Last "seawolf" Class Ssn Commissioned

[Scott Cunningham]

[Warning: horriffic statements follow] Whatever his faults(legion IMHO) he did authorize the use of submarines in intelligence roles that they had not done previously. He authorized both the big wiretaps that led to what could be argued as the biggest intel coups of the cold war. This naming acknowleges and honors a bold and good decision. Well placed IMO.   [/Warning: horriffic statements follow]

147116[/snapback]

 

 

I think "The Simpsons" had it best when the town of Springfield couldn't afford a good statue so they ended up with one of Jimmy Carter. At the mystery unveiling someone in the crowd screamed "Oh My God!!! Its history's greatest monster!!!" as the statue was revealed.

 

No, he wasnt a monster, but as a president he sucked. Sucked hind tit to be precisise. That he executed some no-brainer intel scams and schemes is still no justification to name a boat after him.

 

I think the only thing that works in his favor is that he is the first US Submariner who was president. If I was a submariner I would be trying to suppress that fact, not make a big deal about it.

[Talyn]

USS Seawolf (SSN-21)

 

USS Connecticut (SSN-22)

 

USS Jimmy Carter (SSN-23)

 

Boy, talk about a motley collection of names for one ship class.

 

Actually, the USS Jimmy Carter should not even be considered a part of the Sea Wolf Class. It's modifications as a special mission submarine really makes it different than the Seawolf and Connecticut. The extra length & tonnage actually reduces it's performance in comparison to SSN-21 and 22.

 

While the 17th edition of The Naval Institute Guide to the Ships and Aircraft of the U.S. Fleet classifies it as a "modified" Seawolf, it really should be it's own on-ship class.

 

I don't know why the media is calling it the most powerful submarine ever since it isn't. The SSN-21 and 22 have the same weapons load and can go faster. But then again it's the most expensive SSN ever built because of the modifications.

[Slater]

Looking over the names of older "Essex" class carriers and others (CVL, etc.), a lot of the names were used on CG-47 cruisers and newer carriers. Some names that don't seem to be in use today are:

 

Bennington

 

Oriskany

 

Cabot

 

Franklin

 

Shangri-La

 

Reprisal (cancelled)

 

Hancock (think this was a Spruance-class vessel)

 

Randolph

 

Langley

 

Wright

 

 

Not sure about Coral Sea and Midway.

[Talyn]

Considering the Virginia Class was supposed to be the low-cost alternative to the Sea Wolf Class, both SSN-21 and 22 cost less to build than the several first Virginia's.

[Ssnake]

I think "The Simpsons" had it best when the town of Springfield couldn't afford a good statue so they ended up with one of Jimmy Carter. At the mystery unveiling someone in the crowd screamed "Oh My God!!! Its history's greatest monster!!!" as the statue was revealed.

Well, first thing I thought about was the Laundry Ship USS Walter Mondale.

[Ken Estes]

Seems 'fishy' [no pun here] to see that Carter was used for the cutout/insert mod because President Jimmy had authorized the use of SSN for clandestine ops, etc. These had always been done by the silent service, mostly with conventional boats more silent and expendable for harbor penetrations of the ol' USSR. Once the Barbels and Graybacks go out of service, only nucs are left, and they are used a lot, with Halibut an early, if obsolescent and dangerous, candidate because of her old Regulus II hangar. But other boats were pressed into service as well, tapping the cables in the Barents and Okhotsk Seas, etc. Here again, some sources seem to credit presidents taking military actions/decisions, when it seldom occurs; Carter's sole operational venture, unfortunately, was probably limited to the Desert One fiasco against Iran. There is a book out there on these ops and I don't think Carter figures in the process at all. Oh well.

Edited February 21, 2005 by Ken Estes

[John Nelson]

Actually, the USS Jimmy Carter should not even be considered a part of the Sea Wolf Class.  It's modifications as a special mission submarine really makes it different than the Seawolf and Connecticut.  The extra length & tonnage actually reduces it's performance in comparison to SSN-21 and 22...

 

[snip]

 

...I don't know why the media is calling it the most powerful submarine ever since it isn't.  The SSN-21 and 22 have the same weapons load and can go faster.  But then again it's the most expensive SSN ever built because of the modifications.

