Will Mayport's Missing Aircraft Carrier Show Up on Schedule?

[Ocklawaha]

SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS Y'ALL!


Yep, Ships with proper names, and a STREETCAR in every garage!  Actually Sportmotor, I'm willing to allow you world rule as long as I can be Burgermeister of Cleveland.  !! DIE YANKEES !!

YAHOO! I got SOCO! AND Rebel Yell!!  Yippppppppppppieeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

OCKLAWAHA
!! DEO VINDICE !!

[stjr]

Review ambiguous about Mayport’s carrier chances
QDR provides for alternative East Coast carrier port

    * By Timothy J. Gibbons
    * Story updated at 7:54 PM on Thursday, Jan. 28, 2010

The Pentagon sees the need to spread out its aircraft carrier fleet, according to a draft copy of the report that is to determine whether Mayport Naval Station gets a nuclear-powered carrier.

It’s unclear though if that need means Mayport will become the home port for a carrier, a goal local politicians have been striving for since the conventionally powered USS John F. Kennedy left town in 2007.

The Navy should “provide an alternative port to dock East Coast aircraft carriers,” says the Dec. 3 draft of the Quadrennial Defense Review. The final copy of the document is expected to be released Monday.

Whether “alternative port” means that a carrier is based at Mayport, that the river is dredged to make carrier visits easier or something else entirely is a question vexing politicians both here and in Norfolk, Va., where a carrier would likely come from.

“I don’t know what that wording means,” said U.S. Rep. Ander Crenshaw, R-Fla. “You can interpret it any way you want.”

The draft obtained by The Florida Times-Union does seem to support the idea of strategical dispersal, the argument that the nation’s fleet is safer when spread out. Providing an alternative port, the document said, would “mitigate the risk of a man-made or natural disaster.”

Supporters of Mayport have long used that argument, which the Navy embraced early last year in signing the official decision to bring a carrier there.

Doing so “reduces risks to fleet resources in the event of natural disaster, man-made calamity or attack by foreign nations or terrorists,” the announcement said.

The Navy’s position on that hasn’t changed, said Dan McLaughlin, a spokesman for U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., although he acknowledged the ambiguity in the draft isn’t good for Mayport.
“It just delays the process,” he said.

But retired Adm. Robert Natter, who has lobbied on behalf of moving a carrier to Mayport, was a bit more optimistic.

“My read is positive,” he said. “We’ve just got to wait until we hear from the Department of the Navy.”

Part of the vagueness of the wording may come from the unusual nature of having such a discussion in the Quadrennial Defense Review. The review focuses on the military’s infrastructure and manpower needs, with the goal of laying out the nation’s defense strategy for the next two decades.

Big Navy issues expected to be addressed are how many carriers the fleet should have, how the Navy’s amphibious ships fit into the Marine’s current missions and how ships should handle ballistic-missile defense. The review does not typically address individual ship placements.

With the ambiguous language in the draft, those on both sides of the issues are urging caution until the final version comes out next week.

“I think we need to be really careful in terms of quoting anything out of this document until it is actually released,” said U.S. Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va.

Because the draft has likely gone through one or two revisions over the past two months, more specific wording may have been found for the Mayport issue.

“If there’s still ambiguity when the QDR comes out, we’ll have to go directly to the White House and the defense secretary for clarification,” McLaughlin said.

And no matter what the report says, the most important statement will come in another document also expected next week: The president’s budget submission.

Unless there’s money slated for the half-billion-dollar project, whatever the defense review recommends will be simply words.

http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2010-01-28/story/review_ambiguous_about_mayport%E2%80%99s_carrier_chances

[mtraininjax]

Typical muckraking by the Times Union on a slow news day. Believe me, Mayport will get another carrier, leaving all in Va, is stupid, and even congressmen know this to be the case.

With the work of the 4th fleet out of Mayport, we will see a carrier here.

[BridgeTroll]

The need for one closer to the Carribean, Central and South America is obvious...

[reednavy]

Along with that, the 4th Fleet is supposedly bringing in a master ASW detachment to Mayport, which is at least a hundred people or more. I would know as I worked ASW for the last 8 months I spent in the Navy.

[BridgeTroll]

I would know as I worked ASW for the last 8 months I spent in the Navy.

That was my entire career... 

[ProjectMaximus]

What is this about?

http://jacksonville.com/news/2010-01-29/story/mayport_to_get_aircraft_carrier

[subro]

Finally, Military intelligence.

[Ocklawaha]

Don't worry boys and girls, it's CONCRETE! This is a childrens camp in China, and you are looking at a building! The place is a cross between Military School, Summer Camp and EPOCT, Nothing to worry about here...


...and THIS one is NOT concrete... and I bet you thought it was ours!


Don't worry about our "friends", they only have the worlds 4Th largest navy.


Pearl Harbor today, and EVERY ship in this photo is Japanese!


No worry here either, this is NOT an aircraft carrier... According to Japan, it's a  new class of "destroyer." This one the Ise, and the earlier one the Hyuga, just happen to be named for two of the most fierce battleships of WWII, subliminal message anyone?

At present, Russia has only one operational aircraft carrier, the Nikolai Kuznetsov, which was commissioned in the early 1990s and has recently re-entered service after a prolonged overhaul. On 14 October 2008 President Dmitry Medvedev said that Russia would launch large-scale construction of aircraft carriers within the next two years. “We need new aircraft carrying warships, this is a very important direction for the development of the Navy,” he said on board Russia’s only aircraft carrier, Admiral Kuznetsov. He added that the first aircraft carrier should be built by 2013-2015.

I sure am glad the Russians only have ONE carrier, the ultimate OFFENSIVE weapon... But HEY? If the Kuznetosov is the ONLY carrier, then what the hell is this, recently photographed at a Russian port? NOTE TO SELF: I just MUST learn to be more trusting.


At least the Russians got rid of this giant, a real hemorrhoid off our... uh... anyway... so guess where they sold it? INDIA, which is rapidly building a military capable of challenging us, China, Russia or anyone else, and they are now building their own fleet of "nuclear super carriers."


Oh hell, leave them all in Norfolk, we are worried about a terrorist attack after all.  It would be much easier to defend these ships against a terror bombing if we had them all in one place.  We could take other precautions against enemy infiltration, such as storing all larger caliber ammunition, lock up all small arms and ammunition, shut down early warning radar stations and bring those crews in to guard aircraft, and last but not least park all aircraft engine cowling to engine cowling in tight clusters to make patrol easier. You just never know when some short, near sighted, buck toothed foreigner might drop in on us...

The radical war mongers among us keep saying someone will attack, so I translated the names of one fleet of aircraft carriers and could only deduce that they represented a tranquil and peace loving race of people, see for yourself: Akagi ("Red Castle," a mountain), Kaga ("Increased Joy,"a province), Sôryu ("Blue Dragon"), Hiryu ("Flying Dragon"), Shokaku ("Soaring Crane"), Zuikaku ("Auspicious Crane"), hardly sound like a threatening war machine do they?

"Climb Mount Nitaka"

Again?

OCKLAWAHA
"Navies That Forget the Lessons of History Are Doomed To Repeat Them...

[mtraininjax]

Ock - sarcasm aside, this is great news for an area that really could use the 500 million in spending to come with making Mayport Nuke ready and dredging to boot. Great news indeed.

[heights unknown]

Hello all:

Take it from a retired Navy guy:

1) Russia is not only serious about re-starting aircraft carrier construction, but also serious in rebuilding and increasing quantity and quality of all of its Armed Forces.

2) Ditto with China as well.  They especially want to increase the superiority of their Navy and make it a blue water Navy capable of challening us around the globe. They have watched us for many decades now stick our chest out and have our way around the globe with our Navy as the foremost, supreme instrument of diplomacy used to ensure we have our way.  China is looking to neutralize and even negate that supremacy and "check" us whenever we seek to use that power in the future.

3) India is also "making waves" especially with its Navy.  India has always, since shortly after WWII had some kind of aircraft carrier, so they've always dreamed of being a quasi military power or a superpower; they're close but no cigar yet.

4) You would think the European Union would band together all of its military resources, along with its vast potential financial and economic resources and become a military power to be reckoned with nudging America off of her pedestal being that all of those nations are becoming unified and are basically thinking and speaking as one.  But they're still kind of sagging in different areas and have not reached total agreement toward being one unified nation; when they do, they will become the world's next premier economic, financial and military superpower.

While we (America) have our thumbs up our bung hole, and are desperately trying to hang on to our superpower status and are only playing superpower, the aforementioned nations are very very close to becoming powers and superpowers, especially militarily, in their own right.  The time will come when we will no longer be number one.  We need to really focus on what's important and quit spending recklessly where we don't need to spend; our power is being sapped financially and it's getting to the point where we can't afford to field an adequate military (all branches), and our peers, friends, and enemies are surpassing us militarily.  The carriers are one of the most important "big sticks" that we have.  If we lose the capability and/or the will to send these "big sticks" around the world where and when they are needed, our power will substantially come to nought, and then we will be ripe for a great challenge militarily from our adversaries.

"HU"

[fsu813]

so this is pretty huge news actually. multi-billion dollar impact for the city. definitely MJ front page story material.

[Sportmotor]

I am excited for this.

[Coolyfett]

whats the name of the carrier coming to Jax?? will it be brand new?

[reednavy]

whats the name of the carrier coming to Jax?? will it be brand new?

We don't know and probabaly won't know for a few years.