Which Museum Ships Would be Brought Back First if Needed?

[@jlawsl]

When your country's museum fleet still has more aircraft carriers then any country in the world...

[@GeneralJackRipper]

Nice.

[@bf1255]

That’s amazing

[@innouniversedoineedthis]

It is a bit of an unfair way of looking at it mate

[@solidsnake8330]

@@innouniversedoineedthis Not wrong though. Even our Helicopter Amphibious Assault Ships. We have carriers out the Wazoo.

[@donsvideos1985]

@@innouniversedoineedthis how so? Has the US failed NATO yet? One could argue the other though...

[@Moon_Cricket_Stinks]

USS Enterprise was completely discarded as scrap metal despite having most most decoration, and massive impact. She deserved to be preserved that any other US ship.

[@brianchiasson2465]

Ignoring the fact that her metal is going into CVN-80, and thus, continuing to serve on the front line, sure...

[@Moon_Cricket_Stinks]

@@brianchiasson2465 HMS Victory which served a great campaign for the British Empire was drydocked and preserved. Saluted by sailors. Be that as it may, enterprise should've gotten the same treatment as a monument for US naval forces. At least the metal is still serving something.

[@snipe1066]

It will serve again as parts of cvn-80, as a sailor from 72-78, with 2 deployments I support that wholeheartedly!

[@N7-WAR-HOUND]

Five years to build a aircraft carrier in a shooting war? I know things are a bit more complicated then the carrier’s of old but a shooting war tends to make lot’s of things suddenly less prohibited. I think we could half bake a carrier in 12to16 months. Any expert thoughts?

[@phantomaviator1318]

West Virginia should've been preserved too :(

[@natural-born_pilot]

I had the pleasure one night to observe the New Jersey some distance off the shore of the base I was stationed in Viet Nam firing it’s big guns in a barrage directly over our heads at targets farther inland. It was the most awesome display of fire power I’ve ever witnessed. The deep roar and the long stream of colorful flame and fire coming from its muzzles. Then looking directly over head we could see the huge rounds sailing through the moon lit cloud base . What seemed like a short time would go by when you would hear the dull rumble when they impacted. I’ll never forget that spectacular sight.

[@hoyavp2236]

Thank you for your service, Shipmate

[@AdmiralYeti8042]

I can’t even begin to imagine what this would have been like. I wish I could have been alive to see the big gun navy inflicting America sized doses of pain to an unfortunate enemy just once. It’s so wild that Jersey was conceived by brilliant Americans with slide rules back when we still valued excellence. They built her to be unstoppable and to the day she hasn’t been proven otherwise.

[@gwynroberson198]

​@@AdmiralYeti8042 while big guns might come back ( they are a good low cost option) Iowa's are expensive to crew, making other options more cost effective.

[@AdmiralYeti8042]

@@gwynroberson198 a naval war today would be an extremely violent affair from beneath the waves and over the horizon. I’m not even sold that building so many aircraft carriers is a good idea. We need a lot of missile launchers spread out over a lot of hulls with every conceivable means of reducing the amount of crew on board per unit it taken. The age of the armored giants has passed though I still believe we need a proper weapons platform for close in amphibious support. The LCS is a total failure and isn’t fit for the job.

[@DJNitreBlue]

Thanks for sharing that memory.

[@imjusttoodissgusted5620]

We have to make sure the guns all work, I saw a documentary called "Battleship", it made me realize that when aliens invade, BB's are the only thing that will stop them.

[@bamafan-in-OZ]

I love that one, the other advantage is that the documentary showed that you can bring the Iowa's back to service in an hour or 2 and then operate them with a dozen crew members 😁

[@MrChickennugget360]

@@bamafan-in-OZ preferably senior citizens who you don't have to pay overtime or hazard pay since they are going to die soon anyway

[@Annatar5289]

@@bamafan-in-OZ and reload the guns at insane speeds somehow. as ive learned from video games, its 30 seconds without reload module

[@thawk1435]

And don't forget dropping the anchor at full steam is actually an awesome way to slew the ship broadside and doesn't actually rip the bow off instead.

[@imjusttoodissgusted5620]

Its a standard BB combat tactic. you can also use it to get in a tight parking space at the pier.

[@ryanschweikhardt]

"Great we're finally going to get more battle stars than Enterprise" I'm dying laughing 😂

[@SC457A]

I almost spit out my drink on that one!

[@bri-manhunter2654]

I was to🤣🤣

[@rocketguardian2001]

Yeah good luck with that.

[@pedenharley6266]

That was funny. Props to the editor to the triple-Ryan effect!

[@brianpayne4549]

I get the feeling that even if the battleship was brought back, and she had a role in EVERY SINGLE action, she STILL wouldn’t get enough lol

[@tippyc2]

If they needed to, I bet the museum carriers would be reactivated before the battleships. I toured the Hornet a few years ago. The catapults and elevators are still being preserved, and that's from the public tour. Hornet is also equipped to handle and secure nuclear weapons. When I stayed there, it still had all the bunks. I believe it's still floating, and they could dry dock it in Vallejo. She's definitely a solid candidate to reactivate, as good as the Iowa from what I've seen on this channel.

[@KennethStone]

The Hornet's a great ship, I really like it. And do you mean Mare Island Naval Shipyard in Vallejo? Just like all the other military bases in the Bay Area, BRAC shut it down in the '90's, and it's been completely deactivated. Same with Hunters Point in San Francisco. The 2 main west coast navy bases are in the Seattle area and the LA area.

[@Jake-cz1kb]

The Hornet was decommissioned in 1970. There is no reason to reactivate it, it is an Esses class carrier with two antiquated catapults that cannot handle modern aircraft. It would be cost prohibitive. And Mare Island has been closed for years.

[@KennethStone]

@@Jake-cz1kb The Essex class ships served until the ‘70’s, and operated some of the most advanced planes of the day.

[@Jake-cz1kb]

@@KennethStone yes, of the day. A bygone day.

[@KennethStone]

@@Jake-cz1kb a lot of the ‘70’s eras planes are still around

[@mattblom3990]

I'm Canadian. The Battleship New Jersey museum said online they wouldn't ship a beer opener made from the original teak deck to me. But I phoned in and the museum curator, a very nice lady, took care of getting me a UPS shipping quote and getting me my bottle opener now mounted on my wall. This is a great ship with an epic history forged in real battle, please support her!

[@NOrlando952]

Canadians need beer openers? Don’t you guys all have a beaver specifically for opening brews?

[@mattblom3990]

@@NOrlando952 lol

[@crazyguy32100]

WWIII on the horizon.... The Navy starts installing VLS tubes onboard USS Constitution. Noiseless, stealthy on radar, emissions free and crewed by only the bravest sailors and officers.

[@danielbowen4550]

That would be both hilarious and terrifying. “Launch the tomahawks!” I’m sorry ,did that 300 year old wooden sailing ship just say tomahawks?

[@generalharness8266]

@@danielbowen4550 Don't worry they need to get really close to throw the axes.

[@scottdoubleyou563]

Then... Suddenly... 24 TLAM-C's out of nowhere.

[@ramal5708]

Well she could launch and store torpedoes Mark-46s or something newer and add sonar on her. The Constitution gonna excel hunting submarines, she's quiet, basically no propeller and the subs gonna distinguish her as cargo ship or oiler or even a yacht

[@Doc_Paradox]

Wrong on the noiseless part the sea shanties being sung on her deck will give her away long before she could be visually identified.

[@dundonrl]

There's a book called Tempered Steel, where the US is attacked by a 100 or so nuclear bombs destroying all of our modern technology. (anything with transistors) and the Navy recommissions all the WW2 fast battleships, heavy cruisers and a bunch of destroyers. Great book especially if you like reading about battleships fighting a modern war!

[@biosaber585]

this discussions has actually been posed with regards to the military as well and the reactivation of much WWII and Vietnam grade armor. Due to the number of tanks we produced during that war for Britain and our own troops most of the equipment would be functionally still usable (albeit most modern soldiers probably wouldn't be very clear on how to use any of it) in the event of warfare and might actually fair rather well considering how easily most of it can be repaired

[@b.w.22]

@@biosaber585 - Are there stashes of old Shermans and Pattons around, coated in cosmoline?

