U.S.S. Yorktown in Trouble

[k5083]

Just thinking out loud, would these old ships be better off if they were preserved in fresh water ports, like one of the cities on the Great Lakes or the Mississippi?

August

[Holedigger]

Or indoors like U-505 in her new underground bunker! I know, the expense would be tremendous and ships belong on water!

[Pogmusic]

As a fresh water sailor the quick answer is yes. The long answer would be that ships THAT big (i.e Yorktown) would have a hard time getting too far inland. Ships the size of a DD are/were in the Mississippi (Baton Rouge) and other major rivers. Not sure of the Great Lakes.

[p51]

As someone into RR preservation as well, I always find it odd how a city will take on a ship, building, steam locomotive, or some similar large metal object like that and then expect that once they have it, it won’t need massive upkeep. Then later on, following administrations will cry, “But we can’t afford to paint or maintain this thing,” and then people will start suggesting to get rid of the problem or (God forbid) scrap the thing to make the problem go away.
For example, when San Francisco decided not to accept the USS Iowa as a museum ship, people thought that was a anti-military move. And it could have been for all I know. Still, I can’t help but wonder if maybe they knew something others don’t. There’s the USS Hornet across the bay, which is operating hand-to-mouth as a museum right now (it was closed in the middle of a Saturday the only time I ever visited Alameda). I can’t say I blame the city if they’re thinking they might be taking on a responsibility they’re unable or unwilling to do. I’d hate to see these ships go to the torch, but they’re massive things that require constant maintenance just to keep them afloat. You think maintaining a stuffed and mounted airplane in a museum is rough? That’s nothing I’d bet compared to a large ship like a carrier.
I think the year was 1997, I was in New Orleans and there was a WW2 escort carrier anchored right off the river downtown. I think it was the USS Cabot. Apparently a good home couldn’t be secured for the ship not too long after I saw it, she was cut up for scrap.

[Obergrafeter]

The Cabot made at least one more sail, down to Brownsville for scrapping.

[Hawkeye]

The ships would be better off in fresh water, buts its no permanent solution. In Toronto we used to have the HMCS Haida berthed on our waterfront, but she had to undergo a 5 million dollar refit 6 or 7 years ago as large sections of hull plating had almost rusted through. Now shes sitting in Hamilton.

[Garth]

$100 million to $120 million to drydock and repair the ship?

There's something not quite right about that number, as it indicates (the article being explicit) major structural problems with the ship.

Intrepid up in NYC just finished a major drydocking and refurbishment. She should be, structurally, a twin of Yorktown. Built in the same yard, laid down on the same day (Dec 1, 1941) and launched and commissioned with a few months of Yorktown. There's no way that she cost that much to refirb.

The article mentions the bow area being problematic, and she does differ from Intrepid in bow design (Yorktown has the rounded hurricane bow, Intrepid the flat one).

There IS mention elsewhere that Intrepid was FRAM'd, while Yorktown's FRAM was "cancelled due to ship's poor condition" (see http://www.hazegray.org/navhist/carrier ... t.htm#cv10). I wonder if that's the delta in refirb costs between the two ships?

[Jerry O'Neill]

Though situation for South Carolina.

I know it's a small ship, but the USS Albacore in Portsmouth., NH, is land locked.
They cut a channel from the river into it's location then floated her in. Once it was filled in, the water drained and it now rests in a fresh water reflecting pool with doors cut into it's sides for visitors. It's not sitting fully in water, but it's very accessible for routine care.
Jerry

[CraigQ]

As a fresh water sailor the quick answer is yes. The long answer would be that ships THAT big (i.e Yorktown) would have a hard time getting too far inland. Ships the size of a DD are/were in the Mississippi (Baton Rouge) and other major rivers. Not sure of the Great Lakes.

