RPG Forums

Go Back   RPG Forums > Role Playing Game Section > Twilight 2000 Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-18-2010, 08:49 AM
Blakrider Blakrider is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Perth AU
Posts: 11
Default the last Light Aircraft Carrier

back in 89, i happened to see a magaizine cover showing the return of the last light carrier USS Cabot from the spanish navy to New Orleans, where it was to be converted to a museum ship. years later i was in New Orleans but found out she hadn't been turned into a museum ship as the article had promised, but was instead just sitting there tied to the pier rusting out. it was finally towed to Brownsvlle Tx for scapping in about 2002.

i have oftened wondered what could have been her fate if the twilight war had started. would it have stayed a rusting hulk in New Orleans?, or would the navy have pressed her into service? and if they did as what a anti sub carrier (ASW) or a maybe a LPH helicopter landing ship?

i have written up the states for both

so any ides or suggestions
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-18-2010, 02:06 PM
copeab's Avatar
copeab copeab is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 649
Default

Here's her history and stats in Spanish service, to give an idea of what her capabilities would have been like in the 90's:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish...arrier_Dédalo

My rough guess is that the USN would have used it in a similar role, though a ski-jump might have been installed for improving the Harriers' performance.
__________________
A generous and sadistic GM,
Brandon Cope

http://copeab.tripod.com
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-18-2010, 02:27 PM
Raellus's Avatar
Raellus Raellus is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Marana, AZ
Posts: 2,559
Default

I like the idea of the US government buying her from her private owners in late '96 or early '97, refurbishing and refitting her (if she'd been neglected, this could take upwards of a year) and returned to service as an escort carrier in '98. On the other hand, the USN would be running short of amphibs by then so perhaps that would be her WWIII role. She already carried Harriers in Spahish service so it makes sense that she'd carry them again in USMC service.

I can see her running convoy escort duty carrying a mix of helis for ASW duties and Harriers optimized for air-to-air combat operations.
__________________
Dulce bellum inexpertis. - Erasmus
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-18-2010, 05:50 PM
Dog 6 Dog 6 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 219
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raellus View Post
I like the idea of the US government buying her from her private owners in late '96 or early '97, refurbishing and refitting her (if she'd been neglected, this could take upwards of a year) and returned to service as an escort carrier in '98. On the other hand, the USN would be running short of amphibs by then so perhaps that would be her WWIII role. She already carried Harriers in Spahish service so it makes sense that she'd carry them again in USMC service.

I can see her running convoy escort duty carrying a mix of helis for ASW duties and Harriers optimized for air-to-air combat operations.
I 2nd that
__________________
"There is only one tactical principal which is not subject to change. It is to use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wounds, death and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time."
--General George S. Patton, Jr.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-18-2010, 10:51 PM
Abbott Shaull Abbott Shaull is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Somewhere in the Eastern U.P. on the edge of Civilization.
Posts: 1,086
Default

These type of ships would be used as the basis and I am sure more modern ones were in the works to serve as Escort Carriers of WWIII. The Navy has practically had several of these ships used to carry Marine landing forces, don't recall the name of the vessels, but they too could be press into Escort Carrier type service too.

In the Persian Gulf they could be used as staging asset for the Heli-borne forces. In and around Korea for the same reason and in the North Sea and Baltic Sea in support of the protecting Marine units in those areas.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-18-2010, 11:09 PM
kalos72's Avatar
kalos72 kalos72 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Jacksonville Florida
Posts: 863
Default

My group even has talked about using the old Intrepid in NYC as a landing platform for rotary wing assets. Of course I cant decide if I should give it to them with working engines or not. :P
__________________
"Oh yes, I WOOT!"
TheDarkProphet
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-18-2010, 11:20 PM
Targan's Avatar
Targan Targan is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 3,470
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kalos72 View Post
My group even has talked about using the old Intrepid in NYC as a landing platform for rotary wing assets. Of course I cant decide if I should give it to them with working engines or not. :P
Its a nice idea and I can see why you'd get excited about it but seriously, even the smallest of carriers is a very large vessel. Where the hell do you get enough fuel oil to give it any kind of range? And would it be an efficient use of what fuel oil you could source? I don't want to rain on your parade here but in the late Twilight War I just don't see it happening.
__________________
"It is better to be feared than loved" - Nicolo Machiavelli
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-18-2010, 11:24 PM
kalos72's Avatar
kalos72 kalos72 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Jacksonville Florida
Posts: 863
Default

That was my position, then they countered with "We will move it around with tugs like the Wisla Krolowa, steam driven".

I have my hands full with these guys, all a bit too smart for their britches but at least they keep me on my toes.
__________________
"Oh yes, I WOOT!"
TheDarkProphet
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-19-2010, 08:31 AM
Abbott Shaull Abbott Shaull is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Somewhere in the Eastern U.P. on the edge of Civilization.
Posts: 1,086
Default

It would take several tugs to move her effectively without causing damage. Takes a lot horse power to start moving, and even more to stop a beast like that if she dead weight in the water.

Then factor in how many modern tugs have the room to be converted to wood/coal burning since there a limited amount of diesel.... After you convert, all the tugs would have limit power compared to before.

There are always ways around things...
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-19-2010, 01:58 PM
Blakrider Blakrider is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Perth AU
Posts: 11
Default here she is

this is the information i had been able to dig up in the USS Cabot as was in Spanish service
Attached Files
File Type: doc CVL.doc (36.5 KB, 140 views)
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 09-19-2010, 06:46 PM
Legbreaker's Avatar
Legbreaker Legbreaker is offline
Blood soaked, axe wielding psycho
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 4,117
Send a message via Yahoo to Legbreaker
Default

Only one small problem I see with this:
Quote:
The carrier remained moored in New Orleans until the middle of WWIII. Given a quick refit and re-equipped, she was recommissioned on 11 March 98.
New Orleans and the surrounding area got nuked in late 1997...

I doubt there'd have been much serious interest in the ship early enough to warrant it being moved. The war started less than a year earlier and am doubtful a 60 year old hull would have held much interest - the battle in the North Sea which destroyed "the last major fleet in being" did not occur until June 1997. Therefore, I can't see anyone in authority starting the process of refitting until a week or later (at best!). Then organising workmen who are probably heavily involved on other wartime projects, plus materials, machinery, etc would add at least another few months...
As the ship was stricken from the Spanish Navy in 89 it's been rusting away for quite a while. It's also highly likely that in it's last years in Spain, maintenance was minimal at best - why spend much time, effort and money on a ship which is about to be decommissioned anyway? Therefore, it's unlikely to be a simple case of an oil change and fresh coat of paint.

So, the assessment is good idea, but it just doesn't quite work given the timelines.
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives.

Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect"

Mors ante pudorem
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-20-2010, 12:07 AM
Targan's Avatar
Targan Targan is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 3,470
Default

+1 to what Leg said.
__________________
"It is better to be feared than loved" - Nicolo Machiavelli
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-20-2010, 06:44 AM
pmulcahy11b's Avatar
pmulcahy11b pmulcahy11b is offline
The Stat Guy
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 3,812
Default

I'll have to agree here too. By 1998, the resources to ready an aircraft carrier would no longer exist or be in very short supply, used elsewhere. The equipment to use and maintain the aircraft would similarly be in short supply. More likely, the ship may have been cut up for scrap, to use the metal plates for other projects.
__________________
All that stuff we know -- what if we're wrong? --Science Channel

