stuckincincy Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 The conventionally-powered carrier USS John F. Kennedy is going to be retired from service. I'd hate to see it scrapped (with the attendant expense). Any thoughts/comments about it's fate? I wonder if GB or Australia or Japan would like to take it over - I searched and it runs about 120M per year in operating cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 The conventionally-powered carrier USS John F. Kennedy is going to be retired from service. I'd hate to see it scrapped (with the attendant expense). Any thoughts/comments about it's fate? I wonder if GB or Australia or Japan would like to take it over - I searched and it runs about 120M per year in operating cost. 192991[/snapback] If I kept the thermostat at 68 and insulated, could I get that down to about $1,500/month? I'm in the market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 The conventionally-powered carrier USS John F. Kennedy is going to be retired from service. I'd hate to see it scrapped (with the attendant expense). Any thoughts/comments about it's fate? I wonder if GB or Australia or Japan would like to take it over - I searched and it runs about 120M per year in operating cost. 192991[/snapback] Probably goes into the reserve fleet, sits mothballed for a while, then gets broken up when the first or second CVNX is launched. And it is usually cheaper to scrap them than it is to keep them mothballed - particularly the JFK, as she's conventionally powered. When they reture the Enterprise or Nimitz, that's going to be expensive. And no countries are likely to take it over. Japan's forbidden by law to have carrier forces (or any expeditionary forces; the deployment of the Japanese Navy to the Indian Ocean for relief work is a serious rarity). She's half-again too big for Great Britian's needs or budget...who's collaborating with France (<snicker>) on their next-generation full-deck carrier anyway. And the Aussies need a carrier like I need a bigger brain. Only countries that can both use and afford carriers, really, are the one's we're least likely to give them to: China and India. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted January 4, 2005 Author Share Posted January 4, 2005 Probably goes into the reserve fleet, sits mothballed for a while, then gets broken up when the first or second CVNX is launched. And it is usually cheaper to scrap them than it is to keep them mothballed - particularly the JFK, as she's conventionally powered. When they reture the Enterprise or Nimitz, that's going to be expensive. And no countries are likely to take it over. Japan's forbidden by law to have carrier forces (or any expeditionary forces; the deployment of the Japanese Navy to the Indian Ocean for relief work is a serious rarity). She's half-again too big for Great Britian's needs or budget...who's collaborating with France (<snicker>) on their next-generation full-deck carrier anyway. And the Aussies need a carrier like I need a bigger brain. Only countries that can both use and afford carriers, really, are the one's we're least likely to give them to: China and India. 193119[/snapback] Thanks for the info, Tom. Perhaps she will be moored somewhere and ultimately become a museum piece/tourist attraction. That would be quite an endeavor, I know. A proud ship due all honors, whatever it's fate may be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blzrul Posted January 6, 2005 Share Posted January 6, 2005 I heard Ashcroft, as a parting gift, is going to load it up with evildoers and sink it in Lake Erie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 6, 2005 Share Posted January 6, 2005 I heard Ashcroft, as a parting gift, is going to load it up with evildoers and sink it in Lake Erie. 195093[/snapback] I think in the Navy they use the term: scuttle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RabidBillsFanVT Posted January 6, 2005 Share Posted January 6, 2005 Good... it's about time. That CVN has been a pain in the a$$ to the Navy for a few years now... the Kitty Hawk looked much better for its age than the JFK! It is going to save the Navy a lot of money and heartache by doing this. No other nation will take her, I imagine... we just don't give away a nuke like that. It's not like it's the Yorktown or something, remember! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack_USN Posted January 6, 2005 Share Posted January 6, 2005 It will be stripped. And probably sent up to Newport, R.I. where there are currently two decommisioned carriers pierside. JFK is junk. Ship was in such bad condition 3 years ago, that its scheduled 6 month deployment was delayed 3 months and the skipper was relieved. Horror stories of people actually being able to put their whole hand through rusted steel bulkheads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted January 6, 2005 Share Posted January 6, 2005 Let's sell it to Israel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Warden Posted January 6, 2005 Share Posted January 6, 2005 Ship was in such bad condition 3 years ago, that its scheduled 6 month deployment was delayed 3 months and the skipper was relieved. The ship was just overhauled starting Jan, 2003 "After some exercises in the Atlantic Ocean, the carrier headed for New York City in July 2000, where it participated in the International Naval Review celebrations and afterwards the KENNEDY conducted another port visit to Boston and was back in Mayport, Fla. in August." "After poor marks on a December inspection, the Navy stripped Capt. Maurice Joyce of his command in December 2001, and KENNEDY's scheduled deployment was delayed a month." USS JOHN F. KENNEDY, which endured serious mechanical problems during the deployment, will begin a nine-month overhaul in January. From October 4 - November 4, 2002, JFK conducted carrier qualifications for Fleet Readiness Squadrons (FRS), Training Command (TRACOM) students and TRACOM