Bring Home The USS Adams To Downtown Jacksonville

Started by Metro Jacksonville, July 04, 2014, 03:00:01 AM

KenFSU

Quote from: vicupstate on December 06, 2017, 08:29:38 AM
You usually see these type of floating museums in cities/neighborhoods that already have a lot of tourism and it is clustered with other attractions. I would proceed very carefully and without rose colored glasses. I could see this being a big money pit if not done the right way and with realistic expectations. 

Seems rather ill-conceived to spend all that money bringing it to Jacksonville and dry-docking it, only to hang it out to dry in an isolated brownfield that will likely be under remediation for years to come.

Josh

So much for the Adams

https://twitter.com/Davidcawton/status/1076222517482831872
QuoteBreaking: per the Jacksonville Historic Naval Ship Association:

The US Navy will NOT donate the USS CHARLES F ADAMS (DDG-2) to the Jacksonville Historic Naval Ship Association as a museum in Jacksonville.

The ship will be scrapped.

thelakelander

#92
Interesting. I thought it was reported the ship was on its way to Jax and that all the necessary funding had been secured?! What happened for this to end so abruptly?
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life." - Muhammad Ali


civil42806


Kiva

Quote from: civil42806 on December 21, 2018, 06:22:49 PM
The city dodged a bullet with the adams
High maintenance expenses? Lack of interest? No way to pay for upkeep? Explain please.

thelakelander

Floating ship museums are well known money pits.
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life." - Muhammad Ali

KenFSU

Quote from: thelakelander on December 21, 2018, 08:43:29 PM
Floating ship museums are well known money pits.

Especially when surrounded by distressed condo shells, toxic brownfields, and a giant hole.

I think it had a much better shot at being viable 10 years down the road when there's more (hopefully) more complementary development in that area.

I do feel really badly for everyone who has worked so hard to make this a reality, however. Seemed like a great group of people behind it, and I don't even want to think of how many thousands of hours have been wasted by city and state officials and the DIA working on this, only to have the Navy change their mind.

thelakelander

Any idea on why the Navy would change their mind?
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life." - Muhammad Ali

Charles Hunter

Is there any official word?  Was it a DOD decision, and if so, why? 

heights unknown

#100
I don't think it was the Navy or even DOD. You must keep in mind that Museum groups that are seeking to acquire a retired/decommissioned Navy vessel have got to prove to the Navy that they are deadly serious about bringing these ships to the designated areas and making them not only a success, but a resounding success. For example, look at the USS MIDWAY Aircraft Carrier in downtown San Diego (for those who don't know, she is the Sister Ship of USS FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT which was homeported in Mayport for 21 years before her decommissioning in 1977). The Midway was in Mothballs for about 10 years, saved from the scrappers torch in and around 2002, and has been a Museum for about 16 or 17 years now, and is now one of the most successful Museums in the entire nation. The Navy will not hand over any of their retired/decommissioned ships to just anyone; if there is little to no interest, they will deny the group the ship and just scrap it. So, that being said, I believe that Jax somehow dropped the ball, and the Navy perceived little to no interest, or even sound fiscal and/or overall planning, relative to bringing the Adams to Jax. I could be wrong, but being a retired Navy Senior Enlisted, I will tell you, that is probably the jest of the case about the Adams. You have got to show fisted energy, sharp planning, sound and aggressive fiscal acquisition relative to monetary sustenance, and overall fortitude and aggressiveness to appease the Navy in handing the ship over to such a Museum Group. Just a thought here.
PLEASE FEEL FREE TO ACCESS MY ONLINE PERSONAL PAGE AT: https://www.instagram.com/garrybcoston/ or, access my Social Service national/world-wide page if you love supporting charities/social entities at: http://www.freshstartsocialservices.com and thank you!!!

heights unknown

One more thing. When these retired/decommissioned Navy ships are scrapped, they are sold by the Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service, to companies that will break them down and scrap them (usually steel/mineral/alloy companies); i.e., the Navy/DOD makes money from selling these retired and decommissioned ships to those companies. So, if the Navy gives a ship to a group or organization, usually for a Museum, then that group or organization had better have a well laid out and successful plan to ensure that the new mission for the retired ship is successful because they may view it as losing money by cancelling the scrapping if they turn the ship over to a Museum group and the new mission for the Ship as a Museum is not a success. Once the Navy turns the ship over to the Museum Group, it (the Navy) no longer has no interest(s) in that vessel. It is then owned solely by that group or organization and if the Museum is a failure, it is then the responsibility of the Museum Group to dispose of the Ship.
PLEASE FEEL FREE TO ACCESS MY ONLINE PERSONAL PAGE AT: https://www.instagram.com/garrybcoston/ or, access my Social Service national/world-wide page if you love supporting charities/social entities at: http://www.freshstartsocialservices.com and thank you!!!

KenFSU

Quote from: Charles Hunter on December 21, 2018, 09:35:42 PM
Is there any official word?  Was it a DOD decision, and if so, why? 

I've been asking around tonight, and even though a lot of people online are suggesting that the Navy got a better offer to scrap it, I'm getting the impression that Heights is probably pretty accurate here:

QuoteI believe that Jax somehow dropped the ball, and the Navy perceived little to no interest, or even sound fiscal and/or overall planning, relative to bringing the Adams to Jax. I could be wrong, but being a retired Navy Senior Enlisted, I will tell you, that is probably the jest of the case about the Adams.

The group might have had the funds to get the ship here, but the Navy might not have been sold on their long term plans to sustain it as a permanent attraction.

It's also worth pointing out that after being in talks with the group for years, the Navy killed the plan within a week of the city announcing that no convention center would be built on the adjacent Courthouse property. Correlation isn't causation, but the timing is interesting.

Snaketoz

This is for the best.  Jacksonville doesn't need another money pit.  Our history of maintaining anything is terrible.  If we can't keep up with a fountain or The Landing, how are we going to maintain a metal hulk resting in salt water?  What we need is a destination type attraction such as an amusement park, entertainment district, even a spruced-up beach.  Use the money collected for the Adams to make the downtown area a better place.
"No amount of evidence will ever persuade an idiot."