Slashdot Mirror


Cold-War Era Naval Vessels Up For Grabs

mcleland lets us in on a Wall Street Journal story about two cold-war era, formerly top-secret vessels the US Navy is trying to give away. At issue are the Sea Shadow (the ancestor of all modern naval radar-evading technology) and the Hughes Mining Barge (a floating dry-dock and more-or-less base for the Sea Shadow). While the ships are being 'given away,' there are multiple regulations involved, making the gift a very costly one. "A Naval Museum is 'a bloodthirsty, paper-work ridden, permit-infested, money-sucking hole,' warns the Historic Naval Ships Association. Because the Navy won't pay for anything — not rust-scraping or curating — to keep museums afloat, survival depends on big crowds."

165 comments

  1. First Boats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    I hope they come with sharks with lasers on their frikkin' heads.

    1. Re:First Boats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who has a handy list of sock puppets and low digit trolls? I hit the slashdot jackpot and have unlimited moderation points.

    2. Re:First Boats by eat+here_get+gas · · Score: 0

      how the fuck an AC with a lame-ass comment like yours gets moderated "informative" is beyond me. fucking mods are on crack.

      --
      the significance of a signature is insignificant
    3. Re:First Boats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean, nice boat.

  2. make a lego version then by CHRONOSS2008 · · Score: 0, Funny

    maybe they could make a giant replica out of lego?

  3. That bad, eh? by truthsearch · · Score: 5, Funny

    A Naval Museum is 'a bloodthirsty, paper-work ridden, permit-infested, money-sucking hole,' warns the Historic Naval Ships Association.

    But tell us what you really think. Don't hold back.

    1. Re:That bad, eh? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Sounds like somebody forgot to do some paperwork a while back....

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    2. Re:That bad, eh? by Darth_brooks · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Dealing with the Navy on issues of museums is a bona fide pain in the ass. As far as they're concerned, there is nothing, zip, zero nada, nil that they have ever 'lost.' Whatever it was, where ever it is, it is still theirs and will gladly tie you up in court for the rest of your life to prove this point. They stick to the following excuses when it comes to the issue of recovering one-time Naval Aircraft:

      -It's a war grave (the excuse they've given for blocking the recovery of Grumman TBM Avenger dive bombers in Lake Michigan. That the pilots may have survived in most cases makes no difference. They're all war graves.)

      -It's still Navy property that they've never bothered to finish recovering (the excuse that's being used after a North Carolina man recovered pieces of an FG-1, a Goodyear-built Corsair. Never mind that the Navy last visited the crash site in 1945.)

      -It just plain doesn't exist at all (the excuse that was given for years when attempts were made to recover one of several B-29's that were being used as target practice at China Lake, even after recovery groups showed recent satellite photographs of B-29's out in the desert, the Navy simply responded by saying that they did not, nor did they ever, possess B-29's.)

      There is purportedly still one, more-intact-than-most-B-29's B-29 that was moved to a hangar sometime in the 1990's, but the Navy refuses all inquiries regarding that aircraft. To their credit, the Navy also had some bad experiences with allowing warbird recoveries at China lake, as the last group that was allowed in supposedly stuffed their B-29 full of whatever happened to be lying around, instead of just grabbing 'their' plane and leaving. There are a few hundred thousand versions of that story floating around, changing by the minute.

      The Navy is an institution unto themselves when it comes to loaning items to museums. Hell, They Scrapped the USS Enterprise. Perhaps it's the type of person that the Navy assigns to handling museum requests, or perhaps its the hundreds of years of Maritime Salvage law that they have to contend with, but based on everything I've heard, they are a bureaucratic nightmare directly out of 'Brazil.'

      --
      There are some people that if they don't know, you can't tell 'em.
    3. Re:That bad, eh? by LWATCDR · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I have never heard of most of these stories. The Navy did allow the recovery of at least one F4F in the Great Lakes. They do protect war graves but that should be understandable.
      As far as dealing with museums and ships well think about it. Ships tend to be large complex steel machines that sit in saltwater. Just not a good mix. They often full of nasty chemicals and fuel. And some of them are very very large.
      The Navy give these multimillion dollar machines away making them safe and clean is up to the people that get them.
      Setting up a floating museum is very expensive.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    4. Re:That bad, eh? by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 1

      ...they are a bureaucratic nightmare directly out of 'Brazil.'

      Yeah, but they got really snappy uniforms.
      That's why the USMC is so jealous of the Navy.

    5. Re:That bad, eh? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They do protect war graves but that should be understandable.

      Not when you're "protecting" those graves from the families of those KIA.

      Look it up if you don't believe me.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    6. Re:That bad, eh? by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      -It's still Navy property that they've never bothered to finish recovering (the excuse that's being used after a North Carolina man recovered pieces of an FG-1, a Goodyear-built Corsair. Never mind that the Navy last visited the crash site in 1945.)

      I don't know for certain, but unlike regular seafaring vessels that sink (and thus become the property of whomever finds it), vessels owned by a country (e.g., military) remain the property of their respective governments. Even if you find some British sucken vessel, if it belonged to the Crown, it and all the contents (gold, etc) are still the property of the Crown.

      And they retain that ownership indefinitely. So even if it turns into a pile of rust, that pile of rust still belongs to the government.

    7. Re:That bad, eh? by LWATCDR · · Score: 2, Funny

      What part of I have not heard of this did you not understand. I never said that it didn't happen. The simple rule is that it is war grave you don't mess with it. Did they tell the family that they couldn't try and recover the body or that they couldn't recover the TBM?
      Also the TBM has a crew of three. Did they get permission from all the families?
      Could it just be possible that they are trying to keep somebody's fourth cousin twice removed from making a fast buck by grave robbing?
      You make these claims and then tell me to go look them up. Why not post the links yourself?

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    8. Re:That bad, eh? by GooberToo · · Score: 1

      Dealing with the Navy on issues of museums is a bona fide pain in the ass.

      Hopefully they fair better than the air force which may at a later date, after the aircraft in question has been fully restored, decide they will steal it back despite contracts clearly stating the current owners. Case is going to before a judge last I heard.

      If poked, I imagine I can dig up a link.

    9. Re:That bad, eh? by dwye · · Score: 1

      > And they retain that ownership indefinitely. So even if it turns into
      > a pile of rust, that pile of rust still belongs to the government.

      Or at least, so they will claim. And they normally have more lawyers, guns, and money than anyone disputing that. OTOH, I knew someone who spent time around WWII salvaging a German battleship, so they can be flexible about that (at least for other people's navies). Also, if true, no one could salvage wrecked Spanish gold ships in the Caribbean.

    10. Re:That bad, eh? by Darth_brooks · · Score: 1

      You're absolutely right on both points. But the Navy being open to any sort of museum request outside of their direct control seems to be the exception rather than the rule.

      --
      There are some people that if they don't know, you can't tell 'em.
    11. Re:That bad, eh? by Darth_brooks · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You're probably thinking of PIMA's B-36, which was never really in "private" hands. B-36's fall under one of the early SALT treaties as strategic heavy bombers. True, the Air Force handled the whole situation poorly, they will come out in the right, if the case actually goes to trial. Any "strategic" arms fall under a whole different set of guidelines, regardless of ownership.

      Case in point. There is (I am almost certain) only one B-52 on display at a non-military base in the world. There are others on static display, but only one in civilian hands. It also happens to belong to the museum I volunteer for. Several years after we acquired the aircraft, we moved it up on a concrete stand approximately 15 meters from where it once stood. ALL. HELL. BROKE. LOOSE. We received an unhappy visit from the Air Force, who had gotten a call from the state department, who'd gotten a call from the Russian Consulate, because the Russian air force team in charge of monitoring SALT compliance noticed that the plane had moved since the last photo pass and, since it was supposed to be de-miled, they damn sure wanted to know why.

      Interesting aside: The air force is in a unique spot when it comes to their old airframes that have been disposed of to civilian hands. A records fire in the 1960's destroyed the paperwork on hundreds of thousands of disposed aircraft. The Air Force has a very limited paper trail prove that they ever actually owned many Korea / WW2 vintage aircraft that they disposed of at auction. It usually falls to that old legal statute of "possession is 9/10ths of the law."

      --
      There are some people that if they don't know, you can't tell 'em.
    12. Re:That bad, eh? by Chyeld · · Score: 3, Informative

      Funny thing about that... Spain doesn't think you can.

    13. Re:That bad, eh? by LWATCDR · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well that really depends on the ship. Even some pretty old ships have secrets even to this day. Others like the New Jersey class still might have military value. I would love to see more ships make it to museums. Way to many are just sunk. The original Enterprise and the Saratoga CV3 both should have been preserved. I would have loved to walk on their decks. Even now the US has sunk most of the Spruance class and gave the rest to allies. Ships are big and expensive to keep around the Navy doesn't want to pay to keep them around and it is hard to find enough public interest to fund them. Airplanes and even tanks are much cheaper to stick in a building and put velvet ropes around than a ship.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    14. Re:That bad, eh? by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      Well there is one at the Orlando Airport. I don't think it is still in military hands.
      Here is a link http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Orlando+FL+airport+B-52&sll=28.418561,-81.31667&sspn=0.002095,0.004828&ie=UTF8&ll=28.449591,-81.312636&spn=0.000552,0.001207&t=h&z=20

      Now it is a D model which where re classified as conventional bombers during Viet Nam. Also the first SALT treaty was in the early 70s. By that time the B-36 where long gone from the Air Force inventory. Russia probably worried about them about as much as they worried about the one B-29 that was still flying. The Air Force really doesn't want anyone to fly a B36. The fall out from a crash would be... Terrible.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    15. Re:That bad, eh? by afterthought · · Score: 1

      Interestingly similar rules apply to all US ordnance regardless of manufacture date.

      When I was stationed in California we received a call from the local police department regarding a man using a Civil War era cannonball as a bowling ball. Sure, enough we showed up at his house and he was rolling the cannon ball on his lawn. We (the military) are obligated to collect and return all US ordnance regardless of perceived ownership. The guy willing surrendered the cannon ball after we explained that not all cannonballs are solid, and those that aren't contain gun powder that can quite sensitive to shock and friction.

    16. Re:That bad, eh? by whereiswaldo · · Score: 1

      Even some pretty old ships have secrets even to this day.

      Could it be mainly psychological value in protecting these "secrets"? As in "our technology is so freaking advanced that even 30 year old tech is still beyond our enemies".
      I'm just saying - there is some value in at least pretending there are secrets.

    17. Re:That bad, eh? by Talderas · · Score: 1

      U-505 anyone?

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    18. Re:That bad, eh? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      The B-36 was probably obslete by the time it was finished, but it was still an awesome bird. I'd love to see one flying again.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    19. Re:That bad, eh? by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      The secrets tend to be more experience than some super high technology.
      Only four countries really have any experience with carriers in combat. That is the US, UK, Japan, and I believe Australia and maybe Canada. Of those the Japanese carriers really didn't do well at taking damage.
      While WWII ships don't have any real secrets left all current carriers are still based of the Forestal design. So it is unlikely that you will see any of that class go any where but the scrape yard or the bottom.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    20. Re:That bad, eh? by LWATCDR · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I knew someone that flew B-47s and he told me that they figured that the B-36 actually had a good chance to get through. He told me that they would be at 40+ thousand feet and would see 36s well over 10 thousand feet higher. Even the best of jet interceptors at the time would have problems reaching them.
      He also said that B-29 was like flying a school bus but that the B-36 was like flying the school.
      Would I like to see six turning and four burning? You bet your sweet bippie I would. It was just really cool to get to see one in person.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    21. Re:That bad, eh? by GooberToo · · Score: 1

      Actually, I'm thinking of a WWII-era plane. I want to say it was a mustang, a twin mustang, or a P38 lightening. I'm a little fuzzy on the facts as it has been a while since I last read about it.

  4. right by N3wsByt3 · · Score: 1

    first post?

    Anyway, it's not "giving" it away, if they ask 25 million for it...

    --
    --- "To pee or not to pee, that is the question." ---
  5. Don't settle for the mining barge... by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...hold out for an exhumer, man!

    1. Re:Don't settle for the mining barge... by TheGeniusIsOut · · Score: 1

      Heh, they won't be giving a Hulk away for a while yet. At least until they get the T3 mining barge developed.

      --
      Ignorance is Bliss -- And the Opposite is True -- Genius is Madness
    2. Re:Don't settle for the mining barge... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because everyone knows the best way to make money in New Eden is to open a Hulk museum.

    3. Re:Don't settle for the mining barge... by Alzheimers · · Score: 3, Funny

      Typhoon:

      Highs:
      4x Miner IIs
      4x Arbalest Cruises

      Mids:
      2x Shield Expander II
      2x Invuln Field II

      Lows:
      7x Cargohold Expander II

      Drones:
      5x Ogre II

      That is how you mine.

    4. Re:Don't settle for the mining barge... by RESPAWN · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure which is sadder. The fact that you're referencing Eve Online here on /. Or the fact that I know you're referencing Eve Online.

      --

      If Murphy's Law can go wrong, it will.

    5. Re:Don't settle for the mining barge... by aliquis · · Score: 1

      I just assumed he was referring to EVE so I must be so much better than you guys! I rock!

    6. Re:Don't settle for the mining barge... by stop+bothering+me · · Score: 1

      The exact same thought crossed my mind. The worse thing is that i chuckled when I saw it.

    7. Re:Don't settle for the mining barge... by Talderas · · Score: 1

      At first I thought he was talking about Galactic Civilizations II, then I remembered there is no mining in Galactic Civilizations II. I just assumed he was talking about EVE, but thanks for confirming that.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    8. Re:Don't settle for the mining barge... by BoothbyTCD · · Score: 1

      Mine for what, battleships?

      --
      snig
    9. Re:Don't settle for the mining barge... by soupforare · · Score: 1

      Yeah really, these scrubs don't know nothing about hazzzzZZZZZZZZ

      --
      --- Do you believe in the day?
    10. Re:Don't settle for the mining barge... by RESPAWN · · Score: 1

      Actually, there is mining in one of the expansion packs. I can't remember which one, though. It's been a year since I've played it.

      --

      If Murphy's Law can go wrong, it will.

  6. Batleships for sale too by drewzhrodague · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There are battleships for sale also. $15 jeeps, old broken trucks -- the government tries to sell whatever it can. I used to visit a computer junkyard, and they'd buy tractor-trailors full of decommissioned computing equipment. We got all kinds of neat toys from there, including some pretty standard usable stuff. What I want, is to buy the SS Consoleeza Rice, and park it in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, and live there. However, anything that is large enough and floats should be okay.

    --
    Zhrodague.net - I do projects and stuff too.
    1. Re:Batleships for sale too by tekrat · · Score: 3, Insightful

      In all seriousness, where are those $15 jeeps?

      I'd buy a dozen right now at that price. I've never been able to locate any of that stuff at a reasonable price, only via "army/navy" resellers who jack up the price 1000% so they can make a healthy profit.

      Even "Cheaperthandirt" isn't all that cheap.

      --
      If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
    2. Re:Batleships for sale too by Unordained · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As noted later in the same wikipedia entry The SS Condoleeza Rice was renamed the Altair Voyager. It's currently headed for Brisbane, it seems.

    3. Re:Batleships for sale too by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

      ROFLMAO! If I only had mod points I'd use 5.

      --
      Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
    4. Re:Batleships for sale too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Not as awesome as you'd think. They somehow get classified as munitions, and so they're not sold in working order. If they are in working order at the time of sale, they will be rendered non-functional in a way that should be very costly to reverse, if it's even possible.

    5. Re:Batleships for sale too by drewzhrodague · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They don't work, and you have to travel to some fly-over state in order to pick it up. Then you have to transport it. Floating things are probably about as annoying an a jeep, especially if the useful equipment and parts have already been stripped from the unit.

      Still, if you pay attention, some of these disposals are useful. They have real estate, missile silos, airports in nowhere, etc.

      --
      Zhrodague.net - I do projects and stuff too.
    6. Re:Batleships for sale too by StikyPad · · Score: 3, Informative
    7. Re:Batleships for sale too by couchslug · · Score: 4, Informative

      "In all seriousness, where are those $15 jeeps?"

      They were scrapped carcasses back many decades ago. For example, M151s were demilled by being torchcut into chunks. "Jeeps" of the actual "Jeep" persuasion are ancient history.

      http://www.govliquidation.com/

      is where to directly bid online for much of what Uncle Sugar no longer needs, but bulk buyers drive up costs quite a bit. If you collect military vehicles, large trucks are often bargains, but fun stuff like CUCVs tend to go high. Lots of interesting stuff, and well worth a browse.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    8. Re:Batleships for sale too by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 1
      --
      You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
    9. Re:Batleships for sale too by aliquis · · Score: 1

      only via "army/navy" resellers who jack up the price 1000% so they can make a healthy profit.

      Ohnoz, $150 for a jeep, teh horrorz!

    10. Re:Batleships for sale too by d474 · · Score: 1

      And we wonder if the government wastes taxpayer money: SOLD - PS3 Guitar Hero guitar

      So it was DARPA that invented guitar hero!

      --
      Authority questions you. Return the favor.
    11. Re:Batleships for sale too by Mathness · · Score: 1

      Underling walks into the Bin Laden lair.

      Minion: Sir!
      Bin Laden: Yes, what is it?
      M: How are the wives?
      B: *sigh* Don't you start as well.
      M: Sorry sir, just some casual conversation. Anyway, I got some good news.
      B: *Lightens up* You found a cave where there is room for table tennis?
      M: Uhm, no sir. You know how we have had some difficulties smugling weapons and gear into USA?
      B: Yes. *mumbles* I would rather talk about my wives.
      M: Good news sir, our superior IT team have found a solution!
      B: You mean those people that really want to live in a cave, as long as we supply them with the infidel products like Cheetos and Coke?
      M: That the ones, sir. They found a supplier of US army gear, and it all legal to buy for our team there!
      B: That is great news, start buying what we need.
      M: Right away, sir!
      B: *Strokes his beard* Who's your Wookie, who's your Wookie.

      Next episode: Lil' Bin Laden and the rust removers.

      --
      Carbon based humanoid in training.
    12. Re:Batleships for sale too by couchslug · · Score: 1

      "And we wonder if the government wastes taxpayer money: SOLD - PS3 Guitar Hero guitar [govliquidation.com] "

      Stuff on govliquidation isn't always directly bought by the goverment when new, and may include impounded or abandoned items.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
  7. Poor Howard Hughes by iluvcapra · · Score: 3, Interesting

    He really believed Nixon when he told him there was all that gold in the continental shelf.

    I keed I keed! To be fair, this wouldn't be the first time they've sold off K-129 salvage gear. The Glomar Explorer herself is leased out and operated for commercial deep-sea oil drilling.

    --
    Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    1. Re:Poor Howard Hughes by Talkischeap · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "He really believed Nixon when he told him there was all that gold in the continental shelf."

      I don't recall anything about gold, but the "official" cover story for the Glomar Explorer was deep ocean mining, and they even made at least one test run.

      I still have a couple of deep sea photos showing the manganese nodules littering the ocean floor, and a small box of tennis ball sized manganese nodules recovered on that test run (they are soft like Ulexite/Borax, and turned my hands black when handled).

      My late father was a principle designer on the H-MB "mining barge", and "Clementine", the huge claw made to pick up the Russian Golf class sub.

      Every time our family drove past the H-MB on the 101 in Redwood City, he'd point it out to us, likely chuckling inside because if we only knew what it was really for ...

      After it was declassified, he eventually received a framed commendation from then President Regan, and a bronze medal.

      If you want some more history, try to read "A Matter of Risk", it was the first book published after the covert operation was declassified, my father said it was fairly close to actual events.

      Wow, guess it's out of print: http://www.amazon.com/Matter-Risk-Incredible-Explorer-Submarine/dp/0394424328

      --
      If it don't GO... chrome it. ~ Frank Banks
    2. Re:Poor Howard Hughes by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 1

      My late father was a principle designer on the H-MB "mining barge", and "Clementine", the huge claw made to pick up the Russian Golf class sub.

      Some information on this program is available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Jennifer, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glomar_Explorer, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_submarine_K-129_(Golf_II).

      --
      Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    3. Re:Poor Howard Hughes by iluvcapra · · Score: 1

      Thank you!

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    4. Re:Poor Howard Hughes by Talkischeap · · Score: 1

      Hey...

      Thanks for the wiki links AM, last time I looked on line there wasn't anything around, but it was some time ago.

      I also thought Project Jennifer was a weak book.

      It was a fascinating covert op to say the least.

      My father came to that via the Skunk Works, via SSD, they've never declassified what he worked on in those places, this op could be small potatoes.

      --
      If it don't GO... chrome it. ~ Frank Banks
  8. Sea Shadow would be ultimate party boat by HangingChad · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Rough water stabilized, diesel electric propulsion and radar stealthy. Me likely. I want to live on it. Too bad it would probably cost a fortune to move and retrofit. The ultimate party boat, though it would be a little tough to fish off the back.

    And you could always fit it with missiles and have endless fun making the great navies of the world think they were shooting at one another.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
    1. Re:Sea Shadow would be ultimate party boat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The funnest would be anchoring off and sleeping for the night, and then as the fog rolls in some guy not seeing you on his radar rams right into you killing you and your innocent friends and family.

    2. Re:Sea Shadow would be ultimate party boat by Nos. · · Score: 3, Funny

      And you could always fit it with missiles and have endless fun making the great navies of the world think they were shooting at one another.

      Be careful who you do that to, since the presumed guilty party might surrender, stopping the planned war. After being convicted of the crime, he could escape, return to his ship, hunt you down, and at the last minute find a way around your cloaking technology and blast you out of the sky, er, water. Oh yeah, and his personal physician will be with him.

    3. Re:Sea Shadow would be ultimate party boat by Spectre · · Score: 5, Funny

      None of my friends and family qualify as "innocent". It's all good.

      --
      "Flame away, I wear asbestos underwear"
    4. Re:Sea Shadow would be ultimate party boat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All while irritatingly quoting Shakespeare at you?

    5. Re:Sea Shadow would be ultimate party boat by dgatwood · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, to get the comparison right, you have to be irritatingly quoting Shakespeare at the presumed guilty party. Oh, and they have to lock up the presumed guilty person in a prison of no escape in the middle of an ice moon. Siberia, perhaps?

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    6. Re:Sea Shadow would be ultimate party boat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The funnest would be anchoring off and sleeping for the night, and then as the fog rolls in some guy not seeing you on his radar rams right into you killing you and your innocent friends and family.

      So your the "BAWWWWW my glass is empty fill me another" type aye

    7. Re:Sea Shadow would be ultimate party boat by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      The hard part is finding someone with their family jewels attached to their kneecaps.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    8. Re:Sea Shadow would be ultimate party boat by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Rough water stabilized, diesel electric propulsion and radar stealthy. Me likely. I want to live on it. Too bad it would probably cost a fortune to move and retrofit. The ultimate party boat, though it would be a little tough to fish off the back.

      Who says you have to keep it in the water? I'd put it on land and park my car underneath it. Or maybe on a tower with an elevator inside to take you aboard, perhaps rigged to turn it to face any direction you wanted. Not that there'd be any kind of view from inside.

      Still, 12 bunks and only a small microwave, refrigerator, and table? Hopefully those bunks include restroom facilities.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    9. Re:Sea Shadow would be ultimate party boat by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      The hard part is finding someone with their family jewels attached to their kneecaps.

      You've obviously never been to New York City ;)

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    10. Re:Sea Shadow would be ultimate party boat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rough water stabilized, diesel electric propulsion and radar stealthy. Me likely. I want to live on it. Too bad it would probably cost a fortune to move and retrofit. The ultimate party boat, though it would be a little tough to fish off the back.

      And you could always fit it with missiles and have endless fun making the great navies of the world think they were shooting at one another.

      That was the plot of the 1997 James Bond movie Tomorrow Never Dies.

      "The stealth ship is not a fictional invention. Lockheed secretly constructed and demonstrated one in the early 1980s, but the US Navy finally decided they didn't want any. The prototype, called the Sea Shadow, was 160 feet long and the movie's ship closely resembles it in shape."

  9. Hmmmm... by Thelasko · · Score: 5, Funny

    What if I didn't put them as a Museum? Instead, I'll use them as part of my dastardly plot to steal missiles from a British vessel lost in the South China Sea due to tampering with the GPS signal. Then use those missiles to provoke a war between China and Great Britain.

    Do you think they will still let me have it?

    --
    One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
    1. Re:Hmmmm... by 0racle · · Score: 4, Funny

      Oh come on now, that idea is so stupid that no one would ever think it would be a good movie, let alone actually attempt it.

      --
      "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    2. Re:Hmmmm... by jollyreaper · · Score: 5, Funny

      What if I didn't put them as a Museum? Instead, I'll use them as part of my dastardly plot to steal missiles from a British vessel lost in the South China Sea due to tampering with the GPS signal. Then use those missiles to provoke a war between China and Great Britain.

      Do you think they will still let me have it?

      It depends. You've already established that you have have a criminally-inclined genius and a ruthless, murderous streak. But more is required.

      1. Can your organization's name be turned into a suitably menacing acronym?
      2. Henchmen with unusual and remarkable deformities?
      3. Henchwomen with names both unlikely and sexually suggestive?
      4. Do you have a white persian cat?
      5. Do you enjoy monologuing?
      6. Can you credibly threaten the destruction of western civilization while maintaining a PG-13 rating?

      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    3. Re:Hmmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was a dumb movie. How long would it take the Chicoms to defeat the UK? 5 whole seconds?

    4. Re:Hmmmm... by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 2, Funny

      No good. Likely, some guy who looks like that guy from Remington Steele would stop you with the assistance of one or more lovely ladies and some high-tech wizardry, all-the-while drinking martinis.

    5. Re:Hmmmm... by Thelasko · · Score: 2, Funny

      No good. Likely, some guy who looks like that guy from Remington Steele would stop you with the assistance of one or more lovely ladies and some high-tech wizardry, all-the-while drinking martinis.

      There goes that idea... to the scrap yard with it then!

      --
      One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
    6. Re:Hmmmm... by hAckz0r · · Score: 2, Funny
      I don't know if they would give it to you or not, but at only 12 mph it would be real hard to 'get away with it' unless you change the plot a little, like adding a worm hole or something. But if you were to take two of the Littoral Combat Ship's Rolls-Royce MT30 36MW gas turbines and retrofitted it with those then you would really be cooking!

      Just one problem. Where do all your scantly clad women go sunbathing on that thing? That's got to get real hot in the sun...

    7. Re:Hmmmm... by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      right, we should remember the most important rule about show business, "give the people what they want".

    8. Re:Hmmmm... by Mr.+Roadkill · · Score: 1

      I don't know if they would give it to you or not, but at only 12 mph it would be real hard to 'get away with it' unless you change the plot a little, like adding a worm hole or something.

      What, something like a salvaged Cthonian relic that wants to wipe out the Deep Ones and their fish-people spawn and doesn't approve of insanity in its minions because it "makes their souls taste funny"?

    9. Re:Hmmmm... by meringuoid · · Score: 1
      That was a dumb movie. How long would it take the Chicoms to defeat the UK? 5 whole seconds?

      The premise is stupid, but not for that reason. The Chinese Army can't attack the UK - there's an awful lot of Russia in the way for a start, and at the time that film came out I'm not sure there was any British soldier within a thousand miles of China (Hong Kong I think had already been returned). I don't think either air force would have the range to reach the adversary. The Chinese Navy would end up playing the game of spot-the-submarine, and they'd probably do about as well as did the captain of the General Belgrano, and then bugger off back to port; not that this would much advantage the Royal Navy, who probably wouldn't want to park carriers off the Chinese coast because they know perfectly well about Exocets and the Chinese likely have plenty of home-grown or Soviet-derived equivalents.

      The only way that the UK and China could do each other serious military damage would be by ICBM. And it would take an awful lot more than a Bond villain's crappy plot for them to go that far.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    10. Re:Hmmmm... by rts008 · · Score: 1

      Just one problem. Where do all your scantly clad women go sunbathing on that thing? That's got to get real hot in the sun...

      Well, they can start with removing more clothes...

      --
      Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
    11. Re:Hmmmm... by SvnLyrBrto · · Score: 1

      > The Chinese Navy would end up playing the game of spot-the-submarine,
      > and they'd probably do about as well as did the captain of the General Belgrano,
      > and then bugger off back to port; not that this would much advantage the Royal
      > Navy, who probably wouldn't want to park carriers off the Chinese coast

      Since you bring up the Belgrano, why even involve surface combatants at all? The Royal Navy's submarine force is nuclear powered, and can remain on station as long as the Prussers Rum holds out. Just announce that the ports of Hong Kong, Shanghai, Shenzhen, and Guangzhou are closed until further notice. There's not much for China to do then but either kowtow appropriately, go the ICBM route, or let their entire economy disintegrate.

      cya,
      john

      --
      Imagine all the people...
    12. Re:Hmmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only way that the UK and China could do each other serious military damage would be by ICBM.

      The Chicoms would only have to threaten to do so. The Brits would surrender so fast, the French would be laughing at them.

      BTW, in about 20 years, all that "Russia in the way" east of the Urals will be Chinese territory. Oil is VERY roughly 210 RMB per barrel today. There's no way in hell the Chicoms will pay 800 RMB to a Russian for a barrel of oil. It will be cheaper and easier to just take it from them.

    13. Re:Hmmmm... by kabocox · · Score: 1

      It depends. You've already established that you have have a criminally-inclined genius and a ruthless, murderous streak. But more is required.

      1. Can your organization's name be turned into a suitably menacing acronym?
      2. Henchmen with unusual and remarkable deformities?
      3. Henchwomen with names both unlikely and sexually suggestive?
      4. Do you have a white persian cat?
      5. Do you enjoy monologuing?
      6. Can you credibly threaten the destruction of western civilization while maintaining a PG-13 rating?

      I have to wonder how many billionaires tried this... They got 1. They skipped 2. 3 was fun. It turns out that most of them are allergic to 4. 5 turns out to be boring. 6 is where it turns out to be far funnier to just have fun with those 3 women. Why was it I even cared about taking over the world if I could afford a massive mobile base, a personal merc defense force, and lots of hot women?

  10. Temp Ban kdawson by T+Murphy · · Score: 0, Troll

    to keep museums afloat

    He deserves it for this one.

    1. Re:Temp Ban kdawson by ArcherB · · Score: 2

      to keep museums afloat

      He deserves it for this one.

      To be fair, he was quoting the Historic Naval Ships Association.

      However, you missed the symbiotic relationship.

      ...to keep museums afloat, survival depends on big crowds.

      and the survival of big crowds depends on the museum staying afloat!

      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
  11. Floating base! by LoRdTAW · · Score: 3, Funny

    Step 1: Acquire free Naval floating base.
    Step 2: Fill said base with servers, generators and networking gear.
    step 3: Profit!

    Companies looking to build floating data centers could be the people to unload these things to. That or have your very own Sea World like base if you can anchor it in international waters. Properly cleaning them up would be the most cost prohibitive as I am sure they are filled with asbestos.

    1. Re:Floating base! by AKAImBatman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If all you need is a hull that floats, there are a lot cheaper ways of getting one than acquiring Navy hardware. Check out the standard crew complement of just about any naval vessel sometime and you'll come to understand that these are overly complicated beasts that are not designed for civilian use.

      (As an aside, a few non-superpowers tried to float aircraft carriers after WWII. They proved to be so expensive to operate, that most were decommissioned.)

    2. Re:Floating base! by Joe+Sick · · Score: 1

      Sounds like a job for SeaCode! :) http://www.sea-code.com/

    3. Re:Floating base! by nobodylocalhost · · Score: 1

      Yes, carrier is a protoss only unit!

      --
      Where is the "Ignorant" mod tag?
    4. Re:Floating base! by lelitsch · · Score: 1

      step 4: add a wireless satellite uplink

    5. Re:Floating base! by DeadDecoy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You should talk to the guys over at The Pirate Bay. Not only would it be deliciously ironic, turning them into real sea-faring pirates, but the *IAA would go crazy trying to issue them region-relevant subpoenas wherever they go.

    6. Re:Floating base! by ImYourVirus · · Score: 1

      Yes, carriers are a protoss only unit!

      here let me fix that for you(tm)

      --
      Why is common sense called that if it's not common?
    7. Re:Floating base! by AKAImBatman · · Score: 1

      the *IAA would go crazy trying to issue them region-relevant subpoenas wherever they go

      No they wouldn't. The Pirate Bay's business is effectively non-regional. Which means that there is no difference between the servers sitting in Sweden, Germany, Switzerland, or the high seas. The actual laws under which they are held responsible would generally be determined by their home port and/or under which flag they fly.

      (See: Flag of convenience)

    8. Re:Floating base! by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      You should talk to the guys over at The Pirate Bay. Not only would it be deliciously ironic, turning them into real sea-faring pirates, but the *IAA would go crazy trying to issue them region-relevant subpoenas wherever they go.

      Yeah, and maybe they could (stupidly) decide to operate off the shores of Somalia and get boarded so we could see a direct side-by-side comparison between "pirates" and honest-to-God-real pirates!

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    9. Re:Floating base! by mewsenews · · Score: 1

      That or have your very own Sea World like base if you can anchor it in international waters.

      Sea World? Will Shamu be there?

    10. Re:Floating base! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      F the subpoenas, issue missile strikes!

    11. Re:Floating base! by failedlogic · · Score: 1

      Hardy, har har, it sounds like you want to start a Pirate Bay floating server.

    12. Re:Floating base! by afterthought · · Score: 1

      At least you wouldn't have to worry about stealthing any of your ports.

    13. Re:Floating base! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As opposed to a wired satellite uplink ?

    14. Re:Floating base! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Naval vessels have heavy crews at least partially so they have lots of bodies available to do damage control. The full compliment is not necessary to the every-day running of the ship.

    15. Re:Floating base! by elFarto+the+2nd · · Score: 1

      ...flag they fly.

      That'll be the Jolly Roger then?

  12. ARR!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    That quote really sounds awesome if you say it with a pirate voice!

    1. Re:ARR!!! by whereiswaldo · · Score: 1

      Peewee Herman?

      Elmo?

      Steve Balmer? *ducks the chair*

  13. Re:An Introduction to Anal Masturbation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Once...just once I want to see a first post similar to these kinds of stories get modded +5 informative.... that would make my day.

  14. Skunk Works by SnarfQuest · · Score: 2, Informative

    This boat is described in the book "Skink Works". The navy didn't want it because it didn't have a paint locker.

    --
    Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
    1. Re:Skunk Works by idontgno · · Score: 1

      "Skink Works"?

      There was a book about stealth projects developed at a facility named after a small ground-dwelling lizard?

      That's the Navy for you. At least the Air Force always went to the right place.

      (Yes, I know it was a typo. It's just a very funny typo.)

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    2. Re:Skunk Works by DerekLyons · · Score: 4, Informative

      No, the Navy didn't want it because it was very expensive and of limited combat utility. It might have been of some use to a primarily coastal defense navy, but it's useless to a power projection navy like the USN.

      The paint locker story reflects Ben Rich's ignorance of the Navy and inability (or unwillingness) to listen to people other than himself. Had he asked, he'd have found that the paint locker is an important space on a warship - because the paint locker is where volatiles and flammables are stored. It has special ventilation and fire fighting provisions, something quite important on a ship that goes in harm's way.

    3. Re:Skunk Works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The paint locker story reflects Ben Rich's ignorance of the Navy and inability (or unwillingness) to listen to people other than himself.

      I read Skunk Works.

      He said that no one in the Navy was very interested in the ship. He speculated that it was partially because the crew complement was too small; he said that in the Navy you get promoted for commanding lots of people. He used the paint locker story as an example of how Navy guys were focusing on petty details and not paying attention to the big picture: that this was a ship that could sneak up on a task force, wreak serious havoc, and slip away again unchallenged.

      His conclusion was that he was better off dealing with the Air Force, because they actually were interested in advanced stealth technology.

      It could be that he was unwilling to listen to others, but I'd like a citation on that.

      Is sneaking up on a superior force and blowing the heck out of it inconsistent with a power projection Navy? I'd like that one explained, too. The US Air Force has gotten good use out of stealth aircraft to blow up air defense systems before the non-stealth aircraft make their attacks; is there some reason this sort of thing doesn't work for the US Navy? Or do you just believe the ship doesn't work as advertised?

    4. Re:Skunk Works by Wes+Janson · · Score: 1

      Except that it wasn't built to go in harm's way, it was built as a proof-of-concept test vessel. Personally, I suspect his theory about the Navy losing interest due to prestige/promotion opportunities was quite possibly accurate. It's very hard to imagine the Navy ditching the traditional surface fleet configuration in favor of ugly, stealthy missile boats with tiny crews.

    5. Re:Skunk Works by DerekLyons · · Score: 4, Interesting

      He said that no one in the Navy was very interested in the ship. He speculated that it was partially because the crew complement was too small; he said that in the Navy you get promoted for commanding lots of people. He used the paint locker story as an example of how Navy guys were focusing on petty details and not paying attention to the big picture: that this was a ship that could sneak up on a task force, wreak serious havoc, and slip away again unchallenged.

      Which, as I said, is indicative of Ben Rich's ignorance of the Navy - a paint locker isn't a petty detail. A paint locker is a matter of life or death if a Sea Shadow was ever damaged in combat. It's fine for Ben Rich to sit in his ivory tower and paint the big picture, but the Navy guys have to worry not only about the combat capability of the ship, but it's survivability in combat.
       
      Other accounts I've heard through the grapevine over the years tend to support my interpretation - Rich offered the design to the Navy, which built and evaluated it. The Navy found it had little combat capability and low combat survivability, and lost interest. Rich then got pissed be he saw the Navy as rejecting his wonder weapon.
       
       

      His conclusion was that he was better off dealing with the Air Force, because they actually were interested in advanced stealth technology.

      The Air Force is also filled with guys interested in high technology for high technologies sake. In the Navy you get promoted for commanding things, but with the high tooth-to-tail ratio of the Air Force you get promoted for being a brilliant manager - especially if you are the brilliant manager who brings home a new shiny. Heck, as long as you fight the good fight against the bureaucracy and Congress, you don't even have to actually bring it home.
       
       

      Is sneaking up on a superior force and blowing the heck out of it inconsistent with a power projection Navy? I'd like that one explained, too.

      The Navy already has entire service branch dedicated to exactly that task - the original stealth service. The Submarine Service.
       
      You also have to consider that a power projection Navy needs global range - something the Sea Shadow cannot do without requiring tremendous support while being less flexible than aircraft.

      The US Air Force has gotten good use out of stealth aircraft to blow up air defense systems before the non-stealth aircraft make their attacks; is there some reason this sort of thing doesn't work for the US Navy? Or do you just believe the ship doesn't work as advertised?

      The USN and USAF operate in completely different environments. The USN doesn't have to take out a missile battery to get at given tactical target - they have to take out entire ships. By the time Sea Shadow came on the scene, the USN had already worked out the combined arms tactics using aircraft and submarines in concert to defeat large enemy formations. The Sea Shadow didn't really bring anything useful to the picture.
       
      And no, it doesn't actually work as well as advertised. Something you won't find in Skunk Works and only rarely discussed in the open literature is this: Against any halfway decent ASW radar (the kind they use to spot periscopes), the Sea Shadow stands out like a sore thumb - while the ship itself is invisible, it's wake is highly visible. If the Sea Shadow slows down to avoid leaving a detectable wake, the defenders have won because a ship sitting virtually still isn't sneaking up on anyone. It's being left behind in their wake.

    6. Re:Skunk Works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you for taking the time to respond to me. I'd mod you +1 insightful if I could.

      It looks to me like a few ideas from the Sea Shadow experiment will find their way into new ship designs if they make sense (the DDX looked to my eyes a lot like Sea Shadow), but the Navy isn't going whole-hog to try to make all their ships like that.

  15. Re:An Introduction to Anal Masturbation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And that is where the genius of metamoderation comes into play. You never make a mod like that because you'll get metamodded into oblivion.

  16. Obligatory Dr. Jones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "That ship belongs in a museum!" ...

    "So do you!"

  17. Pirate Party! by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 1

    What are the regulations in Sweden?

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
    1. Re:Pirate Party! by Spatial · · Score: 1

      Good idea. Let's download some battleships, we can join all our 3D printers together to make it. :)

      The USS Slashdot, a thermoplastic battleship where officers can't speak and the ranks are randomly assigned each day. Sounds good to me!

  18. The jennifer morgue by lessthan · · Score: 2, Informative

    What is really weird is that I'm reading the Jennifer Morgue right now. The book starts with the operations.

    --
    Space Shuttle was a program that strapped humans to an explosion and tried to stab through the sky with fire and math
    1. Re:The jennifer morgue by Arkem+Beta · · Score: 1

      If I had Karma I'd mod you up.
      I too am reading the Jennifer Morgue and found it a bit creepy that the USN is giving away the ship that forms the premise of the book.

  19. Just goes to show.... by Rick+Zeman · · Score: 3, Funny

    TANSTAAFS. :-)

  20. So, by nobodylocalhost · · Score: 3, Funny

    The Chinese Federation is challenging our Holy Britannian Empire?

    Very well, The stake is the world, prepare for battle...

    All Hail Britannia!!

    --
    Where is the "Ignorant" mod tag?
    1. Re:So, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Chinese Federation is challenging our Holy Britannian Empire?

      Very well, The stake is the world, prepare for battle...

      All Hail Britannia!!

      Hah it's just a Pizza Hut marketing plot!

      Will Area 11 ever become the United States of Japan? And while we wait for the answer there will always be more Pizza Hut...

  21. Too late by Is0m0rph · · Score: 1

    I called it. It's going in my backyard.

