Jump to content

USS United States (CVA-58): Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→top: Or this one author claims so, anyway
Renamed citations to references in accordance with standard wikipedia style
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile app edit iOS app edit App section source
 
(45 intermediate revisions by 38 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{short description|Canceled American supercarrier}}
{{Other ships|USS United States}}
{{Other ships|USS United States}}
⚫
{{Use dmy dates|date=July 2020}}
{|{{Infobox ship begin}}
{|{{Infobox ship begin}}
{{Infobox ship image
{{Infobox ship image
|Ship image=[[Image:Artist's impression of the US Navy aircraft carrier USS United States (CVA-58) in October 1948.jpg|300px]]
|Ship image=Artist's impression of the US Navy aircraft carrier USS United States (CVA-58) in October 1948.jpg
|Ship caption = Artist's rendering of the proposed USS ''United States'' handling [[McDonnell FH Phantom|McDonnell FH-1 Phantom]] fighters and [[Lockheed P-2 Neptune|Lockheed P2V-3C Neptune]] twin-engine bombers
|Ship caption = Artist's rendering of the proposed USS ''United States'' handling [[McDonnell FH Phantom|McDonnell FH-1 Phantom]] fighters and [[Lockheed P-2 Neptune|Lockheed P2V-3C Neptune]] twin-engine bombers
}}
}}
Line 8: Line 10:
|Name=''United States'' class
|Name=''United States'' class
|Builders=[[Newport News Shipbuilding]]
|Builders=[[Newport News Shipbuilding]]
|Class before={{sclass-|Midway|aircraft carrier|4}}
|Class before={{sclass|Midway|aircraft carrier|4}}
|Class after={{sclass-|Forrestal|aircraft carrier|4}}s=
|Class after={{sclass|Forrestal|aircraft carrier|4}}
|Total ships planned=5
|Total ships planned=5
|Total ships completed=0
|Total ships completed=0
Line 18: Line 20:
|Ship flag={{USN flag|1949}}
|Ship flag={{USN flag|1949}}
|Ship name= ''United States''
|Ship name= ''United States''
|Ship namesake= [[United States]]
|Ship ordered=29 July 1948<ref name=Elward/>
|Ship ordered=29 July 1948<ref name=Elward/>
|Ship awarded=
|Ship awarded=
|Ship builder=[[Newport News Shipbuilding|Newport News Drydock and Shipbuilding]]<ref name=DANFS>{{cite DANFS|title=United States|url=http://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/ship-histories/danfs/u/united-states-frigate.html|accessdate=18 November 2010}}</ref>
|Ship builder=[[Newport News Shipbuilding|Newport News Drydock and Shipbuilding]]<ref name=DANFS>{{harvnb|DANFS ''United States''|2016}}</ref>
|Ship laid down=18 April 1949<ref name=DANFS/>
|Ship laid down=18 April 1949<ref name=DANFS/>
|Ship fate=Cancelled 23 April 1949<ref name=DANFS/>
|Ship fate=Cancelled 23 April 1949<ref name=DANFS/>
Line 27: Line 30:
|Hide header=
|Hide header=
|Header caption=
|Header caption=
|Ship class=[[Aircraft carrier]]
|Ship type=[[Aircraft carrier]]
|Ship displacement=*68,250 ton class<ref name = "NAVY">{{Cite web|url=http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/OnlineLibrary/photos/sh-usn/usnsh-u/cva58.htm|title=US Navy History: ''CVA-58''|work=US Navy|date=8 September 2001|accessdate=16 December 2011}}</ref><ref name = "FAS">{{Cite web|url=http://www.fas.org/programs/ssp/man/uswpns/navy/aircraftcarriers/cva58.html|title=CVA 58 ''United States''|publisher=FAS Military Analysis Network|accessdate=16 December 2011}}</ref>
|Ship displacement=*68,250 ton class<ref name = "NAVY">{{harvnb|Naval Historical Center|2001}}</ref><ref name="FAS">{{harvnb|Pike|2000}}</ref>
*83,200 [[long ton|ton]]s full<ref name=Polmar>{{Cite book|last=Polmar|first=Norman|title=Aircraft Carriers: A History of Carrier Aviation and Its Influence on World Events: Vol. II, 1946-2006 |year=2008|pages=47 (Table 3-1), 474 (Appendix C)|publisher=Potomac Books, Inc.|isbn=978-157488-665-8}}</ref><!--, 68,000&nbsp;tons standard{{Citation needed|date=November 2007}}-->
*83,200 [[long ton|ton]]s full<ref name=Polmar>{{harvnb|Polmar|2008|pp=47, 474}}</ref><!--, 68,000&nbsp;tons standard{{Citation needed|date=November 2007}}-->
|Ship length={{convert|1090|ft|m|abbr=on}} overall,<ref name=FAS/> {{convert|1030|ft|m|abbr=on}} waterline,<ref name=Polmar/> {{convert|1088|ft|m}} flight deck<ref name=Elward/>
|Ship length={{convert|1090|ft|m|0}} overall,<ref name=FAS/> {{convert|1030|ft|m|0}} waterline,<ref name=Polmar /> {{convert|1088|ft|m|0}} flight deck<ref name=Elward/>
|Ship beam={{convert|125|ft|m|abbr=on}} waterline (molded), {{convert|190|ft|m|abbr=on}} flight deck<ref name=FAS/>
|Ship beam={{convert|125|ft|m}} waterline (molded), {{convert|190|ft|m}} flight deck<ref name=FAS/>
|Ship draft={{convert|37|ft|m|abbr=on}}
|Ship draft={{convert|37|ft|m}}
|Ship propulsion=*Eight {{convert|1200|psi|MPa|abbr=on}} Foster-Wheeler boilers,
|Ship propulsion=*Eight {{convert|1200|psi|MPa|abbr=on}} [[Foster Wheeler]] boilers,
*four [[Westinghouse Electric (1886)|Westinghouse]] steam turbines totaling 280,000&nbsp;hp (209&nbsp;MW)
*four [[Westinghouse Electric (1886)|Westinghouse]] steam turbines totaling 280,000&nbsp;hp (209&nbsp;MW)
*driving four {{convert|20.5|ft|m|abbr=on}} diameter screws<ref name=Elward/>
*driving four {{convert|20.5|ft|m}} diameter screws<ref name=Elward/>
|Ship speed={{convert|33|kn|km/h}}
|Ship speed={{convert|33|kn}}
|Ship complement=*3019 officers and crew;<ref name=FAS/>
|Ship complement=*3,019 officers and crew;<ref name=FAS/>
*2480 air wing officers and crew<ref name=FAS/>
*2,480 air wing officers and crew<ref name=FAS/>
|Ship armament = 8 × 5&nbsp;in (127&nbsp;mm) / 54&nbsp;[[Caliber#Caliber as measurement of length|caliber]] guns in single mounts, 16 × 76&nbsp;mm / 70&nbsp;caliber guns in eight twin mounts, 20 × [[Oerlikon 20 mm cannon]]s<ref name=Elward/>
|Ship armament = 8 × 5&nbsp;in (127&nbsp;mm) / 54&nbsp;[[Caliber#Caliber as measurement of length|caliber]] guns in single mounts, 16 × 76&nbsp;mm / 70&nbsp;caliber guns in eight twin mounts, 20 × [[Oerlikon 20 mm cannon]]s in ten twin mounts<ref name=Elward/>
|Ship aircraft=*12 to 18 heavy bombers<ref name=Elward/><!-- (nuclear-capable) [[North American AJ Savage]] attack/bomber aircraft with twin radial piston engines augmented by one turbojet engine;
|Ship aircraft=*12 to 18 heavy bombers<ref name=Elward/><!-- (nuclear-capable) [[North American AJ Savage]] attack/bomber aircraft with twin radial piston engines augmented by one turbojet engine;
*--> and 54 [[jet engine]]d [[fighter aircraft]]<ref name=Elward/>
*--> and 54 [[jet engine]]d [[fighter aircraft]]<ref name=Elward/>
Line 47: Line 50:
|}
|}


'''USS ''United States'' (CVA-58)''' was to be the [[lead ship]] of a new design of [[aircraft carrier]]. On 29 July 1948, President [[Harry S. Truman|Harry Truman]] approved construction of five "[[supercarrier]]s", for which funds had been provided in the Naval Appropriations Act of 1949. The [[keel]] of the first of the five planned postwar carriers was laid down on 18 April 1949 at [[Newport News Shipbuilding|Newport News Drydock and Shipbuilding]].<ref name=DANFS/> The program was canceled, ''United States'' was not completed, and the other four planned carriers were never built.
'''USS ''United States'' (CVA-58)''' was to be the [[lead ship]] of a new design of [[aircraft carrier]]. On 29 July 1948, President [[Harry S. Truman|Harry Truman]] approved construction of five "supercarriers", for which funds had been provided in the Naval Appropriations Act of 1949. The [[keel]] of the first of the five planned postwar carriers was laid down on 18 April 1949 at [[Newport News Shipbuilding|Newport News Drydock and Shipbuilding]].<ref name=DANFS/> The program was canceled in 1949, ''United States'' was not completed, and the other four planned carriers were never built.


== Design ==
== Design ==
The chief proponent for the new large carrier was Admiral [[Marc Mitscher]].{{sfn|Friedman|1983|p=230}} He wanted a carrier that would be able to handle the most effective weapons of the day. Early design discussions centered around developing a carrier that would be able to support combat missions using the new jet aircraft. These were faster, larger and significantly heavier than the aircraft the {{sclass-|Essex|aircraft carrier|5}} and {{sclass-|Midway|aircraft carrier|5}}-class carriers were handling at the end of the [[World War II|Second World War]]. It was thought that the aircraft carried would have to have longer range to allow the carrier to operate farther away from the target. The deck would have to be able to handle the weight of the heavy jet aircraft landing on the deck. Furthermore, the experience gained against the [[Kamikaze]]s at the end of the war drove home the need for the ship to have an [[armoured flight deck]]. Too many pilots had been lost from kamikaze attack while they were sitting below the wooden flight deck in the [[Ready room|pilot ready room]]. The overall implication was that the ship's strength deck would have to be the flight deck rather than the hangar deck, as had been the case for earlier U.S. carriers.<ref>Cracknell, W.H, Cmdr USN, ''Warship Profile 15, USS Enterprise (CVAN 65) Nuclear Attack Carrier'', p56. Quote: "The main armor carried on Enterprise is the heavy armored flight deck. This was to prove a significant factor in the catastrophic fire and explosions that occurred on Enterprise's flight deck in 1969. The US Navy learned its lesson the hard way during World War II when all its carriers had only armored hangar decks. All attack carriers built since the Midway class have had armored flight decks."</ref> Armoring the flight deck would mean the ship would have a greater tendency to roll in rough weather, as a greater part of the ship's weight would be elevated higher above the waterline.
The chief proponent for the new large carrier was Admiral [[Marc Mitscher]].{{sfn|Friedman|1983|p=230}} He wanted a carrier that would be able to handle the most effective weapons of the day. Early design discussions centered around developing a carrier that would be able to support combat missions using the new jet aircraft. These were faster, larger and significantly heavier than the aircraft which the {{sclass|Essex|aircraft carrier|5}}- and {{sclass|Midway|aircraft carrier|5}}-class carriers were handling at the end of the [[World War II|Second World War]]. It was thought that the aircraft carried would have to have longer range to allow the carrier to operate farther away from the target. The deck would have to be able to handle the weight of the heavy jet aircraft landing on the deck. The implication was that the ship's strength deck would have to be the flight deck rather than the hangar deck, as had been the case for earlier U.S. carriers.<ref>{{harvnb|Cracknell|1972|p=56}}: "The main armor carried on ''Enterprise'' is the heavy armored flight deck. This was to prove a significant factor in the catastrophic fire and explosions that occurred on ''Enterprise''{{'}}s flight deck in 1969. The US Navy learned its lesson the hard way during World War II when all its carriers had only armored hangar decks. All attack carriers built since the ''Midway'' class have had armored flight decks."</ref> Armoring the flight deck would mean the ship would have a greater tendency to roll in rough seas, as a greater part of the ship's weight would be high above the waterline.
⚫
[[File:Preliminary design model of USS United States (CVA-58) undergoing seekeeping tests at Carderock (01), c1947.jpg|thumb|left|A preliminary design model undergoing seakeeping tests.]]
⚫
Based on the size of the aircraft that the new ship was to carry, the design of the carrier was to be [[flush deck]]ed, meaning that the ship would have no [[Aircraft carrier#Deck structures|island control structure]]. This was done to create more space for large winged aircraft.{{sfn|Friedman|1983|p=244}} The flush-deck design carried with it two major areas of concern. The first was concern over how smoke from the power plants would be diverted away from the flight deck.{{sfn|Friedman|1983|pp=241-243}} This had been a major issue with the US Navy's first aircraft carrier, {{USS|Langley|CV-1|6}}, in the 1920s when carrier development was first underway. The second was the placement of early warning radar equipment to allow the ship to detect incoming attacks. One solution was for a command ship to be close by which would carry the commander of the task force and the early detection radar. The command ship would radio electronic information and orders from its command center over to the carrier. A second was for the ship to carry aircraft that could fly the early warning radar. These would fly overhead and detect approaching aircraft.{{sfn|Friedman|1983|p=244}} In truth, the ship as designed would not be able to safely operate by itself, but would need to operate in conjunction with traditional fleet carriers as a complementary bomber-carrier. In fact, the ship was being designed on the basis of the aircraft that it was thought it would carry, and these were based on projections of what aircraft would be in existence in the period 1952 to 1960.{{sfn|Friedman|1983|p=244}}


⚫
[[File:Preliminary design model of USS United States (CVA-58) undergoing seekeeping tests at Carderock (01), c1947.jpg|thumb|left|A preliminary design model undergoing seakeeping tests in a water tank]]
⚫
Discussions included debate on the aircraft carrier's mission. One view was that it would carry a group of large bombers that would be secured to the flight deck, with no hangar for these aircraft, as they would be too large to move up and down in an elevator.{{sfn|Friedman|1983|p=241}} Though they would be built to carry large, nuclear weapons, the total amount of space used for munition storage would be reduced as multiple strikes would not be likely. A small hangar deck would be available for a limited fighter escort and a small magazine for a small number of heavy [[nuclear weapon]]s. Another plan was that it could be built with conventional attack capability with a large hangar deck for a large air wing and a large magazine.<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=YyQDAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA114 "Why The Navy Wants Supercarriers"], ''Popular Science'', January 1949, page 115.</ref> The nuclear attack supporters won in the initial design stage, but the design was modified to carry more fighters. The flush-deck ''United States'' was designed to launch and recover the 100,000&nbsp;pound (45 t) aircraft required to carry early-model nuclear weapons, which weighed as much as five tons.<ref name = "FAS" /> The ship would have no permanently raised island or command tower structure.{{sfn|Friedman|1983|p=244}} It would be equipped with four aircraft elevators located at the deck edges to avoid decreasing the structural strength of the flight deck. Four catapults would be used to launch aircraft, with two at the bow and two others on the outer edge of the deck staggered back. The carrier was designed so that it could land aircraft at the rear while at the same time launching aircraft from the [[catapult]]s at the bow and forward area simultaneously.{{sfn|Friedman|1983|p=188}} The construction cost of the new ship was estimated at US$189 million (equivalent to US${{inflation|US|0.189|1948|r=2}} billion in {{Inflation-year|US}}).<ref name=Elward/>{{Inflation-fn|US}}

⚫
