Slashdot Mirror


US Navy Sells 'Top Gun' Aircraft Carrier For One Penny

HughPickens.com writes Kitsap Sun reports at Military.com that the USS Ranger, a 1,050-foot-long, 56,000-ton Forrestal-class aircraft carrier, is being towed from the inactive ship maintenance facility at Puget Sound for a 3,400-mile, around-Cape Horn voyage to a Texas dismantler who acquired the Vietnam-era warship for a penny for scrap metal. "Under the contract, the company will be paid $0.01. The price reflects the net price proposed by International Shipbreaking, which considered the estimated proceeds from the sale of the scrap metal to be generated from dismantling," said officials for NAVSEA. "[One cent] is the lowest price the Navy could possibly have paid the contractor for towing and dismantling the ship."

The Ranger was commissioned Aug. 10, 1957, at Norfolk Naval Shipyard and decommissioned July 10, 1993, after more than 35 years of service. It was stricken from the Naval Vessel Register on March 8, 2004, and redesignated for donation. After eight years on donation hold, the USS Ranger Foundation was unable to raise the funds to convert the ship into a museum or to overcome the physical obstacles of transporting the ship up the Columbia River to Fairview, Oregon. As a result, the Ranger was removed from the list of ships available for donation and designated for dismantling. The Navy, which can't retain inactive ships indefinitely, can't donate a vessel unless the application fully meets the Navy's minimum requirements. The Ranger had been in pristine condition, but for a week in August volunteers from other naval museums were allowed to remove items to improve their ships. The Ranger was in a slew of movies and television shows, including "The Six Million Dollar Man," "Flight of the Intruder" and "Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home" where it stood in for the USS Enterprise carrier. But the Ranger's most famous role was in the 1980's Tom Cruise hit, "Top Gun." "We would have liked to have seen it become a museum, but it just wasn't in the cards," Navy spokesman Chris Johnson told Fox. "But unfortunately, it is a difficult proposition to raise funds. The group that was going to collect donations had a $35 million budget plan but was only able to raise $100,000."

3 of 118 comments (clear)

  1. Re:The Navy sucks at negotiating by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 3, Interesting

    By "pristine condition" they simply mean that they haven't been stripping it of parts to use elsewhere. They don't mean they had been keeping it up or that it was not in need of a great deal of work to be used as a museum, or for any other purpose.

  2. Re:The Navy sucks at negotiating by Shakrai · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Hell, one Ohio class submarine has more destructive capacity than the entire Navy from 1945.

    Which means absolutely nothing because you can't actually use any of that firepower in any conflict short of "Civilization as we know it is coming to an end." That's not to dispute the rest of your points, which are mostly valid, but let us leave the SSBN out of the calculation of modern naval firepower. They have a specific mission: deterrence. The day they are called upon to loft their birds is the day that mission has failed.

    Why would you want more men when the ships have become more efficient and have so much more firepower?

    There is an argument to be made that we need more ships, particularly attack submarines and surface combatants. The former will prove decisive in any conflict with the PRC and the latter are needed for missile defense, amongst other missions. Unfortunately most of the shipbuilding budget is going to the Gerald Ford CVNs while the looming Ohio replacement is going to consume billions more. Both are needed at the end of the day, so unless we're going to throw more money at the Navy I'm not sure what the solution is. I'd opt for throwing more money at them, since it takes decades to build a modern Navy, and it can't be used (as easily) for interventionist adventures in the same manner as a standing army....

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  3. Re:Sad Day by Celtic+Ferret · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Old 'useta was' "O-Level" AT2 from VAQ-131 here. When I was on the Ranger I heard it got four yards to the gallon. We maintained the avionics of the Prowler, arguably the most important aircraft on board (at least the most expensive). They put us ("airdales" - not "real" Navy) up in an old "drying room" (the AT shop). I could go on and on about how miserable I and my peers were for those five+ years of moist hell but this isn't the place.

    That was in the late 80's. You could hardly go down a corridor without there being at least one angleiron bracket for something no longer used or present sticking out, with seven coats of paint on everything. The cats caught fire daily - I almost got to the point of ignoring the alarms. Never did figure out where all the dirt came from - thought they might have brought dumptrucks of it on board the hangar deck and spread it out before we deployed. A peer had those contact lenses he normally had to remove monthly but on the Ranger he had to do it daily. Took several hours (days) of bathing "back at the rock" to finally wash the boat off. I remember sweating through my boots and one of the worst cases of athelete's foot ever. Taking so many aspirin to keep the pain tolerable my ears rang. Launch noise that vibrated your fillings. JP5 or saltwater (!??) in the water supply.

    It was a very sad day for me when I met the USS Ranger. Still, you'd think there would be a fortune in steel there. It was a floating metal city of five thousand people once. You'd think it could be repurposed for something.
    --CF