Garth wrote:
skymstr02 wrote:
Thats not the original island when the ship was first constructed. The current island was outfitted during an overhaul in 1990, so there is no real historic value to that item to justify the cost involved.
Actually it is the original island. It was just reconfigured (during her 1980 overhaul) removing the billboard arrays and beehive. Over they years the island acquired various bumps and blisters for ECM, SeaSparrow targeting arrays and satellite communications equipment, but it's still the same island.
Garth is right. I see no reason the navy would remove the island only to replace it with one that is exactly the same. Fun fact: The reason the island has the strange shape it does is because it was designed to accommodate the "billboard radars" mentioned above.
Garth wrote:
1. I'm skeptical. CVN-80 hasn't even been ordered yet, and there's plenty of time to change her name. Anyone else recall that CVN-75 was originally named "USS United States", but had it's name changed to "Harry S Truman" after the mid-1990s Republican Congress ordered CVN-76 to be named "Ronald Reagan"?
I haven't heard that before, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's true. However, there might have been something else at play in the decision to make that name change. History tells us that no one likes it when a ship carries the name of its country. It's too much of a propaganda coup for the enemy if it gets sunk, not to mention if you're superstitious. The Germans did it with the pocket-battleship Deutschland during WWII, it became the Lutzow.
I know there are many instances in the past when ships' names have been changed, however, I doubt that they'll change CVN-80's name.
Garth wrote:
2. My understanding is that there are bits of CV-6 incorporated into CVN-65. Including portholes (anywhere from 3 to 8 depending on the stories of the three in the CO's in-port cabin and the five in the alternate conning station in the bow). These definitely need to be preserved and if possible incorporated into CVN-80 (assuming that she bears the name.
Photo:
http://navylive.dodlive.mil/files/2012/06/portholes_Enterprise.jpgI known about those portholes and was wondering what was going to happen to them. If they're not preserved, well...

There's a fact about the portholes that I never understood. The NMNA has a porthole from CV-6 as well. However, they claim that it is
"the only porthole to survive the scrapping of the Enterprise in 1959". Have they never heard of the ones installed in CVN-65? I find that hard to believe.
old iron wrote:
(why are we naming carriers after presidents (or members of Congress) who are often still alive? It is apparent that our politicains have no sense for naval traditions)
Ugh. Don't get me started. The name of
LCS-10 is the worst idea I have ever heard.
I have a peeve about bad nomenclature and designations. SSN-21, F-35, Hyman G. Rickover, Henry M. Jackson, John Warner - all are out of sequence or naming scheme. (I know that CVN-80's name is now breaking the theme as well, but that's one exception I
can make.) I have to go lie down now...
_________________
Tri-State Warbird Museum Collections Manager & Museum Attendant
Warbird Philosophy Webmaster