Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Since the fire started I have been talking to my dad on a daily basis because he is retired navy with 35 years in.

He has been on many aircraft carriers when they are in the yard and I was amazed that the shore facilities typically compromised the watertight bulkheads. Adding to this the pipes, cables and other items that pass through a watertight bulkhead are in a sealed opening when the ship is operational, during yard work many of these openings are opened up to allow new cables and other items to pass through the watertight bulkhead.

I have been told in the past that the firefighters air bottles are only good for 30 minutes, I know that an 80cf scuba tank will last about an hour at shallow debris.

What you have on a this ship is passageways that are small to start with now contain cables, for power and lighting, hoses for ventilation, multiple fire hoses and an almost constant flow of firefighters going in and out.

This sounds like a real pain in the ass to work in.

The investigation will probably show that there were multiple issues on the ship cause by both the contractor and the navy and that this fire was started by one of these issues and the other issues combined to create what happened.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I will admit it cracked me up. Unprofessional yes but if that's the worst our boys do to blow off a little steam and make each other laugh I don't see the big deal. 

Here's a little bit of Free advice, for you to contemplate before next clicking on   Submit reply   Attack the content of the Post,  Not the Poster..!   Consider yourself warned..

Imagine those things landing and taking off from your roof!!! On my first "cruise", I could touch the underside of the flight deck at the #3 wire. You could watch the PLAT camera feed, (which was live

Posted Images

5 minutes ago, Quickfarms said:

I know that an 80cf scuba tank will last about an hour at shallow debris.

 

 

So I  take it the tank doesnt last as long the deeper you go ?

I have no idea, just curious thats all

Paul 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is interesting that the Forrestal Fire happened in 1967 and MIL STD 461 was issued the same year. MIL STD 461 deals with electromagnetic compatibility.

There is a belief that MIL STD 461 was created as a result of the Forrestal incident.

On the Forrestal the Zuni rocket launched because of EMS, electromagnetic susceptibility. A RF transmitter caused the rocket motor to ignite.

The accidental discharge story was a cover because the military did not want to release the truth. The WOW, weight on wheels, switch prevents the accidental launch of weapons. On the ground it takes a lot more than just bumping the wrong switch to launch weapon.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 
So I  take it the tank doesnt last as long the deeper you go ?
I have no idea, just curious thats all
Paul 


Yes

The time a human can stay at a particular depth without decompression is governed by the US Navy dive tables

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
What about the safety pins that only get removed when the aircraft taxis up to the catapults? Did they not have those in 1967?


The pins serve many purposes but since the Zuni is carried in a launch tube they probably do not apply to this situation

The RF can actually cause the igniter in the rocket motor to ignite the motor.

The 1969 fire on the enterprise was attributed to the huffers exhaust heating the Zuni warhead and causing it to explode

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the legendary PT-73. Originally the US Navy's PT-694 (Patrol Torpedo), this 70-foot Vosper was one of two operated by the Hughes Tool Company as chase boats for the H-4 Hercules (aka. Spruce Goose) flying boat project.

Per Ernest Borgnine, Universal approached Hughes years later and convinced them to sell this one for the real-life shots in “McHale’s Navy.”

The boat always shown at the dock was an unpowered prop.

Ernest Borgnine discusses the boat at 14:35 ……………. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtbLShUzI3c

.

 

Photo 6.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Defense News  /  July 23, 2020

The shipyard presiding over the renovations on the amphibious assault ship Bonhomme Richard when it caught fire July 12 was awarded a $10 million contract modification for their efforts with firefighting and follow-on cleanup.

The contract with General Dynamics NASSCO San Diego was among those announced Wednesday in the U.S. Defense Department’s daily roundup.

The work includes “USS Bonhomme Richard (LHD-6) emergency firefighting support, dewatering, safety and initial clean-up efforts,” the announcement read, and is to be completed by November 2020.

US Navy’s top officer reveals grim new details of the damage to Bonhomme Richard

The fire, which broke out July 12, began in the lower vehicle storage area amidships and damaged 11 of the Bonhomme Richard’s 14 decks, according to a letter to all Navy flag officers and master chiefs obtained by Defense News. The Navy said there was no known welding or other “hot work” taking place at the time of the fire, and it is unclear what caused the blaze.

The Navy is conducting a safety investigation — which are not usually releasable to the public so as to encourage witnesses to speak freely — and a more formal administrative investigation accompanied by accountability recommendations that can be released.

The Navy’s top officer, Adm. Michael Gilday, told Defense News in a July 16 interview he is committed to transparency in the investigation.

“This is a very, very serious incident that I think will force the Navy to stand back and reevaluate itself,” Gilday said. “We’ve got to follow the facts, we’ve got to be honest with ourselves and we’ve got to get after it. My intention, once the investigations are done, is to make this available for the public to debate, including what we need to do to get after any systemic problems that we might have.”

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

$10 million to the shipyard (General Dynamics) for helping to fight the fire, and clean-up, appears rather excessive.

Few believe the Navy will invest hundreds of millions of dollars to repair a 22-year-old ship.

Also, the America class amphibious ships are replacing the older Wasp class.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are being "rewarded" for allowing ([possibly causing) a ship to sustain what is probably irreparable damage while it was in their care to the tune of 10M on top of what they have probably already been paid....   just, wow.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Terry T said:

They are being "rewarded" for allowing ([possibly causing) a ship to sustain what is probably irreparable damage while it was in their care to the tune of 10M on top of what they have probably already been paid....   just, wow.

Agreed. But I fear the taxpayer will bear the cost of scrapping the ship.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Sailor under investigation for arson in USS Bonhomme Richard ship fire

Jennifer Kastner, ABC10 News  /  August 26, 2020

SAN DIEGO (KGTV) -- A Navy sailor is under investigation in connection with the fire that caused extensive damage to the USS Bonhomme Richard at Naval Base San Diego.

Multiple sources with close ties to Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) say investigators determined the July 12 fire may have been set intentionally. Investigators identified a sailor as an arson suspect in their probe.

Multiple search warrants were executed at the sailor’s home and property. The sailor’s name and rank were not disclosed.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/27/2020 at 8:46 AM, kscarbel2 said:

Sailor under investigation for arson in USS Bonhomme Richard ship fire

Jennifer Kastner, ABC10 News  /  August 26, 2020

SAN DIEGO (KGTV) -- A Navy sailor is under investigation in connection with the fire that caused extensive damage to the USS Bonhomme Richard at Naval Base San Diego.

Multiple sources with close ties to Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) say investigators determined the July 12 fire may have been set intentionally. Investigators identified a sailor as an arson suspect in their probe.

Multiple search warrants were executed at the sailor’s home and property. The sailor’s name and rank were not disclosed.

Hmnn...Do they still "walk the plank"  ?? Might be fitting😎

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This reminds me of the U.S.S. Miami fire in which a civilian worker that was out of vacation/sick time set a fire because he wanted to go home. He lit a bag of rags on fire in a state room and effectively destroyed a 1.56 billion dollar sub!

Edited by DailyDiesel
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DailyDiesel said:

This reminds me of the U.S.S. Miami fire in which a civilian worker that was out of vacation/sick time set a fire because he wanted to go home. He lit a bag of rags on fire in a state room and effectively destroyed a 1.56 billion dollar sub!

Was that the one at Portsmouth Naval shipyard?  Wonder what he got for a sentence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

               Yes, the Miami was at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard. Repair costs were estimated to be between $450 million and

               $700 million. The Navy decided to scrap the ship and it was towed to Washington state for dismantling.

 

Edited by bulldogboy
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...