[@adamhauskins6407]

You know where it can be found

[@biosaber585]

@@b.w.22 not in cosmoline to my knowledge but there's a shitload of these tanks still in museums that are functional (yes really) not to mention the stupid number that are held by private collectors the world over. Of course thats not even considering the jeeps, half tracks, and other vehicles that had been kept through the years. You'd honestly probably have maybe four or five tank platoons and an ungodly number of other armored vehicles just out of the US's museum and private collections alone, not to mention the recovery vehicles, modified versions like the hellcat and firefly, etc. Theres a LOT of WWII US armor still floating around even today thats in shockingly functional condition

[@Valorius]

@@b.w.22 We have thousands of M1 Abrams in mothballs.

[@TheRiskyBrothers]

When I was a kid I spent a night in a museum sub as part of a cubscout thing. Being a bit naiive, I asked if the ship still worked as a submarine, and got the answer, "well, you can go down, but I'm not sure about up again."

[@eligebrown8998]

Lol, that's cool

[@ww21943]

Was it the USS Ling by any chance?

[@josephsheranda]

Certifiable one-way submarine. 😂

[@seanlambert-knight4735]

I stayed in silversides I believe

[@mandalortemaan7510]

Bismarck was never sank, by the RN nor scuttling, but converted into a submarine

[@InfantrySider]

Imagine a war starts, and you see the Iowa leaving port with full crew

[@hernerweisenberg7052]

Yeah you would probably think: how stupid is that? Considering that if you take a random fishing or cargo vessel and install a VLS, that ship would have a far greater firepower and range than any battle ship that ever was ;D

[@ineednochannelyoutube5384]

@@hernerweisenberg7052 45 miles bombardment range with 9 406mm rifles is significantly more shore attack capacity than any vessel in us inventory, including carriers.

[@hernerweisenberg7052]

@@ineednochannelyoutube5384 Really? Lets see, the 16" Mk. 13 HC Shell had a filling of 153.5 pounds of explosive. The ship could fire ~2 round per minute and gun, thats 2764 pounds of explosive on target per minute. ONE Arleigh Burke Class Destroyer could load up to 96 Tomahawks in its VLS, each with a 1000 pound HE warhead at a range of up to 1500 miles. How many of those destroyers can you field for the cost and crew of one battleship? Now where is the fault in this line of thought?

[@hernerweisenberg7052]

That destroyer only has to fire 3 Tomahawks a minute to beat the battleship in firepower. How many can it launch per minute? No idea, but probably more then 3.

[@ineednochannelyoutube5384]

@@hernerweisenberg7052 Cost. A single tomahawk cost something like 1.7 million dollars to manifacture. And are you certain of the explosive filler weight in the 16" shells? 140poinds of boom in a 1400 pound shell sound like an awfully small fraction of its weight. Though steel is denser than cordite so who knows.

[@airplanes42]

When I visited Hornet years ago, one of the staff told me that she was overhauled just before being placed into mothballs. He said that her machinery was the best of all the museum carriers by far.

[@patcb829]

Down right shame USS Eneterprise CV-6 was scrapped.

[@admiralkipper4540]

Ironically I think those old carriers would be less useful than battleships today because they probably can’t launch jet fighters without a huge amount of modification

[@patcb829]

@@admiralkipper4540 I meant more as a museum memorial ship. I agree with your assessment.

[@admiralkipper4540]

@@patcb829 yeah I think these old era ships should be preserved as much as is reasonably possible, apparently though some of the carrier museum ships could actually fly modern jets so that’s pretty cool

[@Atlasworkinprogress]

@@admiralkipper4540 They could easily launch and recover F-35Bs.

[@tntproductions1996]

@@Atlasworkinprogress They could also be modified to carry helicopters too. Maybe like what we currently have with the Wasp-Class of helicopter carriers.

[@bri-manhunter2654]

“More battle stars then Enterprise” this had me rolling🤣 Wisconsin is in Norfolk where I grew up, she is a pretty lady, as all the Iowa’s are.

[@Omnissiah_]

i think Enterprise needs more respect thou

[@FP194]

@@Omnissiah_ It is getting respect CVN-80 will be USS Enterprise

[@qade2128]

Lol i thought for a moment there you ment norfolk in the uk

[@map3384]

Many years ago I knew a woman who was part of construction crew which built Wisconsin at the Philadelphia Navy yard. Valarie was 19 years old and a welder. She witnessed her launching and was very proud to do her part. Old Val passed on a good many years ago.

[@bri-manhunter2654]

@@Omnissiah_. Grey Ghost!

[@grogery1570]

I remember when the New Jersey came to Australia, made a hell of an impression when it fired off a broad side for the tv news!

[@michaelsommers2356]

We really need to reactivate _Olympia._ What if the Russians reactivate _Aurora?_ Without _Olympia_ we'd be helpless.

[@peterfiske6728]

Good point

[@airplanenut89]

We would need better than Olympia, we would need to locate, and raise KAMCHATKA!

[@ronsee6458]

@@airplanenut89 AND GIVE HER TO THE ENEMY NAVY

[@ricky6608]

@@airplanenut89 Kamchatka would be the most decorated ship of whoever Russia goes to war with

[@matyaskanev2151]

Well now just to persuade the Japanese to dig Mikasa out of the concrete and we can have a good old naval battle.

[@dangerrangerlstc]

In a world full of cyber warfare, there's something to be said for mechanical systems. Can't electronically jam a solid steel slug flying at several hundred miles an hour. Can't down a mechanical system with an EMP.

[@chrissinclair4442]

I was hoping the new artillery developing that flies 1000 to 2000 miles could supplant the guns. Hoping they go on the Zumwalts. Especially useful if you could disable per round the GPS functionality for closer ranges if that is of worry. Even having a closer AP non electronic round. They fly farther, have more round capacity in the magazine, no lose powder or bads so less likely to detonate. Even if you used explosives with that wouldn't detonate in fire would be better.

[@captainriker9088]

It's true. I believe the Millennium Challenge 2002 proved that there is something to be said about using old tech against a modern foe. Of course, the old technology has to be combined with intelligent tactics, but it can be used effectively.

[@vsGoliath96]

Okay, correct me if I'm wrong cause I absolutely might be. I'm pretty sure that the last time they were reactivated, the battleships were all upgraded with advanced electronics and targeting computers. So unfortunately, I believe we've lost the old mechanical advantage, if we want to discuss it in Galactica terms.

[@dangerrangerlstc]

@@vsGoliath96 which was also subsequently removed when they were last put in mothballs. But the old mechanical targeting computers still remain, plus, we know how to make them still. Its not like we would have to reinvent them.

[@vsGoliath96]

@@dangerrangerlstc Thanks for the info! I suppose it wouldn't make any sense to leave valuable equipment in a ship you're immediately going to stop using.

[@MK0272]

I think by far the most likely museum ship to be reactivated is USCG Mackinaw, a US Coast Guard icebreaker that served on the Great Lakes up until 2006, simply because she is an icebreaker. The US has fallen far behind our competitors in the building of ice breakers, and this one was fully functional the day she was replaced by her successor. The biggest reason she was taken out of service was the difficulty in obtaining spare parts, but I suspect that would be alleviated to a great degree by the advent of 3D metal printing. I would not be all that surprised if she did sail again one day.

[@0rien_]

She still can sail if I remember correctly

[@wyattroncin941]

3D metal printing is not an adequate substitute for machined parts in most cases, not does in make spare/replacement parts easier to obtain. If it were so necessary, everything on the Mackinaw can be replicated with CNC machining or even just manual. The problem is that when stuff is no longer in current manufacture, or original prints and specifications are lost, that is what makes spare parts incredibly expensive.

[@JoeKyser]

Yeah well 3d printing still relies on the same elements when developing the parts themselves. You actually still need to make them too. Then you have a cost factor. 3d printing isn't necessarily any cheaper.

[@charlied.469]

Ryan seems so much more comfortable in front of the camera in these recent videos. Great stuff!

[@yankeeclipper4326]

I've noticed the same trend. A year ago he was like a baby deer taking his first steps while in headlights when in front of the camera. Real cringy stuff..........Now Ryan is vastly more confident and smooth when on camera; no averting his gaze or stumbling over his words and thoughts, which is awesome cuz the guy is obviously a lexicon of knowledge and deserves a place in the pantheon of YT naval history presenters. Way To Go Ryan!! Also, I respect that you don't try to present yourself as something you are not. You get some flack for your shabby appearance in the live chats, but I appreciate that you are scruffy and wear clothes that are worn down and were probably purchased 15 years ago(kinda reminds me of me). It conveys a feeling of authenticity, like what you see is what you get. The audience can tell that you are a hands on kind of guy who adores his job(who wouldn't?) and your love of BB NJ and her history is palpable in these videos. If you wore a button down shirt and khakis I wouldn't even bother watching. So keep up the good work Ryan and Libby and the whole BB NJ crew! Visiting you is on my bucket list for post covid and its all because of the great videos you've been posting. Cheers!