147176[/snapback]

 

It has reduced performance as far as speed may go, but it has capabilities no other US sub currently has. It is as quiet as the other subs of its class, and can release up to 50 SEAL forces from its OI (Ocean Interface) hull section. In this article from "Undersea Warfare" magazine:

A Wasp Waist for More Ocean Access

The planned alterations include lengthening the hull behind the sail and inserting an Ocean Interface (OI) section that will support the Multi-Mission Project by opening larger payload apertures to the sea. The resulting modular architecture will allow the ship to be configured for specific missions using interchangeable payloads and tailored support services, yet it will preserve the submarine's core mission capabilities for normal tasking. The OI hull insert is unique, with a horizontal "hourglass" configuration that necks the pressure hull down to a "wasp waist," so that when the section is faired over, significant external volume will be available outside the pressure hull, but still within the skin of the ship. This will allow more flexibility in designing and adding systems and storage, while maintaining a smooth hydrodynamic hull shape with minimal impact on the ship's draft. The OI facilitates more flexible payload interfaces with the water and imposes far fewer constraints on the shape or size of weapons, auxiliary vehicles, and sensors to be deployed from the submarine. The OI supports the launch and recovery of tethered and autonomous vehicles without incurring many of the difficulties of current designs using torpedo tubes. The external volume under the shroud could also contain the necessary support systems for such vehicles. This approach would allow the host submarine to control the vehicle from within the ship without consuming valuable internal space for large cable reels or other support equipment. The OI will also allow the ship to deploy and retrieve a new generation of weapons, countermeasures, and sensors, which can now be developed without the size limitations imposed by torpedo or vertical launch tubes. In addition, Jimmy Carter will be configured with an advanced communications mast to support the high-volume data requirements of network-centric warfare, as well as DSB-recommended auxiliary maneuvering devices for low speed operations in littoral regions.

 

Full Seawolf Warfighting Capabilities - plus Special Operations

Despite her modification to conduct classified RDT&E, Jimmy Carter will retain all her organic warfighting capability, as shown in the accompanying table. She will support the fleet commander as an attack submarine in conducting undersea warfare, surveillance and reconnaissance, covert special operations, mine warfare, and strike operations, just as her two sister ships do. She will also be available to the Navy to test future concepts for weapons, countermeasures, and non-traditional payloads - tasking that is currently divided among several submarines. In addition to these robust capabilities, Jimmy Carter will also be capable of supporting Special Operations Forces (SOF), with provision for operating the Dry Deck Shelter (DDS) and Advanced SEAL Delivery System (ASDS). Moreover, one of the ship's most important functions will be to support research and development for future Naval Special Warfare (NSW) undersea mobility requirements, tactics, techniques, and procedures. Jimmy Carter had already been programmed to support NSW, but the additional volume and length of the OI provides even greater potential to develop new roles for submarines in special operations. The OI will provide a hangar or garage capability for locking-in and locking-out future generations of SEAL delivery vehicles, and her reconfigurable cargo area can accommodate dry stowage and access for maintenance. Other internal volume will be available as command and control space for mission planning and monitoring, plus dedicated berthing space for up to fifty SOF Team members. The extra external volume created by the hourglass design allows for stowage of SOF supplies like Combat Raiding Craft, fuel, munitions or delivery vehicles.

 

USS Jimmy Carter SSN-23

[larrikin]

Well, first thing I thought about was the Laundry Ship USS Walter Mondale. 

147195[/snapback]

 

Comfort Ship William S Clinton

[Guest Mike Steele]

I think "The Simpsons" had it best when the town of Springfield couldn't afford a good statue so they ended up with one of Jimmy Carter. At the mystery unveiling someone in the crowd screamed "Oh My God!!! Its history's greatest monster!!!" as the statue was revealed.

 

No, he wasnt a monster, but as a president he sucked. Sucked hind tit to be precisise. That he executed some no-brainer intel scams and schemes is still no justification to name a boat after him.

 

I think the only thing that works in his favor is that he is the first US Submariner who was president. If I was a submariner I would be trying to suppress that fact, not make a big deal about it.

147169[/snapback]

What you say is true, but I have taken a bit of heat over being "unfair" to Former Dem Presidents. So, this is it until the advent of the USS sHillary Clinton. (ack, spit, spit.....)

[Ivanhoe]

Considering the Virginia Class was supposed to be the low-cost alternative to the Sea Wolf Class, both SSN-21 and 22 cost less to build than the several first Virginia's.

147182[/snapback]

 

So you're saying that for the American taxpayer, the cost of the USS Jimmy is mere ... peanuts?

[pluto77189]

I always felt the British naming of ships was "So F*****G POMPOUS" (as the grim reaper said in the Meaning of life.)

 

Illustrious, invincible, splendid... gotta admit. Takes balls to get on a floating piece of steel, go out into the ocean, and say "Invincible!"

 

I think ships should be named after battles, or events that instantly bring a sense of pride and honor. Yorktown, Saratoga, Midway, Iwo Jima, Tarwara...

 

Is there a Normandy?

 

I have a soft spot for Intrepid. Is is that kinda corny/pompous British way, but I like it. My father took me to see the Intrepid before they opened it to the public. I'd love to see another Intrepid.

[RETAC21]

Is there a Normandy?

 

147365[/snapback]

 

Of course: USS Normady CG-60

 

And many more battles:

 

USS Ticonderoga (CG 47)

USS Yorktown (CG 48)

USS Vincennes (CG 49)

USS Valley Forge (CG 50)

USS Bunker Hill (CG 52)

USS Mobile Bay (CG 53)

USS Antietam (CG 54)

USS Leyte Gulf (CG 55)

USS San Jacinto (CG 56)

USS Lake Champlain (CG 57)

USS Philippine Sea (CG 58)

USS Princeton (CG 59)

USS Normandy (CG 60)

USS Monterey (CG 61)

USS Chancellorsville (CG 62)

USS Cowpens (CG 63)

USS Gettysburg (CG 64)

USS Chosin (CG 65)

USS Hue City (CG 66)

USS Shiloh (CG 67)

USS Anzio (CG 68)

USS Vicksburg (CG 69)

USS Lake Erie (CG 70)

USS Cape St. George (CG 71)

USS Vella Gulf (CG 72)

USS Port Royal (CG 73)

 

Take your pick.

[Garth]

Yup, the cable tappings were definitely authorized by Carter (read "Blind Man's Bluff") for more details on this. After Hallibut left service this job fell to the old Seawolf (she actually had helicopter-like "skids" installed on her hull to allow her to land on the ocean floor). Then Parche had her hull-extension mod in the late 1980s, which is when the capability went from being an ad-hoc sort of thing to being truly cutting edge.

 

While Carter personally authorized the tapping missions, it was really the Reagan Administration that exploited them. I think it's covered in a few books ("Fall from Glory" is one of them, iirc), but in the early 1980s the USN managed to "disappear" a couple of CVGs and the New Jersey SAG in the Pacific. The Sovs only "found" them when the inbound alpha strike on Vladivostok showed up on their radar screens (even though the A-6s turned away at the 12 mile limit, the Sovs were then force to "find" new pairs of underware). Apparently the intelligence haul off the tapped cables during that particular game of chicken does the term "phenominal" a disservice.

 

--Garth

 

As another of Tanknet's resident rightwing nutjobs, I'll agree with Mike. I'm definitely no fan of Jimmy Carter and his presidency and do think that the ship naming system is out of control in spite of my admiration for Ronald Reagan and the fact that there's a carrier named after him. BUT, given the present system, it was somewhat fitting that this sub be named after Carter given his record in using subs for this purpose and given that he is the only president to be qualified on subs and one of Rickover's "boys". It still pained me everytime I had to applaud his greatness though.

147137[/snapback]

[swerve]

I always felt the British naming of ships was "So F*****G POMPOUS" (as the grim reaper said in the Meaning of life.)

 

Illustrious, invincible, splendid... gotta admit.  Takes balls to get on a floating piece of steel, go out into the ocean, and say "Invincible!"

 

I think ships should be named after battles, or events that instantly bring a sense of pride and honor.  Yorktown, Saratoga, Midway, Iwo Jima, Tarwara...

 

RN tradition limits the names used. Naming Ark Royal took much soul-searching & many arguments, because her predecessor hadn't been lost in battle, & that's traditionally a prerequisite for re-using a name. An exception was made because it's our oldest surviving ship name.

 

Many fine names of victories, victorious admirals, etc, have been used up. And the Navy does not use the names of land victories (so no HMS Washington ).

[Garth]

Warner tried to mandate Lexington for CVN-77 (GHWB) and it wouldn't surprise me if he were to try again.

 

I'm fine with Lexington for CVN-78, but CVN-79 should definitely get "Enterprise" (which will be retired and replaced by CVN-78 by the time -79's keel is laid). Can't imagine there not being a carrier Enterprise in the fleet.

 

--Garth

 

I'd heard a story that Senator John Warner had introduced a bill requiring the next two CVNs be named USS Lexington and Saratoga. Any chance this is actually true?

147160[/snapback]

[RETAC21]

. And the Navy does not use the names of land victories (so no HMS Washington  ).

147400[/snapback]

 

Wonk! wrong answer:

 

Later Battle Class

HMS Agincourt (second time that I know, first time in WW1)

HMS Aisne

HMS Alamein

[swerve]

Wonk! wrong answer:

 

Later Battle Class

HMS Agincourt  (second time that I know, first time in WW1)

HMS Aisne

HMS Alamein

147408[/snapback]

 

My error - on checking, I found Agincourt was first used in the 1790s, then 1865, then again for a ship built for Brazil, sold before completion to Turkey, & taken over by the RN in 1914, before delivery.

 

Apart from the other two, obviously named in sympathy with Agincourt, I've found -

Minden (first non-UK built - in India - 1810)

Poictiers , used in the Napoleonic wars

Ramillies (how could I forget?)

Corunna - but that was partly a naval action.

 

So, not completely unknown, but very rare.

[Jeff]

EB is working on a Multi Mission Platform (MMP) for the Virginia class so the Carter is an excellent test platform to see what works and what doesn't on this latest design. I expect the lessons learned to be incorporated into the MMP design when it's eventually incorporated into the subsequent Virginia's.

[gewing]

Yup, the cable tappings were definitely authorized by Carter (read "Blind Man's Bluff") for more details on this.  After Hallibut left service this job fell to the old Seawolf (she actually had helicopter-like "skids" installed on her hull to allow her to land on the ocean floor).  Then Parche had her hull-extension mod in the late 1980s, which is when the capability went from being an ad-hoc sort of thing to being truly cutting edge.

 

While Carter personally authorized the tapping missions, it was really the Reagan Administration that exploited them.  I think it's covered in a few books ("Fall from Glory" is one of them, iirc), but in the early 1980s the USN managed to "disappear" a couple of CVGs and the New Jersey SAG in the Pacific.  The Sovs only "found" them when the inbound alpha strike on Vladivostok showed up on their radar screens (even though the A-6s turned away at the 12 mile limit, the Sovs were then force to "find" new pairs of underware).  Apparently the intelligence haul off the tapped cables during that particular game of chicken does the term "phenominal" a disservice.

 

--Garth

147399[/snapback]

 

 

WOW!!!

[Scott Cunningham]

If you are into that stuff "Blind man's Bluff" is a fascinating story of cold war submarine action. Some of the stuff the US did was pretty amazing, and is only now starting to come to light. I'm sure in 20 years there will be a whole lot more eventually.

[Garth]

The current HMS Argus, HMS Albion and HMS Bulwark being good examples of this, I suppose?

 

 

RN tradition limits the names used. Naming Ark Royal took much soul-searching & many arguments, because her predecessor hadn't been lost in battle, & that's traditionally a prerequisite for re-using a name. An exception was made because it's our oldest surviving ship name.

[Garth]

"Spy Sub" as well, although it only deals with a portion of USS Hallibut's early career.

 

--Garth

 

If you are into that stuff "Blind man's Bluff" is a fascinating story of cold war submarine action. Some of the stuff the US did was pretty amazing, and is only now starting to come to light. I'm sure in 20 years there will be a whole lot more eventually.

147485[/snapback]

[Josh]

While Carter personally authorized the tapping missions, it was really the Reagan Administration that exploited them.  I think it's covered in a few books ("Fall from Glory" is one of them, iirc), but in the early 1980s the USN managed to "disappear" a couple of CVGs and the New Jersey SAG in the Pacific.  The Sovs only "found" them when the inbound alpha strike on Vladivostok showed up on their radar screens (even though the A-6s turned away at the 12 mile limit, the Sovs were then force to "find" new pairs of underware).  Apparently the intelligence haul off the tapped cables during that particular game of chicken does the term "phenominal" a disservice.

 

--Garth

147399[/snapback]

 

Was this the NORPAC 82 exercise?

[Guest Demon]

HMS Invincible ...

WWI:

MS Invincible was attached to the 1st Cruiser Squadron, Home Fleet at the end of 1908. At the Falkland Islands on 8th December 1914 HMS Invincible and HMS Inflexible destroyed Admiral von Spee's Cruiser Squadron, including Scharnhorst and Gneisenau. HMS Indomitable assisted HMS Lion after the battle of Dogger Bank in 1915. HMS Inflexible took part in the Dardanelles operations in 1915 but was mined and badly damaged needing 3 months of repairs. All three ships were present at the Battle of Jutland, HMS Invincible blew up and sank after a hit from Lutzow with the loss of 1,026 crew. The two surviving ships were eventually scrapped on 1st December 1921.

 

fairly confident the next ship of that name was destroyed in WWII as well. Hmm, gotta look that one up.

[swerve]

The current HMS Argus, HMS Albion and HMS Bulwark being good examples of this, I suppose?

 

 

It's one of those ancient traditions that's neither ancient nor rigidly followed. But some people still get worked up over them. There was a fuss over Ark Royal.