiaircraft support for the carrier battle groups. This became set when the Enterprise had a BB, USS South Dakota. as part of the antiaircraft defense, and the Hornet did not. The Hornet was lost, leaving only the Enterprise and the damaged Saratoga in the Pacific.

A few weeks later, the South Dakota and the Washington were involved in a night engagement at Guadalcanal. Our fleet was very poorly trained, and had never operated together as a unit. The destroyers were selected by their fuel supply, and not for any readiness status. Admiral Lee in the Washington took over battle, but the South Dakota was in front, and blocking their radar. All 4 of our destroyers were lost, and the South Dakota took a real pounding, and if it hadn't been such a tough ship, would have been lost. The Washington having not being the target of the enemy ships ended up mortally wounding the Hiroshima that sank the next day.

The older battleships were used extensively as shore bombardment and fire support action, as well as for protection of the invasion fleets. In this role, they were exemplary. In the Oct. 1944 Battle of Leyte Gulf, the old battleships, several that had been sunk at Pearl Harbor were involved in the last battleship vs. battleship action.

As the New Jersey was refitted for Vietnam, it ended only serving one tour. The battleship was the perfect ship for this type of warfare, as it could stand off shore, and target almost the entire battlefield without having to risk pilots and airplanes. One of the first items in the peace talks was negotiated to get rid of the New Jersey by north.

When Regan put the 4 Iowa class back in service in the early 80's, the idea was to from a Battleship Battle Group around them, much like is done around a carrier. They were very good at showing the fleet and diplomacy as a very large show of force. The Wisconsin and Missouri were the two last battleships in commission, and were an active participant of Dessert Storm, both with their 16" guns and tomahawk missiles. I actually think that they would have been kept in service much longer if it hadn't been for the fiasco of an investigation of the turret explosion on the Iowa. This left a big black eye for the navy and their reputation, so the battleships fell from grace. They were also manpower intensive vs. more modern ships, so they were easy targets for arguments for putting them back in reserve. The Marine's were very resistant, but were ultimately unsuccessful, in preventing them from being decommissioned as we did not have a gunship that was capable for infantry support that was anywhere the level of the Iowa class ships.

Steve


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Off Topic (Marine Preservation)--U.S.S. New Jersey
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 9:29 pm 

Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2016 7:05 pm
Posts: 63
Seems to me the reason BBs are held so high in the psyche is that they're the embodiment of power. Hitting power, staying power, power projection, longevity, what have you. The American Iowa class were the best BBs ever constructed by many accounts - best armor, fire control, damage control and anti-aircraft armament, so it's good that they survive. They may have been displaced in capital ship vs. capital ship slug-outs, but they were not relegated to coastal defense in WWII and are still very capable (aside from their museum status) of close-in shore support and accurate shore bombardment. They are the complete opposite of the aircraft carrier - get in the ring and slug it out vs. take the high ground and strike downward, a heavyweight boxer vs. a bird of prey. Carriers are also an abstract concept to most commoners - most people don't have much if any clue what a carrier does or how it does it, but say the word battleship and more will have at least some clue. On another note, a few weeks ago a Jeopardy panel was given a clue concerning the 'bookends' of WWII being parked next to each other and not one could come up with Arizona and Missouri at Pearl Harbor. Not a clue about the most important war of the 20th century, battleships, the Navy. Sad.

BB-62 in commission at Long Beach Naval Shipyard, 1985, taken from FFG-54 at Pier 16, Long Beach Naval Station (note the Jack atop her bow and she's low in the water - loaded). I didn't have a (very) wide angle lens at the time, but just to the right at Pier E was USS Missouri, broadside to me. The Shipyard had a drydock capable of handling the Iowas. All gone now, the Station and Shipyard are now a commercial container port.
Attachment:
BB62 - Copy.jpg
BB62 - Copy.jpg [ 137.37 KiB | Viewed 1712 times ]


Reagan's reasoning for bringing them back in the 80s wasn't just that they were cheaper than FFGs - he was insistent, with John Lehman's help, that America build up a 600 ship Navy as a cold war strategy. Bringing back the BBs was power and money that we could afford. We didn't win the cold war just because the Germans didn't want a divided country anymore - Reagan showed the Soviets that we could and would outspend them, something they couldn't do much longer. The cold war was won as much by money as political attitude.