instructors in the western Atlantic Ocean. On January 6, 2003, KENNEDY began a nine-month overhaul at the ship's homeport in Mayport, Fla. Ready to return to sea in October, the carrier's next major mission was Operation Blinding Storm which was the combined joint task force exercise for the KENNEDY strike Group. Departing Mayport, Fla., on June 7, 2004, the Strike Group participated in the CJTFEX till June 18, and after being certified to deploy, the carrier set sail for the Mediterranean. After a port visit to Malta from June 26 - 29, the strike group continued its voyage through the Suez Canal and entered the Persian Gulf on July 7. Local operations including direct support of Operation Iraqi Freedom lasted till November 20, when the KENNEDY was relieved by the USS HARRY S. TRUMAN (CVN 75). After another Suez Canal Transit, the KENNEDY returned home to Mayport on December 13, 2004. During the deployment CVW-17 aircraft flew 8,296 sorties for a total flight time of 21,824 hours. Of that total, 4,396 sorties and 11,607 flight hours were in direct support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. http://www.navysite.de/cvn/cv67.htm Aaah - A namesake charges in : http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washingt...john_f_kennedy/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody Posted January 6, 2005 Share Posted January 6, 2005 The govt spends 9 months overhauling it just 2 years ago and now they are scrapping it? There's a fine use of our tax money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted January 6, 2005 Share Posted January 6, 2005 The govt spends 9 months overhauling it just 2 years ago and now they are scrapping it? There's a fine use of our tax money. 195528[/snapback] Some senator probably needed to make sure there were union jobs available for his constituants. Happens all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RabidBillsFanVT Posted January 6, 2005 Share Posted January 6, 2005 The govt spends 9 months overhauling it just 2 years ago and now they are scrapping it? There's a fine use of our tax money. 195528[/snapback] Believe me, the Navy was ALREADY plenty embarassed when they had to pour all this money into her. Plenty of people got relieved over this whole fiasco... so we KNOW it was a waste. Believe me, the govt does it all the time... They spent millions of dollars in construction costs into buildings in Roosevelt Roads, Puerto Rico, only to have to close the whole base down. These things are common. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted January 6, 2005 Share Posted January 6, 2005 Let's sell it to Israel. 195199[/snapback] That's actually a better idea than you think it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted January 6, 2005 Share Posted January 6, 2005 That's actually a better idea than you think it is. 195821[/snapback] Wanna bet. I realize how great of an idea it. Could you imagine Israel projecting power? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted January 6, 2005 Share Posted January 6, 2005 Wanna bet. I realize how great of an idea it. Could you imagine Israel projecting power? 195913[/snapback] I'd love to see the Arabs get the shiat bombed out of them and we didn't have to do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted January 8, 2005 Author Share Posted January 8, 2005 I heard Ashcroft, as a parting gift, is going to load it up with evildoers and sink it in Lake Erie. 195093[/snapback] So it's last port of call will be Hyannisport, MA? Might have trouble negotiating the St. Lawrence Seaway and the Welland Canal, though... BTW, seriously, hope you had happy holidays, blz. We are friends now, remember? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Warden Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 "A proud ship due all honors, whatever it's fate may be." After stripping all reusable materials - sometimes they just sink them ! The Oriskany (CVA-34) is on it's way http://www.ussoriskany.com/id18.html Following twenty-five years of service, Oriskany was decommissioned 30 September 1975. She was stricken from the Naval Vessel Register in July 1989, and sold for scrapping on 9 September 1995. The contractor defaulted and the ship was repossessed by the Navy, with the contract terminated 30 July 1997. The ship remained at the Beaumont Reserve Fleet in Beaumont, Tex., until December 2004 when she was towed to Pensacola, Fla., for prepration to be sunk as an artifical reef in the summer of 2005. http://peoships.crane.navy.mil/reefing/faqs.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody Posted January 10, 2005 Share Posted January 10, 2005 I'd love to see the Arabs get the shiat bombed out of them and we didn't have to do it. Except 3/4ths of the crew would probably still be american and repair costs would probably still be paid by the US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 10, 2005 Share Posted January 10, 2005 So it's last port of call will be Hyannisport, MA? Might have trouble negotiating the St. Lawrence Seaway and the Welland Canal, though... BTW, seriously, hope you had happy holidays, blz. We are friends now, remember? 198158[/snapback] A WHOLE lot of cutting! Getting there is a whole 'nother story! Only the American lock (Poe) at the Soo (1200'x110') might accomdate it... BUT, then again that is past Lake Erie and Ashcroft's desired location. The Poe accomadates the super-lakers... Then draft and beam would be an issue. The Welland would be a tough squeeze at (766'x80', Lock #8 is 1148'x80')... Like a "blivet": "Ten pounds of sh*t in a 5 pound bag!" With its (USS JFK) beam being about 130' and length at just over 1,000 feet... I take it can't navigate the Panama Canal (1000'x110')either? That horizontal clearance (beam) has got to be pretty solid, so I guess any modification is out of the question??... The radical beam is at a whopping 249' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts