Enterprise - Here we go again...

[TOMLABEL]

CVN-65 heading for the end. Not under her own power. The island (while rumored that it would be saved and displayed somewhere) has no plans but to be scrapped.

A proud ship who should be honored for her 50+ years of service!!!

[TOMLABEL]

a

[TOMLABEL]

b

[tocaff]

Honored by a country that can't afford to maintain other proud ladies who served so well? All ships are destined for the breakers sooner or later. I know it sounds heartless, but it's the reality of today. She was an awesome machine in her day.

[John 3rd]

Totally depressing...

[Lokasenna]

Honestly? What an ugly island. I never realized how ugly it was.

It would be nice if the ship was able to be preserved somewhere since she's the first nuclear carrier, but that's so expensive for a ship of that size.

[Cap Mandrake]

I imagine scrapping her will not be cheap either. You can't just cut up the reactor even after you remove the fuel.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

I imagine scrapping her will not be cheap either. You can't just cut up the reactor even after you remove the fuel.

The program works pretty well for subs, with the reactor compartments currently stored in trenches at Hanford (to be buried real soon now.) Several nuke skimmers are still in the pipeline at Bremerton; they are substantially harder to cut up than cylindrical sub hulls. Enterprise is the first nuke carrier to be sent for processing, and will be a bear given the realities of eight reactors and the depth they are buried in the hull. It will be very ticklish to get them out and still keep the rest of the hull from collapsing in on itself. Once out they are exactly like a sub reactor in relative size and radcon challenges. I expect they'll end up in the trenches in Washington with the rest.

[czert2]

Any idea if it will be named another ship to honor her ?  (and i think at least about 3 CVs which are allready in servise/constuction and they dont desrve names of president they have, since that president did nothing imoprant/good).
Or her hame will be saved for future ncc-1701 ?

[GaryChildress]

No surprise here. If they could scrap CV6 after its distinguished career, they can scrap anything without remorse. May as well scrap the USS Constitution.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: czert2

Any idea if it will be named another ship to honor her ?  (and i think at least about 3 CVs which are allready in servise/constuction and they dont desrve names of president they have, since that president did nothing imoprant/good).
Or her hame will be saved for future ncc-1701 ?

There was a move in Congress last winter to name one of the Ford-class (the third one?) CVNs "Enterprise." Normally naming flows from SecNav's office without Congress getting involved, but if Congress wants a name it usually gets it. We'll be without a Big-E for awhile, decades, but not until Starfleet acts.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress

No surprise here. If they could scrap CV6 after its distinguished career, they can scrap anything without remorse. May as well scrap the USS Constitution.

We have a deficit. I read in today's paper than NIH funding has been slashed to all-time lows under sequestration. I think Enterprise is historic too, but I'd rather have a cure for diabetes or Alzheimers.

[GaryChildress]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress

No surprise here. If they could scrap CV6 after its distinguished career, they can scrap anything without remorse. May as well scrap the USS Constitution.

We have a deficit. I read in today's paper than NIH funding has been slashed to all-time lows under sequestration. I think Enterprise is historic too, but I'd rather have a cure for diabetes or Alzheimers.

FWIW I'm not that worried about CV65 anyway.

[Cap Mandrake]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

I imagine scrapping her will not be cheap either. You can't just cut up the reactor even after you remove the fuel.

The program works pretty well for subs, with the reactor compartments currently stored in trenches at Hanford (to be buried real soon now.) Several nuke skimmers are still in the pipeline at Bremerton; they are substantially harder to cut up than cylindrical sub hulls. Enterprise is the first nuke carrier to be sent for processing, and will be a bear given the realities of eight reactors and the depth they are buried in the hull. It will be very ticklish to get them out and still keep the rest of the hull from collapsing in on itself. Once out they are exactly like a sub reactor in relative size and radcon challenges. I expect they'll end up in the trenches in Washington with the rest.

In other words it will slowly end up in the Columbia River. [;)]

Eight reactors...wow. What do the Russians do? Just sink the things n the Arctic?

[rjopel]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: czert2

Any idea if it will be named another ship to honor her ?  (and i think at least about 3 CVs which are allready in servise/constuction and they dont desrve names of president they have, since that president did nothing imoprant/good).
Or her hame will be saved for future ncc-1701 ?

There was a move in Congress last winter to name one of the Ford-class (the third one?) CVNs "Enterprise." Normally naming flows from SecNav's office without Congress getting involved, but if Congress wants a name it usually gets it. We'll be without a Big-E for awhile, decades, but not until Starfleet acts.

During CVN-65's decommissioning ceremony the Secretary of the Navy announced that CVN-80 would be named Enterprise.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

I imagine scrapping her will not be cheap either. You can't just cut up the reactor even after you remove the fuel.

The program works pretty well for subs, with the reactor compartments currently stored in trenches at Hanford (to be buried real soon now.) Several nuke skimmers are still in the pipeline at Bremerton; they are substantially harder to cut up than cylindrical sub hulls. Enterprise is the first nuke carrier to be sent for processing, and will be a bear given the realities of eight reactors and the depth they are buried in the hull. It will be very ticklish to get them out and still keep the rest of the hull from collapsing in on itself. Once out they are exactly like a sub reactor in relative size and radcon challenges. I expect they'll end up in the trenches in Washington with the rest.

In other words it will slowly end up in the Columbia River. [;)]

Eight reactors...wow. What do the Russians do? Just sink the things n the Arctic?

They're supposed to be lined trenches with a 500-year-plus time before failure. I think failure is defined as pinhole leaks. I have a brand new B-I-L, former Navy nuc officer, who works at Hanford. If I ever meet him I could ask. [:)]

Eight was a one-off. I think the Nimitz-class has two, but the truth is classified most likely. The Soviets did lay some old reactors on the surface ice I think, but not over ocean. FWIW we sank the reactors from the very first nuke subs to be decommed in deep water in the Atlantic.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: rjopel

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: czert2

Any idea if it will be named another ship to honor her ?  (and i think at least about 3 CVs which are allready in servise/constuction and they dont desrve names of president they have, since that president did nothing imoprant/good).
Or her hame will be saved for future ncc-1701 ?

There was a move in Congress last winter to name one of the Ford-class (the third one?) CVNs "Enterprise." Normally naming flows from SecNav's office without Congress getting involved, but if Congress wants a name it usually gets it. We'll be without a Big-E for awhile, decades, but not until Starfleet acts.

During CVN-65's decommissioning ceremony the Secretary of the Navy announced that CVN-80 would be named Enterprise.

So, he got the memo. [;)]

Thanks.

[tocaff]

When the Congress controls the funding the naming if "requested" will be honored.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: tocaff

When the Congress controls the funding the naming if "requested" will be honored.

Thus the USS Mendel Rivers SSN-686 and USS William H. Bates SSN-680, notable fish species.

[Knavey]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

Eight was a one-off. I think the Nimitz-class has two, but the truth is classified most likely. The Soviets did lay some old reactors on the surface ice I think, but not over ocean. FWIW we sank the reactors from the very first nuke subs to be decommed in deep water in the Atlantic.

Nimitz class has 2 A4W reactors. I split atoms in both of them. Going to have to cut some pretty big holes in the ship to get them out.