Tkelly1986 Member Username: Tkelly1986
Post Number: 182 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Saturday, November 11, 2006 - 2:39 pm: | |
With the talk about the USS Intrepid being rehabbed in New York, it raised the question whether the riverfront could be a good location for an old battleship docking/museum, similar to the HMS Belfast in London. Has Detroit has ever this type of exhibit? What are people’s thoughts of Detroit getting this kind of permanent exhibit of some WWII Battleship or a permanent tall ships exhibit? |
Flybydon Member Username: Flybydon
Post Number: 47 Registered: 01-2005
| Posted on Saturday, November 11, 2006 - 3:32 pm: | |
Not sure a Battle Ship could get up river. It would have to fit through the two lock systems (St. Lawrence and Welland) then it would have to be of shallow draft in order to navigate the Lake Erie channels. It would be nice to have something dock at Historic Fort Wayne perhaps. Would be an added draw.
|
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 1714 Registered: 10-2004
| Posted on Saturday, November 11, 2006 - 3:51 pm: | |
Move it like moving a house and pull down overhead wires and remove pesky bridges as it treks westward... |
Kathleen Member Username: Kathleen
Post Number: 1688 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Saturday, November 11, 2006 - 4:08 pm: | |
Great aerials of Fort Wayne, Flybydon!! Thanks for posting!!! |
Tkelly1986 Member Username: Tkelly1986
Post Number: 183 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Saturday, November 11, 2006 - 4:15 pm: | |
exactly what bridges would get in the way of a ship the size of the HMS Belfest? In terms of locks, I would assume these ships would also fit here. |
Tarkus Member Username: Tarkus
Post Number: 147 Registered: 04-2006
| Posted on Saturday, November 11, 2006 - 4:16 pm: | |
Sure it could get up river. If a 1000ft. freighter loaded with ore can do it so could a battleship. |
Ray1936 Member Username: Ray1936
Post Number: 910 Registered: 01-2005
| Posted on Saturday, November 11, 2006 - 4:41 pm: | |
Treaty between the United States and Canada bans warships on the Great Lakes. |
Flybydon Member Username: Flybydon
Post Number: 49 Registered: 01-2005
| Posted on Saturday, November 11, 2006 - 5:07 pm: | |
Don't think 1'000 footers transit the St. Lawrence and Welland. Believe the canals are to narrow 1'000 footers and Battleships are at least ninety to one-hundred foot wide. Lock systems: Montreal to Lake Ontario - 2 U.S., 5 Canadian Welland Canal - 8 Canadian St. Mary's River - 4 U.S. parallel locks -- one transit (Army Corps of Engineers) Vessel maximum: 225.5 m (740 ft.) length; 23.7 m (78 ft.) beam; 8.08 m (26 ft., 6 in.) draft; 35.5 m (116.5 ft.) height above water. Channels maintained at 8.2 m (27 ft.) minimum over the chart datum. Distance from the Atlantic Ocean to Duluth, Minnesota on Lake Superior = 2,038 nautical miles (2,342 statute miles or 3,700 kilometers), 8.5 sailing days. Includes some 245,750 square kilometers (95,000 square miles) of navigable waters. |
Tkelly1986 Member Username: Tkelly1986
Post Number: 184 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Saturday, November 11, 2006 - 5:09 pm: | |
I doubt that treaty would have any barring; I grew up in St. Joseph on the west side of the state and every year for their venation festival they would bring in a small battleship…..so, this could be a possibility. Its not like it is there fore malicious purposes or even in working condition. |
Jams Member Username: Jams
Post Number: 4151 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Saturday, November 11, 2006 - 5:11 pm: | |
...aside from the Treaty, what would a battleship have to do with the City or the Great Lakes as a museum? We're not able to come up with enough money to maintain museums that directly pertain to our own history. We need dollars to restore and maintain Fort Wayne and the Brodhead Armory, both of which the administration has been transferred to the Dept. of Parks and Recreation which allows both to crumble despite volunteer groups that are willing to devote time, labor, and money to at least stabilize them. I learned today of the plans to tear down Fort Wayne's hospital and consign its remains to a clay lined landfill due to issues regarding lead, asphestos, and bio issues. |
Johnnny5 Member Username: Johnnny5
Post Number: 401 Registered: 06-2005
| Posted on Saturday, November 11, 2006 - 5:13 pm: | |
There's a WW2 sub (USS Silversides) docked at Muskegon and I'm pretty sure Canada knows it's there. If I remember correctly many of the large freighters never leave the Great Lakes due to there size. I'd love to see a retired Battleship in Detroit, but I doubt they would be able to get one here. |
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 1715 Registered: 10-2004
| Posted on Saturday, November 11, 2006 - 5:24 pm: | |
The German sub (U515?) now at the Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago was temporarily beached at various Great Lakes locations on its way there during the 1950s (or whenever it was). I saw it parked by one of Milwaukee's beaches back then. |
Douglasm Member Username: Douglasm
Post Number: 700 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Saturday, November 11, 2006 - 6:15 pm: | |
Well heck, there used to be a sub docked at Broadhead Naval Armory. I assume the Canadians knew it was there. It would be interesting to know the history of Naval Reserve training ships on the Great Lakes. The USS Yantic was all over the lakes from the post Civil War era until the the late 1920's. (Message edited by douglasm on November 11, 2006) |
Gistok Member Username: Gistok
Post Number: 3058 Registered: 08-2004
| Posted on Saturday, November 11, 2006 - 6:26 pm: | |
One would tend to believe that decommissioned (no munitions) ships are allowed. |
Jimaz Member Username: Jimaz
Post Number: 991 Registered: 12-2005
| Posted on Saturday, November 11, 2006 - 6:43 pm: | |
Wasn't there just recently a big stink over holding firing practice in the Great Lakes? Was that the Coast Guard? |
Jams Member Username: Jams
Post Number: 4155 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Saturday, November 11, 2006 - 6:44 pm: | |
quote:From 1818 until 2004, an agreement with the Canadian government stipulated there be only four armed warships on the Great Lakes. But with homeland security concerns, Canada agreed in 2004 that Coast Guard vessels could be armed
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15 323868/ |
Jams Member Username: Jams
Post Number: 4161 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Sunday, November 12, 2006 - 12:49 am: | |
Still would like to hear why a battleship tied to a wharf on the Detroit River would be a viable expense while the Dossin Museum, which is devoted to the Great Lakes, is barely surviving. |
Dtown1 Member Username: Dtown1
Post Number: 525 Registered: 08-2006
| Posted on Sunday, November 12, 2006 - 12:58 am: | |
Detroit must have something the world needs besides cars, if not, they need to get it fast in order for it to survive. |
Fortress_warren Member Username: Fortress_warren
Post Number: 163 Registered: 10-2006
| Posted on Sunday, November 12, 2006 - 6:24 am: | |
The Iowa has been anchored about 15 miles away for 3 or 4 years. It was supposed to be in San Francisco harbor, city council said no. Whodda thunk. There was talk about moving it to the Great Lakes, canals too small, like previous posters mentioned. Now Stockton is working on getting it. Amazingly long and low, fast too. 40mph, you could waterski behind it. |
Detroitplanner Member Username: Detroitplanner
Post Number: 346 Registered: 04-2006
| Posted on Sunday, November 12, 2006 - 9:06 am: | |
Battleships would fit. Aircraft carriers are larger (wider) than most of the bi cargo ships we see on the great lakes. |
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg
Post Number: 371 Registered: 12-2005
| Posted on Sunday, November 12, 2006 - 10:33 am: | |
As mentioned by Fortress_warren, battleships of the World War Two Iowa class would NOT fit through the St. Lawrence Seaway system locks. They are about 140 feet too long and 30 feet too wide. USS Iowa (BB-61) Dimensions: 887' 3" (oa) x 108' 2" x 37' 9" (Max) |
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 1720 Registered: 10-2004
| Posted on Sunday, November 12, 2006 - 11:27 am: | |
"They are about 140 feet too long and 30 feet too wide." If some pipe dreamers think that Detroit will have light rail, then have the locks widened and lengthened so that some scrap iron also comes this way. |
Patrick Member Username: Patrick
Post Number: 3646 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Sunday, November 12, 2006 - 12:41 pm: | |
I remember the assholes running San Fran declined to have the Iowa and there was a big stink (snickers) over that. |
Detroitplanner Member Username: Detroitplanner
Post Number: 347 Registered: 04-2006
| Posted on Sunday, November 12, 2006 - 2:34 pm: | |
Amazing! I had no idea those ships were that BIG! I need to find my way to a port again to check em out, I did see some by Norfolk, but they were all far out in the bay! |
Bob Member Username: Bob
Post Number: 1220 Registered: 11-2003
| Posted on Sunday, November 12, 2006 - 3:52 pm: | |
Johnny5 is correct about the Silversides being on the Great Lakes, but the treaty says the ship has to be operational. The Silversides has it propellor taken off, so you can run the engine, but it is not going anywhere. |
Jimaz Member Username: Jimaz
Post Number: 1007 Registered: 12-2005
| Posted on Sunday, November 12, 2006 - 4:08 pm: | |
Is that Silversides sub visible in Google Earth? I may have found it but I'm not sure what it looks like.
|
Bob Member Username: Bob
Post Number: 1222 Registered: 11-2003
| Posted on Sunday, November 12, 2006 - 5:15 pm: | |
It depended on if that is at the mouth of the Muskegon River by Lake Michigan, if that is then yes that is the Silversides. |
Jimaz Member Username: Jimaz
Post Number: 1008 Registered: 12-2005
| Posted on Sunday, November 12, 2006 - 5:24 pm: | |
Bob, yes that's where it is. Thanks. |
Harsensis Member Username: Harsensis
Post Number: 106 Registered: 07-2005
| Posted on Sunday, November 12, 2006 - 6:55 pm: | |
The 1000 footers are locked in the Great Lakes. I also agree with Jams, Why would we want a battle ship when are local stuff is suffering. If anything, get a freighter like Toledo has, but I don't see that happening. |
Mcp001 Member Username: Mcp001
Post Number: 2317 Registered: 11-2003
| Posted on Sunday, November 12, 2006 - 7:10 pm: | |
As much as this sounds like a good idea, exactly what connection would this have to Detroit? It's not as if there were very many battleships that were cranked out of here during WWII. |
Billybbrew
Member Username: Billybbrew
Post Number: 228 Registered: 07-2005
| Posted on Monday, November 13, 2006 - 12:42 am: | |
Ummm, yeah, we can't even preserve a 200 foot long Bob-Lo boat that has local and Great Lakes historical significance, or keep our own maritime museum open more than 2 days a week. I don't think that a battleship would be a realistic goal. |
Mcp001 Member Username: Mcp001
Post Number: 2318 Registered: 11-2003
| Posted on Monday, November 13, 2006 - 7:40 am: | |
I wasn't even going to go there Billybrew. BTW, has it been towed out to NY yet? |
Flybydon Member Username: Flybydon
Post Number: 51 Registered: 01-2005
| Posted on Monday, November 13, 2006 - 8:15 pm: | |
Roger That..... Billy |