Author	[Modern View]
Centex Farmall 11-29-2012 21:20:17 166.128.103.167 Report to Moderator	Good to bring up the Texas as the only one of it's type anywhere. Latest plans are to go to a permanent dry dock setup and build it around the ship; deemed to risky to even tow a little ways in the channel. Lot of problems this summer with flooding. [Reply]   [No Email]
Ultradog MN 11-30-2012 16:08:33 184.100.109.75 Report to Moderator	Re: Retiring U.S.S. Enterprise in reply to Centex Farmall, 11-29-2012 21:20:17   Here is a nice website that has a little write up on the Texas. Here [Reply]  [No Email]
CenTex Farmall 12-01-2012 17:48:10 173.219.184.18 Report to Moderator	Re: Retiring U.S.S. Enterprise in reply to Ultradog MN, 11-30-2012 16:08:33   Also, thanks [Reply]  [No Email]
hermit 12-01-2012 07:27:22 96.8.225.195 Report to Moderator	Re: Retiring U.S.S. Enterprise in reply to Ultradog MN, 11-30-2012 16:08:33   Thanks for that Ultradog MN. [Reply]  [No Email]
hermit 11-30-2012 03:11:42 96.8.226.85 Report to Moderator	Re: Retiring U.S.S. Enterprise in reply to Centex Farmall, 11-29-2012 21:20:17   I agree with you'll on the Texas. I went on a hard hat tour of her about a year ago, and she is in sad shape indeed. They said at the time that the future didn't look good. I heard about the flooding earlier this year, but haven't heard any more lately. And the last time I looked on the website, there weren't any updates on the situation. Sad to see a piece of history like that go to the devil. On the subject of carriers, have any of you'll been to the Lexington in Corpus? I have been wanting to go for a while, just need to get off my rear and do it. As to the demise of Navy ships, I would have liked to have had a hand in cutting up that miserable POS tin can I was on last!!! [Reply]  [No Email]
Centex Farmall 11-30-2012 11:51:33 32.176.0.34 Report to Moderator	Re: Retiring U.S.S. Enterprise in reply to hermit, 11-30-2012 03:11:42   I have been to the Lexington a couple of times, most recently on Oct. That one is getting better and better. More of the ship is being opened up as time goes on. Even if you kind of hurry you can barely see all of it in a whole day (or maybe I'm just slow). Lots of displays in the hanger deck. A number of aircraft displayed topside. Some of it is well restored and some of it is not, so parts still have that "lived in" look. A ferry boat runs from the seawall in front of the area hotels across the bay to where the Lexington is for a couple bucks. The Lex is protected by some kind of double throw down anode system so the hull should be fine for a while. There's a couple of guys at work that qualified on the Lexington when it was still active. [Reply]  [No Email]
dhermesc 11-30-2012 09:56:16 24.248.193.103 Report to Moderator	Re: Retiring U.S.S. Enterprise in reply to hermit, 11-30-2012 03:11:42   The problem with the "Texas" is how they tried to display her after she was retired. Basically they sank her in the mud at dock side and called it good. After years of sitting like that the hull was nearly destroyed along with the rest of the ship. Trying to "recover" from that horrible treatment is expensive. [Reply]  [No Email]
Centex Farmall 11-30-2012 11:57:18 32.176.0.34 Report to Moderator	Re: Retiring U.S.S. Enterprise in reply to dhermesc, 11-30-2012 09:56:16   My mother recalls visiting with her family in the 50's and they had poured concrete over the deck rather than repair the wood. Back then it was just another old boat. I remember the funding drive in the 90's when they chipped that stuff off and put wood back. [Reply]  [No Email]
dhermesc 11-30-2012 12:27:33 24.248.193.103 Report to Moderator	Re: Retiring U.S.S. Enterprise in reply to Centex Farmall, 11-30-2012 11:57:18   The concrete leaked water throughout the upper decks of the hull rusting out the parts that were not submerged. Topping it off the battleships built by the US just before and during WW1 were not all that well designed and were using cheap material in their construction. [Reply]  [No Email]