U.S.S. Ronald Reagan Sails for San Diego!

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2004-05-27 04:36pm

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/mili ... eagan.html

WASHINGTON – The nation's newest and most powerful aircraft carrier today sails from Norfolk, Va., on a journey that will take a crew of nearly 3,000 and a name with great California significance – Ronald Reagan – to its home port in San Diego.

To get to its new home, the nuclear-powered carrier will travel more than 12,000 nautical miles, going around Cape Horn at the southern tip of South America, a place noted for violent weather.

"We expect some high winds and heavy seas," said Capt. James Symonds, commanding officer of the 97,000-ton, 1,092-foot-long warship. "But I think we can handle it."

Along the way, the Reagan and its crew will transition from spring into fall, then into winter before emerging into summer for the ship's scheduled arrival at North Island Naval Air Station about July 23.

"We know we're in for a tremendous reception when we get there," Symonds said in a telephone interview.

A large part of the welcoming crowd the carrier's crew can expect will be family members who already have taken up residence in the San Diego area or will be moving there during the ship's two-month transit.

Relocating the crew and their families has been "a huge undertaking," Symonds said. "We figure we're moving about 1,000 families."

For some of the sailors and their families, the change from Norfolk to San Diego brings a bit of sticker shock when they look for housing.

"Housing in San Diego is one of the big challenges," with prices considerably higher than those in the Norfolk area and the waiting list for government housing up to a year, Symonds said.

Many of the Reagan crew members, however, benefited from a Navy policy that allowed them to put their names on the housing list when they first got orders to the ship, up to two years ago.

That means "some of the Reagan sailors are at the top of the list now," Master Chief Petty Officer Kathleen Hansen said.

Also, some of the crew members came to the Reagan from San Diego, leaving their families there, Hansen said.

Hansen made that move only two months ago, transferring from the job of command master chief on the amphibious ship Pearl Harbor, the latest of many San Diego assignments in her 24-year Navy career.

"I love San Diego," she said.

Hansen has been heavily involved in the home-port challenges since her arrival. One of her major tasks has been ensuring that crew members were getting the allowance for housing for San Diego, which can be twice as much as for Norfolk, she said.

While wrestling with the personnel issues associated with the relocation, Symonds also had to worry about getting his vessel out of the Newport News shipyard, where it spent five months correcting problems revealed during its initial sea trials and getting planned upgrades.

The process went two weeks longer than expected, Symonds added, but "we are in great shape. . . . We're ready to take on the staff and the air wing." That was a reference to the staffs of Cruiser Destroyer Group 1, commanded by Rear Adm. Robert Moeller, and Carrier Air Wing 11, led by Capt. James Greene.

The Reagan will sail with only a few of the normal 70-plus aircraft, but plans to conduct flight operations on a number of days en route to San Diego, Symonds said.

Several years ago, the Navy considered assigning the carrier to Bremerton, Wash., instead of San Diego. But the San Diego congressional delegation led a successful fight to keep the warship in the state where Reagan became famous as an actor and two-term Republican governor.

"That was right thing," Symonds said. "(The ship) could not go anywhere but San Diego."

Symonds, who has flown as both a bombardier and a pilot in attack aircraft in his 28-year career, said command of a carrier is a great honor that is made even more special because this ship "carries the great name of Ronald Reagan."

"He was absolutely the best president. He changed my life," the captain said. "All of a sudden, it was a great thing to be in the military again. We got great pay raises . . . we were honored again.

"I think that extends throughout the ship. Our morale is a bit higher than other ships, all because of the Ronald Reagan name."

Hansen said she believes "a lot of people specifically come here just because of the name. For the younger people, it's not a president like Washington. This is one from their lifetime."

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2004-05-27 04:41pm

San Diego is a great place and a hell of a duty station. Alot of those sailors can find lodings easily if they push out of the downtown area more. Especially east county.

That said, nice to have a new toy in the arsenal.

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2004-05-27 04:45pm

I take it that the Reagan could not transit through the canal for security reasons?

Also I was a little troubled that a congressional bruhaha could get a carrier reassigned from where it was based originally because it was the "right" thing to do. What if Reagan were governor of Idaho? Then it wouldn't really matter much what port it was assigned to.

I'm just not a big fan of political bullshit games played in military affairs.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2004-05-27 04:48pm

Stravo wrote:I take it that the Reagan could not transit through the canal for security reasons?

She's too big. Even an Essex only has a few inches clearance, and they're nowhere near the size of a Nimitz.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2004-05-27 04:49pm

Stravo wrote:I take it that the Reagan could not transit through the canal for security reasons?

Also I was a little troubled that a congressional bruhaha could get a carrier reassigned from where it was based originally because it was the "right" thing to do. What if Reagan were governor of Idaho? Then it wouldn't really matter much what port it was assigned to.

I'm just not a big fan of political bullshit games played in military affairs.

Ever tried to get a CVN through the Panama Canal? Ain't a pretty sight.

Post by **LadyTevar** » 2004-05-27 04:51pm

Admiral Valdemar wrote:
Stravo wrote:I take it that the Reagan could not transit through the canal for security reasons?

Also I was a little troubled that a congressional bruhaha could get a carrier reassigned from where it was based originally because it was the "right" thing to do. What if Reagan were governor of Idaho? Then it wouldn't really matter much what port it was assigned to.

I'm just not a big fan of political bullshit games played in military affairs.
Ever tried to get a CVN through the Panama Canal? Ain't a pretty sight.

I kinda figured that would be the problem. After all, the Canal wasn't build for such huge warcraft.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2004-05-27 04:57pm

Stravo wrote: I'm just not a big fan of political bullshit games played in military affairs.

Bah, take a look at the USS Kearsarge BB-5 and USS Alabama BB-8

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2004-05-27 05:16pm

The Panama Canal locks are only 110 feet wide. The Essex class was only 93 feet at the waterline, but the flight deck overhang did indeed leave them with about a foot of clearance to spare. No USN carrier since then has been able to fit through the locks. A Midway was 121 feet at the waterline and it just gets worse from there, a Nimitz is 134 feet at the waterline as originally designed and its a bit more now since the more recent examples are heavier and sit lower in the water as a result.

The 1940 Two Ocean Navy bill did lay the groundwork for a third set of much larger locks at Panama, which would have been exclusively for US naval vessels. However when we got involved in WW2 the steel shortage made building the locks impossible and by the end of the war US strength was so great that there was little need to rapidly transfer major warships from ocean to ocean. The Panamanian goverment is now considering building a third set of locks as well while widening the whole canal, something the US also planned to do. The biggest vessel the locks can hold is about 80,000 tons, but merchant ships well over this are now common and they want that traffic back.

However this is unlikely to occur because of the massive cost involved. The canal system also doesn't have enough water to sustain the regular use of larger locks so they'd need an expensive additional system of piping and storage pools that partly recycles the water used as well. The biggest single issue though probably is that if the artic ice keeps melting for much longer, and it shows no signs of stopping, then it will be practical for normal merchant ships to use the Northwest passage from the Atlantic to Pacific via way of the Artic seas around Canada. That will allow for even quicker transportation from the likes of Japan to the America east coast and Europe then the Panama canal does. And its those long shipping lanes that the huge freighters follow. The Trans-Siberian railroad is also providing an ever-increasing capacity to rapidly ship goods to Europe overland

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2004-05-27 05:24pm

Stravo wrote: Also I was a little troubled that a congressional bruhaha could get a carrier reassigned from where it was based originally because it was the "right" thing to do. What if Reagan were governor of Idaho? Then it wouldn't really matter much what port it was assigned to.

Acutally there are far better reasons then the ships name to fight to keep it in San Diego, mainly the fact that it will bring billions of dollars into the local area and naval base during its lifetime. The name is just a cover for that sort of reasoning, which tends to annoy the military.

Lonestar · Post by **Lonestar** » 2004-05-27 06:17pm

Stravo wrote:I take it that the Reagan could not transit through the canal for security reasons?

Also I was a little troubled that a congressional bruhaha could get a carrier reassigned from where it was based originally because it was the "right" thing to do. What if Reagan were governor of Idaho? Then it wouldn't really matter much what port it was assigned to.

I'm just not a big fan of political bullshit games played in military affairs.

Coronado has berthing for 4 aircraft carriers. The most I've ever seen it filled is when the Constellation, Stennis, USNS Mercy were there. As it stands, It's highly unlikely we'll ever have 3 carriers in San Diego at once again. Coronado is a good place for the Reagan now that the Connie is decommed.

Now we need to start petitioning for the San Diego to be homeported here!

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2004-05-27 06:21pm

Just to illustrate the size of the massive locks in comparison to this lovely Iowa class BB.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2004-05-28 09:08pm

Admiral Valdemar wrote:[img]

snip

Just to illustrate the size of the massive locks in comparison to this lovely Iowa class BB.

Similar thing with HMS Hood when she went through on her world junket tour.

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2004-05-28 11:39pm

Stravo wrote:Also I was a little troubled that a congressional bruhaha could get a carrier reassigned from where it was based originally because it was the "right" thing to do. What if Reagan were governor of Idaho? Then it wouldn't really matter much what port it was assigned to.

A story I heard years ago went along the lines that, when pork is involved, it would be quite possible to get a home port for navy ships in Arizona.

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2004-06-01 09:29am

Patrick Degan wrote: A story I heard years ago went along the lines that, when pork is involved, it would be quite possible to get a home port for navy ships in Arizona.

Phoenix, after all, will be the home of the inevitable CVN-xx USS McCain.

Tsyroc · Post by **Tsyroc** » 2004-06-01 11:16am

Col. Crackpot wrote: Phoenix, after all, will be the home of the inevitable CVN-xx USS McCain.

Nah, John McCain has pissed off too many Republicans by not being enough of a right wing nutjob so if he's real lucky he might get a Destroyer named after him or his father.

Otherwise it's going to be some sort of tender.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2004-06-01 01:43pm

Tsyroc wrote:
Col. Crackpot wrote: Phoenix, after all, will be the home of the inevitable CVN-xx USS McCain.
Nah, John McCain has pissed off too many Republicans by not being enough of a right wing nutjob so if he's real lucky he might get a Destroyer named after him or his father. Otherwise it's going to be some sort of tender.

Actually, I believe there's already a destroy John S McCain or at least was.

EDIT: DDG 56 John S McCain.

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2004-06-01 02:02pm

Stormbringer wrote:
Tsyroc wrote:
Col. Crackpot wrote: Phoenix, after all, will be the home of the inevitable CVN-xx USS McCain.
Nah, John McCain has pissed off too many Republicans by not being enough of a right wing nutjob so if he's real lucky he might get a Destroyer named after him or his father. Otherwise it's going to be some sort of tender.
Actually, I believe there's already a destroy John S McCain or at least was.

EDIT: DDG 56 John S McCain.

named for his father the Admiral i presume?

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2004-06-01 02:04pm

Col. Crackpot wrote:
Stormbringer wrote: Actually, I believe there's already a destroy John S McCain or at least was.

EDIT: DDG 56 John S McCain.
named for his father the Admiral i presume?

Presumably.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2004-06-01 02:23pm

Col. Crackpot wrote:Phoenix, after all, will be the home of the inevitable CVN-xx USS McCain.

Such a ship would be considered cursed given events on the Forrestal. Most likely the USN will quietly name a ship for him that won't ever do anything just to avoid such a scenario. That worked pretty well with Jimmy Carter.

TrailerParkJawa · Post by **TrailerParkJawa** » 2004-06-02 10:17pm

Knife wrote: San Diego is a great place and a hell of a duty station. Alot of those sailors can find lodings easily if they push out of the downtown area more. Especially east county.

That said, nice to have a new toy in the arsenal.

San Diego has gotten very expensive in the last 5 years, as has most of California. It's a tough place to live for an enlisted man without a good COLA.

Lonestar · Post by **Lonestar** » 2004-06-02 10:56pm

TrailerParkJawa wrote:
San Diego has gotten very expensive in the last 5 years, as has most of California. It's a tough place to live for an enlisted man without a good COLA.

TPJ....

It's called "Basic Allowance for Housing", or BAH. For shore types there's Basic Allowance for Substienc" (or something like that) BAS. If you're on a ship in the uSN the Navy kindly takes away your BAS because, in theory, you're eating 3 meals a day on ship.

Tsyroc · Post by **Tsyroc** » 2004-06-04 07:29pm

Lonestar wrote: It's called "Basic Allowance for Housing", or BAH. For shore types there's Basic Allowance for Substienc" (or something like that) BAS. If you're on a ship in the uSN the Navy kindly takes away your BAS because, in theory, you're eating 3 meals a day on ship.

Don't you love the "fairness" of that system?

It's always nice to have been in service longer, outrank and have better reviews than someone who is making more money than you are because the government is giving him money to live off the boat because he got married.

There were a couple of guys on my last ship who got married to chicks that they were just friends with and then split the money (or less). One girl did it just for enough money to meet her monthly car payments.

Those guys could have really been fucked if they'd been caught or someone rated them out and they weren't exactly the greatest at keeping it secret.

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2004-06-04 09:49pm

TrailerParkJawa wrote:
Knife wrote: San Diego is a great place and a hell of a duty station. Alot of those sailors can find lodings easily if they push out of the downtown area more. Especially east county.

That said, nice to have a new toy in the arsenal.
San Diego has gotten very expensive in the last 5 years, as has most of California. It's a tough place to live for an enlisted man without a good COLA.

California has alway been really expensive, but I bet its worse today. Hell, even when I was in, there was a large percentage of military folk on wellfare.

Andras · Post by **Andras** » 2004-06-08 11:00am

Iowa class beam is 108', leaving a 1' gap on each side during transit