USS United States (CVA-58) – Guide 394 (NB)



The USS United States, an almost-built carrier of the United States Navy, is today’s subject.

Read more about the ship here:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/U-S-Aircraft-Carriers-Illustrated-History/dp/0870217399/
http://strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/parameters/Articles/1981/1981%20mcfarland.pdf

Naval History books, use code ‘DRACH’ for 25% off – https://www.usni.org/press/books?f%5B0%5D=subject%3A1966

Free naval photos and more – www.drachinifel.co.uk

Want to support the channel? – https://www.patreon.com/Drachinifel

Want a shirt/mug/hoodie – https://shop.spreadshirt.com/drachinifels-dockyard/

Want a poster? – https://www.etsy.com/uk/shop/Drachinifel

Want to talk about ships? https://discord.gg/TYu88mt

‘Legionnaire’ by Scott Buckley – released under CC-BY 4.0. www.scottbuckley.com.au

source

32 thoughts on “USS United States (CVA-58) – Guide 394 (NB)”

  1. I whoud aboslotly love a video about the Hannover as its name is in world of war ships I think it’s class was H-45 ENORMOUS SHIP but I am not a historian and I can not find mutch videos let alone sorces for it

    Reply
  2. Louis A Johnson was Truman's chief fundraiser for the 1948 campaign and actively lobbied for SecDef position. which he got after Truman forced out James V Forrestal. well deserved retribution for Forrestal to have a class of CV's named for him.

    Reply
  3. You're a historian. If you were a historiographer, you'd be talking about OTHER historians. Like "Oh my Herodotus can't be trusted for X and Y reasons". Which would be boring as hell. So be a historian.

    Reply
  4. My biggest wonder about this whole episode was the short-sightedness of assuming atomic bombs would never get smaller. Surely they were already working on smaller designs by the end of the war. I can only guess it was too secret to let anybody else know. But by 1948-49-50? Somebody must have had an inkling by then 5 years after the first ones.

    Reply
  5. Oof. I'm a little peeved about your dubious coinage of the term "double-angled deck".

    Historically speaking, the importance of the term "Angle Deck Carrier", lies in the purely functional attribute of allowing jets to retain fly-through momentum for a go-around upon missing their intended arresting wire (aka. "Bolter"). The distinction is only generically made between "angle-deck", and the earlier "straight" or "axial-deck" configuration of the landing runway. NOT the catapults. I.e., it's the main "directional" layout of the modern air-traffic-management problem that's at stake, not any mere visual shape irregularity in the planform of the deck-edge. A modern CATOBAR carrier deck has many angles, but only one "Angle".

    Reply
  6. The assumption that the next war would be nuclear, thus only nuclear weapons were really needed, took awhile to finally die. Gen. Maxwell Taylor's "The Uncertain Trumpet", 1960, finally drove a stake through it, IIRC

    Reply
  7. It’s like the Navy thought technology would stand still when coming up with this design. You know a design is whacky when you can’t even tell which ends are the bow and stern.

    Reply
  8. A ship to review… the "Active" class of Coast Guard cutters. Built in 1926-27, they are now the oldest surviving military vessels in the country that were powered by internal combustion engines. Also known as the "buck and a quarter" fleet, these plucky little 125-foot cutters were originally designated WPC (Whiskey Patrol Cutter). There's precious few of them still existing, with only two in preservation and another being attempted to get into preservation before it goes to scrap. One additional ship, the Bonham (aka Polar Star), is sunk in shallow water in Oregon and is rusted through so badly that she's a total loss.

    I'd really enjoy seeing what you come up with for these little ships!

    Reply

Leave a Comment