12
12
0
As a kid, I was in love with this ship (still am as an adult). There was nothing like her, she was the strength of the US in less than a 1/4 mi in length. Even as a Soldier, it sucked to see this ship be decommissioned. As many other ships that could've been torn down, this one shouldn't have been. Good news is there is a rumor there is another USS Enterprise in the making. I hope I'm here long enough to see that one sail. Maybe they'll use the island from this one on the next.....?
Posted in these groups: Aircraft Carriers
Sailing
Sailing
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 4
5
5
0
4
4
0
3
3
0
SSG Warren Swan
Besides the reactor core, and radiation issues, there was more than enough money raised to keep her as a floating museum. Why did the Navy make a point in tearing her down? Hell the Nimitz is as old as she was and the Nimitz is still steaming today.
(1)
(0)
PO1 William "Chip" Nagel
SSG Warren Swan I Think the First Part of Your Statement has a Lot to Do With It. Enterprise 8 Reactors, Nimitz 2 Reactors. 8 Separate Nuclear Accidents waiting to Happen.
(1)
(0)
PO1 William "Chip" Nagel
SSG Warren Swan Cheaper to Build a New One or RCOH Nimitz Twice for what it will take and cost to ROCH Enterprise.
(1)
(0)
SSG Warren Swan
PO1 William "Chip" Nagel - Didn't think of it that way. I figured after cleanup the ship could be towed to a permanent berthing somewhere and become a museum piece. 8 reactors does make cleanup and decon a serous issue, BUT in the same breath, she's in Norfolk being torn down. For arguments sake, the reactors couldn't be removed, decon done over a year and she become a floating museum? If the cores/fuel rods can be removed and replaced for refuel, why not just removed and the ship patched back up with "duds" in place to show what one might've looked like if there ever was a tour that took one down in the bowels of the engine rooms?
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google