[@pbrstreetgang2467]

Perhaps, but still seems quite hesitant and extemporaneous in places. Arms crossed telegraphs his unease. Good historical content but an overall rough video to watch and listen to.

[@charlied.469]

@@pbrstreetgang2467 rude

[@tomfinch7653]

Dude me and my kids have been trying to make a channel rather unsuccessfully i might add getting in front of a camera sucks.

[@bboxx069]

Don't forget about Yamato!!! We could raise her and modernize her with a Wave Motion Gun and engine!

[@clif4403]

And make it fly through space!!!

[@LTPottenger]

If the governments of the world had any sense they would do whatever it takes to make it happen but they don't.

[@Fellzu]

Wish you had the amenities to wave off your enemies with one big blast from your wave motion gun....

[@rdr8147]

And deriving from that we'd create the Andromeda Class Space Battleship with the double barrel wave motion gun and recall Captain Gideon from the Naval Reserve.

[@battleship6177]

Yamato! TO THE SKIES!!!

[@hab790]

The Wisconsin is about a 20 minute drive from me and she's still in amazing shape. They've pulled her out of retirement before and I really think they could do it again if absolutely necessary.

[@Mr-mopar]

I been there ..nice whip..they did say they keep her at 50 percent..plus she was outfitted with cruise missies.

[@founderoftheempire8589]

@@Mr-mopar and the ability to use UAVs, plus shoot shells filled with nuclear explosives

[@d.c.4598]

Call me when they do!,i miss my rack,🤣🤣🤣👍

[@stargatetitanx]

that's probably why they keep her so close to the dock yards the navy and pretty much snatch her up over night if they had too you could drive by her while going home get up going to work and see her moved to the dock yard

[@jds6206]

No, they can't. The cost is prohibitive.

[@chrissmith7669]

I remember while I was in they did a test reactivation of the ghost fleet to move it when a hurricane was inbound. The ghost fleet was supposed to be quickly available to return to service. As I recall getting them fired up and actually moving under their own power was a disaster. Even ships meant to be ready at a moment’s notice weren’t truly ready as they’d sat untested for years sometimes decades.

[@sirboomsalot4902]

Was Iowa still in the ghost fleet when that happened?

[@rickypalacios1554]

I like that. "If Navy need New Jersey for world war 3. Great we can finally get more battle stars then Enterprise"

[@_R-R]

5 ships for me: 1 & 2) Treasury-class cutters (327 cutters). 3) USS Midway (CV-41). She operated alongside much newer carriers and carried F-18s onboard. 4) USS Wisconsin (BB-64). Material condition and imposing and versatile weapons systems. 5) USS New Jersey (BB-62). Same as Wisconsin.

[@rjenkins66bj]

The Midway could only launch Aircraft in calm seas. Cutters belong to the coast guard. They are not built for Blue Water or have enough firepower. I served on the Jersey from 82 -84. I was a MM in NO1 Engineroom . The engines are toast. The pumps are 70 years old

[@Felix-Orion]

I mean, I think the obvious answer to "What is the first museum ship that the Navy would really like back?" is the USS Pueblo but I don't think the current museum "owners" would exactly want to give her up without an actual fight, lol.

[@Felix-Orion]

@Robert Miner Yeah that's my point, dude, lmao.

[@B-enjoyer]

What about uss midway?

[@vsGoliath96]

I had to look that up and got a damn good laugh. Thanks!

[@velocity9OOOYT]

I mean they literally stole the goddamn thing

[@velocity9OOOYT]

And its some how still in commission

[@SirLoinTheBeefy]

USS Cod. Her pressure hull is still intact (the only one, iirc) and engines were restored in 2013.

[@DetTigerFan]

USS Silversides submarine is in Muskegon, Michigan.

[@ChemicalU235]

@@DetTigerFan ok u said silversides. For real she came to mind soon as he started talking. Still watching vid though

[@halo6801]

SEND IN THE FISH

[@mwswarrior]

Having spent time aboard and actually worked with my sailors aboard USS COBIA when I was the skipper at NOSC Green Bay, I believe she is still owned by the Navy. We assisted the museum in preparing for a periodic NAVSEA inspection in the late 2000s. She also regularly fires up engines (for reunions, etc) and has operational HPACs to do so. Her radar and radios are also operational after repair and refurb from a team of active and veteran sailors. For these reasons, I believe she may be the most complete and operational of the museum subs.

[@MrSchnebs]

My reaction to one of the museum ships being brought back to fight would be the same as my reaction if they called me up to reactivate my commission - “Boy, you guys must be REALLY desperate!” 😂

[@Flack55]

I was thinking THE SAME THING. "Reactivation of the conventional fleet, boy we must be in some deep stuff, anyone going out wouldn't likely be coming back... oh wait, they'd probably be calling me at the same time!" Hahaha

[@jarvisfamily3837]

Yeah - if they call me back they've scraped the bottom of the barrel, turned it over, and are now eye-balling the underside. :-) And let's consider some practical implications, like fuel. I believe the Iowa's burned "black oil" (Bunker C), even after their refits during the 80's. Is Bunker Charlie even *available* anymore? That's going to affect the load-out on oilers as they'd have to carry JP-5 for aircraft and gas-turbine propulsion, DFM for most steam plants, and then find some space for Bunker C for one ship? Nuts. I remember in the early 80's when one of the old repair ships (might have been Ajax or Hector (?)) was sent out to Diego Garcia, she had to up anchor and steam north to Colombo in Sri Lanka to take on fuel because the Navy had no Bunker C available and that was the only place they could still get it. 40 years later I have to think that availability of black oil is going to be even more restricted.

[@RonJohn63]

I think he said that about eight times.

[@jadedandbitter]

@@jarvisfamily3837 so A.) Retrofitting to burn different fuel wouldnt be that hard and B.) if youre bringing her back from the dead, why not put a nuclear reactor or three in, like a carrier? And they could put in power sources more advanced than that if they had to.

[@spidermann5000]

@@jadedandbitter coz the war would be over before reactivation is done?

[@ctg6734]

Note to self: Never give the navy back a ship.

[@rossreed9974]

Completely thankful for the many people maintaining the one-of-a-kind vessels, thank you for what you do! I have been on the New Jersey and Wisconsin more than once for touring and agree with your assessment - Wisconsin is in great shape and New Jersey still breathes a lot of life.

[@Fellzu]

We are only a couple steps removed from asking "which museum ship do we give the Space Battleship Yamato treatment?" at this point.

[@aquateenchris]

Or Space Dreadnought Texas

[@aquateenchris]

@Notnser nobody cares

[@Aim54Delta]

"At first, we thought battleships lacked sufficient range. After performing the calculations, however, an Iowa class battleship in low earth orbit has incredible potential for ground penetrating strikes with hypersonic 16" armor piercing rounds. It would also be effectively invulnerable to any existing or plausible land based anti-satellite munition."

[@aquateenchris]

It would be badass to see old Dreadnought ships reclassified as "Planet Breakers"

[@Aim54Delta]

@@aquateenchris My dad told a story about how when he arrived in Nam, one of the Iowas, I think it was the New Jersey, was shelling an island nearby. After a few hours of this, there was an enormous explosion and half the island fell into the water. He guessed they finally set off an ammunition dump. I think that with some of the innovations in directed energy weapons, the evolving anti-satellite role, the limitations of air launched/dropped ordnance, and the sheer practicality of heavy artillery (with things like coil guns and/or rail guns factored in) creates an environment where a modern battleship is not so crazy of an idea even in the age of carriers (which, arguably, the success of carriers in world war 2 was as much coincidence as it was down to carriers being effective. There were numerous instances where carriers missed getting completely raped by a main battle fleet by dumb luck and we would still regard the carrier as a support ship had dumb luck not gone in the carrier's favor). Consider that the manning of a battleship is around 1700 souls, which could be reduced somewhat through automation (but I am of the mind that a battleship needs fingers to plug holes moreso than computers to actuate valves), whereas even the most aggressive thinning of crews among carriers leaves them with around 3500 souls plus air wing. You can easily get two, possibly three battleships out of the same crew for a carrier while still being able to basically cripple a country by parking near their port(s), even with the limitations of world war 2 16" guns. Let alone what snazzy stuff could be innovated today with advances in propellants, steel/barrels, and possibly a railgun/coilgun for antisatellite munitions or some crazy intercontinental artillery idea. If you did go nearly all electric accelerators, you could radically reduce magazine requirements as well as, if using some nuclear design, radically reducing fuel requirements. This would free up plenty of weight and volume for added armor, torpedo defense/compartmentalization, and - as I propose - a mobile fabrication facility and/or depot level refit for certain items - focusing more on the tech-heavy stuff. This would be full rebuilds of jet turbines for aircraft or even part sourcing from alloy stock, perhaps even including die lithography for production of radar parts and the like. You have a giant armored box that can turn into a laser disco and shred entire air forces and their missiles. Much harder to take down than land based facilities in a world where even conventional ICBMs are a practical endeavor for a nation, and it can contribute to the function and service of the fleet in ways outside of diplomatic pressure and combat. The only real threat at that point is submarines and/or some kind of crazy long range torpedo. Or another really big ship with really big guns. Hence how we arrived at dreadnoughts in the first place and why carriers were not seen as being the kings of naval combat until they were practically the only thing America had left to fight with in the Pacific and we did a damned good job of fighting with support ships and disposable aircraft. The novelty of modern air capability developed more quickly than the process of designing and building entire ships could keep up with - between the time the Iowas were put on paper to the launch of the last Iowa, aircraft went from novel monoplane, all-metal designs to being highly supercharged engines with wings which, themselves, were being considered obsolete next to newfangled jet engines. From just a design perspective, aviation was accelerating so quickly that carriers made more sense to build since their arsenal could be rotated out with the newest aircraft while a battleship built to deal with the ME-262 would be completely overwhelmed by the capabilities of the F-86. Now that we are up against physics as the primary limiters of performance and size of aircraft and their ordnance, rather than method, it makes sense to go back and think about ye olde dreadnought and her role in force projection.

[@Ridliman]

Navy: "We want to reactivate Texas and Olimpia!" Everyone: "Why?" Navy pointing at politicians trying to gain votes. Everyone: "Ok, that makes sense."

[@Snaperkid]

I doubt Texas would ever be reactivated. The ship is barely able to float because of poor maintenance.

[@Ridliman]

@@Snaperkid I know :(

[@clif4403]

@@Snaperkid That ship hasn't floated in a decades. They are currently filling the hull with expanding foam to attempt to get it to a dry dock before it collapses.

[@teuflhunden]

@@Snaperkid not to mention there would not be upgrades you would be able to do with out reworking the hull which would probably cost more than building a new ship. The Texas which is a New York class BB is the last and only surviving WW1 super dreadnought of the US fleet. If I had money to spare I'd donate to BB-35 restoration efforts. I'm proud to have her here in Texas.

[@jackhuffman9313]

oh gosh, if i was a 100 billionaire i would pay to do a complete restoration of BB 35 , USS TEXAS full steam ahead...

[@michaeldolch9126]

Thank you so much for your content! As a fan of all military history from a young age, at 40 years old I really enjoy this channel. Makes me feel like a kid on a ship again. I live in Baltimore area so I am close to the USS Torsk and a few others but really need to visit more. Hope to see yall soon. Used to live in SC and loved Patriots Point and love visiting the Yorktown, Laffey and Clagmore. Also love the old sail ship Constellation in Baltimore. Hope to add yall to my list! God bless yall!

[@Semper_Iratus]

“Stop suggesting it”. I was dying.

[@vtr0104]

I mean, he's right :))) Also, I'd vote for Ryan as secretary of the Navy :| #ryansnavy

[@brucelombardo]

It has been decades... “Yes, we are gonna finally get more battle stats than the Enterprise!”

[@andrewcoates3050]

The USS Yorktown holds a special place in my heart as I got to stay overnight on her while I was in scouts and I can tell you that she still has a lot of her internal components as they are all protected by acrilic cases and other than her hull issues and the outdated nature of her equipment she is still in fairly good condition although you are right that she would likely need the most work out of all the carriers Edit: also I'd reactivate the USS Laffey, knowing her history she'd probably still refuse to die

[@richard6133]

I had a similar experience, it was an annual trip for our high school JROTC unit. Instead of _per se_ reactivating the CV-10 _USS Yorktown_ , keep her where she is, and load her flight deck up with land-based mobile ABM systems, for defending Joint Base Charleston area command airspace. Some of the comms suite would still work, with a little TLC. Anchor _USS Laffey_ in a position to further shield her, with modernized AA guns. Reactivate Ft. Moultrie, and give them some anti-shipping support fire weapons. You've also got easy manpower augmentation available, here. There would be no shortage of volunteers to man them. Unfortunately for the _USS Clamaglore_ , she's too far gone to participate as anything but a shipping obstruction. Which were historically used in Charleston Harbor during the Revolutionary War and the Civil War.

[@andrewcoates3050]

​@@richard6133 That is a really good plan if they would need to bring back Yorktown, unfortunately clamagore is being recycled but she was in a bad state as it was so probably for the best, honestly the USS Laffey is in pretty good shape seeing as at one point she had to have her hull completely overhauled after sinking at her moorings plus knowing her history I think any adversaries would find her difficult to sink

[@richard6133]

​@@andrewcoates3050 Aaaand... The DoD steals my ideas, again... kzbin.info/www/bejne/mIjWqp5poc9_e5Isi=-motzg2D_FEF1KgT Only, they're doing it with oil rigs, instead of the USS _Yorktown_ ...

[@34scot]

I served with Admiral Katz on the Big J... then he was a captain. Nice to see your still kicking sir. Capt. R.D. Tucker took over, both were top notch.

[@nofrackingzone7479]

I live Houston Texas did not know the USS Texas was going into dry dock for repairs. There has been talk about it for years.

[@hoppermantis7615]

It's a wreck. But, scuttle butte is they are focusing on her hull. Above & beyond with reinforcement....

[@AnthonySmith-l1j]

Re-activate a lot of the smaller ships, and assign them to Naval National Guard, Naval Reserve, state naval guard, etc. You could still allow them to be museum ships but allow these units to maintain and operate the ship when needed. The Navy can set up plug and play modern systems that can be brought aboard in quick order if needed to enhance the analog systems but kept away from prying eyes the rest of the time. The Cyclone class patrol vessels would have also been a good choice. Several older 'gator navy' ships could even be assigned to inland states to use on the river systems like LST 325. They help pay for themselves as museums but are ready if needed.

[@vbvol]

In Cub Scouts we slept on the Wisconsin so much i learned the layout and it became a part of me kinda

[@baseballjustin5]

There was a sub in Wisconsin that I slept on, they would turn her on, but not sure about battle worthy lol

[@baseballjustin5]

I'm seeing maybe the USS Cobia?

[@rarincoronet197bob3]

Same. It was amazing, what pack where u in? I was in 179

[@vbvol]

@@rarincoronet197bob3 374

[@rarincoronet197bob3]

@@vbvol well darn

[@MrTexasDan]

Excellent summary Ryan, Thanks! I shudder in horror at the thought of activating any of the Iowas, historical artifacts of our military history ... ... but, strangely, nothing would make me prouder.

[@BillSentry]

I loved the response by an Iowa class Battleship Captain when asked if he was worried about the enemy firing anti ship missiles at his Battleship. His said, "I'd be worried about my paint job."

[@warhorse03826]

a few years back I talked the engineer on board the USS Salem CA-139 he said it would take him about a month to get the boilers and turbines up to where they could go to sea. there would a whole lot more updating needed to get everything else to work.

[@Smileybaloney]

Our poor destroyer, The Sullivans is sinking 😔 She's listing to port and taking on more water than she can pump out. There's a fundraiser on now for hull repairs.

[@PhoenixT70]

That's a damn crime. I hope you can save her.

[@Smileybaloney]

@@PhoenixT70 It's looking more promising now. The Naval park people were able to get a large donation from a local car dealership.

[@dotwill]

I donated $50 today. Trying to do my part.

[@tylerdeppeler7050]

@@Smileybaloney i was so relieved when i seen west herr donated they were able to save the Croaker and i remember she was in really really sad shape at one point i know The Sullivan will be saved and live for years to come!

