CVN-80 Named Enterprise

[billy1928]

On December 01, 2012 the Secretary of the Navy Announced that the namesake ENTERPRISE will continue with is 9 incarnation on the CVN-80

http://www.defense.g...releaseid=15708

 

I find this a relief that the US Navy will continue to have an ENTERPRISE as a capital ship

 

There are even rumors that the island of the CVN-65 will be preserved as a museum

 

http://nns.huntingto...65/img/logo.png

 

 

CVN-80 is scheduled to finish construction 2025

 

The Enterprise Lineage

by Newport News Shipbuilding

 

 

 

 

1775 - The first USS Enterprise was a sloop-of-war originally named George. She fought in the Battle of Quebec (1775) and the Battle of Valcour Island (1776) during the Revolutionary War for the Continental Navy.

 

 

1776 - The second Enterprise, a schooner, served on the Chesapeake Bay under the Continental Navy, also during the Revolutionary War.

 

1799 - The third USS Enterprise fired the first shots in the First Barbary War. She was built as a 12-gun schooner later re-rigged as a 14-gun brig.

 

 

1831 - The fourth USS Enterprise was a 10-gun schooner.

 

1874 - The fifth USS Enterprise (1874) was a barque-rigged screw sloop.

 

 

1917 - USS Enterprise (SP-790) was a motor yacht and served as a non-commissioned vessel during World War I.

 

1938 - USS Enterprise (CV-6), "Big E", was a Yorktown-class aircraft carrier that served in World War II. It is the most decorated vessel in the history of the U.S. Navy. During the war in the Pacific, CV-6 and her air group sunk or damaged 35 Japanese vessels and shot down 185 Japanese aircraft. She received 20 battle stars and both a Presidential Unit Citation and a Navy Unit Commendation for her service. She was built by Newport News Shipbuilding.

 

 

1961 - USS Enterprise (CVN 65), also nicknamed "Big E," became the world's first nuclear-powered surface vessel when it was comissioned. It has served in every major U.S. military conflict in its 51-year service. CVN 65 Infographic

2012 - At the Inactivation Ceremony for CVN 65 on Dec. 1, 2012, Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus announced that CVN 80 will carry on the name USS Enterprise. It will be the third Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier

 

 

[ScarredJosh]

Love it. Im glad they will keep the tradition alive. +1 for the Big E

[El3m3nttt]

Lets hope it survives till the Humans go extinct.

[Crag_r]

El3m3nttt, on 19 January 2013 - 10:26 AM, said:

Lets hope it survives till the Humans go extinct.

As i device used to deliver Nuclear Weapons i highly doubt the Chinese or Russians would let it live that long, so it would miss out by about half an hour so we can call it close enough  :Smile_trollface:

[El3m3nttt]

Crag_r, on 19 January 2013 - 11:03 AM, said:

As i device used to deliver Nuclear Weapons i highly doubt the Chinese or Russians would let it live that long, so it would miss out by about half an hour so we can call it close enough  :Smile_trollface:

"War, War never changes" Ehh.... yes it does, we'll be fighting with AI Controlled Jets and Ships, in about 5-10 decades and I doubt a CV will be safe for long, not without heavier support like Big Gunned Warships close to BB Strength.

Your trolling attempt FAILED lol.

[NargilFenris]

Scheduled to finish in 2025 but not actually started. Am I the only one who thinks it might not happen? Sorry I am just a tad worried about military cuts and chopping blocks.

[El3m3nttt]

NargilFenris, on 19 January 2013 - 02:44 PM, said:

Scheduled to finish in 2025 but not actually started. Am I the only one who thinks it might not happen? Sorry I am just a tad worried about military cuts and chopping blocks.

They can always recycle older Carriers that are not preserved as museums, it also cuts some of the price off if they melt the scrap down into newer metal and use that as the hull, it's easy and effective to recycle them because of how they make the newer Carriers in sections and not from the hull up.

[mrlazorz]

El3m3nttt, on 19 January 2013 - 01:52 PM, said:

"War, War never changes" Ehh.... yes it does, we'll be fighting with AI Controlled Jets and Ships, in about 5-10 decades and I doubt a AC will be safe for long, not without heavier support like Big Gunned Warships close to BB Strength.

Your trolling attempt FAILED lol.

Issues galore with that. AI controls in aircraft-vs-aircraft fights are damn near impossible to code much less carry out on the fly, and by AC I'm not sure if you're trying to mention an aircraft carrier or an armored cruiser, because you're using the wrong designation. You're looking for CV.
And in the current state of mind of our congress I doubt we'll be getting any ships with main guns above 8" for a while.

[El3m3nttt]

mrlazorz, on 19 January 2013 - 05:27 PM, said:

Issues galore with that. AI controls in aircraft-vs-aircraft fights are damn near impossible to code much less carry out on the fly, and by AC I'm not sure if you're trying to mention an aircraft carrier or an armored cruiser, because you're using the wrong designation. You're looking for CV.
And in the current state of mind of our congress I doubt we'll be getting any ships with main guns above 8" for a while.

Oops, Sorry I forgot about the real Acronym/Designation.

[brian333]

For the cost of one Ford class carrier I'd build several dozen 'Typhoon' class subs and exchange the missile silos for V/STOL hangars. With enough freeboard running at the surface, there would be no need for a mast or superstructure, and you would end up with a true flattop. You could even lengthen the ship from 600' to 800' or even 1000' to get a longer flight deck and more hangar space.

 

Stealth carrier FTW!

