Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth

[truetanker]

I just read that as Draconis Combine Naval Systems!

TT  ;D

[Feenix74]

Yep, BT does terrible things to your mind  :D

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

You mean awesome things. :thumbsup:

[Weirdo]

https://www.northjersey.com/story/news/bergen/hackensack/2018/08/14/hackensack-submarine-uss-ling-flooded-intentionally-memorial-plaques-stolen/989139002/

[glitterboy2098]

https://www.northjersey.com/story/news/bergen/hackensack/2018/08/14/hackensack-submarine-uss-ling-flooded-intentionally-memorial-plaques-stolen/989139002/

To the vandals

[Wrangler]

What friggin LOSERS.  Omg.  Why would they do that.  They hate the ship that much?  Thank god the interior wasn't flooded if i'm reading that report right.  They'll need hell of crane to life it from the floor of the river.

It does bring questions:  Will they able restore submarine ability's ability to purge the water in the tanks out to make it light enough to life?  Part me wishes engines were operational enough it could pull itself out of the mud.  It's warship, ancient sure, but engines if condition could do it.

I hope hell they find those guys and beat the tar out of them before they turn them in.  Omg.  :ticked:

[glitterboy2098]

Actually it says the interior was flooded. Which is a worse act than the theft of the plaques. Plaques can be remade. The interior of the sub and all the historical artifacts inside will have been ruined.

[Weirdo]

The river's not deep enough for her to float, she's embedded in several feet of mud, and the insides are flooded. I'm going to assume that the technology to lift her either doesn't exist, can't reach her location, or would be implausibly expensive. As such it seems like there are three options:

1: Build a cofferdam and then a permanent dry mount for her in place.

2: Scrap her.

3: Let her rust away.

1 is obviously the ideal choice, but is also the most expensive. 2 would suck, but let's be honest, still loads better than 3. On the upside, 3 seems unlikely. The article mentioned that the owners of the adjacent land are planning to build housing there, and I doubt they'd stand for leaving 2.5 kilotons of solid tetanus in their shiny new backyard.

[Luciora]

I have a hunch the new landowners set something up to rid themselves of a development problem instead of wanting to work something out.

https://www.northjersey.com/story/news/bergen/hackensack/2018/08/14/hackensack-submarine-uss-ling-flooded-intentionally-memorial-plaques-stolen/989139002/

[Weirdo]

How is a flooded sub stuck in mud less of a problem for them than an intact sub?

Unless they're cartoon-level evil-for-evil's sake or think they can make a fair amount of cash scrapping her themselves, I don't see the point.

[HobbesHurlbut]

How is a flooded sub stuck in mud less of a problem for them than an intact sub?

Unless they're cartoon-level evil-for-evil's sake or think they can make a fair amount of cash scrapping her themselves, I don't see the point.

If anything, they would have made it an attractive piece for their development area.

[Kidd]

I have a hunch the new landowners set something up to rid themselves of a development problem instead of wanting to work something out.

I like the way you think. But given that this makes it harder to remove, and this new info about property development, how's this:

Ex-caretakers of the boat, incensed that property developers would soon get rid of it, deliberately scuttled the boat to sabotage the project and saved the one artifact that they believed worth treasuring - the memorial plaques.

[Luciora]

Depends on the quality of the consultants hired to do the job?  Especially if you don't want to leave a trail is my guess.  Enough specific damage was done to the sub itself and the bronze from the plaques were stolen. 

Someone knew what to do to make it no longer usable as a museum and helped themselves to some side cash.  It looks to be in worse shape than the USS Pompanito in San Francisco as it is, so this would force the city or even government perhaps to step in and remove it for cheap or free, thus not bothering the landowners.

How is a flooded sub stuck in mud less of a problem for them than an intact sub?

Unless they're cartoon-level evil-for-evil's sake or think they can make a fair amount of cash scrapping her themselves, I don't see the point.

[Luciora]

That's a sad plausible possibility too.

I like the way you think. But given that this makes it harder to remove, and this new info about property development, how's this:

Ex-caretakers of the boat, incensed that property developers would soon get rid of it, deliberately scuttled the boat to sabotage the project and saved the one artifact that they believed worth treasuring - the memorial plaques.