[@Smileybaloney]

@@tylerdeppeler7050 amen!

[@MarkJoseph81]

I love these kinds of speculative conversations. Great podcast episode! Thank you!

[@RickLowrance]

"People pry things off the walls to take home as souvenirs." For real?? I'm thinking capitol punishment here...

[@achillebelanger9866]

In New Jersey nowadays any Battleship that still has it's Hubcaps and Catylitic Converters is a Visitor. Everything thing has been pinched and pawned that can be!

[@rdr8147]

Find the culprits and pry off their teeth

[@fastst1]

Naah, 400 hours of scraping and painting!

[@earlwyss520]

Firing squad by 16" guns & full 5" gun broadside for good measure.

[@safety_doggo2]

@@earlwyss520 Ah yes.

[@AFHProvider]

Hey I was on the New Jersey the last time it was in service. My friend was the turret captain of turret 2. Served under the admiral in the video. Amazing engineering

[@Terminus_4]

I'm pretty sure I heard somewhere that if you wanted to change the propulsion of any of the surviving battleships, it would just be cheaper just to build another battleship.

[@number6338]

Texas is probably thinking: What do you mean? I am the most relevant battleship ever to be sailed!

[@mandalortemaan7510]

Number 14...

[@steph01879]

Texas is the only one that matters.

[@midwestreview6382]

If it saw action agen it would be the most bad ass ship to ever sail but I think the refit might be done with hand tools

[@hauntedhouse7827]

That list Texas has is worrying,

[@ShelbyRestorations]

@@hauntedhouse7827 they are fixing her! she is getting a full drydock restore, and the guns are being restored and made movable too! so it would be easier to reactivate her if they wanted a fully analog war machine check it out here: battleshiptexas.org/battleship-updates/

[@frankielarkin8142]

Another perk with the location for the Wisconsin is that NNSY in Portsmouth is technically still equipped to service an Iowa class

[@stargatetitanx]

i did not know that .. thats so cool my question is ammo for the ship tho

[@kuehnel16]

The picture behind you is my favorite because it shows all four sailing together ❤

[@tomfinch7653]

As much as i would love to see the Iowa's reactivated. I think however the better bet would be to design a brand new battleship, maybe actually build 2 to 3 montana class battleships with some modernisation to the plans.

[@ByyakoKitsune69]

I agree build some modern BBGs that can take a hit on the chin and still fight like hell afterwards

[@tsunsu]

I agree however it depends on time. If the situation is already active thir be no time to build up new desighns. They would likely repair the current systums and retrain troops and crew. Thir is a reason why most vessels come with the manuel.

[@mad555max]

A design from scratch would be better to be honest. Designed from the start with VLS. A large hanger for 4 helicopters at the least etc.

[@evoraptor]

@@ByyakoKitsune69 I like to imagine it'd be multipurpose and have stupid designation like BBBLN or something. Battleship - ballistic missile armed - landing ship - nuclear.

[@5000mahmud]

It would be a needless concentration of force, better to not keep your eggs in one basket. A few units can only be so flexible, and in war flexibility is everything.

[@cdc194]

Former military Logistician here, Battleships would be what we call condition code H (unservicable and unsuitable for repair) which basically means building a new one would make more sense than tearing one down and retrofitting it with modern working equipment.

[@deserteaglegaming5290]

(Before I begin take into account that I’m an 18 yr old and this is all opinion) I think that the Iowa’s are still in a suitable condition that they could be re-upgraded considering they still have the main thing they would be brought back for which is their 16-inch guns. I also actually think that if we had another war with a superpower bringing them back out of retirement would not be a terrible idea for the reasons that were mentioned in the video. That being that modern defensive armament usually is missile protection and no destroyer is actually equipped to be able to take a 16 inch shell hit which are relatively undetectable compared to modern missiles and would therefore be much harder to plan around. Most modern naval offensive armament also revolves around the same idea of missiles which would be interesting as they would have to use much higher caliber missiles (like the missiles they would usually reserve for land attacks rather then naval) to even have a hope of penetrating the armor.

[@Sierra-208]

How much would it cost, theoretically, to reactivate and modernize the Iowas?

[@alganhar1]

@@deserteaglegaming5290 Wrong. The Machinery of the Iowa Class battleships is shot to hell, not only has that machinery come to the end of its serviceable life it has been essentially unmaintained since the ships were turned into museums. You have ANY kind of idea what a huge job ripping the Machinery out of a Battleship and replacing it is? This is not like tearing the engine and camshaft etc out of a car and replacing it, its a HUGE job, and an insanely expensive one. You would have to remove turrets, cut through armour that in places is 12 - 14 inches thick, and cut away enough of it that you can get the old machinery out and the new machinery in. That is before you think about what its going to cost in both time and money to replace the machinery for the Iowas, the Machinery of a warship is one of the longest lead items for a ship (along with the guns on the big old battlewagons). We are not talking a couple of weeks here, you cannot use off the shelf engines, they are built for the ship and literally take YEARS to build. Refitting the machinery into an Iowa would take several years, not months, years. Even worse, you have to replace those 16 inch rifles, or at least the barrels. Show me ANYWHERE in the US that has a gun pit large enough to produce 16 inch barrels for Battleships these days! There is nowhere, a naval gun barrel is not just a simple pipe, it is a superbly engineered piece of construction and metallurgy wizadry. At best those barrels have a few hundred rounds of life in them before they have to be replaced. That is the reason why when those ships were built in the first place several replacement barrels were manufactured for each gun they carried. Anyone who think sit is viable to put pretty much any museum ship back into service is living in a fantasy. They are museum ships for a reason.

[@kirkveselka5179]

Actually, the Wisconsin they have to keep things ready to bring back to duty. It will take about 180 days to update and be ready for action.

[@austinhawkins3307]

@@kirkveselka5179 negative, they used to until about 2009, where it was transfered to become a permanent museum ship.

[@farpointgamingdirect]

I remember in the late 80s when I was in the Marines, they fired up the old Yorktown and took her out to sea to escape a hurricane to avoid damage. Patriots Point is a museum complex that's well worth a visit

[@jonholder1962]

I was also a ari e station at Marine Barracks Charleston NWS in the late 80s. Sorry to say you were misinformed. when Hurricane Gloria came the Yorktown never left. In fact she has not moved from patriots point since she was placed ther in 1975. In fact she is in about 15’ of mud

[@JoeKyser]

Idk about that

[@CJOlin]

You are definitely mistaken. The Yorktown has never moved since 1975. In fact, her engines, rudder and most of the propulsion plant have been deactivated far beyond what would be needed to "fire her up", just to move. On top of that, a skeleton crew of at least 300 would be needed, provided they were experienced for this particular ship, just to restart these systems. This is the exact reason the Missouri was towed from Bremerton, to Astoria, OR to sit in fresh water to drop any salt water growth, then onto Pearl Harbor. The Navy did this because of the lack of experienced and trained crew just for an Iowa Class Battleship, and would have needed a minimum of 300-500 skeleton crew to sail under own power. The issue of the propulsion plant being mothballed and in preservation oil, it wasn't economical nor was it feasible to do this. Towing by tug was the cheapest, safest and easiest option.

[@awhilewithwileycoyote456]

I immediately thought of Midway first thing when I saw the idea of this video, I served on her sister, Coral Sea, they are both big, tough, fast and durable ships that served our name in the best traditions of the navy....keep on........wiley coyote

[@inTIMMYdator44]

Id say Midway. Its fairly museumified, but if the navy is reactiving museums shit has hit the fan lol. A couple years to refit a carrier that can still carry most aircraft in operation, and could probably accommodate the f35. it would be the most useful ship to add back into the fleet. But realistically none, our fleet is basically unmatched, and if theyre gunna reactivate anything, itll be all the mothballed ships in philly.

[@Joesolo13]

Yea carriers would definitely be the first in my mind. Their most important weapon is the planes, and if the elevators work and the deck's still intact you can always stick 35Bs(or harriers) on them. The battleships would all take so much effort to drag into service most wars would almost be over. I've seen estimates of 5+ years to mobilize Jersey, that's a long time in any war.

[@WALTERBROADDUS]

@@Joesolo13 even if you equip them, we don't have the pilots or planes for another airwing.

[@northwoodsrailproductions4538]

@@Joesolo13 that’s why you start that process now to make sure it’s ready for that war lol. With any luck it would almost be easier to build a brand new battleship from the keel up than it would be to repair/refit one of the existing ones as you would have the benefit of modern systems being integrated right away. Would lose out on the heavy armor and big guns though since the various industries that manufactured those have long since gone out of business

[@Letyourcolorsblendwithmine]

China's fleet out numbers our own, in quantity if not quality. They're going balls-to-the-wall to modernize. We're going to have serious problems in five years.

[@hailexiao2770]

@@northwoodsrailproductions4538 Anybody that makes nuclear containment vessels (e.g. US Steel) can make battleship armor with a learning curve. 16 inch guns are a bigger problem--it'll probably take at least a few years, maybe a decade of R&D to make one again.

[@COACHWARBLE]

i remember this video from 2 years ago. i decided to like and comment because i remember the amount of interest this video caused for the channel. I think this video 2 years ago established half of your subscribers.

[@MisterHedgeFund]

I think Down Periscope demonstrated the usefulness of WW2 era submarines.

[@pedenharley6266]

Yeah... Those boats would submerge once...

[@raymondweaver8526]

This is a battleship

[@Irish381]

The diesel engine submarine are NOT useful , the Sterling engine submarines from Holland would be more useful.

[@achillebelanger9866]

@@raymondweaver8526 It may perform as a Submarine at least once at this point...

[@philwalmsley1116]

Ryan, that was AWESOME. I continue to be impressed by your vast knowledge. Well done. Thank you and your dedicated crew (Libby, Alaina and Ken). You guys rock!!!!!

[@MeganLMaki]

With destroyers, you left out the Turner Joy in Bremerton WA. Two advantages. 1. It's material condition is pretty good because yard workers volunteer to maintain it. 2. It's right next to PSNS, where it can be repaired and upgraded. It would need new boiler refractory, all pumps rebuilt or replaced, the piping squeezed and inspected, tanks cleaned and inspected, and hull inspected and repaired to make her seaworthy. The Mk-42, 5"-54cal guns are antiquated and any repair parts would probably have to be custom made. However, Mount 52 could be yarded out and replaced with an eight or sixteen cell Mk-41 VLS. Not sure if the electrical production could handle the electronics and radars the ship would need.

[@stormlord1177]

sad uss Texas noises

[@jwenting]

yeah, Texas is a barely floating wreck. More rust than steel below the waterline, the pumps can barely keep up with the water coming in through the many holes and cracks. Only thing she's going to be good for if brought back is as a training vessel for teaching swabbies how to swab the decks of the other classics, while sitting solidly encased in mud and concrete to prevent her from going under.

[@cgmason7568]

@@jwenting i think she's sealed up now, they are reinforcing he internals for towing

[@razgriz1723]

@@jwenting I would have to disagree. I did time on her and she is save able. She is on a even keel now which she hass not been for a long time. We now have her sealed up and ready for the move

[@BLACKMONGOOSE13]

It’ll buff out. They have some grand plans to basically put her in a park style attraction.

[@charleshollensheadii3078]

They need to get her out of the water for good. That's the only thing that will save that ship.

[@ForceSmart]

I think your analysis was pretty dang good. I'm glad the cutters got a mention too! :)

[@snoozieq4584]

Yes, the USS Wisconsin BB64 is in Norfolk, VA. I live a ferry ride away from her and she is still in wonderful condition. She is moored across the Elizabeth River from Norfolk Naval Ship Yard, which is down the street from me. Newport News Shipbuilding is on the James River which the Elizabeth River empties into. There are numerous other shipyards here in the Hampton Roads area. It's been rumored that there are extra 16" guns kept in storage at St Julian's Creek Annex, which is up river from NNSY. Big Whiskey would be the easiest and cheapest to refit and get underway. Many of her lower compartments have been kept off limits to visitors since the last time I visited her.

[@jscottski4140]

Big Whiskey would likely be placed in NNSY if ever reactivated. NNSY has the capability to dry dock a Iowa class as it can easily dry dock modern USN carriers. I Know having over 2 years living a shipyard experience at NNSY.

[@RonaldGilbert-de1ui]

Still would have to have shells and propellant made for the guns. All of that has been disposed of.

[@ericrupert2687]

There were a few gun barrels at st Julian’s creek stored outside but they disappeared about 15 years ago.

[@snoozieq4584]

@@ericrupert2687 That's a shame.

[@trevorn9381]

@@ericrupert2687 There are still a bunch of gun barrels at Dahlgren. That may be where they went.

[@justinwilliams7148]

Considering how many ships go from construction to scrapping without ever seeing anything significant. At least bringing the Iowas back would get them cleaned and restored for future generations even if they were just publicity and morale rather than combatants.

[@jonhawkins7510]

The Wisconsin BB 64 is a museum in Norfolk Virgina. The Missouri BB 63 is a museum on the West coast. The New Jersey BB 62 is probably in the Philadelphia ship yard and the Iowa BB 61 I don't where that is.

[@alganhar1]

Yah... you know what the issue with that is? The Machinery of those ships is shot to hell, which means to get them sailing again it will all need to be replaced. Ever seen what scale of a job refitting a Battleship with its full Machinery is? Think about it... you have to remove turrets, go through the armour, pull out the old machinery, replace it with new machinery. Its both expensive and time consuming. It's not like tearing the engine out of a car, or the transmission out of an M4 Sherman....

[@hernerweisenberg7052]

Yeah building a modern Guided Missile Destroyer would probably way easier then to reactivate any old battleship. And such destroyers have far greater firepower and range.

[@chrissinclair4442]

@@hernerweisenberg7052 I can't wait until the army develops the 1000+ mile artillery they have been talking about, if it isn't a pipe dream. They can put it on the Zumwalts for a fraction of what they originally wanted to fire. All the ships that could carry it would be amazing. Unfortunately you can hope in one hand...

[@Rougeliger]

@@chrissinclair4442 there are only three zumwalts and the navy has no intentions for more because they are ridiculously expensive. If anything the navy would probably figure out how to put those guns on something like a arleigh burke as it would be much much cheaper.

[@jhogan1960]

Good analysis. I live in Norfolk, it is awesome to see the Wisconsin moored at Nauticus.

[@billr2115]

Absolutely fascinating!!! It is incredible how much knowledge you have of current museum ships.

[@joshuastiles6084]

I live near Norfolk and the USS Wisconsin is an absolutely stunning ship and it'd make me proud to see her serve her country once again

[@jonathanjones3623]

Give it some time I'm sure a president will make that decision if only for a Command Performance LOL Wisconsin is the ideal Choice she like Ryan said has the least amount of mileage all of her components are relatively intact give or take I got the chance to visit her before The Cove at epidemic shut everything down practically a brand new Battleship compared to New Jersey I've been on New Jersey treat a total of three times so I can absolutely see that as a feasible action on the half of the Navy but that being said I still think they should never have modernized or reactivated all the ships given the Reagan years and historical significance I think Missouri should have remained as she was New Jersey was a logical Choice she had been recently updated for the Vietnam War but Iowa again slightly more mechanically improved than the others at the time it is a shame that none of them are in their World War II configuration like North Carolina

[@phillipbouchard4197]

Good video ! I agree that Wisconsin is in the best material condition of the three " Iowa's" I have visited. Missouri is the only one I have never been aboard.

[@maxcaysey2844]

I would absolutly LOVE to see the iowa-class battleships brought back to full operational status with a full refurbishment and modernization. Including having fully oerational 16" guns, so they could be used for what ever purpuse would be fitting. I assume if modern faster burning powder was used, that one could increase the range of the guns, so that might increase its utillity! Question: How much do you think it would cost to bring back one Iowa-class battleship?

[@bildo85]

It would cost more to bring one back than to build a new one.

[@ultraman5168]

The conventional 5 inch guns in use on destroyers and cruisers have shown promise in firing the long range, precision guided HVP shell that was originally going to be used in railguns. They work, albeit at a reduced speed of Mach 3. So in our hypothetical fantasy reactivation of the Iowas, if the 16 inch shell could be made to fire multiple HVPs, that could be a very potent capability for land attack, anti-ship, and anti-air/missile defense. The price tag would make F-35 look like a candy bar.

[@aidenhall9832]

Personally I think it would be easier to just build more battleships in the design of the Iowa class just fully modern. Nuclear power and keep the 16” guns. Fully modern equipment.

