Keep an eye or Two on USS George H.W. Bush, page 1

Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 1 times

Topic started on 2-3-2011 @ 05:16 PM by heineken

Will the US intervene in Libya ?

The USS George H.W. Bush Carrier might be an indication , if deployed earlier than scheduled,

"It also requires more airplanes than you would find on a single aircraft carrier. So it is a big operation in a big country," Gates said.

The U.S. military could speed up deployment of a second aircraft carrier if necessary to support a no-fly zone over Libya or other operations, according to Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Gary Roughead. The USS George H.W. Bush is scheduled to deploy from Norfolk, Virginia, in three weeks but could leave sooner, Roughead told reporters Wednesday.

"That ship is ready," he said.

Source : U.S. mulling military options in Libya

reply posted on 2-3-2011 @ 05:20 PM by schuyler

The Reagan is also ready to deploy. The Boxer is in Hawaii and will be headed over very quickly to replace the Kearsarge, which was just moved back up the Suez. The Enterprise is in the Red Sea and could go either way.

reply posted on 2-3-2011 @ 05:28 PM by Cobaltic1978

reply to post by heineken

Do the U.S always name their new carriers after former republican presidents?

When do you expect the George Dubya to be launched?

The entire world needs to keep their nose out of what is going on in Libya. The rebels do not want any assistance. To think the U.K Government were more than happy to work alongside Gadaffi only a couple of months ago and now the rhetoriic coming from the U.K Government just demonstrates how hypocritical the whole system is.

Then again, the Government we are left with because of the coalition demonstrates the hypocrisy of politics, and war is merely politics with guns.

edit on 18/02/2011 by Cobaltic1978 because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 2-3-2011 @ 05:48 PM by schuyler

Originally posted by Cobaltic1978
reply to post by heineken

Do the U.S always name their new carriers after former republican presidents?

Not entirely, though it is a trend. The next carrier will be the Gerald Ford. We now have eleven carriers. 4 out of 11 are not named after presidents. Of the remaining seven, five were named after Republicans. So your contention that US carriers are "always" named after republican Presidents is false. 5 out of 11 were Republican and 4 out of 11 were Democrats or other, two of whom were not even presidents. You're not even close. Bear in mind that Abraham Lincoln was the first Republican president, but he is rather more famous for preserving the Union, freeing the slaves, and getting himself shot rather than espousing contemporary Republican ideals. people rarely think of Lincoln as a Republican. He's kind of a general-purpose hero.

CVN-65 Enterprise (Continetal Navy armed sloop, 1775, served on Lk. Champlain)
CVN-68 Nimitz (WWII five star admiral)
CVN-70 Carl Vinson (D-GA) "father of the two ocean Navy" a Democrat
CVN-74 John Stennis (D-MI) long-serving Senator, a Democrat

In addition, Harry S. Truman (CVN-75) was a Democrat. and George Washington (CVN-73) was neither. Theodore Roosevelt was a Republican, but moved to the Progressive Party (Bull Moose), which championed what we would call Progressive (Liberal) ideas, and ran for Presdient under that party, and lost.

When do you expect the George Dubya to be launched?

There are no plans for a George Dubya at this time. The CVN-78 will be the Gerald Ford, which will be replacing the Enterprise. The CVN-79 is unnamed, but there is a petition out to name it Enterprise as well, which would make it the ninth US ship with that name. The CVN-79 will not be delivered until 2019.

The entire world needs to keep their nose out of what is going on in Libya. The rebels do not want any assistance. To think the U.K Government were more than happy to work alongside Gadaffi only a couple of months ago and now the rhetoriic coming from the U.K Government just demonstrates how hypocritical the whole system is.

Actually, both the rebels and the US Ambassador have asked for assistance. They would like a no-fly zone, but they do not want troops on the ground. However, Gates, SecDef, just told Congress that there cannot be a no-fly zone without taking out the air defense mechanisms, including mobile SAM sites.

edit on 3/2/2011 by schuyler because: spelling, as usual

reply posted on 2-3-2011 @ 06:38 PM by dizziedame

reply to post by schuyler

Thank you for sharing the good information.

It seems we are in the seas and it is only a matter of time that we could be in the air and on the land.

My thoughts are with those that can't get out of Libya. Even though hundreds of thousands are back or headed back to their country there are still great numbers of people that can't leave.

Speaking of US War Ships, I am interested in going back and revisiting the events of the beginning of WW2 with the bombing of Pearl Harbor.
I always feel ill when I think of all those men on our ships that met their grave where they slept.

reply posted on 2-3-2011 @ 06:52 PM by Tasty Canadian

Ya we're sending in a ship to assist in the effort. Hell, it's even on Wikipedia already!

en.wikipedia.org...

On Wednesday March 2, 2011, the Charlottetown has left its home port of Halifax to be a part of a humanitarian relief operations in conjunction with an American carrier battle group led by the nuclear-powered USS Enterprise. Their destination is to reach Libya to help restore peace, evacuate Canadian citizens in Libya and provide humanitarian relief.

www.torontosun.com...

The HMSC Charlottetown also left the Halifax Harbour Wednesday morning on a week-long voyage to the Mediterranean Sea to lend support to international efforts to maintain stability and security in region.

The naval frigate left Halifax carrying 240 officers and crew, as well as a Sea King helicopter and an air detachment.

Go Canada!

reply posted on 3-3-2011 @ 12:04 AM by heineken

reply to post by schuyler

there is no doubt you are ATS's Navy Expert..thanks for the info

is there any how we can track ships online?

edit on 3-3-2011 by heineken because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 3-3-2011 @ 12:59 PM by Cobaltic1978

reply to post by schuyler

My comments were made with my tongue firmly in my cheek. However, thanks for the naval lesson, I am now fully informed regarding the U.S Naby's carriers.

I have not read or heard about the rebels requesting a 'NFZ' but I have heard that the Arab League were considering imposing one. If this is the case then the U.N should Police this and not NATO. It's none of our business until it has been ratified through the U.N.

Then again we have a history of going in without a resolution from the U.N!!

reply posted on 3-3-2011 @ 01:08 PM by schuyler

Originally posted by heineken
reply to post by schuyler

is there any how we can track ships online?

Not in real time. There are several sources of information with varying levels of accuracy

1. The US Navy itself. They are usually pretty vague and will never tell you exact departure times, but they will tell you that a ship is "preparing for an upcoming deployment." Each ship has its own web site and sometimes you can get some information there. The Navy has been upfront about the Bush being ready to go, but maybe neglected to mention the Reagan is as well.

2. Navy Times, a private newspaper. They track the overall positioning of the fleet and are probably the most detailed, but I've found their positioning to be off once in awhile. They are a weekly and publish a weekly map showing approximate positions. Local newspapers in Navy towns (Norfolk, San Diego, Bremerton) often cover arrivals and departures. That is about the only place you can get info on the smaller ships such as destroyers, frigates, and the like.

3. Stratfor.com. They have a weekly US Navy update that attempts to track the carriers and amphibious groups. It's available online, but costs money to subscribe, like $349 per year without any deals. They are usually accurate.

4. Personal experience. If the USS Carl Vinson sails up Puget Sound, it's pretty hard to miss that it has deployed. I've caught stratfor a couple of times when they claim the Lincoln is in Bremerton when I can see it is in Everett, for example. In Bremerton, there are also windows of opportunity. The carriers cannot traverse Rich Passage without a high tide, which is why there is a base at Everett at all. Also, if you hang with Navy families you can sometimes get a glimmer. The sailors have email and even telephone, so if Jim says, "Yeah we're still hanging out in the Gulf and I'm bored" then that might be a tidbit. That kind of stuff is hit or miss, but if you live in a Navy community, people kind of know.

5. The Russians or Chinese. They know where all of them are at any given time, it's just that they won;'t tell us!

Incidentally, debkafile, which some people cite for intelligence information, is often far off base and deals in rumors. I wouldn''t trust what they say without corroberation from somewhere else. Last year they claimed a large international fleet of destroyers was in the Indian Ocean, a complete fantasy.

Pages: ^^TOP^^