So long "Big E"

[Trim]

U.S.S. Enterprise retires after a 51 year career.  :salute3:

http://news.yahoo.com/uss-enterprise-carrier-taken-active-211422506.html  

[Nebula]

It will be back ;)

[Eloi]

Plenty of letters left in the alphabet.

[Vortex]

http://hamptonroads.com/2012/12/navy-next-carrier-built-will-be-named-enterprise

[captain_obvious]

I think the name is a testament to the spirit of western civilization.  I'd rather be on a rusty old tub with that name than a brand spanking new ship named after a politician.

EDIT

Hmm, not a mention in the British media or even on aol.  Weird, it's a record breaking ship.  Stil, it's probably due to the media agenda of convincing people that anything perceived as "nuclear" is scary and should be opposed at any cost.  Shame.

[Trim]

I'm glad that they decided to name the third Ford class carrier Enterprise, was really hoping they would.  

[Shadowknight1]

Glad that the name will be carried on.  Still a shame that the ship has to be nearly completely dismantled in order to properly take care of the reactor.

[captain_obvious]

Glad that the name will be carried on.  Still a shame that the ship has to be nearly completely dismantled in order to properly take care of the reactors.

Fixed it for you ;)

8 reactors on board instead of the usual 2.

[Shadowknight1]

Thanks.  Didn't realize that.

Heh, someone should make the CVN-65 "refitted" as a spaceship, ala. Space Battleship Yamato.  Just as a tribute.

[JB2005]

I think the name is a testament to the spirit of western civilization.  I'd rather be on a rusty old tub with that name than a brand spanking new ship named after a politician.

EDIT

Hmm, not a mention in the British media or even on aol.  Weird, it's a record breaking ship.  Stil, it's probably due to the media agenda of convincing people that anything perceived as "nuclear" is scary and should be opposed at any cost.  Shame.

We've got our own troubles with the loss of Ark Royal...they're on about renaming the second QE class but that's still another 6 or 7 years...

[CyAn1d3]

theres also talk of naming another ship the "Mutiny" after the loss of the original one during hurricane sandy (its loose talk, but even still).... i miss driving down Bayshore blvd and seeing that beauty

as for the Enterprise, my grandfather had the pleasure of doing work on her during one of her many refits over the years, i called him to tell him of her decommission and he nearly broke down in tears on the phone.

the name will be carried on. believe it, the American navy will not let the name die here.

i salute one of Americas greatest vessels ever. 

[Shadowknight1]

Well, doing the math, the US Navy has 13 years without an Enterprise before the CVN-80 is completed.  Let's hope we don't screw it up in the meantime.

[Tuskin38]

theres also talk of naming another ship the "Mutiny" after the loss of the original one during hurricane sandy (its loose talk, but even still).... i miss driving down Bayshore blvd and seeing that beauty

as for the Enterprise, my grandfather had the pleasure of doing work on her during one of her many refits over the years, i called him to tell him of her decommission and he nearly broke down in tears on the phone.

the name will be carried on. believe it, the American navy will not let the name die here.

i salute one of Americas greatest vessels ever. 

I believe you mean the 'Bounty' not 'Mutiny'.

[eclipse74569]

i salute one of Americas greatest wessels ever. 

Fixed and agreed!

One last Chekov-ism for her!

[moed]

I visited the Enterprise once... big ship.

On the entrance to the bridge there is a 10 foot top view orthographic of the original TOS Starship Enterprise permanently affixed to the deck plates... very cool.

Will miss the one time U.S.A. flagship.

[CyAn1d3]

I believe you mean the 'Bounty' not 'Mutiny'.

yes, forgive my brainfart 

[1DeadlySAMURAI]

yes, forgive my brainfart 

[captain_obvious]

We've got our own troubles with the loss of Ark Royal...they're on about renaming the second QE class but that's still another 6 or 7 years...

I never considered the Ark (22 000t) to be a proper carrier especially when compared to her predecessors (The audacious class of 46 000t).  Even the previous ark shouldn't have made it past the mid '60s due to her awful material condition even then.  To refit her cost the govt. Nearly ?40 million in the mid 60's where as her sister ship HMS Eagle would have cost a lot less (less than ?10 million) due to her already having most of the gear that the ark had to have fitted as well as her much better overall condition.  A shame, the Eagle might well have made the 90's where the old ark didn't even make the 80s.
I still don't get why the navy scrapped 4 carriers that had only just come out of refit and another that had just finished refit and only needed recommissioning so that they could keep one carrier that was falling apart, had no planes and needed to be fitted with most of the then modern equipment that the others already had. 

Btw, here is a shot of the previous Ark along side the USS Nimitz.  See how small she seems compared to the Nimitz?  Now keep in mind that the Invincible class carrier that replaced that Ark is only slightly over half the size of her predecessor and you might just being to see my point.

Now if you want to talk about a *really* old carrier, go look up HMS Hermes/INS Viraat.  Started in 1944, commissioned in '59 and it's still in service to this day with the Indian navy!

[Killallewoks]

The Ark Royal was a victim of the horffic spending cuts in the late 70's, the government didn't want to spend the milllions to get a fully fledged fixed wing carrier. In the end we ended up with three 'through deck cruisers' which whilst cheap didn't have the oomph that was really required.

The big E though had an illustrious service, shame that they can't preserve but that's the unfortuante nature of nuclear power.   

[captain_obvious]

The Ark Royal was a victim of the horffic spending cuts in the late 70's, the government didn't want to spend the milllions to get a fully fledged fixed wing carrier. In the end we ended up with three 'through deck cruisers' which whilst cheap didn't have the oomph that was really required.

Fixed wing naval aviation was the victim of spending cuts taken during the mid 60s ('66 iirc).  4 of our carriers which were pretty much fresh from refits were scrapped and the last one (the ark herself) was falling apart but saved just so they could spend nearly ?40 million (unadjusted figure) just trying to get her back up to scratch (Failing as she was then decommissioned in '79)

The big E though had an illustrious service, shame that they can't preserve but that's the unfortuante nature of nuclear power.   

I would say that it's more the unfortunate nature of it having a unique 8 reactor design rather than simply having reactors at all.  Preserving a nuclear powered carrier could definitely be done, but it all comes down to cost.  That as well as the unhealthy fear of radiation perpetuated by our media barons. 
But that's another topic entirely