CVN-80 will be called USS Enterprise

[quagmire]

Originally Posted by GermanyChris

I'm a "old" soldier not a sailor but why was a ship commissioned in '61 retired thats hardly old in ship terms.

It's not surprising at all. CVN-65 is the second oldest serving ship in the US Navy. CV-6 was only in commission for 9 years( thanks to the jet age making her too small and structure too weak for jet fighters). 50 years is pretty long for a ship to be in commission. Especially when Enterprise is her own class making maintenance and up keep expensive( especially when the ship was expensive to build in the first place hence why only one was built in a class planned for 6).

She was planned to serve until about 2015( when her next refueling would be due) to shorten the time until CVN-78 was finished to replace her, but they retired her early to keep costs down.

Originally Posted by Peace

The Enterprise was one of the Navy's first ships . It was also the first nuclear powered carrier. Thus the tradition.

Actually CVN-65 was named as a part of the deal the US Navy made after the screw up of not being able to make CV-6 a floating museum and the scrapping of her.

[GermanyChris]

Originally Posted by quagmire

It's not surprising at all. CVN-65 is the second oldest serving ship in the US Navy. CV-6 was only in commission for 9 years( thanks to the jet age making her too small and structure too weak for jet fighters). 50 years is pretty long for a ship to be in commission. Especially when Enterprise is her own class making maintenance and up keep expensive( especially when the ship was expensive to build in the first place hence why only one was built in a class planned for 6).

She was planned to serve until about 2015( when her next refueling would be due) to shorten the time until CVN-78 was finished to replace her, but they retired her early to keep costs down.




Actually CVN-65 was named as a part of the deal the US Navy made after the screw up of not being able to make CV-6 a floating museum and the scrapping of her.

Really I've flown on planes as old..

It's nice to see heritage and legacy carry forward

[quagmire]

Originally Posted by GermanyChris

Really I've flown on planes as old..

It's nice to see heritage and legacy carry forward

And you can see the negative consequences of keeping those old birds flying with American Airlines trying to keep those things airworthy(they have the oldest fleet in the industry). One of the reasons why AA filed chapter 11.

And Cunard decommissioned the QE2 a few years ago after 40 years in service.

[GermanyChris]

Originally Posted by quagmire

And you can see the negative consequences of keeping those old birds flying with American Airlines trying to keep those things airworthy(they have the oldest fleet in the industry). One of the reasons why AA filed chapter 11.

And Cunard decommissioned the QE2 a few years ago after 40 years in service.

Military planes..

It all seems so disconcerting but the USN will do what best with it's ships.

[quagmire]

Originally Posted by GermanyChris

Military planes..

It all seems so disconcerting but the USN will do what best with it's ships.

I know this is wikipedia, but maybe this can explain why the US is already starting the process of replacing Enterprise and the Nimitz class carriers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_...rcraft_carrier

Simply put, with the advancement of technology and the addition of UAV's, the Enterprise and Nimitz class doesn't have any flexibility left that these new systems could be installed into these ships. The Ford Class will be able to fit these systems and have plenty of flexibility left for future systems to be installed in the future.

[wgnoyes]

Originally Posted by iJohnHenry

Yes, she is still a registered 'ship of the line', and quite impressive.

But not as impressive as The Victory.

True, but I don't think they take the HMS Victory out to stretch her legs anymore. They still sail the Constitution on very special occasions.

[GermanyChris]

Originally Posted by quagmire

I know this is wikipedia, but maybe this can explain why the US is already starting the process of replacing Enterprise and the Nimitz class carriers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_...rcraft_carrier

Simply put, with the advancement of technology and the addition of UAV's, the Enterprise and Nimitz class doesn't have any flexibility left that these new systems could be installed into these ships. The Ford Class will be able to fit these systems and have plenty of flexibility left for future systems to be installed in the future.

Requirements for a higher sortie rate of around 160 exits a day with surges to a maximum of 220 sorties. (That is a rather impressive improvement)

The new A1B reactor plant is a smaller, more efficient design that provides approximately three times the electrical power of the Nimitz-class A4W reactor plant. (technology is wonderful)

The minimum weight limit is above the weight of all UAVs. (does make the ship antique UAVs are the future and save grunts lives)

It was my impression that carriers carried about 5500 people on mission, what is the reduction in crew going to be? It would seem just reducing the number of bodies by 500 or so would give another 60 days or so port free.

[Orange Crane]

Impressive engineering. Clearly more so than iPhone camera, which seems to take upside down photos or something. (port orchard facing Bremerton via kayak).