What's new
By:
Filters
Gamecock Fanatics

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Aircraft carrier USS Kitty Hawk (CV-63) getting scrapped in Brownsville, TX

kingofnerf

kingofnerf

GCF Super Moderator
Messages
10,891
Fanatics Cash
51,898
Points
8,216
It is a shame to see her taken apart like that. I do understand that she was old and had been replaced by much better equipment, but it just seems they could have found some other way to use her.
If not letting an ally like Israel use her, maybe target practice and a new artificial reef that scuba divers could enjoy for many, many years.
I served on CVN-69, the Ike, for 3 years. I hate to hear that she is close to being decommissioned, but she is coming up on 50 years of service. After serving on an aircraft carrier, it is hard to imagine them not always being useful. We completed some amazing things on Ike, and she was a mighty vessel. Sadly, they cost hundreds of millions to keep in operation, but someone like Reagan would have found a way to keep them in service. There is no such thing as TOO MANY aircraft carriers. They are the strongest offensive weapon our military has today. No other country has anything close to ours.
 
The standard for many years was a total of 15 carriers and the rule of thirds: 1/3 at sea, 1/3 in the yard for maintenance, and 1/3 in reserve status of some kind.

Now we're down to 10 total I think. The Japanese and Australians have never liked nuclear-powered ships anywhere their countries. It was a big deal when the USS Ronald Reagan relieved the KItty Hawk as the forward-deployed carrier that was based in Japan a while back.

Maybe we need a carrier in between the CVNs and the LHD in size. Maybe about the size of the old Essex-class boats.

Both the John F. Kennedy and Kitty Hawk were sold to the scrappers for one penny each. A sad state of affairs to be sure.
 
kingofnerf said:
Both the John F. Kennedy and Kitty Hawk were sold to the scrappers for one penny each. A sad state of affairs to be sure.
Click to expand...
62K tons, $175.00 /ton. means the penny makes them over $10,000,000 less labor and equipment cost. I don't have a port or the equipment but I would pay a dollar for one if I did.
 
the ole shitty kitty.. Had some shipmates that went to her after their deployment with the Tarawa.
 
kingofnerf said:
The standard for many years was a total of 15 carriers and the rule of thirds: 1/3 at sea, 1/3 in the yard for maintenance, and 1/3 in reserve status of some kind.

Now we're down to 10 total I think. The Japanese and Australians have never liked nuclear-powered ships anywhere their countries. It was a big deal when the USS Ronald Reagan relieved the KItty Hawk as the forward-deployed carrier that was based in Japan a while back.

Maybe we need a carrier in between the CVNs and the LHD in size. Maybe about the size of the old Essex-class boats.

Both the John F. Kennedy and Kitty Hawk were sold to the scrappers for one penny each. A sad state of affairs to be sure.
Click to expand...
I think we have 11 don't we? Or maybe it's down to 10 now. But the next to us is 2.
 
gamecock88 said:
I think we have 11 don't we? Or maybe it's down to 10 now. But the next to us is 2.
Click to expand...
It's these 10:

USS Nimitz (CVN 68), Bremerton, Washington
USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN 69), Norfolk, Virginia
USS Carl Vinson (CVN 70), San Diego, California
USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN 71), Bremerton, Washington
USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72), San Diego, California
USS George Washington (CVN 73), Newport News, Virginia
USS John C. Stennis (CVN 74), Newport News, Virginia
USS Harry S Truman (CVN 75), Norfolk, Virginia
USS Ronald Reagan (CVN 76), Yokosuka, Japan
USS George H.W. Bush (CVN 77), Norfolk, Virginia

Plus the new Gerald R. Ford-class ship:

USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78), Norfolk, Virginia

With these to follow:

PCU John F. Kennedy (CVN 79)
PCU Enterprise (CVN 80)
PCU Doris Miller (CVN 81)

CVN-78 went through some lengthy delays, but finally deployed recently.

news.usni.org

VIDEO: USS Gerald R. Ford Makes Norwegian Port Call, Kremlin Calls Visit ‘Illogical, Harmful’ - USNI News

Aircraft carrier USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78) pulled into Oslo, Norway on Wednesday for a port call to the Norwegian capital, according to U.S. 6th Fleet. The port visit for Ford, the embarked Carrier Air Wing 8 and its escorts is the first one in the strike group’s first global deployment. Royal...
news.usni.org news.usni.org

Brand new and into the danger zone.
 
kingofnerf said:
CVN-78 went through some lengthy delays, but finally deployed recently.
Click to expand...

And after going through those delays, the next 3 will get commissioned way quicker.
Being an ex-CVN sailor, I think having 14 would almost be enough. Sadly, Nimitz and Ike are real close to being de-commissioned.
50 years is a long time for any piece of military equipment. I left Ike in 87. I can only imagine how hard it may be to keep everything up and running now. We worked hard to keep it ship shape back then. Kind of like our bodies, things just break over time.

I just hope they keep building CVN's faster than they de-comm them.
 
I saw where the Navy was going to decommission the troublesome LCS ships and is returning to a "Blue Water Navy" strategy.

That would seem to make sense. The Ticonderoga CGs are old, but at least they don't break down all the time.
 
AikenGameFan said:
I just hope they keep building CVN's faster than they de-comm them.
Click to expand...
I read an article a few weeks back about the possibility of buying destroyers from the ROK or Japan. Both build DDGs based upon our designs and can build them faster/cheaper than US shipyards.
 
Last edited:
JimG said:
I read and article a few weeks back about the possibility of buying destroyers from the ROK or Japan. Both build DDGs based upon our designs and can build them faster/cheaper than US shipyards.
Click to expand...
And then maybe we sell some of our ships to Ukraine to replace their lost assets as well, similar to the Lend-Lease stuff done in WW2?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top