Yes, indeed. And good photos exist and a few models survive.

Going back to USS Atlanta CL51, the machinery model from 1939 survives and I was priviledged to tour it arranged by the late Admiral James Shaw, who was plot officer during the ship's epic night battle. The machinery model is both firerooms and both engine rooms, about 20 to 25 feet long, in absolutely stunning detail. If one exists for SS United States it could be adapted into a very large model of the entire ship. If the machinery model for USS Atlanta were ever to be used that way, the resulting model of the complete ship would probably be 50 to 60 feet long, for a 541 foot ship.

PC

I would really love to know what became of the 16-278A Destroyer Escort engine/generator mockup model that was given to George Codrington upon his retirement.

..and all the other Cleveland Diesel model engines (other then the one I have..)

I wonder if there are surviving machinery models for any of the four propulsion system arrangements used on USN Destroyer Escorts.

PC

The saga continues.

The deadline for moving SS United States has passed and she's still there. A Federal Judge stayed the deadline and suggested arbitration by a Federal Magistrate Judge. Both parties seem amenable.

Phil Mulligan

Here is an insightful comment on the Conservancy Facebook page.

Yes, it obviously needs to be cleaned, it wont be cheap, but I can tell you, knowing numerous individuals in the business that reef various (large) marine craft (post 2006), that none of that are things followed to the T. The vast majority of the document is suggestions, not law.

It is absolutely common practice to leave engines in open engine rooms, wiring, solid paint, plumbing, etc. Its the oil and stuff that has to go, with lines being flushed.

I have been in the maritime industry for almost 20 years at this point, and it is absolutely mind boggling to read some of the social media threads on this ship, as well as other large museum ships. If you think the general population is clueless about railroads...

HA! The reason New Jersey had to go to the former Phila Navy Yard was to be drydocked for bottom scraping, inspection, repairs and painting. (The Yard is active as a commercial yard. )

The Philadelphia Inquirer reported it was for a "face lift." Now a face lift is cosmetic surgery to change a person's facial appearance. The ship got hull work; specifically to her bottom.

The good news is the work is done, New Jersey is back at her berth and the work should be good for 30 years.

A question. SS United States was built at Newport News right after USS United States (CVA-58) was cancelled and her keel (all of the hull that had been built) was scrapped. The horsepowers are similar: did the liner get the Carrier's engines?

Phil Mulligan

Based on the linked Wikipedia article below, it looks like the United States got new engines and other hardware, but all of it based on "civilian" versions of military equipment.

For me, it's interesting how much influence the Navy had in her design. This included a lot of safety precautions, structural practices, and other things that would be important for a ship's survival, even under combat conditions. Inside her hull, she's designed and built like a large warship.

Her interior design had a lot of influence from her principle designer, who was very concerned about fire prevention. That was part of the reason for all the potentially hazardous material in her interior (some things that don't burn very well can be problematic for people). Supposedly a member of the galley crew cobbled up a homemade wooden shelf for working bread dough or something; this upset the designer, who had a new shelf of aluminum made to the same dimensions to replace the wooden job.

Finally, the few recent photographs of the liner in the Wikipedia article suggest, to me, that the ship isn't in really bad condition, just stripped. She'd probably never be profitable as a restored vessel (I doubt she'd ever earn her restoration cost back), but if the photos are any indication, the process of such a return wouldn't be that hard, just expensive.

This in turn suggests, again as an opinion, that this country doesn't value its history as well as it should. It's a big part of why our efforts in railway preservation are as difficult as they are, and as limited as they are, compared with what we see in Britain.

Another part of the difficulty is the cultural emphasis on money and riches. It seems money rules us.

I am reminded of a Chinese proverb that goes, "Fire is a good servant but a bad master." I think we could substitute "money" for "fire," and have something even more true.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_United_States

You hit the nail on the head regarding several points. The ship is not in bad shape, just stripped of her interiors and almost all fireproofing. I'm old enough to remember when "asbestos was our friend!" Interior restoration would be expensive but hardly impossible and new engines would be enormously expensive. Still, restored, I'd bet she would sell out trans-Atlantic crossings for the better part of a decade before the nuance of the experience wore off on the public. A single fare, rapid ocean crossing with modified standards of a traditional ocean crossing, would romantic and relaxing.
Up until her retirement, Cunard's QE2 offered a one-way ocean voyage and an air return.

I doubt they'd make up the investment, but it would be a unique trip to Europe on a restored liner.

In the late '90s Cunard offered a deal that I wish I had dipped into my savings for: One way to or from the UK on the Concord, and the other on the QE2.

I did both in the 1980'son different occasions. My memory of the Concord was that the seats were uncomfortably small for my 6'4", 250 lb. body. It was interesting that we landed at JFK in NYC a few minutes earlier than we left the UK. We raced the sun westbound.

The Queen was a delight although we hit the edge of a storm and for 24 hours battled rough seas. I was ok but lots of my shipmates were terribly seasick.

Ross Rowland

Hate to be the bearer of bad news, but yeah, looks like the big U's sailing days are long over. Money is just flooding into maintaining it with no active use or profitable returns. It's a bit tough to swallow but the reefing seems to be the best course of action.

Don't get me wrong, she's an amazing piece of marine history and architecture, and it would be nothing short of spectacular if she could see active days again. But realism has to kick in at some point. Not easy, but necessary. The reef plan at least gives her a purpose and a chance to still serve in a noteworthy capacity.

As for her engines, well, let's just say it's a miracle if those bad boys can be revived after 50+ years of doing well, nothing. But hey, miracles do happen, right? I guess all we can do now is to keep the memory of what she represented alive and hope the reef brings joy to a new set of sea enthusiasts.

A sadly similar story posted on CNN:

https://www.cnn.com/travel/bought-a-cru ... index.html

"Although he had no prior experience working on ships"

That sums up that situation.

You do not buy a ship, of that age, and NOT drydock it...FIRST.

I can not tell you how many failed boat projects I have seen over the years, that were started by guys that have zero prior knowledge in maritime anything, and when it gets to be too much, they essentially abandon the boat and make it somebody else's problem, which is exactly how that article read.

I think sinking this marvel of marine architecture in the name of an artificial reef is a real shame. Sure, her glory days are surely in the past, but doesn't she deserve a more dignified end than this? We've seen other iconic liners and ships being turned into hotels or museums. Why not try a similar approach with the SS United States? It might cost a hefty sum, but it wouldn't be a bottomless pit. Who knows, it might just turn out to be a fruitful venture. This ship could still serve a purpose beyond being a diving spot and home for aquatic life. Well, that’s my two cents.