Had the BB reactivation held to $1.5B for the four Iowas, it would have come in under the cost of four 4th-flite FFGs (about $1M per foot at the official 453' in 1985). FFG construction time was about 23 months from 'keel laying' to commissioning. Other Navies like Australia have made serious capability improvements to their Perrys, but the writing is on the wall for most, with their thin hulls at 30-40 years old.

As for New Jersey, I hope they're able to keep it going and raise the funds they need. $8M for teak? Sounds like another government contract. I'd hope they discussed other options for drawing more visitors - I would think a great draw would be to have the 'restaurant' on board. Serve civie-improved Navy chow or SOS or peanut butter over rice in the enlisted galley with visitors eating on the mess decks with 40s music playing on the MC. I don't know if they have on-board sleep-overs in berthing for scouts and others as some other ships do.

_________________
G.
______________________________________
Radio crackles - "What the #^(& did we just hit, over?"


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Off Topic (Marine Preservation)--U.S.S. New Jersey
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 10:58 pm 

Joined: Thu Dec 12, 2013 1:26 pm
Posts: 44
What I remember reading about the New Jersey's refurbishment in 1981, was that it took them one year to get a replacement pump slinger by going through the procurement process. I can just imagine a machinist mate or machine repairmen cutting one out in a couple of minutes from some gasket material. Of course the article was about how the Navy was going to streamline their procurement system. I can imagine what the slinger cost them, too.
On another note, at the beginning of the Korean war, the Navy recovered new WWII artillery pieces from Tokyo bay, that had been thrown overboard after VJ day.

Tom


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Off Topic (Marine Preservation)--U.S.S. New Jersey
PostPosted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 11:10 pm 

Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2004 10:52 pm
Posts: 909
Quote:
The Wisconsin and Missouri were the two last battleships in commission, and were an active participant of Dessert Storm, both with their 16" guns and tomahawk missiles. I actually think that they would have been kept in service much longer if it hadn't been for the fiasco of an investigation of the turret explosion on the Iowa. This left a big black eye for the navy and their reputation, so the battleships fell from grace. They were also manpower intensive vs. more modern ships, so they were easy targets for arguments for putting them back in reserve.


Hi,

Well said. I remember the firing of the 16" guns (although no longer the "main" battery) and the Tomahawks (having become the "main" offensive punch) being fired during Desert Storm. When you think of a shell the size of a small car being projected up to 20 miles, it still gives me the shivers.

My Dad flew B25s during WWII and air power was the style of battle never before used (layout airfield to project power and then move up to take the new ground to build new airfields etc).

Only the Japanese had heavier guns. The one BB they had had 18" guns.

Question, Was not the Wisconsin sunk through maybe a combination of a torpedo and a typhoon? I seem to recall tails of one ship (thought it was a BB that went down in shark infested waters and few got out.

Doug vV

As for pricing, a Perry cost $122 million new.

The New Jersey was about $100 million - call price a wash. The BBs were both more manpower intensive and more survivable than the Perry's


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Off Topic (Marine Preservation)--U.S.S. New Jersey
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 12:00 am 

Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2010 8:25 pm
Posts: 243
Doug,

"Question, Was not the Wisconsin sunk through maybe a combination of a torpedo and a typhoon? I seem to recall tails of one ship (thought it was a BB that went down in shark infested waters and few got out."

I think you are remembering the USS Indianapolis, a fast cruiser built in the 1920's.

It was tasked with delivering the "guts" of the atomic bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima.

After delivering the secret cargo the Indianapolis was returning to "friendly" waters when it was sunk by a Japanese submarine with a great loss of life (the initial sinking and later shark attacks). The US Navy in an epic "screw up" lost track of this capital ship and nobody "in charge" noticed that it was late in arriving (by several days).

A patrolling airplane just happened to notice sailors in the water and started a rescue.

This unfortunate incident was overwhelmed by the news of "VJ" day and mostly ignored.

The commander of this ship was court marshaled (the only US Navy commander among several hundreds of commanders that lost ships in WWII) in a disgraceful "face saving" trial by the US Navy. The US Navy actually brought the commander of the "IJN" (Imperial Japanese Navy) submarine to testify at the court marshal. In the 1990's the conviction of the US commander was reversed, but he had already committed suicide many years before....

The eventually exonerated commander was Charles McVay.

For more info;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Indianapolis_(CA-35)

Cheers, KevinK


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Off Topic (Marine Preservation)--U.S.S. New Jersey
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 12:38 am 

Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2004 10:34 pm
Posts: 602
I too remember hearing that the NJ on Yankee Station was a big hit, no pun intended. Her fire power was accurate and very helpful to those in need. With her range she could fire half way to Laos.

Thought I recalled hearing about accuracy problems with the 16" guns during Desert Storm being blamed on bad propellant. Something along the lines that no new propellant had been mfg since WW2? The cost of starting up a new batch would of gotten pricey even for our government. So along with the turret explosion on the USS Iowa the BB was called home? Those mechanical computers were really state of the art and quite complex. I recall reading about them. One of my dream vacations is to hit the museum in Mobile, Al and tour the ships and museums there, would also like to tour the USS Texas as I think she might be the oldest surviving BB. I think battleships are like steam locomotives, in the way they attract some of us. Pure power and bulk. Great history you guys. Regards, John.

PS. Thank you for the link below, excellent read.


Last edited by John Risley on Sun Apr 16, 2017 12:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Online
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Off Topic (Marine Preservation)--U.S.S. New Jersey
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 1:45 am 

Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2004 10:52 pm
Posts: 909
Hi,

Is there a board to discuss WWII? Most that I found are basically inactive.

Doug vV


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Off Topic (Marine Preservation)--U.S.S. New Jersey
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 4:49 am 

Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 3:41 am
Posts: 3012
Location: Inwood, W.Va.
John Risley wrote:
I too remember hearing that the NJ on Yankee Station was a big hit, no pun intended. Her fire power was accurate and very helpful to those in need. With her range she could fire half way to Laos.

Thought I recalled hearing about accuracy problems with the 16" guns during Desert Storm being blamed on bad propellant. Something along the lines that no new propellant had been mfg since WW2? The cost of starting up a new batch would of gotten pricey even for our government. So along with the turret explosion on the USS Iowa the BB was called home? Those mechanical computers were really state of the art and quite complex. I recall reading about them. One of my dream vacations is to hit the museum in Mobile, Al and tour the ships and museums there, would also like to tour the USS Texas as I think she might be the oldest surviving BB. I think battleships are like steam locomotives, in the way they attract some of us. Pure power and bulk. Great history you guys. Regards, John.


You might be interested in this, though it looks like some things are missing, such as video links.

https://arstechnica.com/information-tec ... comments=1


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Off Topic (Marine Preservation)--U.S.S. New Jersey
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 11:38 am 

Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2004 11:12 am
Posts: 459
Location: Somewhere off the coast of New England
NYCRRson wrote:
Doug,

"Question, Was not the Wisconsin sunk through maybe a combination of a torpedo and a typhoon? I seem to recall tails of one ship (thought it was a BB that went down in shark infested waters and few got out."

I think you are remembering the USS Indianapolis, a fast cruiser built in the 1920's.
...
...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Indianapolis_(CA-35)

Cheers, KevinK

A sidenote in the saga of the USS Indianapolis is that after the the survivors were spotted in the water the first surface vessel to reach them was a destroyer escort, the USS Cecil J. Doyle. Its skipper, a Harvard lawyer who had clerked for both Judge Learned Hand and Justice Louis Brandeis before the war, was Lieutenant Commander William G. Claytor, better known by his middle name 'Graham', who went on to become the President of the Southern Railway, Secretary of the Navy, and President of Amtrak.

I know I will upset my son (USMC) and a granddaughter (USN) by saying this but the the Navy's problem is that it is pretty much restricted to the water. A battleship in the context of modern warfare is a very stable firing platform for heavy artillery. Like the A-10, which is really a Tank Destroyer with wings, it needs to be thought of in the context of what it can do rather than what it looks like. The limitation is where it can go. Unlike the self-propelled and trailed cannon in Armoured and Mechanized Divisions it cannot race overland to be within range of its next target, hence the adaptation for cruise missiles.

Of the Battleships which are on public display, I believe the New Jersey is the only one which is accessible by rail.

GME


Offline
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 45 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


 Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], John Risley, jrevans, Yahoo [Bot] and 53 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: