• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

USS Enterprise (CVN-65) 50 years old today

T

Train

Lifer
http://www.wired.com/thisdayintech/2010/09/0924nuclear-aircraft-carrier-enterprise-launched/

One giant floating peice of American awesomeness.

Was surpised to see that despite a $662 mil refurbishing in 2010, it's scheduled to be decommisioned in 2013. Though I predictit somehow it will get extended a few years.
CVN65-Enterprise[rs].jpg
 
Yup and she was 1 of a kind within the Nimitz class as well.
But her replacement is due in 2013 and will be the first of the Truman class of Super Carriers. I dont see her staying in service past that date as her replacment ship is nearly done.

I grew up watching her come and go from NAS Alameda in the Bay Area.

been on board her serveral times at Fleet Weeks.

Hopefully she wont be the last to carry that historic name.
 
CVSiN said:
Yup and she was 1 of a kind within the Nimitz class as well.
But her replacement will be the first of the Truman class of Super Carriers.

I grew up watching her come and go from NAS Alameda in the Bay Area.

been on board her serveral times at Fleet Weeks.

Hopefully she wont be the last to carry that historic name.
Click to expand...

It wasn't a nimitz class buddy.

And the next class of Super Carriers is the Gerald R. Ford class.

Man your post is full of fail.
 
Hmm there is kind of gap there. The Enterprise replacement is CVN-78 Gerald Ford which isn't due for commissioning until 2015. So there is a 2-year gap. I also wonder if the Enterprise life will be extended a couple of years.
 
RbSX said:
It wasn't a nimitz class buddy.

And the next class of Super Carriers is the Gerald R. Ford class.

Man your post is full of fail.
Click to expand...

Man your attitude is full of fail. Should we bring up your posts in L&R?
 
Last edited:
RbSX said:
It wasn't a nimitz class buddy.

And the next class of Super Carriers is the Gerald R. Ford class.

Man your post is full of fail.
Click to expand...

USS Enterprise (CVN-65), formerly CVA(N)-65, is the world's first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier and the eighth US naval vessel to bear the name. Like her predecessor of World War II fame, she is nicknamed the "Big E". At 1,123 ft (342 m)[3], she is the longest naval vessel in the world. Her 93,284 long tons (94,781 t)[2] displacement ranks her as the 11th-heaviest supercarrier, after the 10 carriers of the Nimitz class.

you are correct about the Ford class I have no idea why truman popped into my head.
but Enterprise is and always will be the first Nimitz class carrier ever.
 
CVSiN said:
USS Enterprise (CVN-65), formerly CVA(N)-65, is the world's first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier and the eighth US naval vessel to bear the name. Like her predecessor of World War II fame, she is nicknamed the "Big E". At 1,123 ft (342 m)[3], she is the longest naval vessel in the world. Her 93,284 long tons (94,781 t)[2] displacement ranks her as the 11th-heaviest supercarrier, after the 10 carriers of the Nimitz class.

you are correct about the Ford class I have no idea why truman popped into my head.
but Enterprise is and always will be the first Nimitz class carrier ever.
Click to expand...

Enterprise isn't a Nimitz class carrier. Enterprise was essentially a one-ship class.
 
CVSiN said:
USS Enterprise (CVN-65), formerly CVA(N)-65, is the world's first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier and the eighth US naval vessel to bear the name. Like her predecessor of World War II fame, she is nicknamed the "Big E". At 1,123 ft (342 m)[3], she is the longest naval vessel in the world. Her 93,284 long tons (94,781 t)[2] displacement ranks her as the 11th-heaviest supercarrier, after the 10 carriers of the Nimitz class.

you are correct about the Ford class I have no idea why truman popped into my head.
but Enterprise is and always will be the first Nimitz class carrier ever.
Click to expand...

http://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?cid=4200&tid=200&ct=4

Technically, the enterprise is an 'Enterprise Class' carrier because her design is distinctively different from the Nimitz.

Unless you want to argue with the navy's website smartass.
 
Brovane said:
Hmm there is kind of gap there. The Enterprise replacement is CVN-78 Gerald Ford which isn't due for commissioning until 2015. So there is a 2-year gap. I also wonder if the Enterprise life will be extended a couple of years.
Click to expand...

