• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Indianapolis has been found

eohrnberger said:
What? So that some can tear this one down as well? :roll:
Click to expand...

That would depend on how the winds of fashion and political correctness are blowing. I mean, was the Indianapolis a "good" ship by this minute's standards? Or is it a symbol of imperialism? ;)
 
nota bene said:
That would depend on how the winds of fashion and political correctness are blowing. I mean, was the Indianapolis a "good" ship by this minute's standards? Or is it a symbol of imperialism? ;)
Click to expand...

And, as time passes, and those "winds of fashion and political correctness" change direction ever more history, historical monuments and historical statues will be torn asunder, rendered irrecoverable, culminating with a society without history, all the easier to be manipulated by those "winds of fashion and political correctness".
 
eohrnberger said:
And, as time passes, and those "winds of fashion and political correctness" change direction ever more history, historical monuments and historical statues will be torn asunder, rendered irrecoverable, culminating with a society without history, all the easier to be manipulated by those "winds of fashion and political correctness".
Click to expand...


you would need to connect the monument to racism first
 
katzgar said:
I would love to see her raised and become a memorial but maybe that would be disrespectful and likely she is just too damn deep
Click to expand...

More importantly, it wouldn't be practical......the USS Indianapolis was a heavy cruiser....My grandfather served on the Indianapolis' sister ship, the Portland....over 10,000 tons, and about 180 meters long, its just big.
Add to the fact it was hit by two torpedoes, each with a 1200 lb warhead, its most likely that the ships hull and back were broken.....then it had an 18,000 ft dive down before hitting the ocean floor.

I would think that her condition would be much like that of the Titanic....broken into sections on the sea bed.
 
katzgar said:
you would need to connect the monument to racism first
Click to expand...

Connecting an inanimate object with something that only a person could do?
I think you (and others) give these inanimate objects far more power and control over your emotions than they warrant.
 
Polar Bum said:
More importantly, it wouldn't be practical......the USS Indianapolis was a heavy cruiser....My grandfather served on the Indianapolis' sister ship, the Portland....over 10,000 tons, and about 180 meters long, its just big.
Add to the fact it was hit by two torpedoes, each with a 1200 lb warhead, its most likely that the ships hull and back were broken.....then it had an 18,000 ft dive down before hitting the ocean floor.

I would think that her condition would be much like that of the Titanic....broken into sections on the sea bed.
Click to expand...


I have seen her described as a heavy cruiser and a destroyer. Whats the difference?
 
eohrnberger said:
Connecting an inanimate object with something that only a person could do?
I think you (and others) give these inanimate objects far more power and control over your emotions than they warrant.
Click to expand...


and yet you are defending monuments to traitors in a totally irrelevant thread.
 
nota bene said:
That would depend on how the winds of fashion and political correctness are blowing. I mean, was the Indianapolis a "good" ship by this minute's standards? Or is it a symbol of imperialism? ;)
Click to expand...


civility isnt a fashion it is just now coming to the surface.
 
katzgar said:
I have seen her described as a heavy cruiser and a destroyer. Whats the difference?
Click to expand...

A great deal......A destroyer is much smaller and less armed than a Heavy cruiser.

A heavy cruiser ( or battle cruiser, depending on the Nation ) is a Smaller version of a Battleship...which was considered the largest combat ship of the time ( Excluding length....Aircraft carriers were longer) and carried the largest guns.

Destroyers on the other hand, are significantly smaller, faster, and have much lighter armor and weapons.... their primary function was to serve as escort vessels for merchant chips, battle groups, and as sub chasers.
They generally ran about 2000-2500 tons, and about 350-360 feet long, carried torpedoes, and depth charges in addition to their smaller deck guns.

Behind the destroyers in size were frigates ad Corvettes.

on the left....destroyer....center, battleship, on the right, heavy cruiser

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/25/5b/88/255b88504db4aa130742f8ffc9750bc2--heavy-cruiser-korean-war.jpg
 
Last edited:
eohrnberger said:
And, as time passes, and those "winds of fashion and political correctness" change direction ever more history, historical monuments and historical statues will be torn asunder, rendered irrecoverable, culminating with a society without history, all the easier to be manipulated by those "winds of fashion and political correctness".
Click to expand...

Down the memory hole. Perhaps the great hope will be realized, that those who have "defective memories" will be vaporized. Of course, for those who are familiar with 1984, even Syme, who gloried in the beauty of the destruction of words because this would make thought-crime impossible, was also vaporized. ;)
 
Polar Bum said:
A great deal......A destroyer is much smaller and less armed than a Heavy cruiser.

A heavy cruiser ( or battle cruiser, depending on the Nation ) is a Smaller version of a Battleship...which was considered the largest combat ship of the time ( Excluding length....Aircraft carriers were longer) and carried the largest guns.