[@maxcaysey2844]

@@aidenhall9832 Maybe... The thing about the real Iowas tho, is their history... it would be sweet to be able to sail on a ship with such rich and important history... That would also make them a bigger and more valuable target as a moral center of gravity. Which, if struck, would be devastating to say the least.

[@lovellrodriguez8567]

They are 70 yrs?old the mills and machinery used to mill and make and of course the craftsmanship and knowledge all gone .The projectile s power bags that too .as for the Babcock boilers if that's the brand the will need repair the firebrick.mud drum needs too honed valves refurbish firebox all this need upgrades radar com gear navigation its a massive over taking but if push comes to shove may be theres a chance 1 might come back to life at a great expense just 1 turrent crew is over 50 sailors

[@dierkrieger]

I went on the Midway when she was still in service and have gone to visit her a number of times over the years and love this carrier.

[@Legowiebe]

Speaking of brand new teak wood decks, I know that Missouri has one. In 2016 I helped rip up some of the old deck as part of the ongoing replacement process.

[@phoenixrising4073]

This was one of my favorite videos you've done. Very informative and fun at the same time.

[@WayneHarris]

It would take 5 years a ship, and many billions to refit these ships. Not sure its worth it militarily, but I'd love to see it happen.

[@Sanderford]

@Ray Bourque 77 Not replacement, but honestly you would have to replace a bunch of hoses and pipes, not to mention the wiring.

[@formula73]

@Ray Bourque 77 probably every single piece of steam piping would need to be replaced, which also means a LOT of asbestos lagging removal and replacment with calcium silicate and fiberglass. All the sea water piping is probably shot, too...

[@decentish8546]

Yeah so much work would have to be done to restore them that in would pretty much be better to just build new ones.

[@Sanderford]

@Christopher Williams If the turbines are shot you immediately write off the ship as unable to return to service, and lay plans for a new ship instead.

[@davidfuller581]

@Ray Bourque 77 It's not about speed, it's about the propulsion systems being shot.

[@codykirby1775]

I was hoping to hear you mention lst-325! She still runs to this day!

[@peterolson823]

In my hometown.

[@Mike-yq7ce]

I could see the Iowas being a good fit working with the Amphibious groups. Especially if full out amphibious landings are necessary. They van deliver a hit along with taking a hit. Adding in some of those old Cruisers would give a nice 1,2 shore bombardment punch allowing the modern destroyers and cruisers to handle air defense and longer range targeting.

[@cbrown17982010]

Navy strategist watching this video like, " Hey guys someone did all the hard work for us already, just write up his comments and send them up to command"

[@pghpaisan]

Texas 6:56 South Dakota Class: Massachusetts & Alabama 9:08 Iowa Class: North Carolina 10:30 Iowa 13:26 New Jersey 18:08 Wisconsin 19:28 Carriers: Yorktown 30:44 Intrepid 31:00 Hornet 31:44 Lexington 21:31 Midway 32:24

[@ConardCarroll]

Probably the best 'guest intro' I've seen yet. Wow! Keep it up y'all!

[@kennethbedwell5188]

Triage, get the ships that are closest to modern ships up and ready while working on the older ones.

[@supersnot4]

Having been on Midway, I would be shocked if they didn't reactivate that ship in a major crisis.

[@RetiredSailor60]

My brother served on USS Midway in the late 80s...

[@supersnot4]

@@RetiredSailor60 I didn't serve, just visited as a tourist a couple years ago. It definitely seems like a lightly modernized Midway could still go toe to toe with any other non-US aircraft carrier currently in service.

[@kwaktak]

They may yet. With the F-35C and drones and COVID in tight quarters I see super carriers being phased out for CVLs along the lines of the old Midway class.

[@jayss10]

You would be surprised how much of her machinery has been removed prior to her becoming a museum.

[@machinistmikethetinkerer4827]

Hey bro Midway relieved us at Gonzo Station back in late 80s man were we glad to see you guys rolling up on our stbd stern I can still see it today. Ranger CV61 HT2

[@SuperAgentman007]

Any battleship or aircraft carrier that is in a museum right now can be recommission by the US Navy by eminent domain. It may cost a boatload of money to do so but it has been done several times through the years.

[@sethgrandeau9267]

We all know the answer to this is USS Missouri. You just need to move vending machine out of the way, toss a torch into the boilers, and cut away an anchor and off you go! But seriously, I'm really looking forward to this one. Thanks, Battleship New Jersey! I'm hoping this goes into just how "museum-ified" various ships are. The battleships are all pretty far down that path (looking at you, USS Texas!), but I wonder if some of the other ships are in closer to usable shape.

[@daleeasternbrat816]

The guys that operate these museum ships seem to take their job seriously. The help of guys like that would take months off the time required to activate one of these ships. Some could be reactivated more quickly than others. Midway and Lexington always worked. If reactivated they would work again.

[@jerrydiver1]

No, Seth, most of us know that the Wisconsin was maintained the longest as a reserve ship before becoming strictly a museum, and is in the best material condition of the four Iowas, by far. There is no consideration other than material condition, that is to say, the ship that can be brought back with the least expense and in the shortest amount of time. I'd like to see all the Iowas and all the heavy cruisers brought back in this emergency scenario, but nostalgia has no place in the decision and never will.

[@bamagrad99]

@@jerrydiver1 Seth's comment is a reference to the movie "Battleship" where, with the help of a bunch of retirees working at the museum, Missouri was sailed out of Pearl Harbor to fight invading aliens. It helped that the Navy was nice enough to leave a little gas in the tanks and shells in the magazines.

[@michaelsommers2356]

Why get rid of the vending machines? What are the sailors going to eat and drink?

[@harrisonturner1716]

@@michaelsommers2356 that’s the most american thing I’ve ever read

[@greggmoceansail5276]

Its a real shame that the Uss Forrestal was sold and scrapped for a penny, she was the first super carrier ever built, first in her class, people tried to make her a museum, but not enough money was raised unfortunately, I know this is about battleships but cmon it was the first super carrier, thanks to Pres Obama it went to Brownsville, TX for scrapping,,,we as crewmembers couldn't believe it!!!!! If any carrier was to be a museum it should have been Forrestal, along with the others

[@bob80q]

can't save every old warship

[@Matt-xj2bx]

scrap for a penny, do you know what scraps worth?

[@ww21943]

@@Matt-xj2bx the cost of remediation and abatement is astronomical. That’s why cruise ships are scrapped in India. They could careless what’s leaking and lurking.

[@TheEyeTeaMan]

@@Matt-xj2bx the extreme costs involve in making sure it is scrapped in an environmentally healthy way in the us and not just sent to some 3rd world ship breaker. the scrapper made some money but not an astronomical profit.

[@Matt-xj2bx]

Well I disagree but I do sympathize with your loss and it had a lot of sentimental value with that and I do respect that sorry I made that comment

[@cjansenATL]

Hi! Two questions: 1. If railguns come into service, would the Iowa class be a potential platform for these weapons systems? 2. As a curator, is there a ship/boat that you feel should have become a museum, but for whatever reason this never realized? I love what you're doing. Thank you. //c

[@BattleshipNewJersey]

The rail gun program has been discontinued for a reason. And the Iowas don't produce enough power to support them anyway. Trying to convert the Iowas to be nuclear would be more expensive than building a whole new battleship. Here's a whole video on the ship's we think should have been preserved but were not: kzbin.info/www/bejne/gYeZl4Zqa9FobpY

[@magdovus]

Would the real problem for battleships be finding 16" ammo?

[@johnsmith2249]

The problems are numerous. Ammo for the main guns is actually the easiest problem to solve.

[@tsunsu]

@@johnsmith2249 yes

[@mad555max]

Yeah the ammo would be the least significant problem. They'd have ammo production up and running before the battleships would have left drydock.

[@biosaber585]

@@mad555max are we sure they don't have stockpiles of it? Honestly knowing the US military it wouldn't surprise me

[@colinlook5237]

I think it would be interesting to think about what the navy would/could do with the Alaska and Guam if they were still arround

[@laa0fa502]

Great video. The 15 minuets off topic at the beginning were very important to the questions in the video itself. Always thought they were on lease from the D.O.D

[@rancidink7069]

Having been on hornet relatively (pre covid) recently, I would argue she is not a good candidate for reactivation as she is not in great material shape.