Entirely too much T2K stuff here: www.pmulcahy.com
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09-20-2010, 10:11 AM
copeab's Avatar
copeab copeab is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 649
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b View Post
I'll have to agree here too. By 1998, the resources to ready an aircraft carrier would no longer exist or be in very short supply, used elsewhere. The equipment to use and maintain the aircraft would similarly be in short supply. More likely, the ship may have been cut up for scrap, to use the metal plates for other projects.
Alternatively, it may have been used as a floating town, after being moved some distance from shore.
__________________
A generous and sadistic GM,
Brandon Cope

http://copeab.tripod.com
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 09-20-2010, 12:07 PM
kalos72's Avatar
kalos72 kalos72 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Jacksonville Florida
Posts: 863
Default

Now I LIKE that idea actually...or even as a floating base.
__________________
"Oh yes, I WOOT!"
TheDarkProphet
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 09-20-2010, 05:08 PM
Legbreaker's Avatar
Legbreaker Legbreaker is offline
Blood soaked, axe wielding psycho
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 4,117
Send a message via Yahoo to Legbreaker
Default

Of course as New Orleans got nuked, who'd want to live the glowing metal coffin?
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives.

Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect"

Mors ante pudorem
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 09-20-2010, 05:30 PM
pmulcahy11b's Avatar
pmulcahy11b pmulcahy11b is offline
The Stat Guy
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 3,812
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Legbreaker View Post
Of course as New Orleans got nuked, who'd want to live the glowing metal coffin?
At least you wouldn't have to worry about lighting the place at night...
__________________
All that stuff we know -- what if we're wrong? --Science Channel

Entirely too much T2K stuff here: www.pmulcahy.com
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 09-21-2010, 07:50 PM
Blakrider Blakrider is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Perth AU
Posts: 11
Default

well it could have been bought and moved to Mobile to be added to the USS Alabama Museum. missing the nuke and being some what restored.

and if you looking for a possible ship to use as a sea base how about the USS Gage a Haskell class Assault transport.


i also have some of her deck plans

as well as plans for WW2 Era LSTs' LCIs' as well as ther specs. any one interested?
Attached Files
File Type: doc USS GAGE APA 168.doc (60.5 KB, 152 views)
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 09-21-2010, 10:26 PM
Legbreaker's Avatar
Legbreaker Legbreaker is offline
Blood soaked, axe wielding psycho
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 4,117
Send a message via Yahoo to Legbreaker
Default

Quote:
and was inactive until her name was struck from the Navy List 1 in 1958 She was transferred the same day to the Maritime Commission Reserve Fleet and was berthed in James River, Va. Till the middle of WWIII
Can anyone else say "rustbucket"?
It'd be lucky to still hold water after 40 odd years sitting idle.
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives.

Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect"

Mors ante pudorem
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 09-21-2010, 11:36 PM
StainlessSteelCynic's Avatar
StainlessSteelCynic StainlessSteelCynic is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 1,579
Default

Actually if it's in the reserve fleet it would probably be kept in a decent state, they have a significant maintenance program to ensure the ships can be put back into service. That's not to say that every ship in the reserve fleet would be seaworthy, some of the oldest ones are getting a bit "thin in the hull"
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...y/dot/ndrf.htm
What the global security writeup does infer though is that the longer a ship has be sitting in the reserve fleet, the greater the likelihood it will be scrapped or sunk (as artificial reefs)
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 09-22-2010, 05:23 AM
Canadian Army's Avatar
Canadian Army Canadian Army is offline
No-Intensity Conflict Specialist
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 269
Default Cost of reactivation

Another thing to point is the cost of reactivation. Following 25 years of service, USS Oriskany was decommissioned on 30 September 1976 and laid up for long-term storage in Bremerton, Washington, where the carrier was maintained as a mobilization asset. Reagan Administration proposals to reactivate Oriskany were rejected by the United States Congress on the basis of the ship's poor material condition and limited air wing. The cost of reactivation was estimated at approximately $520 million for FY 1982 ($1 billion in 2010). This figure would probably more for the USS Cabot, given its age. I think the better solution would be Langley-class Escort Carriers found at Chico's site http://mysite.verizon.net/vzeedox4/ship_designs.html.
__________________
"You're damn right, I'm gonna be pissed off! I bought that pig at Pink Floyd's yard sale!"