  22. Re:An Introduction to Anal Masturbation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of course because metamoderation isn't flawed, not in the least.

    -- A troll who metamoderates regularly

  23. Anyone else intereted in forming a Naval Fleet? by ipc0nfig · · Score: 3, Informative

    From the webpage: http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2006/09/fr091406.html Other ships that are currently available for donation include: (1) Patrol Combat ex-CANON (PG 90), Philadelphia, PA. (2) Guided Missile Destroyer ex-CHARLES F. ADAMS (DDG 2), Philadelphia, PA. (3) Destroyer ex-CONOLLY (DD 979), Philadelphia, PA. (4) Destroyer ex-EDSON (DD 946), Philadelphia, PA. (5) Submarine ex-TROUT (SS 566), Philadelphia, PA. (6) Guided Missile Cruiser ex-TICONDEROGA (CG 47), Philadelphia, PA. (7) Aircraft Carrier ex-RANGER (CV 61),Bremerton, WA.

  24. Re:An Introduction to Anal Masturbation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was wondering why I never seem to get modpoints these days :)

  25. Re:An Introduction to Anal Masturbation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good, solid advice, however, I would rather think about your breathing

  26. Survival Depends On More Than Big Crowds +1, Fun by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Survival depends on the military-industrial-Congressional complex.

    Good luck in your gulag.

    Seditiously As Always,
    Kilgore Trout

  27. oh a floating data centre by naeone · · Score: 1

    microhoo or googlesoft should take this and make it a floating data centre and close all its ports to keep it stealthy

    1. Re:oh a floating data centre by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Didn't the article say something about lots of costly regulations to follow, reams of paperwork?

      I can hardly imagine how much paperwork it would take to get a datacenter in one... let-alone to actually have a decent chance of convincing the authorities to allow some of the DC equipment

  28. Had to go there - I'm just that guy by concoursrider · · Score: 0

    All your base are belong to us

  29. Pass on this one... by rickb928 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I asked my brother in-law AND my ex-brother-in-law, who both work for Bath Iron works.

    You don't want this boat. Even for free.

    One of them mentioned some ancient wisdom about being given boats for free...

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    1. Re:Pass on this one... by sr180 · · Score: 1

      Boats, aircraft and women are the three things that are better to rent than to own.

      --
      In Soviet Russia the insensitive clod is YOU!
    2. Re:Pass on this one... by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      As if you can really own women.

      They rent you.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    3. Re:Pass on this one... by base3 · · Score: 1

      In Soviet Russia . . . oh, never mind.

      --
      One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
    4. Re:Pass on this one... by kipin · · Score: 1

      Boats, aircraft and women are the three things that are better to rent than to own.

      I thought it was just better to have a neighbor who owns one of those - that way you get all the advantages (getting to ride in a boat, airplane or woman) without the annoyances that come along with owning one.

      --
      If I can not smoke in heaven, then I shall not go. -- Mark Twain
    5. Re:Pass on this one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So does your sister work there as well?

  30. What's the difference? by GatheringDust · · Score: 1

    Sounds like any other government project to me...

  31. Thinking small by RyoShin · · Score: 1

    to keep museums afloat, survival depends on big crowds

    Why just make it a museum? I'm not familiar with navy tech, but I'd bet you could fix it up and turn it into some sort of roving marine research center or an interesting themed-cruise liner for the fairly-rich.

    For the research center, with a floating dry dock you could probably modify it to also hold an unmanned underwater vessel.

    For the cruise liner, you have something along the murder-mystery parties, but now it's a spy-theme. Everyone pays $X,000, and if you figure out who the spy is and what they're after, you get a prize of some sort (perhaps an extra cruise above the Shadow?).

    Or combine the last two: a roving museum. Over a few days on the open seas, not only do you learn about the whole project and get to see some stuff in action, but you are also taken to various spots of interest. Sure, there won't be much to see out on the ocean, but I'm sure an enterprising individual could figure out how to keep attention for those moments. Everything in between is like a normal cruise liner, though I don't think they'd be able to install a pool on the ship.

    1. Re:Thinking small by westlake · · Score: 1
      For the cruise liner, you have something along the murder-mystery parties, but now it's a spy-theme

      The cost of bringing the aging QE2 into compliance with future safety standards sent the liner into premature retirement as a dockside hotel. There are, inevitably, with a military vessel the questions of fuel consumption, manning requirements and so on, endlessly.

  32. Re:An Introduction to Anal Masturbation by Kagura · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Metamod yesterday (the first time I've metamodded in a long time) asked me to give a thumbs up/thumbs down to COMMENTS themselves. Not moderations of comments, it was actually asking me to decide whether the comment was good or not. I know this because 1) It told me flat out to vote whether the comment is good or not, and 2) only ONE of the comments I thumbed up or down had any type of moderation on it! The rest were just Score: 1 comments.

    What in the hell happened to the old metamod system?

  33. Who needs exhumer when.... by ztcamper · · Score: 1

    you can get a stealth ship that can pewpew n00bs with cruse missiles and nukes! A gank of thease would pwn ur exhumer before you can press omgwtf key! lo1!1

  34. one (compound, recently coined) word: seasteading by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

    Forget a naval museum.

    1. Anchor the barge out in international waters.
    2. Put a fancy hotel on barge
    3. Claim independence as your own nation
    4. legalize gambling, marijuana, and hashish
    5. ferry people to it in the ship
    6. wait for some pirates or a prudish navy to attack
    7. ???
    8. profit!

    The ??? in this case has something to do with fending off the invasion claiming you're not a legitimate nation, but it's still a ??? because I have no idea how you're going to do that indefinitely.

  35. Donate it to GreenPeace by carld · · Score: 1

    Bunk space for 12 and a microwave is more then adequate.

  36. Re:Floating bed and breakfast by SethJohnson · · Score: 1

    Spain did get a hand-me-down Aircraft carrier from the US after WWII-- the USS Cabot. Operated it from 1967 to 1989.

    Then some folks tried to set it up as a floating museum in America. It leaked a big slick of oil somewhere, and the coast guard charged the non-profit group $2 million for the cleanup. Not having the funds, they had to sell the Cabot in an auction for a winning bid of $187,000 as scrap. George Bush Sr. and some other ex-Navy big-wigs got involved and tried to purchase it at the Auction. No luck. The winner was an overseas scrapyard who was planning on towing it to India or some such place to chop it up. Perhaps at Bush's bidding, the federal government forbade the overseas company from towing it into international waters because it contained asbestos, which would violate international law to transport toxic waste in international waters or some such agreement.

    Finally, the Cabot got chopped up on the Gulf coast of Texas.

    Would have been cool to operate as a bed-and-breakfast out in the Gulf. Or perhaps a theme cruse ship where old Navy guys could dress in uniform and sail over to the coast of Japan where they could shout insults at their defeated enemy. Where is Disney when you need an investor with out-of-the-box thinking capabilities?!?

    Seth

  37. Re:An Introduction to Anal Masturbation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I sometimes post high moderated stuff and I sometimes troll and I sometimes even use my regular excellent log-in to post. I metamod all the time and there's a handful of trolls that I click negative even when it's something valid. Thinking of you, spun (one of twitter's sockpuppets).