According to the Navy this is thier position on extending her life to wait for the Ford.

The US Navy wants to decommission its oldest aircraft carrier, the USS Enterprise (CVN 65) three years early, in 2012. In May 2009 testimony before the House Armed Services Committee, CNO Admiral Gary Roughead said "During the period between the planned 2012 inactivation of USS ENTERPRISE (CVN 65) and the 2015 delivery of GERALD R. FORD (CVN 78) legislative relief is needed to temporarily reduce the operational carrier force to 10. Extending ENTERPRISE beyond 2012 involves significant technical risk, challenges manpower and the industrial base, and requires expenditures in excess of $2.8B with a minimal operational return on this significant investment. Extending ENTERPRISE would result in only a minor gain in carrier operational availability and adversely impact carrier maintenance periods and operational availability of the force in the future. The temporary reduction to 10 carriers can be mitigated by adjustments to deployments and maintenance availabilities."
 
CVSiN said:
According to the Navy this is thier position on extending her life to wait for the Ford.

The US Navy wants to decommission its oldest aircraft carrier, the USS Enterprise (CVN 65) three years early, in 2012. In May 2009 testimony before the House Armed Services Committee, CNO Admiral Gary Roughead said "During the period between the planned 2012 inactivation of USS ENTERPRISE (CVN 65) and the 2015 delivery of GERALD R. FORD (CVN 78) legislative relief is needed to temporarily reduce the operational carrier force to 10. Extending ENTERPRISE beyond 2012 involves significant technical risk, challenges manpower and the industrial base, and requires expenditures in excess of $2.8B with a minimal operational return on this significant investment. Extending ENTERPRISE would result in only a minor gain in carrier operational availability and adversely impact carrier maintenance periods and operational availability of the force in the future. The temporary reduction to 10 carriers can be mitigated by adjustments to deployments and maintenance availabilities."
Click to expand...

Thanks for this information. I wonder if at some point there was a delay in the Ford since she is a new class of ships. It does make sense in this instance to temporarily deal with the reduction to 10 carriers instead of extending the Enterprise.
 
MotF Bane said:
I'd be rather surprised to see her go for scrap.
Click to expand...

Probably mothballed for a few years in case the Ford doesnt come online soon enough and/or shit hits the fan somewhere in the world and we need that 11th carrier.

Then made into a fixed-location museum similar to how the Midway is now.
 
Train said:
Probably mothballed for a few years in case the Ford doesnt come online soon enough and/or shit hits the fan somewhere in the world and we need that 11th carrier.

Then made into a fixed-location museum similar to how the Midway is now.
Click to expand...

I dunno. They may wait on a fixed location museum for a Nimitz class to retire, as I think that would be the bigger draw and have more history behind some of them.
 
FallenHero said:
I dunno. They may wait on a fixed location museum for a Nimitz class to retire, as I think that would be the bigger draw and have more history behind some of them.
Click to expand...

Really? what Nimitz class would have more history than the Enterprise?

The E was in everything from the Mercury space missions to the war in Afghanistan
 
Why did the government / military waste our $662 Million for only 2-4 more years of service ? ? Certainly, if the decom date is firm, the ship could have been kept going for a lot less money.
 
MotF Bane said:
I'd be rather surprised to see her go for scrap.
Click to expand...

Train said:
Probably mothballed for a few years in case the Ford doesnt come online soon enough and/or shit hits the fan somewhere in the world and we need that 11th carrier.

Then made into a fixed-location museum similar to how the Midway is now.
Click to expand...

I dunno. Fixed location museums with aircraft carriers are pretty expensive to operate. The Intrepid museum in NY doesn't even break even, iirc. The cities with the kind of tourist base to support such a museum are pretty limited.

The Big E will at the very least have be gutted to take out the reactors and anything else that has become even slightly radioactive.
 
It would be very expensive to have Enterprise as a museum carrier. I suspect she will be mothballed and then have her reactors removed. She will then be probably sunk during exercises so the Navy can gather information on how the design holds up to battle damage and how effective the anti-ship weapons area.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top