[NargilFenris]

El3m3nttt, on 19 January 2013 - 04:37 PM, said:

They can always recycle older Carriers that are not preserved as museums, it also cuts some of the price off if they melt the scrap down into newer metal and use that as the hull, it's easy and effective to recycle them because of how they make the newer Carriers in sections and not from the hull up.

I have never heard of this happening with any military ship and I see problems with using sections of a older ship that has been out to sea for decades. Now taking stuff off of one ship and putting it on a current ship yes but not a brand new one. I would like to hear what some of our engineers have to say on it.

[Wunderwaffen1945]

Grey ghost will sale again

[Crag_r]

El3m3nttt, on 19 January 2013 - 01:52 PM, said:

"War, War never changes" Ehh.... yes it does, we'll be fighting with AI Controlled Jets and Ships, in about 5-10 decades and I doubt a AC will be safe for long, not without heavier support like Big Gunned Warships close to BB Strength.

Your trolling attempt FAILED lol.

You said that it would live to the end of Humans, i was saying that would be Nuclear war, you did not understand, attempt at trolling successful  :Smile_trollface:

[El3m3nttt]

NargilFenris, on 19 January 2013 - 07:18 PM, said:

I have never heard of this happening with any military ship and I see problems with using sections of a older ship that has been out to sea for decades. Now taking stuff off of one ship and putting it on a current ship yes but not a brand new one. I would like to hear what some of our engineers have to say on it.

I mean't MELT IT DOWN and remake it into a stronger metal and not so fatigued by use after however many years it was used,and the metal will save you a lot of money making NEW metal instead of melting down older Carriers that are no longer used by the Military or as a Museum and it is a better choice and saves more money.

[Appollosnos]

YAY!!!! The Enterprise is continuing. I would have been distraught if they would not keep the name.

[Super_Dreadnought]

Congrats to the US Enterprise fans.

 

Spare a poor thought for us Brits though. We got a whole bunch of great ship names with rich histories and no bloody ships to put them on anymore. I curse all our recent governments for being so short sighted!

[NargilFenris]

El3m3nttt, on 19 January 2013 - 10:34 PM, said:

I mean't MELT IT DOWN and remake it into a stronger metal and not so fatigued by use after however many years it was used,and the metal will save you a lot of money making NEW metal instead of melting down older Carriers that are no longer used by the Military or as a Museum and it is a better choice and saves more money.

Well that might work but I wonder of the cost benefit of it. Using the old metal would require cutting it off, transporting it to be melted down, sending it to be fabricated, and then taken to the new ship to be welded.

[El3m3nttt]

NargilFenris, on 20 January 2013 - 02:55 AM, said:

Well that might work but I wonder of the cost benefit of it. Using the old metal would require cutting it off, transporting it to be melted down, sending it to be fabricated, and then taken to the new ship to be welded.

Be a lot better then making a newer batch of metal from scratch when you can just use metal from an older CV or another ship like an older ship class no longer in use like a Heavy Cruiser from post WWII, and I'm pretty sure it'd save about 15-35% maybe 45% of the original cost and that makes a bit extra to add other stuff like more weapons in case they need heavier armaments or more of the ones in use at this time and it could help add more defenses from attacks either by ground based jets/aircraft or missile attacks.

[Destroyer_Atlanta]

Edited:didnt read OP close enough date-wise

[Crag_r]

El3m3nttt, on 20 January 2013 - 03:15 AM, said:

Be a lot better then making a newer batch of metal from scratch when you can just use metal from an older CV or another ship like an older ship class no longer in use like a Heavy Cruiser from post WWII, and I'm pretty sure it'd save about 15-35% maybe 45% of the original cost and that makes a bit extra to add other stuff like more weapons in case they need heavier armaments or more of the ones in use at this time and it could help add more defenses from attacks either by ground based jets/aircraft or missile attacks.

In realty though it is often much cheaper to simply mine new metal out of the ground and then to recycle old stuff, Plus things get allot more complicated when much of the ships metal cannot be used again due to the reactors.

[anonym_auUiRfWCi1jI]

Good job, Navy!

[El3m3nttt]

Crag_r, on 20 January 2013 - 05:30 AM, said:

In realty though it is often much cheaper to simply mine new metal out of the ground and then to recycle old stuff, Plus things get allot more complicated when much of the ships metal cannot be used again due to the reactors.

I'm talking Pre-Nuclear Reactor CV's not during the time of Nuclear Powered CV's

[billy1928]

Deadnought, on 20 January 2013 - 01:51 AM, said:

Congrats to the US Enterprise fans.

Spare a poor thought for us Brits though. We got a whole bunch of great ship names with rich histories and no bloody ships to put them on anymore. I curse all our recent governments for being so short sighted!

Fun Fact

The ship-line that now bears the name Enterprise is in fact British in origin

The first Enterprise was actually a British Sloop named George it was captured by the Continental Navy and was later used as the Flag ship

[NargilFenris]

El3m3nttt, on 20 January 2013 - 05:38 AM, said:

I'm talking Pre-Nuclear Reactor CV's not during the time of Nuclear Powered CV's

Then why did you bring it up for a discussion about a new CVN?

[El3m3nttt]

NargilFenris, on 20 January 2013 - 03:40 PM, said:

Then why did you bring it up for a discussion about a new CVN?

Because it is somewhat relevant for now because we're talking about CV's and most CV's use a LOT of metals and to recycle older metals for the newer CV's will save the time of mining out newer metals when the quarry is farther away from the actual ship and you can just send the older Carrier parts to melt them down at a closer place to the newer Carrier's place of building, saves a bit more time then shipping the new metals for it because normally the quarries for metals used by CV's(and the other ships) is inland.