Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Hangtime on May 17, 2006, 01:48:47 PM
-
Today, the USS Oriskany, CV34, was sunk as a fish reef off the coast of Florida.
A fine ship!
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/17/carrier.reef.ap/
-
Sure was a good ship.
To those sailors still on patrol.
S! shipmates
-
My cousin was on this ship during the Viet Nam war and was one of the first fire teams to get water on the massive fire that errupted and killed many shipmates.
-
So by renaming taken action as ‘reefing’, Navy is fully justified to dump crap into sea? Wouldn’t it be better to recycle all that metal for something more useful than a home for fish? :huh
-
Originally posted by Russian
So by renaming taken action as ‘reefing’, Navy is fully justified to dump crap into sea? Wouldn’t it be better to recycle all that metal for something more useful than a home for fish? :huh
Theres nothing wrong with Reefing. The ships are put though alot de-cam. and sinking a ship is cheaper then cutting it up to make tin cans.
-
nuchpatrick wrote;
Theres nothing wrong with Reefing. The ships are put though alot de-cam. and sinking a ship is cheaper then cutting it up to make tin cans.
From the CNN article;
The Environmental Protection Agency in February approved the sinking of the ship with chemical toxins in electrical cables, insulation and paint still aboard.
It could also provide a convenient means of disposal for other useless items like uncounted ballots, voter registrations and copies of the constitution.
-
Well, for instance - last week the Reserve fleet up in the bay near Concord where the Iowa is anchored alongside about 80 others - 7000 ton Liberity ship, each one of those would take 2 million dollars a piece to get sea worthy - then would have to be towed to a scrapping yard in Texas. Steel goes for $500 per ton at the yard - but depending on the age of the vessle - sometimes its worth it just to blow it up - especially when considering aspestos abatement and all that crap involved when they try to break the vessle up.
Since the westcoast has no scrapping yards left after the drawdown - sometimes its more sensible to use them for weapons tests or reef making.
Wolf
-
The former crew seemed unanimous.. they'd rather see her surrendered to the sea than a cutters torch. Same for weapons testing.. a similar fate met the America.. destroyed in live fire weapons test. The data gained may save a ship and many thousands of lives in the future.
If a warship, a symbol of honorable service in defense of our nation has to go.. I say send her off like the America or the Oriskany.
-
Its hard to believe it would cost more to scrap it than just sinking it.
-
russian
I do believe that a large proportion of the former USSR'S fleet is sat at varoius ports just rotting away......
-
Originally posted by Hangtime
The former crew seemed unanimous.. they'd rather see her surrendered to the sea than a cutters torch. Same for weapons testing.. a similar fate met the America.. destroyed in live fire weapons test. The data gained may save a ship and many thousands of lives in the future.
If a warship, a symbol of honorable service in defense of our nation has to go.. I say send her off like the America or the Oriskany.
I agree. This is what they did to my first ship, the USS Leahy (CG-16)...
(http://www.ussleahy.com/LeFin/LeahyPortBow111104.jpg)
(http://www.ussleahy.com/LeFin/LeahyAft111104.jpg)
(http://www.ussleahy.com/LeFin/LeahyRamp122804.jpg)
As much as I may have hated that ship at the time and I remember how happy I was when I left it, it left a lump in my throat seeing what they did to it.
-
Originally posted by AlGorithm
It could also provide a convenient means of disposal for other useless items like uncounted ballots, voter registrations and copies of the constitution.
:rofl
-
What wolfala said, the asbestos is a ***** to get rid of, they do the same to old NY subway cars because they are lined with asbestos, it has no currently known effects on the water so it is safe. One of the problems with dumping the ships into the sea is all the precious metal that could potentially go with them, gold, platinum, copper, etc.
-
http://www.pensacolanewsjournal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060517/VIDEO/60517014
-
So because it is inconvenient or not economical, it is Okay to litter on environment? And this sentimental argument is beyond silly, almost hippy-like. Hmm, I guess this explains situations like this when it is not economically viable to actually dispose radioactive waste properly.