Destroyers on the other hand, are significantly smaller, faster, and have much lighter armor and weapons.... their primary function was to serve as escort vessels for merchant chips, battle groups, and as sub chasers.
They generally ran about 2000-2500 tons, and about 350-360 feet long, carried torpedoes, and depth charges in addition to their smaller deck guns.

Behind the destroyers in size were frigates ad Corvettes.

on the left....destroyer....center, battleship, on the right, heavy cruiser

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/25/5b/88/255b88504db4aa130742f8ffc9750bc2--heavy-cruiser-korean-war.jpg
Click to expand...



The 761 and the KIDD are the same? The KIDD is pretty small...almost feels coastal.
 
katzgar said:
At 18,000 feet
Click to expand...

Well within the test depth of the Alvin submersible:
Name:Alvin
Namesake:Allyn Vine
Operator:Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
Builder:Litton Systems
Acquired:26 May 1964
In service:5 June 1964
Status:in active service, as of 2017
General characteristics [SUP][1][/SUP]
Type:Deep-submergence vehicle
Tonnage:17 t (17 long tons)
Length:7.1 m (23 ft 4 in)
Beam:2.6 m (8 ft 6 in)
Height:3.7 m (12 ft 2 in)
Draft:2.3 m (7 ft 7 in)
Speed:2 knots (3.7 km/h; 2.3 mph)
Range:5 km (3.1 mi)
Endurance:72 hours with 3 crew
Test depth:6,500 m (21,300 ft)
Capacity:680 kg (1,500 lb) payload
Crew:3 (1 pilot, 2 scientific observers)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DSV_Alvin
Click to expand...
So I guess it's up to Robert Ballard is he's going to dive on it or not. Being a war grave, I'd be inclined to just leave it alone.
 
katzgar said:
The 761 and the KIDD are the same? The KIDD is pretty small...almost feels coastal.
Click to expand...

Um...which USS Kidd are you referring to? DD661 from the Second World War? DD 993 from the 1980's - 1990's? or the most recent USS Kidd, DD 100, commissioned in 2007?

*post edit

just saw you are in Louisiana.....you must have been to the USS Kidd museum...so, yes, that's the WWII Kidd...DD661

if I am not mistaken, the destroyer in the photo is the USS Buck......DD761, so yes...they are roughly the same size.
 
Last edited:
Polar Bum said:
A great deal......A destroyer is much smaller and less armed than a Heavy cruiser.

A heavy cruiser ( or battle cruiser, depending on the Nation ) is a Smaller version of a Battleship...which was considered the largest combat ship of the time ( Excluding length....Aircraft carriers were longer) and carried the largest guns.

Destroyers on the other hand, are significantly smaller, faster, and have much lighter armor and weapons.... their primary function was to serve as escort vessels for merchant chips, battle groups, and as sub chasers.
They generally ran about 2000-2500 tons, and about 350-360 feet long, carried torpedoes, and depth charges in addition to their smaller deck guns.

Behind the destroyers in size were frigates ad Corvettes.

on the left....destroyer....center, battleship, on the right, heavy cruiser

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/25/5b/88/255b88504db4aa130742f8ffc9750bc2--heavy-cruiser-korean-war.jpg
Click to expand...

Slight disagreement.

A battle cruiser usually was on par with (often superior) the a battleship in armaments. It is the armor they sacrificed for speed that set them apart.

The Courageous class Battlecruiser Furious carried an 18 inch gun. Most ther Battlecruisers 12, 14 or 15 guns.
 
Fledermaus said:
Slight disagreement.

A battle cruiser usually was on par with (often superior) the a battleship in armaments. It is the armor they sacrificed for speed that set them apart.

The Courageous class Battlecruiser Furious carried an 18 inch gun. Most ther Battlecruisers 12, 14 or 15 guns.
Click to expand...

Some would call them pocket battleships....but, the definition of Heavy Cruiser will vary from nation to nation. But essentially, you are correct....I was avoiding drilling too deep into details.
 
Polar Bum said:
Um...which USS Kidd are you referring to? DD661 from the Second World War? DD 993 from the 1980's - 1990's? or the most recent USS Kidd, DD 100, commissioned in 2007?

*post edit

just saw you are in Louisiana.....you must have been to the USS Kidd museum...so, yes, that's the WWII Kidd...DD661

if I am not mistaken, the destroyer in the photo is the USS Buck......DD761, so yes...they are roughly the same size.
Click to expand...


I didn't realize there been so many KIDDs
 
katzgar said:
I didn't realize there been so many KIDDs
Click to expand...

Side note.

The latest Kidd class was also a series of 4 ships built for the Shah of Iran.

Shah was overthrown before delivery.

It was far more AA capable than the Spruance it was derived from.

They are now in the Taiwan Navy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom