[sci.military] Carrier Questions

bunge@wam.umd.edu (Robert David Bunge) (03/13/91)

From: Robert David Bunge <bunge@wam.umd.edu>

I submitt the following:

swilliam@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Steve Williams) writes:
 
(In nice listing of operational U.S. aircraft carriers)
 
> the KITTY HAWK class:                                                       
>   CV-67    USS JOHN F. KENNEDY (actually an improved KITTY HAWK carrier)   
 
I've often seen this written like this.  Does anybody know just what
improvements where made to the JFK (especially ones that haven't been done
to the other KITTY HAWKs in twenty plus years of shipyard overhauls) to
make it worthy of a separate listing?  Before you start listing visible
characteristics like the JFK's tilted stack, please realize that all four of
these ships look different from one another.
 
 
> 2. USS LEXINGTON will be replaced by a FORRESTAL class carrier         
>    in the near future.                                                 
            ^^^^
Hasn't the navy been saying this for YEARS?   Anybody know if there are
concrete plans to finally do this?  If so, will the new ship be based out of
Pensacola?  I've always heard the channel there was too shallow for any of
the other carriers (including the Midway class).
 
Just wondering.
 
Bob Bunge
bunge@wam.umd.edu

averys@mist.CS.ORST.EDU (03/14/91)

From: averys@mist.CS.ORST.EDU
Robert David Bunge <bunge@wam.umd.edu> writes,

********
I've often seen this written like this.  Does anybody know just what
improvements where made to the JFK (especially ones that haven't been done
to the other KITTY HAWKs in twenty plus years of shipyard overhauls) to
make it worthy of a separate listing?  Before you start listing visible
characteristics like the JFK's tilted stack, please realize that all four of
these ships look different from one another.
*******

In the book "The Modern US War Machine", Crown Publishers, Inc. New York
1987, p 142, reprinted without permission

Speaking about the differences between the JFK and the other ships of the
class,
  "Of even greater significance was the abandonment of the expensive long-
range Terrier system, which took up valuable space and merely duplicated
similar area defence systems on the carrier escorts, in favour of the Basic
Point Defence Missile System (BPDMS), for which three octuple launchers
were fitted.The SPS-48 radar, carried on a rather slimmer mast aft of the
island, was fitted at the outset. Provision was made, as in America, for
an SQS-23 sonar, but this was never installed.
  John F. Kennedy marks the high point of US carrier construction, and it is
significant that the later CVNs of the Nimitz class are almost identical in
flight-deck layout, armament, and sensor outfit. The earlier three ships of
the Kitty Hawk class are now being refitted to the same standard. In
particular the Terrier launchers, together with the fire control radars,
are being removed and replaced by Mk 29 launchers for NATO Sea Sparrow."

I hope that this was helpful.
Scott Avery
averys@mist.cs.orst.edu
My opinions are all my own