An example of how hard a time that would be is the submarine USS Razorback now docked in Little Rock Arkansas. It was bought from Turkey and towed across and brought up the Mississippi River, then up the Arkansas River to LR. They actually had to wait a couple of days somewhere around Greeneville, MS (IIRC)until the river rose enough to continue. And that was with a sub,

Craig Q

[k5083]

Having looked into the matter, I've learned that the Yorktown is both too long and too wide for the locks at Welland and thus there is no way that she could get from the seaway to the upper Great Lakes. She could get to Lake Ontario and as far as Buffalo, but no further inland.

The largest "salties" as oceangoing visitors to the upper Lakes are called, are 730' long. There are Lakes freighters larger than the Yorktown, but they are forever trapped in the Lakes.

Ships last a long time in Great Lakes fresh water. Much of the freighter fleet is over 50 years old, and several ships are nearing 100. A number of decorated WWII combat veteran cargo ships (i.e. ships whose convoys came under attack) have been rebuilt as freighters and serve in the Lakes to this day. These ships, of course, are small enough to be salties.

August

[cozmo]

If that is what it takes to keep them around.

I was very disappointed when I first found out about the plan to put the Texas on dry land, but I would prefer her to be on land than gone.

The Cavalla and Stewart are on land, so is the Batfish and the Marlin and the Hazard and the Albalcore and the Drum. Those are just the one's I can think of off the top of may head.

If it works for the Texas, it would work for the Yorktown.

[Owen Miller]

A few years ago Battleship Park faced a similar dilemma. Loooong
story short, a coffer darn was built around the battleship and the
water drained out. A trankhoe was used to dig out one section of
the mud surrounding her. The rusted plating was cut off and new
plates welded in place. Then the mud was replaced and another
section dug out. Up and down 680" on both sides took a long time.

At the same time the sub was brought ashore and now sits on
concrete pedestals on dry land. As I recall the bill was $9 million,
That was about ten years ago.

IIRC that is $1 million less that it is costing Patriots Point to drydock
Laffey. So that should give some perspective.

There is legistation in place that prohibits spending DoD money to
help museums. There do seem to be ways around that that I would
like to better understand, The USS Missouri is undergoing hull work
and deck repair ont in Hawaii. I've heard figures quoted from $11
million to $18 million. What is REALLY interesting is that some of
the funds come in the form of a gov't grant. I have not seen figures
on how it breaks down.

http://newsok.com/mighty-mo-undergoing- ... e/3409969#

Don't get wrong: I'd like to see all the museum ships we have tody
saved for future generations, I do worry that we will undertake to
save so many, the needed funds just won't be there. When they
decommission USS Enterprise I'd like to see her saved but it be an
unprecented undertaking. The three stupidest thung the USN has
ever done is nuke the old Sara, cut up Ent CV-6, and let the Cabot
get away,

[Garth]

When they
decommission USS Enterprise I'd like to see her saved but it be an
unprecented undertaking.

The chances of Enterprise being saved fall into two categories: Slim. And none.

There have been attempts to save other nuke ships. A few submarines, the USS Long Beach and the USS Virginia. John Warner wanted Virginia for Nauticus (where Wisky is now) and the Navy didn't just tell him no, they told him HELL NO.

Let me repeat that ... the Navy told then-sitting US Senator John Warner "NO". Anyone who knows even the slightest bit about Senator Warner's life and career should understand clearly the significance of that.

Nautilus is a special case, and as has been mentioned the USN maintains more control over her than any other museum ship, with the possible exception of Constitution (which is still in commission).

From what I've heard (all open source speculation on various discussion boards) they'll probably put Enterprise up in PSNSY, cut out her reactors for burial on the Hanford reservation with the other ship reactors, then seal off and fill the reactor compartments with concrete. THEN haul her out somewhere very, very deep and sink her. And doing THAT is going to cost a small fortune. The Navy might be willing to save her island for display somewhere. And my hope is that the Navy would be smart enough to cut the eight portholes they salvaged from CV-6 out of her and install them on the next Enterprise. Assuming it's actually a ship worthy of the name (given current naming conventions I could really see the Navy hanging the name onto one of the LCSs).