(1986
After almost 40 years of cover-ups, the U.S. Government released 19,000 pages of previously classified documents which revealed that the Hanford Engineer Works was responsible for the release of significant amounts of radioactive materials into the atmosphere and the adjacent Columbia River. Between 1944 and 1966, the eight reactors, a source of plutonium production for atomic weapons, discharged billions of gallons of liquids and billions of cubic meters of gases containing plutonium and other radioactive contaminants into the Columbia River, and the soil and air of the Columbia Basin. Although detrimental effects were noticed as early as 1948, all reports critical of the facilities remained classified. By the summer of 1987, the cost of cleaning up Hanford was estimated to be $48.5 billion. The Technical Steering Panel of the government-sponsored Hanford Environmental Dose Reconstruction Project released the following statistics in July 1990: Of the 270,000 people living in the affected area, most received low doses of radiation from Iodine, but about 13,500 received a total dose some 1,300 times the annual amount of airborne radiation considered safe for civilians by the Department of Energy. Approximately 1,200 children received doses far in excess of this number, and many more received additional doses from contaminants other than Iodine. [See also May 1997 and July 2000.]), [/i]
.
http://www.lutins.org/nukes.html
-
Well,
Considering how many ships were sunk by Germany's atlantic blockade - shouldn't someone today be sueing them for the oil slicks and tens of thousands of gallons of other crap that went to the bottom?
Hanford is not a ship. Hanford is a engineering blunder that turned toxic.
-
Originally posted by Wolfala
Well,
Considering how many ships were sunk by Germany's atlantic blockade - shouldn't someone today be sueing them for the oil slicks and tens of thousands of gallons of other crap that went to the bottom?
Hanford is not a ship. Hanford is a engineering blunder that turned toxic.
While I agree that my example is way off, your example is of same type.
-
Guilty.
BTW, whats the story with paintball on Saturday?
-
Originally posted by Russian
So by renaming taken action as ‘reefing’, Navy is fully justified to dump crap into sea? Wouldn’t it be better to recycle all that metal for something more useful than a home for fish? :huh
Reefing is good for the environment..It does alot more than just make a home fpr fish.
-
I wouldnt mind having a PT boat as a personal watercraft
-
Well we could just sell the ships to the break up yards along India's coast and let those workers get killed and die slow deaths from all the asbestos and other crap that happens to them over there. Besides they need the scrap steel to sell to China or build their own things...
On the other hand; sinking the thing would keep potentially useful military ships out of China's hands forever.
-
I wouldnt mind having a PT boat as a personal watercraft
why think small. John Wayne had a 140 foot WWII minesweeper converted to a hump palace... er 'yacht'.
heluva way to save a ship .
(http://www.posterhorse.com/images/jwaynewild%20goose.jpg)
-
Russain,
Reefing does alot more that creat a home for ships. It reefs act as barriers to ocean currents and in many cases help resist beach/land errosion. The benifits of having the ship at the bottom of the sea far outweigh any potential environmental risks.
-
Originally posted by Wolfala
Guilty.
BTW, whats the story with paintball on Saturday?
Neg on that. Sorry...
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
Russain,
Reefing does alot more that creat a home for ships. It reefs act as barriers to ocean currents and in many cases help resist beach/land errosion. The benifits of having the ship at the bottom of the sea far outweigh any potential environmental risks.
Who said nature needs your help? It (she?) survived for how many millions of years now without any help from humans. Those are just excuses to throw garbage into sea….nothing more.
-
Theres nothing large enough for a minesweeper. a PT boat would work fine in the lakes around here
-
The Oriskany is being sunk relatively deep. I think the flight deck is going to be at 130 feet. So while scuba divers can dive on it, its not for novices.
-
Originally posted by Hangtime
why think small. John Wayne had a 140 foot WWII minesweeper converted to a hump palace... er 'yacht'.
heluva way to save a ship .
I am afraid that noone will convert a carrier to a luxury yacht, even though you would have a runway for your private jet(s) included.
imagine...
-
Originally posted by Russian
So because it is inconvenient or not economical, it is Okay to litter on environment?
I wish we favored expediency less and action from principle more.
hap