CV-17 Bunker Hill retirement?

I was looking through Stefan Terzibaschitsch's book Aircraft Carriers of the
US Navy and I see that CV-17 Bunker Hill was withdrawn from service in 1947
and essentially stayed in mothballs until 1966. She was used as an immobile
electronics research ship during that time.

Does anybody know why she was withdrawn from service in 1947?



D

"DDAY" wrote in
nk.net:

I was looking through Stefan Terzibaschitsch's book Aircraft Carriers of
the US Navy and I see that CV-17 Bunker Hill was withdrawn from service
in 1947 and essentially stayed in mothballs until 1966. She was used as
an immobile electronics research ship during that time.

Does anybody know why she was withdrawn from service in 1947?

See http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/...istories/cv17-
bunkerhill/cv17-bunkerhill.html for further info.

Google is your friend!

Dave in San Diego

"Dave in San Diego" wrote in message
. 30...
"DDAY" wrote in
nk.net:

I was looking through Stefan Terzibaschitsch's book Aircraft Carriers of
the US Navy and I see that CV-17 Bunker Hill was withdrawn from service
in 1947 and essentially stayed in mothballs until 1966. She was used as
an immobile electronics research ship during that time.

Does anybody know why she was withdrawn from service in 1947?

See http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/...istories/cv17-
bunkerhill/cv17-bunkerhill.html for further info.

Google is your friend!

Dave in San Diego


Well OK but it really doesnt answer the question as to why she was
withdrawn and not modernized like most of the other Essex class carriers.

An article on the global security website claims that along with the
Franklin
she was excluded from other modernization programs to be available for the
"ultimate"
conversion to operate with the supercarrier United States.

Following the cancellation of the United States, they were eventually broken
up unmodified.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita.../ship/cv-9.htm

Keith



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Keith W" wrote in
:


"Dave in San Diego" wrote in message
. 30...
"DDAY" wrote in
nk.net:

I was looking through Stefan Terzibaschitsch's book Aircraft Carriers
of the US Navy and I see that CV-17 Bunker Hill was withdrawn from
service in 1947 and essentially stayed in mothballs until 1966. She
was used as an immobile electronics research ship during that time.

Does anybody know why she was withdrawn from service in 1947?

See http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/...istories/cv17-
bunkerhill/cv17-bunkerhill.html for further info.

Google is your friend!

Dave in San Diego


Well OK but it really doesnt answer the question as to why she was
withdrawn and not modernized like most of the other Essex class
carriers.

An article on the global security website claims that along with the
Franklin
she was excluded from other modernization programs to be available for
the "ultimate"
conversion to operate with the supercarrier United States.

Following the cancellation of the United States, they were eventually
broken up unmodified.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita.../ship/cv-9.htm

Well, I read the article, and came to this conclusion - money, and needs of
the Navy, which, in many cases, are the driving forces for change or the
the lack thereof.

Dave in San Diego wrote:
"Keith W" wrote in
:

"Dave in San Diego" wrote in message
. 30...
"DDAY" wrote in
nk.net:

I was looking through Stefan Terzibaschitsch's book Aircraft Carriers
of the US Navy and I see that CV-17 Bunker Hill was withdrawn from
service in 1947 and essentially stayed in mothballs until 1966. She
was used as an immobile electronics research ship during that time.

Does anybody know why she was withdrawn from service in 1947?
See http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/...istories/cv17-
bunkerhill/cv17-bunkerhill.html for further info.

Google is your friend!

Dave in San Diego

Well OK but it really doesnt answer the question as to why she was
withdrawn and not modernized like most of the other Essex class
carriers.

An article on the global security website claims that along with the
Franklin
she was excluded from other modernization programs to be available for
the "ultimate"
conversion to operate with the supercarrier United States.

Following the cancellation of the United States, they were eventually
broken up unmodified.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita.../ship/cv-9.htm

Well, I read the article, and came to this conclusion - money, and needs of
the Navy, which, in many cases, are the driving forces for change or the
the lack thereof.

I arrived at that hypothesis without reading the article

An additional factor - especially in FRANKLIN's case - may have been the extensive battle damage received by both ships at the very end of WWII.

While both ships went into the yards just as the war was ending, it is very likely that they were only patched together enough to be worth keeping in reserve as secondary mobilization assets, with little intention of ever really having to send them out again. With so many other ESSEX class ships in much better material condition at the end of WWII - and with war $$ drying up faster than a puddle in the desert - this hypothesis makes as much sense to me as any other.

Just a guess, though.

--
Mike Kanze

"I hate newspapermen. They come into camp and pick up their camp rumors and print them as facts. I regard them as spies, which, in truth, they are. If I killed them all there would be news from Hell before breakfast."

-- General William Tecumseh Sherman

"Jim Carriere" wrote in message . ..
Dave in San Diego wrote:
"Keith W" wrote in
:

"Dave in San Diego" wrote in message
. 30...
"DDAY" wrote in
nk.net:

I was looking through Stefan Terzibaschitsch's book Aircraft Carriers
of the US Navy and I see that CV-17 Bunker Hill was withdrawn from
service in 1947 and essentially stayed in mothballs until 1966. She
was used as an immobile electronics research ship during that time.

Does anybody know why she was withdrawn from service in 1947?
See http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/...istories/cv17-
bunkerhill/cv17-bunkerhill.html for further info.

Google is your friend!

Dave in San Diego

Well OK but it really doesnt answer the question as to why she was
withdrawn and not modernized like most of the other Essex class
carriers.

An article on the global security website claims that along with the
Franklin
she was excluded from other modernization programs to be available for
the "ultimate"
conversion to operate with the supercarrier United States.

Following the cancellation of the United States, they were eventually
broken up unmodified.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita.../ship/cv-9.htm

Well, I read the article, and came to this conclusion - money, and needs of
the Navy, which, in many cases, are the driving forces for change or the
the lack thereof.

I arrived at that hypothesis without reading the article

On Wed, 17 May 2006 17:16:41 GMT, Dave in San Diego
wrote:


Well, I read the article, and came to this conclusion - money, and needs of
the Navy, which, in many cases, are the driving forces for change or the
the lack thereof.

Intersting article, but incomplete. INTREPID (CV/CVS-11) is not
mentioned at all (except as a museum). I know she had a variety of
the -27C conversion ('cause I flew off her with VS-27 from '70-'72).

IIRC, budgets drive fleet size. (In theory needs should drive
budgets, but that's not always how it works.) If a fleet downsizing
is required, cadidates are identified and surveys are done to
determine which vessels are in the best material condition. List is
made in order of condition. Cutting begins at the bottom.

Again, pure rationality might not drive a program but it's more likely
than not.

Bill Kambic
Haras Lucero, Kingston, TN
Mangalarga Marchador: Uma Raça, Uma Paixão

If CV-17 was not a slant deck carrier it would be considered obsolete.

"famous apollo" wrote in message
oups.com...
If CV-17 was not a slant deck carrier it would be considered obsolete.


None of the Essex class carriers had an angled flight deck as built.
They were all added when reconstructed.

Keith



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

On Sat, 27 May 2006 13:56:15 GMT, "famous apollo"
wrote:

If CV-17 was not a slant deck carrier it would be considered obsolete.

Every ESSEX class carrier was obsolete once the concept of angled
decks was devised. All of them, like every other carrier up to
FORRESTAL (commissioned 1955) was built with a straight deck.


--
Andrew Toppan --- --- "I speak only for myself"
"Haze Gray & Underway" - Naval History, DANFS, World Navies Today,
Photo Features, Military FAQs, and more - http://www.hazegray.org/