  38. USS Ranger to Portland (hopeful) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's an organization that's trying to raise funds and navigate the bureaucracy in order to get the Ranger moved to Portland to form part of a new Naval museum. Frankly, I think their chances of success are slim, but it would be pretty cool if they got it all worked out.

    I'm surprised the Ticonderoga is on there. The Aegis cruisers are still a major part of the fleet, although there have been a host of improvements since Ticonderoga was commissioned.

  39. Re:An Introduction to Anal Masturbation by Kagura · · Score: 1

    What the heck does this have to do with my post, aside from the fact that you metamod based on the identify of the person at times?

    I'm also perplexed as to why I was modded troll above, unless somebody doesn't like offtopic yet meaningful chatter?

  40. Re:An Introduction to Anal Masturbation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would mod it off-topic because this was supposed to be a conversation about Cold-War boats and anal masturbation. Speaking of your mother, your mother is so fat when she jumps on the Stealth Boat, it becomes Red October.

  41. Tough Qualifications!! by rts008 · · Score: 1

    'jollyreaper', I think your bar is set too high for the /. geek.

    Hell, man, only Hollywood [shakened, not stirred] could meet your criteria!

    Oh, wait a minute.....[face>palm] D'oh!

    The hell with the sharks with frikkin' lasers!...bring on the fembots with machinegun jugglies!!!!

    *ring...ring*
    Gotta go find a Cone of Silence, my Shoe Phone is ringing...

    note to self: quit posting while drinking!...not as funny as you think...

    --
    Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
    1. Re:Tough Qualifications!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      note to self: quit posting while drinking!...not as funny as you think...

      Amen.

  42. Sea Shadow was by Brain_Recall · · Score: 2, Informative
    From what I remember, the Sea Shadow was actually mostly a failure, in terms of radar signature. Sure, it was damn stealthy. In fact, too stealthy. Water naturally reflects radar, so when they took Sea Shadow out, all they had to do was look for the hole where they weren't getting any reflection. :-/

    In other ways it was a success. It did have a very low noise signature. The hull design did help it greatly reduce the ships wake, keeping it from turning up too much water.

  43. The sun is over the yardarm...somewhere by rts008 · · Score: 1

    Yes, the sun never sets in/on the British Empire.{1} [forget which is correct:*/+....it's been so long ago...;-) ]

    Ah, yes...the Good Old Days! (new 'Battle Cry': Remember Hong Kong!![styled after 'Remember Pearl Harbor/the Alamo!' in the USA], and don't take no for an answer...be bold!), just remember Gunga Din.

    {1} Not meant to be inflammatory or disrespecting my British cousins in the least.(cousins==literally and figuratively:-))*

    *obligatory: [citation needed]:
      I do have a double chin, you insensitive clod!...why do you think I grew a beard?! #tongue-in-cheek humour intended here#

    --
    Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
  44. Head A splodes!!! by rts008 · · Score: 1

    ...to keep museums afloat, survival depends on big crowds.

    and the survival of big crowds depends on the museum staying afloat!

    I, uhm, well, to be honest...*enters recursive, redundant loop*

    I think I will quit here. [when in a hole...stop digging with a backhoe!]

    I can see where this could be a problem of course.

    --
    Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
  45. Perfect investment opportunity here.... by rts008 · · Score: 1

    This should be of interest to 'The Pirate Bay' as a 'pirate/underground' server setup.

    1. It has stealth tech
    2. It has it's own service barge..that's submersible!
    3. It can take up station out of [insert country/nation here]'s jurisdiction in International Waters[tm]
    4. It is cool

    *ignore the downsides to this idea(especially 3.- connectivity could be a nightmare!)-it's a joke!*

    --
    Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
  46. Better pic (Google maps) by mnemotronic · · Score: 1

    I'll bet this is how the aliens see it.

    --
    The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
  47. raft by Jookey · · Score: 1

    Can I buy an aircraft carrier and use it as a nucleus for a giant raft city filled with refugees.

  48. Here they are! by ukemike · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The ship in question, and the floating dry in which it rests are here:
    http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=38.069464,-122.101327&spn=0.001824,0.003455&t=h&z=18

    The box at the Northwest end of the row, contains the Sea Shadow. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Shadow

    Interestingly the ship on the other end of the row is the USS Iowa, a WW2 and Korean War Battleship. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Iowa_(BB-61)

    --
    -- QED
  49. Mod Parent +Funny (and +Informative) by handy_vandal · · Score: 1

    What I want, is to buy the SS Consoleeza Rice, and park it in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, and live there.

    Made me laugh! Mod parent up!

    --
    -kgj
  50. Re:An Introduction to Anal Masturbation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How is anal masturbation off-topic from anything having to do with the Navy? I thought all seaman were into that.

  51. Very insightful post by Kupfernigk · · Score: 1
    No mod points, but this is a high quality post that people should take note of. (Incidentally it is not only military craft where the paint locker is important. My flammables are kept in a steel structure with low level vents and with an expanse of deck between it and the cabin; not only can fumes not build up but an actual fire should not result in any serious damage. Fire is in fact a much bigger hazard on boats than sinking.)

    Your comment on ASW radar is spot on, but in fact it's even worse than that - readily available low-tech radar can pick up the wake from an aircraft. Unfortunately, too many people think they are smarter than the people in navies, whereas the truth is that navies tend to attract some extremely bright and forward thinking people.

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
    1. Re:Very insightful post by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      Fire is in fact a much bigger hazard on boats than sinking.

      Thanks, not many non sailors realize that we fear fire above all else. At sea, there isn't anywhere to run.
       

      Unfortunately, too many people think they are smarter than the people in navies, whereas the truth is that navies tend to attract some extremely bright and forward thinking people.

      It's not that they think they are smarter than the people in navies I think. It's that they don't realize just how different a navy is from an army or air force. Like the guy I replied to who was thinking in terms of how the USAF destroys defensive systems to get at the actual targets - he doesn't realize that in naval warfare, the defensive system and the actual target are one and the same. The USAF approach doesn't make sense in that context.

  52. Thanks by Kupfernigk · · Score: 1
    I'm only a peacetime sailor myself - but I learned a lot from my father who commanded a ship during and after WW2, as well as the retired naval officers and engineers who infest our marina. I was in fact alluding to many Slashdot posters who feel able to comment on waterborne matters while clearly having no idea (e.g. my son-in-law who cannot understand why I don't fit a couple of 500HP Diesels to my displacement hull to "get more speed", but is easily capable of understanding the propellor law if he ever put his mind to it).

    You can see the same thing on a thread above where I commented, very briefly and intended humorously, on the point that to win a battle in the days of sail the British tactic involved very close bombardment indeed, perferably between wind and water at a range of a few feet. Moderated down. Moderated up were posts by people who obviously thought that Nelson, Drake and co. would have stood off a good long way and fired their guns using fire control computers. They and the moderators clearly haven't even been round a wooden warship, let alone been on one when the wind is blowing and the sea is up.

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
  53. Fishin' With Tom Clancy by dpiven · · Score: 1

    That'd make one king hell of a bass boat, I'll tell you what.