CV-17 Bunker Hill retirement?

DDAY wrote:
My suspicion is that Bunker Hill was in poor condition and that's why she
was not modernized and was retired early.

Franklin was clearly in bad condition and bringing her back to flight status
was not considered practical. But Bunker Hill suffered from a bad fire, and
the info I have seen implies that she really did not regain flight
capability after the damage.

The Navy probably could have repaired her, but they had a lot of Essex class
carriers and they didn't need more. In fact, if anything, they probably
needed a few ships laid up to provide spare parts.

But I don't have anything that confirms that.




D


IIRC, it provided reduction gears for repair of Bon Homme Richard,
Kearsarge and Ticonderoga.

Rick

*** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ***

"DDAY" wrote in message
k.net...
My suspicion is that Bunker Hill was in poor condition and that's why she
was not modernized and was retired early.

Franklin was clearly in bad condition and bringing her back to flight
status
was not considered practical. But Bunker Hill suffered from a bad fire,
and
the info I have seen implies that she really did not regain flight
capability after the damage.

The Navy probably could have repaired her, but they had a lot of Essex
class
carriers and they didn't need more. In fact, if anything, they probably
needed a few ships laid up to provide spare parts.

But I don't have anything that confirms that.


There are articles that suggest the precise opposite

http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/...unkerhill.html

States that Bunker Hill was put back into service between Sept 1945 and
January 1946
as a unit of TG 16.2 returning veterans from the PTO

Other records indicate she was repaired at Puget sound between June and Sept
1945

http://warlords.hobbyvista.com/history.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 =----

DDAY wrote:
My suspicion is that Bunker Hill was in poor condition and that's why she
was not modernized and was retired early.

I do believe it's simply that she was never modernized, that's all.
She was repaired and remained in the active fleet for a short period
following the war (decommissioned and mothballed on 9 JAN 1947).

MW

Bunker Hill was put back into service between Sept 1945 and January 1946 as a unit of TG 16.2 returning veterans from the PTO

Point taken. However OPERATION MAGIC CARPET duty was a far cry from the demands of even normal peacetime operations. You don't need much material refurbishment to bring redundant forces home.

As others besides me have pointed out, there were many other ESSEX assets in much better material condition. So there was little economic or national security incentive for the Gummint to modernize BUNKER HILL or do more than make FRANKLIN temporarily seaworthy at war's end.

--
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

"Keith W" wrote in message ...

"DDAY" wrote in message
k.net...
My suspicion is that Bunker Hill was in poor condition and that's why she
was not modernized and was retired early.

Franklin was clearly in bad condition and bringing her back to flight
status
was not considered practical. But Bunker Hill suffered from a bad fire,
and
the info I have seen implies that she really did not regain flight
capability after the damage.

The Navy probably could have repaired her, but they had a lot of Essex
class
carriers and they didn't need more. In fact, if anything, they probably
needed a few ships laid up to provide spare parts.

But I don't have anything that confirms that.


There are articles that suggest the precise opposite

http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/...unkerhill.html

States that Bunker Hill was put back into service between Sept 1945 and
January 1946
as a unit of TG 16.2 returning veterans from the PTO

Other records indicate she was repaired at Puget sound between June and Sept
1945

http://warlords.hobbyvista.com/history.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 =----

Mike Kanze wrote:
Bunker Hill was put back into service between Sept 1945 and January 1946 as a unit of TG 16.2 returning veterans from the PTO

Point taken. However OPERATION MAGIC CARPET duty was a far cry from the demands of even normal peacetime operations. You don't need much material refurbishment to bring redundant forces home.

However repairs didn't stop when the war ended. According to the a/c
allocation list of 7 SEP 1945, CVG-13 was assigned to Bunker Hill, and
they were working up preparing for deployment. Had the war continued I
don't think there's any doubt she would have been part of TF38 / 58 for
the final push on Japan.

MW

----------
In article , "Keith W"
wrote:


Franklin was clearly in bad condition and bringing her back to flight
status
was not considered practical. But Bunker Hill suffered from a bad fire,


There are articles that suggest the precise opposite


http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/...v17-bunkerhill
/cv17-bun
kerhill.html

States that Bunker Hill was put back into service between Sept 1945 and
January 1946
as a unit of TG 16.2 returning veterans from the PTO

Other records indicate she was repaired at Puget sound between June and Sept
1945

http://warlords.hobbyvista.com/history.htm

But she never again flew aircraft. She only served as a transport. This
makes me wonder if the repairs were incomplete.




D

Mike Weeks,

Workups ashore by the Air Group are a bit different than readying the ship itself for deployment. The former can happen (and in this case, apparently did) without the latter necessarily happening. In addition, an Air Group could be easily shifted to another deck, if absolutely needed.

Sidebar Sea Story:

Any veteran of predeployment refurbishment dets can personally attest to the variations between ship readiness and squadron/air wing readiness. A big part of ship readiness can vaguely be defined as the "habitability" of the spaces assigned to the Air Wing. Depending upon (a) the ship's general material condition, (b) the conditions of the prior cruise (war, peace, greater than 10 months, etc.), (c) "town/gown" relations between ship's company and "passengers, and similar factors, you could find things pretty nice or a complete wreck.

VA-95 was lucky. Our "habitability" challenge aboard CORAL SEA, preparing for its 1973 cruise, consisted mainly of scraping off all of the "Semper Fi" tags and painting over all the red/gold areas left by our predecessor A-6 squadron, VMA(AW)-224. g

--
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

"Mike Weeks" wrote in message ups.com...

Mike Kanze wrote:
Bunker Hill was put back into service between Sept 1945 and January 1946 as a unit of TG 16.2 returning veterans from the PTO

Point taken. However OPERATION MAGIC CARPET duty was a far cry from the demands of even normal peacetime operations. You don't need much material refurbishment to bring redundant forces home.

However repairs didn't stop when the war ended. According to the a/c
allocation list of 7 SEP 1945, CVG-13 was assigned to Bunker Hill, and
they were working up preparing for deployment. Had the war continued I
don't think there's any doubt she would have been part of TF38 / 58 for
the final push on Japan.

MW

Mike Kanze wrote:
Mike Weeks,

Workups ashore by the Air Group are a bit different than readying the ship itself for deployment.

Yes it can be, But in this case BH had already been repaired; ie, by 7
SEP 1945, the date of the allocation list.

The former can happen (and in this case, apparently did) without the latter necessarily happening. In addition, an Air Group could be easily shifted to another deck, if absolutely needed.

One can go back in time to sci.military.naval, to the 1996-98 period to
see the various discussions which centered around Franklin and Bunker
Hill and "never repaired". g

As an aside, and FWIW as well as IIRC, I have somewhere buried in my
files of CVG histories/stories an item that states BH did conduct
flight ops following the war -- never deployed mind you, but she was
operational capabable. Again, FWIW ...

MW

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 =----