In reply to BrazosBendHorn
Cool, thanks for the pics
9:58a, 2/13/23
In reply to BrazosBendHorn
Awesome pics. Thx for posting- I need to book a tour with the kids!
6:33p, 3/1/23
Baytown and Beaumont are out of consideration as a future berth. Looks like the next option is Galveston. Could it go back to it's original berth?
9:40p, 3/1/23
In reply to Marauder Blue 6
I think, and one pretty good source also thinks, that Galveston is most likely. But there's a lot of money to make up. I imagine the leg would need to put a bond election up.
7:41a, 3/3/23
I think Galveston was always likely destination, it is just a question of where in Galveston. Seawolf Park, Pier 21, ??
Also probably trying to shore up more state funding for the move and development of the new home in the current legislature before making an annoucement.
Also probably trying to shore up more state funding for the move and development of the new home in the current legislature before making an annoucement.
9:23a, 3/3/23
I've debated where to put this but I figure naval history fans…might appreciate it/see it best here;
#OTD in 1990, THE HUNT FOR RED OCTOBER premiered. The film was based on the Tom Clancy novel published by @USNIBooks. The Naval Institute had never published original fiction but decided to take a chance on the unknown Clancy who was working as an insurance agent at the time. pic.twitter.com/zvIq0rDVSm
— U.S. Naval Institute (@NavalInstitute) March 2, 2023
7:00p, 3/3/23
I'm glad they've eliminated beaumont, that was the goofiest idea possible.
Unless something major has changed, the battlefield actively wanted to get rid of the ship. The sentiment when I was an undergrad was that it was a liability and detracted from the site. She will end up at a temporary dock before she'll go back there I believe.
I'm pretty sure the plan is to put her back in the strand area, the delay is likely just to hammer out the details. The biggest problem for putting the ship anywhere is dredging..... the more they have to dredge I'm, the more they'll have to dredge out in 20 years. We've also learned a lot, and burying these ships in the mud is a terrible idea
Unless something major has changed, the battlefield actively wanted to get rid of the ship. The sentiment when I was an undergrad was that it was a liability and detracted from the site. She will end up at a temporary dock before she'll go back there I believe.
I'm pretty sure the plan is to put her back in the strand area, the delay is likely just to hammer out the details. The biggest problem for putting the ship anywhere is dredging..... the more they have to dredge I'm, the more they'll have to dredge out in 20 years. We've also learned a lot, and burying these ships in the mud is a terrible idea
12:17a, 3/4/23
I hate hearing the Baytown is officially out, it would've looked great sitting at the base of Fred Hartman as you drive into town. I get it though, there's absolutely nothing worth visiting in Baytown unless you're coming here for work.
1:38p, 3/26/23
3/26/1945: Battleship Texas continues outstanding service
On this day in 1945, the battleship Texas supported the landings for the battle of Okinawa, the final great amphibious assault of World War II. The keel of the Texas, the second battleship to bear this name, was laid at Newport News, Virginia, on April 17, 1911. After serving in the Atlantic Fleet in the First World War, she supported the World War II landings in North Africa, Omaha Beach, southern France, and Iwo Jima. After more than thirty-four years of naval service she was retired and given to the state of Texas to be used as a memorial.
On this day in 1945, the battleship Texas supported the landings for the battle of Okinawa, the final great amphibious assault of World War II. The keel of the Texas, the second battleship to bear this name, was laid at Newport News, Virginia, on April 17, 1911. After serving in the Atlantic Fleet in the First World War, she supported the World War II landings in North Africa, Omaha Beach, southern France, and Iwo Jima. After more than thirty-four years of naval service she was retired and given to the state of Texas to be used as a memorial.
11:19a, 6/6/23
In reply to Ag_of_08
I realize prohibitively expensive, but I wish the plans for her were long-term dry display of some kind.Ag_of_08 said:
I'm glad they've eliminated beaumont, that was the goofiest idea possible.
Unless something major has changed, the battlefield actively wanted to get rid of the ship. The sentiment when I was an undergrad was that it was a liability and detracted from the site. She will end up at a temporary dock before she'll go back there I believe.
I'm pretty sure the plan is to put her back in the strand area, the delay is likely just to hammer out the details. The biggest problem for putting the ship anywhere is dredging..... the more they have to dredge I'm, the more they'll have to dredge out in 20 years. We've also learned a lot, and burying these ships in the mud is a terrible idea
1:08p, 6/6/23
Not sure what the refurbishment includes.
