Midway museum - San Diego

John wrote:

On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 19:39:10 -0500, mah wrote:

One new item was the Midway carrier museum. Where is it moored and what
has it to offer?

If you are going to be at the convention center, it is to your left as
you come out - towards the airport. About a mile, I would guess.
Basically right downtown. If you leave the airport on Harbor Drive
(going south, or left from the airport) it is about 2 miles, give or
take a bit.

There is also the ship (the "Rose" I believe) that was used in the
filming of "Master and Commander" you can tour. Pretty good tour - you
learn a lot about how the ship was modified and how things got done to
fool the camera.

On either side of the "Rose" is a ferry and a clipper both open for
tours. Worth the money all around.

Couple of excellent resturants there as well.

And it's an easy stroll/jog/ride from the hotel district downtown.

If you can get to Balboa Park (where the zoo is) there is also an
excellent aviation museum up there.

Absolutely. I unconditionally recommend it. I was there a bit earlier, I've
been lax about putting up a Trip Report.
Actually, all of Balboa Park is worth seeing. San Diego is a delightful
Tourist City - It's a great place to visit, something for everybody, and
compact enough that you only need to spend minutes traveling to/from
wherever you'd like to go.

--
Pete Stickney
Without data, all you have is an opinion

"J.McEachen" wrote in news:Nh7Yg.14755$6S3.9318
@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net:

Well, there is an exhibit on the hangar deck that states this. Next trip
I'll photograph it and send it to you. "Montana" rings a bell with me.
The post below stating "design" rings a bell, but the shape sure isn't
like Forrestal. While this exhibit on the hull origins looks factual, I
did bite my tongue when the bridge guide called the "blisters"
counterweights welded to the hull below the waterline to counterbalance
the weight topside.

Well, counterweight might not be the best term, but they were definitely
intended to increase available displacement and make it less top heavy. When
I was aboard from '80 to '83, we did an extensive weighing evolution because
the ship was overweight and top heavy. Several measures were taken at that
time to reduce the topside weight, but they were only a small help.

Here's a link to a good description of the mod, with many pictures.
http://midwaysailor.com/midwayeisra86/

Dave in San Diego
AT1 USN (Ret)
CV-41 1980-1983

On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 15:36:34 GMT, "J.McEachen"
wrote:

Well, I wasn't entirely wrong. I wish you had "corrected" me with facts
instead of merely sending an uninformative broadside.

I did. Fact: The US Navy never convered a battleship to a carrier.

Another fact: the website you quoted (whatever it is) has borrowed
most of its text from my website.

Have you joined
the Navy yet, or still wishing while watching Salem?

Perfectly happy with a career in naval ship design, thank you.

On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 15:23:25 GMT, "J.McEachen"
wrote:

Well, there is an exhibit on the hangar deck that states this. Next trip
I'll photograph it and send it to you. "Montana" rings a bell with me.

Been there, seen that, got the photograph.

The fact is the MIDWAY hull design shared nothing with the MONTANAs.
Period.

On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 22:23:56 GMT, in rec.aviation.military Andrew C.
Toppan actoppan@nospam wrote:

On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 15:36:34 GMT, "J.McEachen"
wrote:

Well, I wasn't entirely wrong. I wish you had "corrected" me with facts
instead of merely sending an uninformative broadside.

I did. Fact: The US Navy never convered a battleship to a carrier.

U.S. Navy conversions to aircraft carriers:

1 collier (USS Langley)
2 battlecruisers (Lexington-class fleet carriers)(converted while
building)
9 light cruisers (Independence-class light carriers)(converted while
building)
4 oilers (Sangamon-class escort carriers)
30-odd merchant hulls (USS Long Island, Bogue-class escort carriers,
HMS Archer, Avenger-class and Attacker-class escort carriers)

No battleships...

Another fact: the website you quoted (whatever it is) has borrowed
most of its text from my website.

I found that the Wikipedia entry on Taffy 3 was almost word-for-word
from my site. I pointed it out and the WikiGods killed the article.

--
William Hughes, San Antonio, Texas:
The Carrier Project: http://home.grandecom.net/~cvproj/carrier.htm

William Hughes wrote: U.S. Navy conversions to aircraft carriers:

1 collier (USS Langley)
2 battlecruisers (Lexington-class fleet carriers)(converted while
building)
9 light cruisers (Independence-class light carriers)(converted while
building)

SNIP

Sorry, but no

I don't have my refverences handfy, but only the first several vessels
were laid down as CL's. The remainider, like my dad's ship the San
Jacinto (CVL-30), were built on hulls of modified CL design, but laid
down as carriers by New York Ship


4 oilers (Sangamon-class escort carriers)
30-odd merchant hulls (USS Long Island, Bogue-class escort carriers,
HMS Archer, Avenger-class and Attacker-class escort carriers)

SNIP

Actually no.

Same deal as the Independence class

Lomg Island & HMS Archer, converted

Charger/HMS Attacker class, converted

Bogue Class/HMS AvengerClass, some converted, some laid down as
carriers using C3 hull design

Prince William/HMS Ruler Class- laid down as carriers using C3 hull
design

On 17 Oct 2006 16:58:06 -0700, "
wrote:

I don't have my refverences handfy, but only the first several vessels
were laid down as CL's. The remainider, like my dad's ship the San
Jacinto (CVL-30), were built on hulls of modified CL design, but laid
down as carriers by New York Ship

There was no difference between those "converted" and those "built on
CL hulls". ALL of them had been ordered as CLs and had CL
designations.

http://www.hazegray.org/navhist/carriers/us_light.htm