Last edited by Canadian Army; 09-22-2010 at 05:33 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-22-2010, 07:55 PM
Matt W Matt W is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 290
Default Another (semi-serious) alternative?

Your carrier may not have been available as a Naval Asset - but it could have been very useful as a prison hulk. Lots of room and nobody digs escape tunnels

Where else are you going to "warehouse" the POW population?
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-22-2010, 07:58 PM
Matt W Matt W is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 290
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blakrider View Post

i also have some of her deck plans

as well as plans for WW2 Era LSTs' LCIs' as well as ther specs. any one interested?
Definitely interested in the LST stuff
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-22-2010, 11:47 PM
Legbreaker's Avatar
Legbreaker Legbreaker is offline
Blood soaked, axe wielding psycho
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 4,117
Send a message via Yahoo to Legbreaker
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt W View Post
Your carrier may not have been available as a Naval Asset - but it could have been very useful as a prison hulk. Lots of room and nobody digs escape tunnels

Where else are you going to "warehouse" the POW population?
Again, it probably got nuked....
I don't know much about the layout of New Orleans, but my guess is the docks would have been fairly high up on the list of priority targets for the warheads launched against the city.
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives.

Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect"

Mors ante pudorem
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-26-2010, 10:42 AM
Blakrider Blakrider is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Perth AU
Posts: 11
Default

you made some good points legbreaker about the USS Cabot, but I could simply say that an other organisation bought her in 92 and moved her to Mobile, AL and began making repairs and preping her to be a Museum ship next to the USS Alabama. when things started side into that bucket, the navy may just think to here her like Chico did the remaining Essex class Carriers and bring it back into service.

and as to possible cost of reactivating the Attack Transport USS Gage, the haskell class is really nothing more then a WW2 era Victory Frieghter that has been converted to a attack ship. and a large number of them were still part of the reserve fleet in the mid to late 90s.

In the 1997 a survey was done to evaluate the cost of refit and reactivation of the ships to active duty. total cost estimated $2. Million, almost the same cost of building them in the first place, ($2,500,000, but adjusting for inflation her construction coasts would have been a estimated $40 Million. if they had gone ahead it would made the US Military less reliant on forgien shipping. ( of course the politicians stopped it, made to much sence)
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-26-2010, 05:25 PM
mikeo80 mikeo80 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Fayetteville, NC
Posts: 962
Default Different Universe

I know I am treading on thin ground being a "newbee" to the game...

But consider the following...

What IF the nukes were limited to some tactical exchanges?

What if the Minutemen, B-52's and etc. (plus the Russian equivalent) had stayed at high alert, but stayed in the silos/airfields? The Politicians and the Generals determined that the possibility of doomsday was STILL too unacceptable.

As I have read the stories posted here, the attrition of the conventional forces were enormous...

I think that the US Military would look at the older Battleships as a way of introducing MAJOR combat units in 1 - 2 years.

Just my mind wondering down a different road.

Mike
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-26-2010, 05:31 PM
mikeo80 mikeo80 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Fayetteville, NC
Posts: 962
Default

Just an additional thought....

There is something very satisfying to a gamer as the image of a Battleship firing nine 16" guns.....
Attached Images
 
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-26-2010, 09:08 PM
Adm.Lee Adm.Lee is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 1,202
Default

I'd think the Navy would have trouble finding experienced chiefs for the older ships. The machinery (not least the guns) were generations old, and the guys who knew how to run them were scarce. Those in the Iowaclass would have to be thinned out to get the older ships running, and parts would be a major headache. With a disrupted supply chain, I can't see the museum ships used for more than accommodation and secure storage.

Lee.
__________________
My Twilight claim to fame: I ran "Allegheny Uprising" at Allegheny College, spring of 1988.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 10-05-2010, 03:24 PM
dragoon500ly dragoon500ly is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: East Tennessee, USA
Posts: 2,554
Default

another thing to consider is the amount of modification that took place on the museum ships to allow easier access...the USS Alabama is a case in point...in order to allow easier access to the 16-inch magazine spaces, a nice large hole was cut through the side of the barbette.

I was also able to take a tour of the engine spaces, and based on what I saw, I'd say at least 12-14 months of heavy repair to get the old turbines back into shape. That is if the yard didn't decide to just yank them out and replace them completely.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 05-02-2018, 10:25 PM
Olefin Olefin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Greencastle, PA
Posts: 2,049
Default

FYI - Using the NUKEMAP and plotting out the detonations that occurred in the 1997 attack on New Orleans and reconciling it with information in United States v. Ex-USS Cabot/Dedalo, 179 F. Supp. 2d 697 (S.D. Tex. 2000)

she was docked at the Press Street Wharf in the Port of New Orleans from about February 4, 1993 to October 13, 1997.

On May 3, 1997, the M/V Tomis Future collided with the Cabot and damaged both the vessel and the Press Street Wharf. The owner of the M/V Tomis Future hired Crescent Towing to position a tugboat alongside the Cabot from May 3rd to May 7th. The tugboat was necessary to prevent the Cabot from breaking away from the wharf.

When the owner of the M/V Tomis Future took Crescent Towing off hire on May 7th, the U.S.S. Cabot Dedalo Museum Foundation, Inc. refused to take action to protect its ship. The United States Coast Guard was therefore forced to take over. The Coast Guard performed repairs to the wharf and hired companies to provide tug assistance to protect the Cabot from breaking away and colliding with another vessel or facility. On October 12, 1997, the Coast Guard paid for the Cabot to be taken to a safer docking facility in Violet, Louisiana. The Coast Guard spent at least $500,868.94 on wharf repairs, tug assistance, and towing the Cabot.

On October 14, 1997 they took her to Port Isabel, TX and that is where she was for the TDM.

So there are three scenarios for where the Cabot was in the Twilight 2000 timeline

a) the navy after taking the losses they took early in 1997 tow to Cabot to where she can be refit to be used as carrier most likely using Harriers and helicopters as her air group - this would have been in progress during the TDM so depending on where the refit happened is what her fate would be - and thus she isnt anywhere near New Orleans when the nuclear strikes occur

b) the navy decides its not worth the effort to bring her back into the fleet after the losses in 1997 and she stays in New Orleans but the collision does not occur - thus she is at the Press Street Wharf for the TDM and untouched by the nukes that hit New Orleans - the closest nuke is the Meraux strike but the outer edges of the destructive area of that strike end about 1.5 kilometers away from her - in other words close but not enough to damage her - however she is going to be sitting in the water as a lot of contaminated debris goes by her on the river

and any attempt to recover her post TDM means having to get her past the debris and effects of two of the nuke strikes and their after effects on the Mississippi River to get her out to sea - so most likely if she is still there for the TDM she is sitting on the dock rusting away

c) the collision occurs and they move her and she is either in Violet, LA or Port Isabel, TX for the TDM - if she is in Violet, LA then the Meraux strike most likely gets her or heavily damages her at the least - on the other hand if she is in Port Isabel then she may have been there for the Mexican invasion - meaning she is still sitting there most likely and anyone who has played Red Star Lone Star knows what is in Port Isabel

so for those who want to have the Cabot in T2K there are actually several possibilities for her - she could have been put back into service with the USN or at least brought to a base where the work could have been started, she could be sitting at the Press Street Wharf still in New Orleans (maybe as the base for a local group of marauders terrorizing the area that the players are sent to deal with), she could be sunken wreck in Violet or she could be sitting at Port Isabel and possibly play a part in Red Star Lone Star as part of the action in Port Isabel
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.