Hunter Suggests NATO Take Over JFK Flattop

Aviation Now ^ | 15 May 06 | Michael Bruno

[LSUfan]

The chairman of the House Armed Services Committee is suggesting NATO take over the USS John F. Kennedy aircraft carrier, which the U.S. Navy and the Bush administration want to retire early for budget reasons.

[thinkthenpost]

"ORISKANY Departing"

[Non-Sequitur]

It's a shame those those two ships could have seen service into early 2010's if kept up right.

Well the Cold War was over and nobody thought we'd be in continuous wars in the Middle East. The Kitty Hawk should be gone in another couple of years.

I'm real surprised Teddy hasn't called for museum hold though.

He probably will, once the decision to decommission is made. Then watch them appropriate half a billion or so to spiff her up for the tourists.

I'm gonna look around and see if they sank the ORISKANY this morning.

I thought I heard she went down on schedule. Still waiting for the video.

[Levante]

"Out of curiosity can you name a NATO country besides Britain that operates carriers?"

Spain and Italy. But they are very small "Harrier Carriers."

[varon]

Put it in NYC, use the deck for automobile parking, and the UN would have tons of office space.

Better yet, put UN Headquarters on it, take it out to mid-Pacific and sink it!!!

[AFreeBird]

They can't use a catapault. Cats are steam powered and the British carriers are gas turbine driven.

Okay, so they couldn't set up a small boiler for cat ops? I'm sure the steam powered carrier boilers are only bleeding off a relatively small amount for cat ops, so it's not like it would have to be a large boiler.

And I had also read that the Navy was working on new technologies that would replace our steam cats.

Still, for a carrier that is supposed to be close in size to a Nimitz class carrier, one would think that it would be designed for a faster operational tempo regarding aircraft launches and recovery, and based upon the artist rendering, it doesn't look like this carrier would suffice.

[Non-Sequitur]

Okay, so they couldn't set up a small boiler for cat ops? I'm sure the steam powered carrier boilers are only bleeding off a relatively small amount for cat ops, so it's not like it would have to be a large boiler.

A very inefficient use of your engineering space. If you insist in cats then make it a steam plant. Simple as that.

[thinkthenpost]

If Congressman Hunter really thinks this is a good idea, how about the Kitty Hawk when she is decommed, I bet she'll still be in better shape than the JFK.

[cva66snipe]

If that post is true it's weird cannibalizing a hot carrier.

[Jeff Head]

On top of that...it's not in the best of shape. Rode hard and put up wet. A victim of beaurocratic oversight that let her down IMHO.

NATO not only would take years to come up to speed on its operation (ie. they have no supercarriers, no experience with these boilers, and they have no carrier based CTOL aircraft), they would be getting something at the end of its service life. There are reasons we want to decommission her and the economic reasons are not to get us to one less carrier...IMHO, it's because she is costing too much to maintain and keep up.

[Reagan 76]

Actually, if Taiwan received it they'd only be manning it with 5000 MEN, saving the costs of the dual fitted heads, day care centers, illegitimate-birthing subsidies, etc. that the US Navy is forced to maintain.

[Non-Sequitur]

Actually, if Taiwan received it they'd only be manning it with 5000 MEN, saving the costs of the dual fitted heads, day care centers, illegitimate-birthing subsidies, etc. that the US Navy is forced to maintain.

OK, you've established that you don't believe that women belong in the armed forces. Good for you. Now what exactly is Taiwan supposed to do with a clapped out, run down, non-operational aircraft carrier?

[Reagan 76]

"OK, you've established that you don't believe that women belong in the armed forces."

No, I've established the Taiwanese don't deal with what our Post-Reagan Navy deals with.

[SunkenCiv]

http://navysite.de/cvn/cv67.htm
“...the last conventionally-powered aircraft carrier built by the US Navy.”

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/cv-67.htm
“In September 1995, the USS John F. Kennedy became the Naval Reserve’s first aircraft carrier. Homeported at Mayport, FL, her primary function during contingency operations is to provide a surge capability, and in peacetime to support Navy force training requirements. As with all other Reserve ships, she remained fully mission ready.”

[SunkenCiv]

Note: this topic is from 5/16/2006. The ship has been decommissioned and in March was towed to a naval storage facility in Philly: "She was officially decommissioned on 1 August 2007 [2] leaving the USS Kitty Hawk (CV-63)Template:WP Ships USS instances as the US Navy's only conventionally-powered carrier remaining in commission." *