USS America

Sir you are mis-informed. As former crew member of the America I have
been following the planned sinking of the ship for a couple of years
now. Click this link for information and some letters to the USS
America Carriers Veterans Association from the Navy concerning the
planned sinkink of the ship:

http://www.ussamerica.org/final_mission.htm

It cost the Navy $22 million dollars to sink the ship.

I would suggest thst you go to navy.mil to search for USS America CV-66

Gerry Hamm USN/retired

On 5/23/05 9:23 PM, in article , "Scott
Peterson" wrote:

Dave in San Diego wrote:

Retired Carrier Sunk Off Atlantic Coast

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050521/...s/carrier_sunk


Has anyone seen any pictures of these tests?

This seemed to happen awfully quickly. Usually it takes years and
lots of manpower and money to prepare a ship and remove all the
contaminants, asbestos, etc.

Anyone else think that the Navy short circuited some of the
environmental regulations they're supposed to follow?

Scott Peterson


Last time I had the opportunity to hear about the preparation for a SINKEX,
the EPA had reps on site to ensure that proper environmental procedures were
followed.

This one, of course, was bigger than any others I've heard of, so I'd bet a
rep was present.

I doubt that the Navy could have circumvented any procedures--even if they
had wanted to. Your comments seem to attach a bit of mistrust.

--Woody

Has anyone seen any pictures of these tests?

This seemed to happen awfully quickly. Usually it takes years and
lots of manpower and money to prepare a ship and remove all the
contaminants, asbestos, etc.

The decision to sink the America was taken a couple of years ago. According
to the planning that was made public, all the environment issues have been
addressed since then. It would be very odd if you came across pictures of
the actual sinking. It was a full exercise to evaluate the amount of real
punishment, from a number of strikes, that a big CV can take and function /
survive. Guess top secret would be the minimum clearance needed to see
those.
_____________
José Herculano

José Herculano wrote:
Guess top secret would be the minimum clearance needed to see
those.

Not only that, but also need to know.

--
John Miller
email domain: n4vu.com; username: jsm(@)

Scott,

Anyone else think that the Navy short circuited some of the environmental
regulations they're supposed to follow?

I don't. Sounds as if you may have an agenda in your post.

Others in this NG have separately cited the length of time that the Navy has
been preparing for this SINKEX. If you are truly interested - and not just
trolling - do a Google search on the plans and environmental preparations
for the upcoming scuttling of the former USS ORISKANY (CV-34) as an
artificial reef off the Florida Panhandle. One example of these is the
removal of ORISKANY's wooden flight deck planking due to PCB contamination.
This will give you perhaps the most comparable analog to what the Navy did
to prepare AMERICA.

--
Mike Kanze

"The nation that will insist upon drawing a broad line of demarcation
between the fighting man and the thinking man is liable to find its fighting
done by fools and its thinking by cowards."

- Sir William Francis Butler

"Scott Peterson" wrote in message
...
Dave in San Diego wrote:

Retired Carrier Sunk Off Atlantic Coast

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050521/...s/carrier_sunk


Has anyone seen any pictures of these tests?

This seemed to happen awfully quickly. Usually it takes years and
lots of manpower and money to prepare a ship and remove all the
contaminants, asbestos, etc.

Anyone else think that the Navy short circuited some of the
environmental regulations they're supposed to follow?

Scott Peterson

--
A king has no proper business with reforming.
His best policy is to keep things as they are; and
if he can't do that, he ought to try to make them
worse than they are.
Mark Twain

17/612

"Mike Kanze" wrote:

I don't. Sounds as if you may have an agenda in your post.


Don't waste time looking for what's not there. It's a legitimate
question as the navy does not have a particularly good environmental
record.

Others in this NG have separately cited the length of time that the Navy has
been preparing for this SINKEX.

Did look. Did you? It was first announced by the Navy about the
beginning of March, this year. Their announcement at that time said
that "some" materials had been removed.



If you are truly interested - and not just
trolling - do a Google search on the plans and environmental preparations
for the upcoming scuttling of the former USS ORISKANY (CV-34) as an
artificial reef off the Florida Panhandle. One example of these is the
removal of ORISKANY's wooden flight deck planking due to PCB contamination.
This will give you perhaps the most comparable analog to what the Navy did
to prepare AMERICA.


Yes and it's taking 2 years plus on a ship less than half the size of
the America. Oriskany is also having to make two trips between
Florida and Texas to avoid hurricanes while they are working on her.

....and yet the Navy is able to prepare the America for this in months
instead of years, with no money or manpower explicitly budgeted?





--


Scott Peterson

--
After eating, do amphibians have to wait an
hour before getting out of the water?

127/612

"Scott Peterson" wrote in message
...
"Mike Kanze" wrote:

I don't. Sounds as if you may have an agenda in your post.


Don't waste time looking for what's not there. It's a legitimate
question as the navy does not have a particularly good environmental
record.

Others in this NG have separately cited the length of time that the Navy
has
been preparing for this SINKEX.

Did look. Did you? It was first announced by the Navy about the
beginning of March, this year. Their announcement at that time said
that "some" materials had been removed.

SNIP

Just because the Navy issued a press release in March doesn't mean that the
advance planning and material removal had not been going on for some time
before that. Since America was non-nuclear, that takes care of one of the
large environmental problems right there.

Wonder if they have to do an EIR - Environmental Impact Report, for this
type of thing?

"Joe Delphi" wrote:

Just because the Navy issued a press release in March doesn't mean that the
advance planning and material removal had not been going on for some time
before that. Since America was non-nuclear, that takes care of one of the
large environmental problems right there.


Totally understand that. It's very clear that some planning had been
going on before the announcement. but generally ships used like this
are in many ways cleaner than when they were built.

Wonder if they have to do an EIR - Environmental Impact Report, for this
type of thing?

That's what I was wondering. Usually, like the old joke, when there's
enough paperwork to weigh down the ship, it sinks. Maybe as someone
suggested, a ship sunk this deep does not require the same effort as
one sunk closer to shore. I don't know, it seems to have gone through
awfully quickly for an operation of this size.



Scott Peterson

--
Rome did not create a great empire
by having meetings...they did it by
killing all those who opposed them.

417/612

The Oriskany is being sunk as a artifical reef in shallow water. There
fore more preperation. The Navy made the offical announcment about the
America sinking in December 2004. It has been been planned for the last
couple of years. The USN spent $22 million to sink the ship.

http://www.ussamerica.org/

The men operating that site tried in vain for years to save the ship
from being sunk.
If you want the true story about what happened to the America go to the
above website. Scroll down to the links on the bottom of the page and
click on Americas final mission. On that page you will find copies of
the offical letters noting the sinking of the ship. Email the webmaster
of that page and he will send you most anything you want to know about
the sinking of that ship.

Gerry Hamm USN/retired

wrote:

The men operating that site tried in vain for years to save the ship
from being sunk.
If you want the true story about what happened to the America go to the
above website. Scroll down to the links on the bottom of the page and
click on Americas final mission. On that page you will find copies of
the offical letters noting the sinking of the ship. Email the webmaster
of that page and he will send you most anything you want to know about
the sinking of that ship.

I know they've been trying to save it, although as I understand it,
the Navy has consistently turned them down saying that the ships
condition was not suitable for a nuseum ship. But it looks like they
were only told on Dec 15, 2004 that the ship was going to be used in
these these tests. That's 3 months earlier than the Navy public press
release on this.

However, it does indicate that they've been working on the ship for
some time to remove anything that might be needed. It does not discuss
EIR issues.

Regards,


Scott Peterson

--
As far as we know, our computer has
never had an undetected error.

- Weisert

310/612