So fitting! Remains of the WTC to be constructed into a battleship! (1 Viewer)

[Inspector Hammer!]

I heard this on the news last night and I for one think this a tremeandously great idea! Has anyone heard this?

 

[Patrick_S]

It would be a stupid idea and besides the report you heard has got to be pure fantasy.

The US Navy doesn't use Battleships anymore because they are obsolete in modern navel warfare. In today’s Navel it is all about carrier battle groups and Submarines.

 

[Jeff Kleist]

The report is true, the battleship part is not. It's going to be an amphibious attack vessel USS New York

They haven't made new battleships in over 60 years

Runty ready for resurrection to the OAR Avengers!

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Obviously i'm not too keen on the in's and out's of the NAVY so I must have misunderstood what they said, my bad folks. :b
However an amphibious attack vessle is still too cool!

 

[Patrick_S]

The report is true, the battleship part is not.

Obviously the report as stated in the thread title is not true since it is not a Battleship they are going to build.

Reusing the scrapped steel is of course a good idea, why have it go into a landfill when they can simply melt it down and reuse it.

 

[Robert_eb]

How about using it to build a memorial?

 

[Joseph DeMartino]

How about using it to build a memorial?

Some of it is going into the eventual memorial. And the new ship itself will constitute something of a memorial. But do you have any idea how much scrap steel was hauled out of that site? We're talking two 110 story towers that were largely made of steel. Unless you plan on building a memorial exactly the same size as the original towers, some of it is going to be put to other uses.

BTW, New York State had to get special dispensation from the Navy both to use the steel (assuming that it passes Q.C. checks) and to name the vessel. In U.S. Naval usage only the most powerful capital ships afloat can be named after states. From around 1900 to the end of WWII this meant battleships. For the past few decades this has meant ballistic missle submarines. (Starting with the Ohio class.) Carriers, the next most powerful vessels, are named for either individuals - usually Presidents - or for earlier carriers. (Hence the U.S.S. Enterprise and the U.S.S. Theodore Roosevelt.) U.S. cities give their names to fast attack submarines, like the Los Angeles class. "New York", either in reference to the city or the state, could not normally be used as the name of a surface ship, but the Secretary of the Navy made an exception in this case.

Regards,

Joe

 

[Scott L]

I saw an article last year that reported how they were scrapping the steel and shipping it to India to be used to make furniture. I guess there's more of it to go around.
http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htfo...threadid=40217

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Furniture!? Man, that's kinda creepy, can you imagine having a couch and chair in your house made out of steel from the WTC!?

Gives me goosepimples to think about it.

 

[Vickie_M]

I'm not surprised at ALL that they'd think to use steel from the WTC for a military purpose.

I think I'm going to be sick.

(Edited to take out references to current "troubles" in distant lands)

 

[Yee-Ming]

Joseph: why not then use the steel in an Ohio or LA class submarine?

although my guess would be that there aren't any being planned right now, and/or those already ordered/under construction have already been named and the state/city getting bumped might be a bit cheesed off.

but if an exception were to be made, why not go the whole hog and name an aircraft carrier New York? again maybe because there aren't any further Nimitzs being planned. if memory serves, they've just started work on the George Bush (Sr).

 

[Frank Anderson]

Any links for the Navy ship?

 

[JayV]

Joseph: why not then use the steel in an Ohio or LA class submarine?

Yee-Ming, as you pointed out, these aren't built any more. 688s are, what, two generations old now? Also, a question back at you: do you prefer to be addressed as "Yee-Ming" or "Yee" or "Ming"?

Besides, what could be more appropriate than an amphib, a vessel designed for delivering a MAGTF and its materiel?

It seems that they're used so often for both military and humanitarian missions these days; I really like the idea. And I suspect the extent of its use will be a steel beam runing through its messdecks and the wardroom.

Finally, Navy naming conventions have been treated pretty loosely in the last 20 or 30 years. For example, only battleships had state names traditionally (as was pointed out earlier in this thread). Admiral Rickover decided to name the new boats after states and cities instead of fish, which was tradition until then. When he was questioned why he did this, he purportedly replied "Because fish don't vote."

-j

 

[LDfan]

It would be neat to see another battleship created although I don't think our shipyards have the know-how to weld such large ships these days.
Battleships really aren't as obsolete as some may think. Despite their age and size they are still the fastest ships in the fleet and their guns make ideal close shore support.

Jeff

 

[Joseph DeMartino]

Admiral Rickover decided to name the new boats after states and cities instead of fish, which was tradition until then. When he was questioned why he did this, he purportedly replied "Because fish don't vote."

Rickover was, of course, also well-known for being a smart-ass. The reason the state names started going to "boomers" is that they were now the most powerful ships (or boats) in the fleet. Aircraft carriers may be the new capital ship among surface vessels, but no single warship carries the concentrated striking power of a nuclear missle sub. Still, Rickover was a consumate politician when it came to getting funding for his projects, so I'm sure he was at least half-serious about his "fish" comment. But I think the "power" argument is the one that convinced his fellow admirals to change the naming convention.
I'll pass over Vickie_M's comments as this forum has rules about political discussions - and one violation of them per thread is more than enough.
Regards,
Joe

 

[John Spencer]

In today’s Navel it is all about carrier battle groups and Submarines.

Really? I thought that in today's navel it was all about piercings and encircling tatoos, but I could be wrong.

 

[Moe Maishlish]

I'm not surprised at ALL that they'd think to use steel from the WTC for a military purpose.
Maybe we should send some of it over to Afganistan to help rebuild the country.
I think I'm going to be sick.

Perhaps not as sick as many of the readers of this forum may feel after reading your comments.
I'll avoid further agression, and simply ask an admin to either remove the offensive text, or lock the thread.
Moe.

 

[Patrick_S]

Battleships really aren't as obsolete as some may think. Despite their age and size they are still the fastest ships in the fleet and their guns make ideal close shore support.

Some one correct me in I'm wrong but if I recall correctly all of the Battleships that were refitted in the boondoggle 80s have now been decommissioned and are in mothballs.

 

[Frank Anderson]

Moe,
I believe Vicki was just expressing her displeasure/disagreement for the use of the steel in her first sentence. Nothing wrong with that. Not everyone would agree to it or think it a good idea.
I believe her second sentence was sarcasm and while it may have offended you I am sure she did not mean to. Write her a PM and discuss it with her. At this time I don't see a need to lock the tread but based just on the emotional subject matter I can certainly see where it could get closed quickly.

 

[Jack Briggs]

I'll go one better: Moe, those were not nice things to say to another HTF member in public. Vickie's comments certainly didn't sicken me; she feels very strongly about matters related to the terrorist attacks of 2001.