No way Texas returns to its home berth under its own power, is there?
No way Texas returns to its home berth under its own power, is there?
2:55p, 6/6/23
In reply to 74OA
No. I don't think they'll ever bring the engines online again, and the rudder is permanently rusted in place.74OA said:
Not sure what the refurbishment includes.
No way Texas returns to its home berth under its own power, is there?
3:43p, 6/6/23
In reply to Ag_of_08
Not surprised that the park wants to get rid of her. It seems that park administrators can't stand for people to actually show up and enjoy a park.
5:25p, 6/6/23
In reply to CanyonAg77
I think the reality is that the battleground just doesn't get enough people to support the Texas. No one will accidentally wind up there, so there's no peripheral traffic from other sights and tourist destinations. The only people that really go are school groups and a few dedicated history buffs
CanyonAg77 said:
Not surprised that the park wants to get rid of her. It seems that park administrators can't stand for people to actually show up and enjoy a park.
I think the reality is that the battleground just doesn't get enough people to support the Texas. No one will accidentally wind up there, so there's no peripheral traffic from other sights and tourist destinations. The only people that really go are school groups and a few dedicated history buffs
9:11p, 6/6/23
In reply to DrEvazanPhD
True. All of this.
DrEvazanPhD said:CanyonAg77 said:
Not surprised that the park wants to get rid of her. It seems that park administrators can't stand for people to actually show up and enjoy a park.
I think the reality is that the battleground just doesn't get enough people to support the Texas. No one will accidentally wind up there, so there's no peripheral traffic from other sights and tourist destinations. The only people that really go are school groups and a few dedicated history buffs
True. All of this.
1:29p, 6/7/23
In reply to BrazosBendHorn
Why not a tourist destination, then? Something on the coast (near Padre Island?) which is flooded with bodies in warm weather?BrazosBendHorn said:DrEvazanPhD said:CanyonAg77 said:
Not surprised that the park wants to get rid of her. It seems that park administrators can't stand for people to actually show up and enjoy a park.
I think the reality is that the battleground just doesn't get enough people to support the Texas. No one will accidentally wind up there, so there's no peripheral traffic from other sights and tourist destinations. The only people that really go are school groups and a few dedicated history buffs
True. All of this.
3:11p, 6/7/23
In reply to 74OA
It's probably going to Galveston.74OA said:Why not a tourist destination, then? Something on the coast (near Padre Island?) which is flooded with bodies in warm weather?BrazosBendHorn said:DrEvazanPhD said:CanyonAg77 said:
Not surprised that the park wants to get rid of her. It seems that park administrators can't stand for people to actually show up and enjoy a park.
I think the reality is that the battleground just doesn't get enough people to support the Texas. No one will accidentally wind up there, so there's no peripheral traffic from other sights and tourist destinations. The only people that really go are school groups and a few dedicated history buffs
True. All of this.
3:41p, 6/7/23
Always appreciate the updates on this thread (which also led me to donate to the cause - and received some of the coolest trinkets ever from a donation).
I would love to see a dry dock solution whether it be Galveston or seeming more appropriate Corpus. Trying to add in a trip down to Portsmouth when in London next month. They have the HMS Victory and HMS M 33 both in permanent / semi permanent dry dock. Sees like the right way to do it.
I would love to see a dry dock solution whether it be Galveston or seeming more appropriate Corpus. Trying to add in a trip down to Portsmouth when in London next month. They have the HMS Victory and HMS M 33 both in permanent / semi permanent dry dock. Sees like the right way to do it.
4:03p, 6/7/23
In reply to fka ftc
Agree with the dry dock. Would love to be able to tour the area below the water line
9:00p, 6/7/23
In reply to p_bubel
I think Galveston is where the battleship Texas foundation would prefer to be. I know corpus was considered as an option, but the worry is that two museum ships in the same area will attract the same number of visitors a year, so basically viewing/revenue will stay the same, but the maintenance costs double. Galveston would get plenty of incidental traffic from vacationers, folks going on cruises, and general tourism
p_bubel said:It's probably going to Galveston.74OA said:Why not a tourist destination, then? Something on the coast (near Padre Island?) which is flooded with bodies in warm weather?BrazosBendHorn said:DrEvazanPhD said:CanyonAg77 said:
Not surprised that the park wants to get rid of her. It seems that park administrators can't stand for people to actually show up and enjoy a park.
I think the reality is that the battleground just doesn't get enough people to support the Texas. No one will accidentally wind up there, so there's no peripheral traffic from other sights and tourist destinations. The only people that really go are school groups and a few dedicated history buffs
True. All of this.
I think Galveston is where the battleship Texas foundation would prefer to be. I know corpus was considered as an option, but the worry is that two museum ships in the same area will attract the same number of visitors a year, so basically viewing/revenue will stay the same, but the maintenance costs double. Galveston would get plenty of incidental traffic from vacationers, folks going on cruises, and general tourism
4:06a, 6/8/23
In reply to 74OA
the best possible plan would be to send her to Charleston and dock at Patriots Point next to the Yorktown
huge amount of tourists there - and how awesome would it be to have a battleship and fleet carrier side by side?
74OA said:Why not a tourist destination, then? Something on the coast (near Padre Island?) which is flooded with bodies in warm weather?BrazosBendHorn said:DrEvazanPhD said:CanyonAg77 said:
Not surprised that the park wants to get rid of her. It seems that park administrators can't stand for people to actually show up and enjoy a park.
I think the reality is that the battleground just doesn't get enough people to support the Texas. No one will accidentally wind up there, so there's no peripheral traffic from other sights and tourist destinations. The only people that really go are school groups and a few dedicated history buffs
True. All of this.
the best possible plan would be to send her to Charleston and dock at Patriots Point next to the Yorktown
huge amount of tourists there - and how awesome would it be to have a battleship and fleet carrier side by side?
8:56a, 6/12/23
For those who have taken the tour, do you get to go on the ship, or is it just a walk around the hull? Is it worth a special trip to Galveston to do it?
10:18a, 6/12/23
In reply to LMCane
Send her to Pearl Harbor and let her rest with the Missouri next to the Arizona
LMCane said:74OA said:Why not a tourist destination, then? Something on the coast (near Padre Island?) which is flooded with bodies in warm weather?BrazosBendHorn said:DrEvazanPhD said:CanyonAg77 said:
Not surprised that the park wants to get rid of her. It seems that park administrators can't stand for people to actually show up and enjoy a park.
I think the reality is that the battleground just doesn't get enough people to support the Texas. No one will accidentally wind up there, so there's no peripheral traffic from other sights and tourist destinations. The only people that really go are school groups and a few dedicated history buffs
True. All of this.
the best possible plan would be to send her to Charleston and dock at Patriots Point next to the Yorktown
huge amount of tourists there - and how awesome would it be to have a battleship and fleet carrier side by side?
Send her to Pearl Harbor and let her rest with the Missouri next to the Arizona
11:17a, 6/12/23
In reply to ABATTBQ87
i imagine that would be cost prohibitive to tow her that far.
and why would they want another battleship when they got the Missouri there already
and why would they want another battleship when they got the Missouri there already
11:31a, 6/12/23
In reply to BQ_90
Eazy peazy lemon squeezy:
"The absence of the word accountability is not the same as wanting no accountability" -unknown
"You can never go wrong by staying silent if there is nothing apt to say" -Walter Isaacson
"You can never go wrong by staying silent if there is nothing apt to say" -Walter Isaacson
12:33p, 6/12/23
In reply to BQ_90
Hawaii has about 1.5 million population, and 10 million annual visitors, many of them from outside the US. You would think the latter group has little interest in Texas.
Texas has nearly twice as many people (20 million or more) living east of I-35, and over 70 million out-of-state visitors a year.
Agree, unless you're going to sink her next to Arizona, she needs to be at a Texas port.Quote:
why would they want another battleship when they got the Missouri there already
Hawaii has about 1.5 million population, and 10 million annual visitors, many of them from outside the US. You would think the latter group has little interest in Texas.
Texas has nearly twice as many people (20 million or more) living east of I-35, and over 70 million out-of-state visitors a year.
12:38p, 6/12/23
And why sink Texas at Pearl Harbor? She wasn't there for the attack. Makes zero sense.
12:40p, 6/12/23
In reply to Breggy Popup
Nobody is going to sink her, I was just making a ridiculous comparison.Bregxit said:
And why sink Texas at Pearl Harbor? She wasn't there for the attack. Makes zero sense.
12:41p, 6/12/23
In reply to CanyonAg77
It sounded like what 87 up above was suggesting.
CanyonAg77 said:Nobody is going to sink her, I was just making a ridiculous comparison.Bregxit said:
And why sink Texas at Pearl Harbor? She wasn't there for the attack. Makes zero sense.
It sounded like what 87 up above was suggesting.