Re: Warload of a US aircraft carrier
- From: "TMOliver" <tmoliverjrFIX@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 18:31:38 -0500
<aminyard@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote ....
Yo do not seem to know just how difficult it is to misson kill, much
less sink, a US CVN.
With a Hell of a lot more time on the Bridge of a CV as you've spent
misunderstanding them, "Mission Kill" may be accomplished with substantially
less assets and capability than you might imagine....
A single Zuni mission killed FORRESTAL for an extended period (and, yes, the
USN made substantial changes asa result, but the specter of a flight deck
fire of some magnitutde is an everyday hazard on any CV).
SARATOGA was mission killed alongside the pier in Mayport, flooding to
settle in the coffee-grounds, unable for some time to fullfill operational
requirements.
The list of ESSEX class ships "mission-killed" for extended periods is long.
The number sunk was short. Read up on BENNINGTON's problem, again addressed
with substantial material changes.
No one really knows what happens when a wake homer potentially takes out two
screws, but one thing's for sure, unless the wind gets up, no strike a/c are
going to be launched.
There is a reason that SINKEXs of them are not
made public. They recently sank the ex-Oriskany, a 1940s design, and
the structure, amount of explosives used, etc. was still classified.
And, before you ask, I ain't tellin'
A. 'Cuz you don't know.
B. Not near as much as you think
I'm sure there were those in FRANKLIN for whom sinking would have been
easier to deal with. I went to firefighting school on the pier next to her
berth at Bayonne. Just a glance was a stark reminder that fire on a CV
remains far more to be feared than sinking (and provides a far more likely
"mission kill".). Cumshawing valves, fittings, etc. from below decks, there
was an occasional smell to remind you of the personnel aspects of mission
kill. Her former much decorated flight deck officer,from this part of the
country and with a big oil company, could provide a ghastly and sobering
account of it all.
TMO
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Warload of a US aircraft carrier
- From: BlackBeard
- Re: Warload of a US aircraft carrier
- References:
- Re: Warload of a US aircraft carrier
- From: g lof2
- Re: Warload of a US aircraft carrier
- From: Derek Lyons
- Re: Warload of a US aircraft carrier
- From: g lof2
- Re: Warload of a US aircraft carrier
- From: William Black
- Re: Warload of a US aircraft carrier
- From: Tankfixer
- Re: Warload of a US aircraft carrier
- From: Paul J. Adam
- Re: Warload of a US aircraft carrier
- From: Tankfixer
- Re: Warload of a US aircraft carrier
- From: Paul J. Adam
- Re: Warload of a US aircraft carrier
- From: Tankfixer
- Re: Warload of a US aircraft carrier
- From: Paul J. Adam
- Re: Warload of a US aircraft carrier
- From: aminyard
- Re: Warload of a US aircraft carrier
- Prev by Date: Re: Gun Development
- Next by Date: Re: Arsenal Ships: (was) Warload of a US aircraft carrier
- Previous by thread: Re: Warload of a US aircraft carrier
- Next by thread: Re: Warload of a US aircraft carrier
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading