Navy ship on fire

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

From a few of the photos I've seen, everything above the hangar deck will have to be replaced. Probably looking at a cost in excess of 50% of a new build when it all gets evaluated.
 
If there is a clean line (e.g. everything from waterline up) then a new half could be built on the old hull (waterline down) giving us a "Bon Homme Richard With Improvements". However, since our Congress, our Shipbuilders, and our Navy Brass would all be involved in the operation, maybe this wouldn't work out well. How ever did we do things in WWII? We commissioned a new destroyer each week from Sept 1939 to Sept 1945. 10 battleships commissioned between 1941 and 1944. Granted we have computers and electronics in everything everywhere shipboard running up component cost and complexity, but, we also have them in ship design and construction tools!
 
It also depends on whether it is cost effective. If the cost to repair the ship would cost more than simply replacing it, why waste the tax payers money?

Remember, this is a ship, not a lawnmower engine. If you look at the pictures, there appears to be a lot of structural damage caused by the heat. There is buckling evident. It takes immense heat to buckle steel. And that is just the visible damage. What have they not seen yet. What ever repairs are done, need to ensure that it will remain seaworthy, and mission capable.

I'm sure that capable and qualified shipbuilders and engineers will evaluate the entire ship and make the right determination.
 
Gnomey said:
Probably not worth it then.
Click to expand...
Same was said about USS Cole and USS Stark.





But symbolically it makes sense to rebuild and return from the ashes anew. I'd like to see USS Bonhomme Richard rebuilt. It's still cheaper, likely available earlier and more resistant to Congressional budget cutting than a new build. And the repaired ship will likely be the most capable of the Wasp class ships.
 
One of the problems with the BR, is that almost everything above the flight deck is aluminum. One thing I noticed in some of the photos that I saw, was significant buckling of both bulkheads and frames. The engineering effort required to rebuild her would be massive. They would have to create a new set of prints for everything that would be a joining of new and old. That mating point creates it's own need for installation redesigns, as things may no longer fit from the original designs. For example, in splicing a frame, the contour will change within the splice area and equipment may no longer fit in the same location, That would necessitate a move, which will drive more moves and so on....It will happen, even if the entire ship was modeled in mockup software. I've seen i happen in the aircraft world and we're much smaller projects.
 
Battle conditions would be much different. Since she was in the yard undergoing retrofit, probably 90% of the watertight doors were not able to be closed, and undoubtedly there were large openings in bulkhead and decks that had not been replaced yet. Additionally, much of the fire fighting and other systems were not active, or available too. All those openings helped to create drafts that help to feed fresh air to the fires and it continued until they were able to get enough water on it, or the area ran out of fuel for the fire.
 
In my days, about half of all fire incidents in our shipping companies happened during major repairs in the yards. Besides the vulnerabilities described earlier, there is shore personnel around whose training and awareness might be not very good. Yard engineers can take decisions disregarding the safety measures. Ship's crews get relaxed sometimes as well.
 

With a yard period coming to end and a home-port change, most of the crew with damage control experience from the work-ups to the end of last cruise would have taken orders of the ship along time ago. The size of the duty section had a lot to do with it as well.

After that? My days in a Ship's Repair Locker and as an instructor were almost 25 years ago now and there other things that I believe will need to be publicly published before I comment on them here.
 
Last edited:
cvairwerks said:
Since she was in the yard undergoing retrofit, probably 90% of the watertight doors were not able to be closed, and undoubtedly there were large openings in bulkhead and decks that had not been replaced yet.
Click to expand...

When I first saw the fire on TV my first thought was why don't they get some seals to put a row of charges along one side and quickly roll and sink it - the explosive and water damage would would be easier and cost less to repair than fire damage.
Then I thought that won't work because of the watertight bulkheads.
Your post brings back the first question.
 
Don't forget that in those war years, the shipyards were being run 24/7/365 with all the manpower that was needed.
 
"For Sale - Warship, one (almost) careful owner from new, some light damage, needs TLC, or spares / repair. Buyer to collect. Re-listed due to budget overspend. No dreamers, tyre-kickers or brokers. "
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Blimp hangars on fire
Replies
3
Views
943
GreenKnight121
F
Subs for the Netherlands Navy
Replies
0
Views
410
Frog
F
Japanese Navy Helicopters Crash
Replies
3
Views
764
Gnomey
Veteran with PTSD receives his medals on 100th birthday
Replies
4
Views
257
Gnomey
Fire fighting aircraft down in Qld - 3 dead
Replies
11
Views
1K
GrauGeist
Menu
Log in
Register