What's new
By:
Filters

The USS Texas going to dry dock!

USS TX refueling in early 1945.

_nc_ohc=wfkzwLJ0k8AAX-9V3Pd&_nc_ht=scontent-lga3-2.jpg
 
I got to go down in the belly a few years back, and the old broad had crabs.

Seriously….
Crabs coming through rust holes in the plates.
She was resting in mud at her mornings.
 
8 in the US:

BB-35, 55, 59, 60 and all 4 Iowas.

Don't believe there are any overseas, but not as familiar with foreign museum ships.
 
sdmuleman said:
8 in the US:

BB-35, 55, 59, 60 and all 4 Iowas.

Don't believe there are any overseas, but not as familiar with foreign museum ships.
Click to expand...
Technically the pre dreadnaught mikasa that is encased in concrete in japan is a battleship. It is a pre dreadnaught battleship if you want to split hairs but it technically does count. And to my knowledge is the only battleship still around outside the us.
 
Mikenike said:
Technically the pre dreadnaught mikasa that is encased in concrete in japan is a battleship. It is a pre dreadnaught battleship if you want to split hairs but it technically does count. And to my knowledge is the only battleship still around outside the us.
Click to expand...
And one day it will arise as a space ship to battle the aliens that have come to conquer earth and exterminate the humans.
 
87manche said:
And one day it will arise as a space ship to battle the aliens that have come to conquer earth and exterminate the humans.
Click to expand...
I believe that was the yamato in those cartoons but id be down to see that. Predreadnaught looks cooler anyway
 
Swung some of the twin bofors around shooting at ghost jap zeros and kates years ago and almost knocked my buddy out with the barrels. Good times.
 
justsomedude said:
Swung some of the twin bofors around shooting at ghost jap zeros and kates years ago and almost knocked my buddy out with the barrels. Good times.
Click to expand...
My sister and I did similar on the North Carolina with one of the AA turrets, were swinging it all around, coasted to a stop aiming at a building a short distance away as a guy pulled the curtains open. His eyes got all :eek: for a second, we laughed our asses off. Probably not the first time he'd ever done that, but as kids we thought it was hilarious! :laughing:

:usa::flipoff2:
 
Ransil said:
How many BBs are museums ?
I have done 3 ,the North Carolina in Wilmington is the best tour.
Click to expand...
I was on BB-60 USS Alabama as a kid in the late 70's. I'm on a project of scanning the family vacation slides into digital, so here it is;

Alabama 16.JPG
Alabama 25.JPG
Alabama 30.JPG
Alabama 31.JPG

Alabama 29-2 APR 78.jpg
 
Last edited:
justsomedude said:
I've always loved kingfishers, don't really know why. Thanks for the vintage battleship porn for today though.
Click to expand...
Same here; also for unknown reasons.:beer:

I remember as a kid in the '70s learning a story about a Kingfisher landing on water during battle so many U.S. aircrew they found floating could climb out of the water:
1709322483178.png

US Navy pilot Lt. (jg) John Burns, Radioman Aubrey J. Gill, and their rescued passengers awaiting rescue aboard OS2U Kingfisher aircraft, off Truk, Caroline Islands, 1 May 1944
 
FelixstoweF.2 said:
It's a shame they sank her sister ship the USS New York in 1946 during a nuclear test.
Click to expand...
By far the biggest shame the Navy did regarding ships was not preserving the CV(N*)-6 USS Enterprise.
THEE most decorated ship in U.S. Navy history.

That's why the first nuke carrier was named the Enterprise AND first commanded by a CV-6 Enterprise pilot.
Furthermore; they named a brand new Ford-class carrier, Enterprise.
IMHO; the Navy still trying to make up for their mistake after WWII.

*Night-qualified in carrier operations.
 
CDA 455 II said:
By far the biggest shame the Navy did regarding ships was not preserving the CV(N*)-6 USS Enterprise.
THEE most decorated ship in U.S. Navy history.

That's why the first nuke carrier was named the Enterprise AND first commanded by a CV-6 Enterprise pilot.
Furthermore; they named a brand new Ford-class carrier, Enterprise.
IMHO; the Navy still trying to make up for their mistake after WWII.

*Night-qualified in carrier operations.
Click to expand...
That's true the Big E should have been saved. I agree completely. I also think the battleship fleet should have maintained because let's face it if you're invading a country having a platform with cruise missiles and big guns is kinda nice to soften up your enemy's positions.
 
