Midway museum - San Diego

Had a convention flier hit my desk with things to do when not in
sessions. Listed the usual SD destinations in shopping, Balboa Park
(and its aviation museum), Sea World.

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

Yes, I know I could do a web search but some folks in the groups
probably were involved in some way.

Thanks in advance.

MAH

I was there two weeks ago. She is tied up just east of the cruise ship
berths, a Victory ship is also there and some harbor tour boats (I am
from CT but it appears to be in the NE part of the harbor, my SD nephew
drove, there is parking on the pier next to Midway as well as a block
away.) The walking tour with headsets starts in the hangar bay, goes
forward to the forecastle, back through the hangar bay, down to the mess
decks, an enlisted berthing space, one main machinery room, sick bay,
senior officers wardroom, chief's mess, back up to the hangar bay with a
gift shop and cafe on the fantail, up to the flight deck with many a/c,
small group tours to the island and bridge. Well worth the trip. I kept
comparing her to my Forrestal, not fair as the Midways started out as
converted BB hulls. At this stage in life, anything Navy or Naval Air
gets the adrenalin pumping and the memories flowing.
J.McEachen

mah wrote:
Had a convention flier hit my desk with things to do when not in
sessions. Listed the usual SD destinations in shopping, Balboa Park
(and its aviation museum), Sea World.

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

Yes, I know I could do a web search but some folks in the groups
probably were involved in some way.

Thanks in advance.

MAH

On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 02:45:21 GMT, "J.McEachen"
wrote:

comparing her to my Forrestal, not fair as the Midways started out as
converted BB hulls.

They did not!

The US Navy never convered a battleship to a carrier. Ever.

Correct, but the Midway class did use the Montana class hull design as
a starting point.


Chuck W
www.atomicturtle.net

Sharc, NAR Section 613
www.flysharc.org

Sharc, we fly rockets so you don't have to!

ChuckW wrote:
Correct, but the Midway class did use the Montana class hull design as
a starting point.


sNIP

Sorry, buty no.

While the Montanas were of the same generation as the Midways but had a
standard displacment of 60,500 tons while the Midway's was 45,0000 and
had a substantially differnt hull design. What was derived from the
battleship design was the machinery, the 212,000 SHP powerplant being
almost identical to the Iowas. The Momtanas had 172,000 SHP plants. See
Friedman's definitive works, "US Battleships" & "US Airvraft Carriers"

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.

Andrew C. Toppan wrote:
On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 02:45:21 GMT, "J.McEachen"
wrote:

comparing her to my Forrestal, not fair as the Midways started out as
converted BB hulls.


They did not!

The US Navy never convered a battleship to a carrier. Ever.

"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 15:23:25 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.

Well, I wasn't entirely wrong. I wish you had "corrected" me with facts
instead of merely sending an uninformative broadside. Have you joined
the Navy yet, or still wishing while watching Salem?

The product of the Newport News Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Company,
she was the lead ship of three 45,000-ton Midway class CVBs, followed
by USS Franklin D. Roosevelt, CVB-42 and USS Coral Sea, CVB-43. Two
additional ships were canceled. Midway's keel was laid on October 27,
1943. The Midway class hull arrangement was modeled on the canceled
Montana class battleships and was a new, much larger design intended
to correct certain problems in the Essex class design. They had
armored flight decks, requiring a much larger hull and lower
freeboard, to reduce top weight. They also carried a very heavy AA
battery of 5/54 weapons. The armor requirement was originally meant
to counter 8" cruiser gunfire, but by the time the ships were laid
down the focus had shifted to defending against aircraft attack.



Andrew C. Toppan wrote:
On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 02:45:21 GMT, "J.McEachen"
wrote:

comparing her to my Forrestal, not fair as the Midways started out
as converted BB hulls.

They did not! The US Navy never convered a battleship to a carrier.
Ever.

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.