The Big "E"…

Posted on by March 6, 2013
The Big “E”, USS ENTERPRISE, is no more…

Officially ‘inactivated’ yesterday at Norfolk, she is cold iron for the first time in 51 years.  She’s been involved in every major operation since the Blockade of Cuba in 1962, all the way through her last deployment supporting C5F in the Middle East.

But she is no more…


There was quite the ceremony yesterday pierside in Norfolk, and as the crew filed off and stood at attention on the pier, many former members of her crew, the families and some of the builders watched.

SECNAV Mabus indicated yesterday that the USS ENTERPRISE will live again, and will be the third carrier in the FORD Class, following the USS GERALD FORD and USS JOHN F KENNEDY.  

You can read the entire article HERE.

h/t Les, Skippy and others.

Comments

The Big "E"… — 17 Comments

  4. I hope some of her steel ends up in the new Big E.

    Gerry

  5. Being an ignorant landlubber, I can’t stop wondering why the reactors can’t be upgraded. I understand they have reached their “designed” service life. Does that mean they are unsafe? Do they need refueled and that is not feasible?

    Seems a waste to scrap her.

  6. Ed- Good point.

    eia- Yep!

    ADM- Yes, but she is part of and will always be a part of Naval History.

    Gerry- I’m ‘sure’ that is in the plan!

    WSF- Steel does break down under radiation, and ‘design’ limits are to make sure there is no failure of the vessels. They probably have another 25 years of life, but for safety reasons they will not be refueled. And the fact that Big “E” was a one ship class, lots of equipment on her is not supported; and to remove/replace the reactors means the ship has to be gutted make is not feasible to put new systems in.

  7. Why do I have a funny feeling that by the time comes to lay down the new “E’s” Keel, that the Admin will say it’s “Too Expensive, Too Provocative, Nuclear Powered and the Money can be better spent on Health Care/Education/the Environment, etc.”

  11. I think what Rev. Paul is saying is that we should start combing our naval academies for a James T. Kirk.

  12. makes me sad. But I am sure if Obama has his way about it, he will bump the line and build the USS OBAMA first.

    I am with Rev. Paul. I think the new Enterprise should be like the Avengers Carrier plane…that was wicked awesome.

  14. JUGM —

    I was disgusted when I found out they were naming ships for people who were still alive.

    Seemed (and still seems) sacriligious to me.

    Of course, I expect USS Che Obama to be announced about fifteen minutes after the next Democrat administration after Obama’s. And our current First Klingon to be the one who hits it with a bottle of organic argula squeezin’s.

    After all, he did save “those ships that have planes that land on them”, right?

  15. I’ve got a question… I’ve read how they plan to tow the Enterprise from Norfolk to some place in California or something…the long way, around the southern tip of South America, as the only place that can de-comission the reactors properly is located there.

    Wouldn’t it have made more sense to drive the ship there under its own power, and *then* do the whole “inactivation” thing? Would probably have been cheaper and faster to do it that way.

  16. Enterprise is going to Bremerton, Washington, Dirk, but I’m not sure why the Navy didn’t drive her around and hold the inactivation ceremony there.

    It’s not like the E can fit through the Panama Canal…

  17. Hey Old NFO, I was late posting my article. I was glad to read that there would be a new Enterprise, I am a fan of tradition and a ship named “Enterprise” is part of the United States.