World Trade Center Steel To Be Used in USS New York
Otis Willie
(EXCERPT) Story Number: NNS030113-02 Release Date: 1/13/2003 8:34:00
AM
From Naval Sea Systems Command Public Affairs
WASHINGTON (NNS) -- When USS New York (LPD 21) joins the fleet in
2007, it will sail with a permanent memorial to those who lost their
lives in New York on Sept. 11, 2001.
Steel salvaged from the World Trade Center (WTC) wreckage will be used
to build New York. The steel was recently shipped to Northrop Grumman
Ship Systems in Pascagoula, Miss., and will ultimately be transported
to its Avondale Operations shipyard in New Orleans, where the ship
will be built.
After shipyard personnel inspects the steel, it will be melted down
and used to make the bow stem of New York.
"We're very proud that the twisted steel from the WTC towers will soon
be used to forge an even stronger national defense," said New York
Gov. George Pataki. "The USS New York will soon be defending freedom
and combating terrorism around the globe, while also ensuring that the
world never forgets the evil attacks of Sept. 11 and the courage and
strength New Yorkers showed in response to terror."
New York is the fifth of the San Antonio-class amphibious assault
ships. The San Antonio-class ships embark, transport and land elements
of an assault landing force by helicopters, vertical take-off and
landing aircraft, air cushion landing craft and amphibious vehicles.
The San Antonio-class’ future compatibility with the Marine Corps’
“mobility triad” of advanced amphibious assault vehicles, landing
craft air cushion and the MV-22 Osprey will make it a vital...
U.S. and friendly nation laws prohibit fully reproducing
copyrighted material. In abidance with our laws this report
cannot be provided in its entirety. However, you can read it
in full today, 13 Jan 2003, at the following URL. (COMBINE
the following lines into your web browser.) The
subject/content of this report is not necessarily the
viewpoint of the distributing Library. This report is provided
for your information and discussion.
http://www.news.navy.mil/search/display.asp?story_id=5340
---------------------------
Otis Willie
Associate Librarian
The American War Library
http://www.americanwarlibrary.com
James Anatidae
Otis Willie <military...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:8eg62vca2akskv4f9...@4ax.com...
Sarge
and the one thing that the reports emphasized what that if the steel met
some standard that it would be used. Why wouldn't the steel meet a standard
once it was melted down and refined again? Doesn't melting it down and
refining it bring it back to it's optimum state?
And another question that is slightly off topic from this one. On the same
new report that I was watching they said they would be naming a CVN after
George Bush. I may be out of touch on this and don't know how things work
anymore, but I remember that it was bad to name a ship like that after
someone that was still alive. Am I wrong on that? Have they done that in
the past or is it just recent?
"James Anatidae" <pars...@citcom.net> wrote in message
news:b00ple$egct$7...@news3.infoave.net...
-----------== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----= Over 100,000 Newsgroups - Unlimited Fast Downloads - 19 Servers =-----
Andrew Toppan
>some standard that it would be used. Why wouldn't the steel meet a standard
>once it was melted down and refined again? Doesn't melting it down and
>refining it bring it back to it's optimum state?
Melting it down doesn't change the basic chemical composition of the material.
>And another question that is slightly off topic from this one. On the same
>new report that I was watching they said they would be naming a CVN after
>George Bush. I may be out of touch on this and don't know how things work
GEORGE H.W. BUSH (CVN 77). (not the current President!)
Naming ships for living people, while non-traditional, is fairly common now.
--
Andrew Toppan --- acto...@gwi.net --- "I speak only for myself"
"Haze Gray & Underway" - Naval History, DANFS, World Navies Today,
Photo Features, Military FAQs, and more - http://www.hazegray.org/
AA Hartberger, USN
WTC in something more substantial than an LPD... I mean, it took me a week
and a half to figure out what kind of ship the USS NEW YORK would be, and
it's an LPD? Maybe they could stick in the new carrier, that would be
patriotic. Of course, then people would be whining about putting it on a
carrier named for a Bush, etc....
Oh well. You just can't please everyone.
--
ATAN Hartberger, United States Navy
"I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend, to the death, your
right to say it." -Voltaire
"Sarge" <class...@unknown.com> wrote in message
news:3e244ab9$1...@news.newsgroups.com...
Andy Dingley
wrote:
>Melting it down doesn't change the basic chemical composition of the material.
Of course it does ! You heat the stuff in an atmosphere that's
probably oxidising, or strongly reducing if we're back at the blast
furnace stage. There may be some interaction with the crucible lining,
or the electrodes in an arc furnace. Most of all though, it's almost
unheard of to melt a quantity of steel from a single homogeneous
source.
Also, steel being steel, the simple chemical proportions of the
elements are only a fraction of the story. Its crystalline behaviour
is vital, and controlling this is the main purpose of heat treatment.
Keith Willshaw
"Andrew Toppan" <acto...@gwi.net> wrote in message
news:a5392vgm320hddd6v...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 14 Jan 2003 09:35:14 -0800, "Sarge" <class...@unknown.com>
wrote:
>
> >some standard that it would be used. Why wouldn't the steel meet a
standard
> >once it was melted down and refined again? Doesn't melting it down and
> >refining it bring it back to it's optimum state?
>
> Melting it down doesn't change the basic chemical composition of the
material.
>
But adding alloying materials to the molten steel
most certainly will. Its not exactly uncommon for the
compositions of scrap steel to be altered in this way.
Keith
edward ohare
<din...@codesmiths.com> wrote:
>Of course it does ! You heat the stuff in an atmosphere that's
>probably oxidising, or strongly reducing if we're back at the blast
>furnace stage. There may be some interaction with the crucible lining,
>or the electrodes in an arc furnace. Most of all though, it's almost
>unheard of to melt a quantity of steel from a single homogeneous
>source.
Absolutely. This is a stupid idea, obviously being promoted for PR
purposes, and proceeding in this way probably costs more than other
methods.
>Also, steel being steel, the simple chemical proportions of the
>elements are only a fraction of the story. Its crystalline behaviour
>is vital, and controlling this is the main purpose of heat treatment.
Can you imagine the crystaline condition within 5 feet of any breaking
point?
--
"This day in US military history" is a regular feature
of us.military.history. Please visit soon!
WB3FUP (Mike Hall)
"AA Hartberger, USN" <aahart...@DIESPAMDIEmail.com> wrote in message
news:vV4V9.10933$Qr4.1...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> Now, if they were really patriotic, they would put the mangled steel of
the
> WTC in something more substantial than an LPD... I mean, it took me a week
> and a half to figure out what kind of ship the USS NEW YORK would be, and
> it's an LPD? Maybe they could stick in the new carrier, that would be
> patriotic. Of course, then people would be whining about putting it on a
> carrier named for a Bush, etc....
>
> Oh well. You just can't please everyone.
>
> --
>
>
Read James H. Cobb's most recent. An LPD, carrying flag btw, paired w/ a
light cruiser or DD are the perfect "Special Operations" platform to battle
the Indonesian pirates. The boat deck, and the helipad, make for an
effective way to transport us jarheads (I can say that) around. The thing
that was unique w/ the New York is the departure from normal naming
structure. LPD's are normally named after something else, and change was
made to accomodate WTC steel. In the naming structure I am familiar with
BB's were named after states, think a class of sub is now.
tnx es cul
73
wb3fup
a Salty Bear
Joel Ehrlich
>
>
>
>Read James H. Cobb's most recent. An LPD, carrying flag btw, paired w/ a
>light cruiser or DD are the perfect "Special Operations" platform to battle
>the Indonesian pirates. The boat deck, and the helipad, make for an
>effective way to transport us jarheads (I can say that) around. The thing
>that was unique w/ the New York is the departure from normal naming
>structure. LPD's are normally named after something else, and change was
>made to accomodate WTC steel. In the naming structure I am familiar with
>BB's were named after states, think a class of sub is now.
>
It is my understanding that USS New York is named for the city of New York,
not the state of New York. In the old days that would have made her a light
cruiser. Today a ship bearing the name of a city not a state capitol might be
almost anything.
Joel
Andy Dingley
(edward ohare) wrote:
>This is a stupid idea, obviously being promoted for PR
>purposes, and proceeding in this way probably costs more than other
>methods.
I think it's a great idea, obviously being promoted for PR
purposes, and proceeding in this way probably costs more than other
methods.
Structurally, it's pointless. But as a piece of flag-waving PR, it's a
work of genius. And the US population has always been a sucker for
this sort of showmanship.
If a US president ever managed to get WTC steel made into the
figurehead of the USS Righteous Smiting Of Iraq, or the USS Freshly
Dead Ex-President, then you wouldn;t even need to hold the next
election, it would be a landslide.
Andrew Toppan
>It is my understanding that USS New York is named for the city of New York,
>not the state of New York.
The city, and the state, and the event.
AA Hartberger, USN
after states. And I'm a squid, not a swabbie!
And I don't recall us ever fighting Indonesian pirates, unless that was in
the book... I lived in Singapore for 8 years, I would have noticed...
--
Piergiorgio
> Steel salvaged from the World Trade Center (WTC) wreckage will be used
> to build New York. The steel was recently shipped to Northrop Grumman
> Ship Systems in Pascagoula, Miss., and will ultimately be transported
> to its Avondale Operations shipyard in New Orleans, where the ship
> will be built.
i don't means to offense the patriotic sentiment of Americans, but I think
this ship will be know for ghost stories aboard....
Hope I rendered well my sentiments. my English aren't very good in writing.
Again, I don't mean to offense anyone.
Best regards,
Piergiorgio from Italy.
Derek Lyons
>
>On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 04:21:46 +0000, Andy Dingley
><din...@codesmiths.com> wrote:
>>Also, steel being steel, the simple chemical proportions of the
>>elements are only a fraction of the story. Its crystalline behaviour
>>is vital, and controlling this is the main purpose of heat treatment.
>
>Can you imagine the crystaline condition within 5 feet of any breaking
>point?
Any such conditions will *vanish* when the steel is melted, and hence
converted from a crystalline to amorphous state. (Chemical conditions
within the steel, which affect crystallization, may or may not
change.)
D.
Mike Miller
However, melting is a choice time to alter the chemical composition.
US DoD milspecs incorporate provisions for using scrap as raw material
(sometimes: "don't" and sometimes: "if the final product meets these
chemical and mechanical properties, scrap is just peachy."
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
edward ohare
<din...@codesmiths.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 12:26:15 GMT, edward...@NOSPAMyahoo.com.INVALID
>(edward ohare) wrote:
>
>>This is a stupid idea, obviously being promoted for PR
>>purposes, and proceeding in this way probably costs more than other
>>methods.
>
>I think it's a great idea, obviously being promoted for PR
>purposes, and proceeding in this way probably costs more than other
>methods.
>
>Structurally, it's pointless. But as a piece of flag-waving PR, it's a
>work of genius. And the US population has always been a sucker for
>this sort of showmanship.
I can't express the degree of my embarassment.
All they need now is for Toby Keith to write a song about it.
Tom Schoene
"AA Hartberger, USN" <aahart...@DIESPAMDIEmail.com> wrote in message
> Ohio class Ballistic missile submarines (SSBN) (soon to be SSGN) are named
> after states. And I'm a squid, not a swabbie!
So are the new Virginia-class attack subs (SSN-774 and following) as well as
one of the Seawolfs (Connecticut, SSN-22)
> And I don't recall us ever fighting Indonesian pirates, unless that was in
> the book... I lived in Singapore for 8 years, I would have noticed...
Well, if you go back to the 1700s and 1800s, there were several punitive
operations against pirates out that way. Since then, not so much. Though
in the last couple of years we have escorted ships carrying military cargo
through various Indonesian straits.
But I'd guess he's talking about the James Cobb books. They're really
implausible, IMO. I pretty much gave up half way through the first one,
which has one supership refighting the Falklands War single-handed. (I
think my disbelief suspenders snapped when the CO decided to employ her
super-secret ASAT missile on a photo-reconnaissance satellite without any
sort of outside approval. (Even having such a weapon was something of a
suspenders snapper, frankly. Why would you put such a thing on a ship in
the first place?)
--
Tom Schoene (replace "invalid" with "net" to email)
"It is not knowledge, but the act of learning, not possession but
the act of getting there, which grants the greatest enjoyment."
Karl Friedrich Gauss
WB3FUP (Mike Hall)
"Tom Schoene" <tasc...@starpower.invalid> wrote in message
news:b06d23$n7$1...@bob.news.rcn.net...
about this being a "Near Future" setting. "Sea Strike", the book I referred
to is set in 2006. Does not have to be today's technology. The Aegeis
sysytem would have snapped your suspenders in 1962, especially if you were
an honary FT on USS Cambria (APA 36), but it happened within a few years of
that time. Do not buy Cobb's books if you do not care for them, NBFD. Just
let us poor jarheads, who are hard pressed to read anything, suspend our
reality at the door and enjoy a< IMNSHO> a good read.
73 es cul
wb3fup (Mike Hall)
a Salty Bear
Tom Schoene
"WB3FUP (Mike Hall)" <wb3...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:b0f99q$o6sse$1...@ID-134747.news.dfncis.de...
>
> No one said that Cobb was tallking about the here and now. He is upfront
> about this being a "Near Future" setting. "Sea Strike", the book I
referred
> to is set in 2006. Does not have to be today's technology. The Aegeis
> sysytem would have snapped your suspenders in 1962, especially if you were
> an honary FT on USS Cambria (APA 36), but it happened within a few years
of
> that time. Do not buy Cobb's books if you do not care for them, NBFD.
Just
> let us poor jarheads, who are hard pressed to read anything, suspend our
> reality at the door and enjoy a< IMNSHO> a good read.
To each their own. I'm glad you found something you enjoyed. But there's
no need to get snippy at me for expressing a contrary opinion about the
author.
I could have taken one or two implausible things, but _Choosers of the
Slain_ was, in my reasonably educated opinion, one implausibility after
another. Just advancing it to 2006 (or whatever) didn't work for me because
I've got a pretty good idea of what we will had in five years time (and also
what we could have had if we'd wanted it) and this wasn't it. Not to
mention the contrivances needed to set up the scenario in the first place.
Bottom line: If you're looking for realistic future naval combat, this
isn't it. OTOH, if you don't worry too much about realism in your fiction,
Cobb may be just the thing for you.
--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
WB3FUP (Mike Hall)
--
73 es cul
wb3fup
a Salty Bear
"Tom Schoene" <tasc...@earthlink.invalid> wrote
in message
news:1AIW9.2001$bL4.1...@newsread2.prod.itd.eart
hlink.net...
>
> "WB3FUP (Mike Hall)" <wb3...@msn.com> wrote in
message
> news:b0f99q$o6sse$1...@ID-134747.news.dfncis.de...
> >
>
I am sorry, the voice of the previous message was
awfully snippy, and it should not have been.
Please forgive me.
73 es cul
wb3fup
a salty bear
klmok
(edward ohare) wrote:
>>Structurally, it's pointless. But as a piece of flag-waving PR, it's a
>>work of genius. And the US population has always been a sucker for
>>this sort of showmanship.
>
>
>I can't express the degree of my embarassment.
>
>All they need now is for Toby Keith to write a song about it.
>
This is one of the silliest PR stunts ever. What is so different
about this to the smearing of spilled blood on a sword to endow it
with supernatural powers.
Tom Schoene
"klmok" <kl...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:3e2d5bf9.3536540836@shawnews.ed.shawcable.net...
> On Thu, 16 Jan 2003 12:27:50 GMT, edward...@NOSPAMyahoo.com.INVALID
> (edward ohare) wrote:
>
>
>
> >>Structurally, it's pointless. But as a piece of flag-waving PR, it's a
> >>work of genius. And the US population has always been a sucker for
> >>this sort of showmanship.
> >
> >
> >I can't express the degree of my embarassment.
> >
> >All they need now is for Toby Keith to write a song about it.
> >
>
> This is one of the silliest PR stunts ever.
A PR "stunt" certinaly. But why silly?
> What is so different
> about this to the smearing of spilled blood on a sword to endow it
> with supernatural powers.
Nothing in particular, really. But that's no strike against it. The metal
is a symbol, just like consecrated swords and special flags (such as the
ground zero flag that flew from a carrier off Afghanistan). If it gives the
crew even a small boost in morale and pride of purpose, I say go for it.
Tom Schoene
> I am sorry, the voice of the previous message was
> awfully snippy, and it should not have been.
> Please forgive me.
Done. Thanks, and I hope I didn't sound too angry myself. It's always hard
to get the tone right on Usenet.
ThePsyko
theobviou...@theobviousindiana.edu (Geoff Cashman) made his/her
contribution to mankind by stating in
news:b0ord7$jh8$1...@rainier.uits.indiana.edu:
> In article <qgMX9.19$0q...@tornadotest1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
> Tom Schoene <tasc...@earthlink.invalid> wrote:
>>"WB3FUP (Mike Hall)" <wb3...@msn.com> wrote in message
>>news:b0ibgt$ouog5$1...@ID-134747.news.dfncis.de...
>>> I am sorry, the voice of the previous message was
>>> awfully snippy, and it should not have been.
>>> Please forgive me.
>>
>>Done. Thanks, and I hope I didn't sound too angry myself. It's
>>always hard to get the tone right on Usenet.
>
> The civility that is breaking out in this group just can't be
> tolerated anymore. What the hell is happening to Usenet? I feel like
> I'm experiencing a flashback to the '80s. You guys gotta knock it off!
>
> -Geoff
>
>
>
>
heh... I don't often venture away from the alt.* groups -- it's a whole
different atmosphere here... almost like being in a different country..
but if you want 'uncivility' hop on over to alt.hackers.malicious and
post something like
"d00dz I'm 1337!! Gibb0r m3 w4r3z!!"
HTH!!
--
ThePsyko
Public Enemy #7
"God told me to skin you alive"