Aircraft Carriers III

Jul 17, 2018
Jul 12, 2017
now noticed 2022 repeated

("As of now, Ford is expected to be ready for deployment in 2022, Couch said.)

inside Carrier USS Gerald R. Ford Enters Year-Long Post-Shakedown Maintenance and Upgrade Period
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
plus now inside
Hail and Farewell: Carrier Ford changes command
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

:

"... the Ford is slated to return to sea in late 2019 and the Pentagon believes it will deploy overseas three years after that."
 
HMS Queen Elizabeth – built to survive

August 11, 2018
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

:

my simple question would be if she could withstand one (1) heavy-weight (*) torp hit amidship?

(*) picking an example from the RN:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


from what I noticed while watching SINKEX vids, smaller ships (for example a former OHP class frigate) wouldn't;

they tend to get severed in the part of the hull which was hit, probably "keel" (LOL if they have one) broken
 

SamuraiBlue

Captain
HMS Queen Elizabeth – built to survive

August 11, 2018
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

:

my simple question would be if she could withstand one (1) heavy-weight (*) torp hit amidship?

(*) picking an example from the RN:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


from what I noticed while watching SINKEX vids, smaller ships (for example a former OHP class frigate) wouldn't;

they tend to get severed in the part of the hull which was hit, probably "keel" (LOL if they have one) broken
Basically modern day torpedo doesn't hit directly the hull but dives below and detonates right under the hull in which creates a vacuum where the weight of the ship is suddenly centered at that point due to sudden loss of bouncy resulting to multiple fractures at the bottom of the ship which can not be stopped by merely shutting a flood door because there will be multiple gaps within the ship for water to flood in.
The bigger the ship the more possibility to contain the floodings due to relative size compared to the area the torpedo might have damaged the ship but that does not mean the ship is not harmed since it still taken in water in the bottom making the ship heavier making it sluggish and may not able to reach launch speed for the planes to take off.
 

Obi Wan Russell

Jedi Master
VIP Professional
you're being facetious about "bouncy" (LOL) anyway modern torps have optional modes of attack (direct or underwater blast)

was now briefly thinking of what was the last confirmed combat use of torps, was it
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

?
Indeed, a WW2 vintage cruiser sunk with WW2 (design) Torpedoes.

In other news, Big Liz' departure for her much awaited WESTLANT 18 deployment is imminent, her air group has begun embarkation in Portsmouth; 820NAS has landed up to 8 Merlin HM2s for the four month mission:39121872_2049406492042343_8529868336199106560_n.jpg 39132386_2049406505375675_3660061440481427456_n.jpg And tge paintwork has been getting a last minute touch up; can't let the side down!39086623_10155509345226481_6989964162189230080_o.jpg 38747219_10212518787505133_1437510212348018688_n.jpg Almost certain she'll be visiting one or two US Naval Bases on the Eastern Seaboard (Norfolk?) and I'd be surprised if the Big Apple wasn't on the list too. We shall see...
 
... Big Liz' departure for her much awaited WESTLANT 18 deployment is imminent, her air group has begun embarkation in Portsmouth; 820NAS has landed up to 8 Merlin HM2s for the four month mission:View attachment 48353 View attachment 48354 And tge paintwork has been getting a last minute touch up; can't let the side down!View attachment 48355 View attachment 48356 Almost certain she'll be visiting one or two US Naval Bases on the Eastern Seaboard (Norfolk?) and I'd be surprised if the Big Apple wasn't on the list too. We shall see...
LOL you forgot onions:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!





The busiest week of the year begins! So much going on to get
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
to sea for
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
and to achieve the aim of
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
But in true Navy tradition; approximately 40,000 onions
1f602.png
26a1.png
is getting real!

DkeV6gWWwAY5fP1.jpg
 
Aug 3, 2018
now
The Navy Could Need More Than 15 Years and Over $1.5B To Scrap USS Enterprise

August 2, 2018
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
and
Navy, Civilian Nuclear Regulators Struggling Over How to Dismantle Former USS Enterprise
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

A brewing regulatory fight between the Navy and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission over who should oversee a possible commercial contract to dismantle the hull of the former USS Enterprise (CVN-65) could ultimately cause the project’s price tag to balloon well above the current $1 billion estimate.

Controlling costs and preventing a log-jam of nuclear refueling and maintenance work on decommissioned nuclear surface ships and submarines were cited as reasons the Navy would consider using a private contractor to dismantle the nation’s first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, according to an August
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.

However, civilian regulators with the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) aren’t keen on overseeing the dismantlement of Enterprise.

The NRC position is, “regulatory responsibility for the safe processing and disposal of Navy ships falls to Naval Reactors under its Department of Energy authority,” reads the report.

Using a commercial shipyard to take Enterprise apart would potentially save hundreds of millions of dollars and shave as many as five years off the project completion time, according to the GAO.

If the Navy contracted a commercial yard do take Enterprise apart, the Navy’s position is civilian regulators should monitor the work of a civilian company, essentially leaving the Navy out of the process.

Meanwhile, the NRC maintains the Navy, under the Naval Reactors office, already has a proven track record of serving as the regulatory authority for nuclear-powered ship dismantling, according to the GAO report. Under this authority, the Navy has regulated the dismantlement of about 130 reactors taken from nuclear-powered submarines and cruisers.

“Naval Reactors is charged with cradle-to-grave responsibility for our nation’s naval nuclear propulsion material,” the GAO report states.

The Navy’s incentive to send Enterprise to a commercial shipyard is not just based on cost. The Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, where nuclear dismantling work occurs, already has a growing queue of projects, according to the GAO report. Puget Sound is used for routine maintenance work and is due to soon start taking apart what will become a steady flow of retiring nuclear-powered submarines.

“The CVN-65 dismantlement and disposal work could affect the shipyard’s ability to complete active fleet maintenance,” the GAO report states. “We found that the addition of the CVN-65 dismantlement and disposal would add almost a year’s worth of work across the estimated 10-year dismantlement and disposal period to an already busy shipyard that has demonstrated difficulties in accurately projecting its future work.”

The Puget Sound shipyard already has a backlog of 10 nuclear-powered submarines and the ex-USS Long Beach (CGN-9) in storage waiting to be dismantled and recycled. An additional three nuclear-powered submarines are pier-side awaiting dismantling, the GAO report states.

The current disagreement between regulators is also creating a situation the GAO reports says prevents commercial shipyards from being able to accurately predict final costs of dismantling Enterprise. Settling the argument, the GAO report states, “would also help ensure the Navy’s selection of a dismantlement and disposal plan for CVN-65 is informed by well understood regulatory expectations and cost and schedule estimates that reflect those expectations.”

The current disagreement between regulators is about more than whether the Navy or NRC monitors the dismantling of Enterprise. With 10 nuclear-powered Nimitz-class aircraft carriers due for decommissioning, defueling and dismantling over the next half-century, the regulatory precedent set now can be long-lasting.

“The precedent-setting nature of the CVN-65 dismantlement and disposal adds a level of risk and heightens the importance of having sufficient accountability measures to facilitate oversight. There is greater potential for unexpected challenges to arise because a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier has not been dismantled and disposed of before,” the GAO report states. “Additionally, CVN-65 provides an opportunity to establish a foundation for management and oversight of future aircraft carrier dismantlement and disposal efforts, with the first of 10 Nimitz-class carriers expected to reach the end of its service life in the next decade.”
 
Top