FelixstoweF.2 said:
That's true the Big E should have been saved. I agree completely. I also think the battleship fleet should have maintained because let's face it if you're invading a country having a platform with cruise missiles and big guns is kinda nice to soften up your enemy's positions.
Click to expand...
The Navy was so focused on the jet age; getting larger carriers to handle them, they forgot/didn't want to spend the money to maintain her.

With the military budget being drastically reduced post-WWII; the Navy and then-new USAF was jockeying for every dollar for their budgets.
AF Gen. LeMay was making a compelling argument on why the Pentagon shouldn't spend money on carrier fleets now that the AF has intercontinental bombers.
 
FelixstoweF.2 said:
I also think the battleship fleet should have maintained because let's face it if you're invading a country having a platform with cruise missiles and big guns is kinda nice to soften up your enemy's positions.
Click to expand...

In the scenario where a BB could operate close enough to an enemy coast to use guns it wouldn't be needed, and it one where it was useful the ship would have been sunk long before. Likewise, massive sea landing aka WW2 is probably also a dead duck today. Beyond that, BB's are hugely maintenance and manpower intensive, and require significant industrial infrastructure that's years dead. (relining guns, producing large power bags, etc)

CDA 455 II said:
The Navy was so focused on the jet age; getting larger carriers to handle them, they forgot/didn't want to spend the money to maintain her.
Click to expand...

Inaccurate. Yes, navy was focused on jets and there was competition with USAF (see "revolt of the admirals") , but this wasn't the cause of CV-6 being scrapped. She was inac-ed after ww2 for cost reasons, much like many many other ww2 ships, including many newer ones. Wasn't until almost 1960 that she was scrapped - well after the Navy/AF carrier discussion was won by the Navy. Every service strongly contracted after WW2, and it's hard to imagine any other option. Note that many ships in better condition and of greater military value were inactivated alongside CV-6. By the time she was scrapped she was obviously of little to no value. Keep in mind too post 1942 she was a one of a kind class, which is logistically very difficult to maintain. Lots of lots of Essex class available that were newer better and more supportable ships.

She was scrapped at roughly the same time as many other prewar and early WW2 built ships. Only BB-55 was saved out of the this group.

Real blame here isn't the Navy, it's no one in the general public being interested enough to be willing to save CV-6.
 
sdmuleman said:
Inaccurate. Yes, navy was focused on jets and there was competition with USAF (see "revolt of the admirals") , but this wasn't the cause of CV-6 being scrapped. She was inac-ed after ww2 for cost reasons, much like many many other ww2 ships, including many newer ones. Wasn't until almost 1960 that she was scrapped - well after the Navy/AF carrier discussion was won by the Navy. Every service strongly contracted after WW2, and it's hard to imagine any other option. Note that many ships in better condition and of greater military value were inactivated alongside CV-6. By the time she was scrapped she was obviously of little to no value. Keep in mind too post 1942 she was a one of a kind class, which is logistically very difficult to maintain. Lots of lots of Essex class available that were newer better and more supportable ships.

She was scrapped at roughly the same time as many other prewar and early WW2 built ships. Only BB-55 was saved out of the this group.

Real blame here isn't the Navy, it's no one in the general public being interested enough to be willing to save CV-6.
Click to expand...
Fair enough; I think the truth is in both our understandings.:beer:

The Navy/AF discussion/debate lasted well into the '60s.
The entire reason the A-3 Skywarrior and A-5 Vigilante existed was for the Navy to show the Pentagon they had platforms to deliver nuke bombs.
The A-4 Skyhawk could be included in that nuke-specific delivery platform.
All three aircraft platforms were late '50s to '60s platforms.

In the meantime the AF were developing long range bombers and ICBMs.

My favorite platform, the F-111, was supposed to be the all-in-one nuke delivery system for both the Navy and AF.
It wasn't until 1969/'70 that the Navy rejected the F-111 for the F-14.

IMHO; the Navy/AF budget war ended, more or less, around '70/'71. YMMV
 
CDA 455 II said:
I was in San Diego when they kept falling out of the sky in the mid-'70s.

Got to see them at countless airshows as well as see them launch from the Kittyhawk on a day cruise.:grinpimp::usa:
Click to expand...
Cool
My 'ole Man (RIP) designed the radar tube in their nose
Still got all sorts of memorabilia from back then
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Back Refresh