[@tbm3fan913]

As reported by a visitor who sees selected areas and wouldn't know what material conditions that matter and what don't. Being a 23 year volunteer on the ship and having been everywhere on the ship I see things differently. The one thing holding back the Hornet, as compared to the Lexington, is her hydraulic catapults. The other thing is that she is my baby and the Navy can't have her back.

[@razgriz1723]

@@tbm3fan913 ive seen her. She is very awesome to look at. I work on her sister Uss yorktown in alot of ways she is my baby as well. My grandpa served on cv5 dearing ww2. He always told me he regreats giving up on her on the battle of midway. So I hold yorktown as apart of my family. She is like a big sister ive never had.

[@1slotmech]

@@tbm3fan913 Hornet needs a drydock and repaint. Bad. Really bad. She doesn't look this good anymore ( www.flickr.com/photos/11410215@N06/12315210714 )

[@tbm3fan913]

@@1slotmech All museum ships could use a dry dock. The Hornet's advantage is that she is free floating all the time and is inspected by Navy divers once a year. Other than that dry docking a carrier runs into the millions. As for paint that you see peeling it was doomed the day it was put on. Not the best water borne paint on an unprepped surface and it just peels off like sunburned skin. I gave up on it after 18 months in 1999 and bought my own to the tune of 60+ gallons where the oil based paint still sticks on the interior to this day. I am now painting the exterior Island level by level using a 2K alklyd paint after scrapping off all the 1998 paint down to solid 1968 Navy paint on top of orange chromate, washing, degreasing and then sanding with 150 for more bite. Two coats of 2K and it will stay for decades although it may fade some. If dry docked she could be blasted and painted in a week but that is a dream.

[@jerrydiver1]

I think that the public, were we allowed to see more of the Lexington on tours, would be shocked at the condition she is in. The museum there in Corpus Christi are very careful to keep a very large part of her out of sight and she's been there in that salt water/air environment without drydocking and overhaul since what, the mid 1990s? When she was being maintained by a crew of 1100, there were trememdous problems maintaining her watertight integrity, to the point that during shipyard overhauls, scavenging parties were sent to other Essex class carriers and WWII museum battleships for watertight doors and hatches, and propulsion system parts, as well. A quarter of a century has passed since then, with the absolute minimum of upkeep needed to keep up the areas that people are allowed to see. So, much as it pains me to say so, I think the Lady Lex is a scratch.

[@Atlasworkinprogress]

As someone who has quite a lot of first hand knowledge of her maintenance team and restoration team, I think you'd be surprised at the condition of Lex. She's definitely not as bad as you think it is. I've been in quite a bit of her below the water line off limits areas, and they aren't closed because they are in bad condition, rather they are closed because Lexington is a big ship, and they want guests on tours with some sort of guide, not roaming free. I've also been up to her radio rooms, and had the privilege to use her radio equipment, which was still functional last I visited. She has much of her flight deck restored recently, and even though she hasn't been drydocked for a while, here structural integrity is still sound enough. She didn't have problems with Cat 4 Harvey when it came through and gave Corpus a near direct hit, nor did she have issues with Hanna this year when the entire North Beach area was under water, and the storm surge went over the seawall downtown.

[@ovk-ih1zp]

@@Atlasworkinprogress And she doesn't lie in the toxic soup known as the Houston Ship Channel that the Texas has to deal with. I was really hoping that Texas was going to be dry berthed at the battlegrounds, but as much & as fast as San Jac is itself sinking, Berthing Big Tex somewhere else might be the best idea. I am a little surprised that the idea of after repairs moving Tex to Corpus Christi wasn't pressed a little harder, but pier 21 seems like a good choice as well. Long way Sexy Lexi continue to fly her flag in Corpus.

[@Atlasworkinprogress]

@@ovk-ih1zp Corpus is one of the 3 cities on the list for Texas's relocation. Port Author, Galveston and Corpus are all on the table last news I heard. Also I believe only a portion of Lex is in the mud, the front end of the ship is basically feet from the ship channel, so I wouldn't be surprised if here rear end closer to the beach is in the mud but the front is fairly free. The ship definitely moves when the surf is heavy, been on her during a few storms.

[@ovk-ih1zp]

@@Atlasworkinprogress I grew up in South Houston only about 10 miles from the Texas & probably spent more time on her than most of the volunteers of even the Park Rangers. It's really heartbreaking to see her in such bad shape & once she's repaired she really needs to be placed somewhere that she can get the foot traffic to help pay for her upkeep. Placing her either with the Lex in Corpus or at Pier 21 in Galveston would go a long way to getting her into a better state.

[@gunrunner7224]

@@ovk-ih1zp I could agree with that might be best to put her with the lex from what I see in the pics there is plenty of room near the lex so she could fit easily and a lot of foot traffic for more visitors. The yorktowns dockage in Charleston had last I was there the Yorktown, a sub, a DD and a CG cutter granted that was 10 years ago but I dont think they have moved all that much but there wasnt a lot of space for another ship in the area. So corpus cristy might be the best bet.

[@R2Rocketeer]

Hey Ryan, I worked on naval weapons systems fora few years, working on Ship Self Defense System (SSDS) and the ESSM missile modeling and simulation. I would LOVE to see the BB's reactivated to become what was conceptualize as the arsenal ships. Most of our ships are very vulnerable to attack by antiship cruise missiles. The BB's are fairly well defended by their massive bands of steel armor. They could easily be upgraded with VLS replacing at least one if not two turrets, keeping one triple mount turret for doing some old fashioned pounding. Also, replace and upgarde the power plants. Make them nuclear. Access the engine room via the rear turret. LETS DO THIS

[@maxshenkwrites]

Uhhhhhhh... @7:54

[@Loki1701e]

Removing the turrets will make the ship horribly imbalanced. Thats a nogo. Plus you can fit a good 200 plus mk41 vls cells without removing anything other than the old box launchers.

[@JohnDoe-pv2iu]

About the only ship that could be practical would be the Midway. She went thru modernization in the late 80s and served well with the newest super carriers. Y'all Take Care and be safe, John

[@biosaber585]

@Kim Kevan So fun fact, that really bad movie Battleship actually poses a similar issue where most modern sailors have little to no experience with older systems like boilers and hell in regards to things like tanks, old gas and diesel engines. Despite in some instances these being easier systems the knowledge has been mostly lost and actually makes these type of ships, tanks and armor entirely worthless without a crew capable of handling it

[@Bustin_cider00]

@@biosaber585 didn’t they get a bunch of old world war 2 vets?

[@biosaber585]

@@Bustin_cider00 yep, they managed to get a lot of vets from around the islands to actually act in the film. But the point does still stand, the knowledge is gone from most modern training regimes and even those who do know it are few and far between. And it'd be incredibly wrong to request the vets to re-enlist or serve again. They gave more than their all for their country and we don't deserve to ask more of them

[@Bustin_cider00]

@@biosaber585 dude if anybody would do it it would be them. My dad served in the 80’s as a Drill Instructor and after 9/11 he called the recruiter trying to serve again! Let alone some old salty bastard who reminices with his friends about the days of the old iron clad battleships 😂 but i get you

[@biosaber585]

@@Bustin_cider00 to be frank im not saying they wouldn't. My great grandfather was a submariner fireman (launched torpedoes not put out fires) and I'm sure if he were still around today he'd still serve if he could. But im just saying I don't consider it right to ask them to serve again, let them choose

[@alanslater4206]

What foreign navy ships would you reactivate? I personally would love to see HMS Belfast back in service..

[@bradbrandon2506]

I love how you added the Cost Guard ships in the end. That was really awesome!

[@hollywood1340]

Save for her armament I would argue USS Constitution is in the best condition of any of the ships listed. Our government maintains a forest for her personal use. And she's the only ship we have left in service who has faced and defeated an enemy.

[@EliteValor1003]

Press the like for respects for all these steel ladies.

[@joed2392]

A definite "YES" for your selection of the USS North Carolina !!! And you might even find a few "Old Salts", that could help with the refit and upgrade too !

[@129aslamnurfikrir4]

I think destroyers can still be useful in second line duty like patrol, convoy escort, etc. They may be modified like Themistoklis/Kanaris class Destroyer

[@bf9142ftw]

Yasssss. Looking forward to this video!

[@donaldlevine1420]

Excellent presentation

[@invader440]

When you were talking about DD's you forgot about the Forrest Sherman class ships Turner Joy and Edson. Where would they fit in?