[beachhead1985]

https://www.northjersey.com/story/news/bergen/hackensack/2018/08/14/hackensack-submarine-uss-ling-flooded-intentionally-memorial-plaques-stolen/989139002/

Gutless, worthless filth.

[kato]

How is a flooded sub stuck in mud less of a problem for them than an intact sub?

Just so we're clear, USS Ling was already "stuck in the mud" in that position in the river way before this. The reason for this is that it is sitting in a canal dredged in the 70s that was never kept up properly and thus filled up with silt. The problem in flooding the Link is also less the depth - that's something that can be worked - and more the fact that the hull below the pressure vessel has virtually entirely turned to rust and barely exists anymore. Supposedly the pumps have actually been running for years now to remove water flooding in...

See e.g. this NYT article from early 2017.

As for the property developers, the museum had their lease terminated in 2016 (a year after it actually closed) - for the landside premises that is, as the submarine is parked in public property. After the museum closed the Navy supposedly retrieved all memorial items from the site that it had loaned to them - except the sub - around the same time since the museum could not provide documentation as to how it plans to keep these safe and in proper order.

[Wrangler]

Another ship or part of one was found.  The USS Abner Read was a Fletcher-Class Destroyer operating off the Aleutian island of Kiska on Aug. 18, 1943.  Her stern was blown off when she during the night ran into a Japanese mine, which took off the stern from the 170 frame.

Private funded Company has now found the 74 year old stern up right, apparently intact. Maybe it will finally give closure to the 70 men that died at in their racks when ship's stern was severed. 

USS Abner Read was towed to port, a new stern was added to the ship. Unfortunately she was taken out later in the Pacific during the actions in Leyte Gulf.

[HobbesHurlbut]

Oof, that's why you compartmentalize your warships...

[Dragon Cat]

Oof, that's why you compartmentalize your warships...

Huge amount of damage

[marauder648]

The bow of the Italian Battleship Littorio following her sistership the Vittorio Vento.  I'd still say that this class of ships was one of the most handsome of WW2 designs. 

[HobbesHurlbut]

Huge amount of damage

I just took a closer look at that damage report. Jesus, that explosion was right beside three magazine rooms....and then the 5" round gunpowder room next door.

[Dragon Cat]

Lucky crew

[I am Belch II]

The bow of the Italian Battleship Littorio following her sistership the Vittorio Vento.  I'd still say that this claof ships was one of the most handsome of WW2 designs.

When I see drawings and models of that ship it's always the aft turret off the main deck that gets my eye. A good design ship just in serviced with the Italians.

[GreyWolfActual]

A good design ship just in serviced with the Italians.

I have to disagree. There’s a ton of very technical information here. However, the gist of it is that the Vittorios were the worst of the major battleship classes and not by a close margin.

[JadeHellbringer]

I have to disagree. There’s a ton of very technical information here. However, the gist of it is that the Vittorios were the worst of the major battleship classes and not by a close margin.

You beat me to it. Handsome ships, but hideously inefficient. They compare very negatively to similar-era ships from other nations, even those that followed the treaties rather than play lip service to them. The guns were poor quality, the secondary battery was split between single-purpose surface and air systems rather than dual-purpose as British and American ships did, their armor setup was ghastly, and that anti-torpedo system the Italians were so fond of was only slightly better than opening the seacocks and helping the Allies do the job. All this despite tacking on several thousand tons (secretly) more than comparable ships like the King George V or North Carolina- even their vaunted speed wasn't much more than contemporaries.

Awful ships that had the benefit of not having to face modern battleships- had KGVs come to the Med in place of QE and R class ships, there's no situation in which they outperform the Royal Navy.

[marauder648]

The Littorio's were inefficient ships, but that have a stunning look to them that just screams classy.

[Smegish]

So typical Italian engineering: Looks great but a bit dodgy under the hood?  :D ;D

[I am Belch II]

Yeah I guess I was being really nice on the design of the ship. A paper tiger, but really nice looking.

[Wrangler]

Here very old pictures, Ironclad USS Essex from 1863.  Built in 1856 as a river steamer, she was best known for he actions as part of the Mississippi river fleet. She was originally named New Era as a civilian ship, but was changed when she enter service with US Army and US Navy.

[marauder648]

Another very inefficient but very handsome in that square jawed rugged kind of way design, the Bismarck is still a horribly overhyped design.