Based on the size of the aircraft that the new ship was to carry, the design of the carrier was to be [[flush deck]]ed, meaning that the ship would have no [[Aircraft carrier#Deck structures|island control structure]]. This would be done to create more space for large winged aircraft.{{sfn|Friedman|1983|p=244}} The flush-deck design carried with it two major concerns. The first concern was over how smoke from the power plants would be diverted from the flight deck.{{sfn|Friedman|1983|pp=241–243}} This had been a major issue with the US Navy's first aircraft carrier, {{USS|Langley|CV-1|6}}, in the 1920s when carrier development was first underway. The second concern was the placement of early warning radar equipment to allow the ship to detect incoming attacks. One solution was for a command ship to be close by which would carry the commander of the task force and the early detection radar. The command ship would radio electronic information and orders from its command center over to the carrier. This command ship role was termed a 'pilotfish' and the {{USS|Northampton|CLC-1|}} would be built in part to fulfill this role.{{sfn|Friedman|1984|p=340}} A second solution was for the ship to carry [[Radar_picket#Replacement_by_aircraft|aircraft that could fly the early warning radar]]. These would fly overhead and detect approaching aircraft.{{sfn|Friedman|1983|p=244}} In truth, the ship as designed would not be able to safely operate by itself, but would need to operate in conjunction with traditional fleet carriers as a complementary bomber-carrier. In fact, the ship was being designed on the basis of the aircraft that it was thought it would carry, and these were based on projections of what aircraft would be in existence in the period 1952 to 1960.{{sfn|Friedman|1983|p=244}}

⚫
Discussions included debate on the aircraft carrier's mission. One view was that it would carry a group of large bombers that would be secured to the flight deck, with no hangar for these aircraft, as they would be too large to move up and down in an elevator.{{sfn|Friedman|1983|p=241}} Though they would be built to carry large nuclear weapons, the total amount of space used for munition storage would be reduced as multiple strikes would not be likely. A small hangar deck would be available for a limited fighter escort and a small magazine for a small number of heavy [[nuclear weapon]]s. Another plan was that it could be built with conventional attack capability with a large hangar deck for a large air wing and a large magazine.{{sfn|Gustafson|1949|p=115}} The nuclear attack supporters won in the initial design stage, but the design was modified to carry more fighters. The flush-deck ''United States'' was designed to launch and recover the 100,000&nbsp;pound (45 t) aircraft required to carry early-model nuclear weapons, which weighed as much as five tons.<ref name = "FAS" /> The ship would have no permanently raised island or command tower structure.{{sfn|Friedman|1983|p=244}} It would be equipped with four aircraft elevators located at the deck edges to avoid decreasing the structural strength of the flight deck. Four catapults would be used to launch aircraft, with two at the bow and two others on the outer edge of the deck staggered back. The carrier was designed so that it could land aircraft at the rear while at the same time launching aircraft from the [[aircraft catapult|catapult]]s at the bow and forward area simultaneously.{{sfn|Friedman|1983|p=188}} The construction cost of the new ship was estimated at US$189 million<ref name=Elward/> (equivalent to US${{inflation|US-GDP|0.189|1948|r=2}} billion in {{Inflation/year|US-GDP}}).{{Inflation/fn|US-GDP}}


== Proposed operations ==
== Proposed operations ==
USS ''United States'' was designed with the primary mission of carrying long-range bomber aircraft that could carry a heavy enough load to undertake nuclear bombardment missions. It would also carry long range escort fighters that would fly along and protect its bombers. The ship could also take on other roles, such as providing air support for [[Amphibious warfare|amphibious forces]] and to conduct sea control operations, but it was primarily to be a "bomber carrier".{{sfn|Friedman|1983|p=242}} It was thought it would operate in a task force coupled with traditional attack carriers, which would provide the air cover for the task force. That mission was virtually certain to make the ship a target of inter-service rivalries over missions and funding. The [[United States Air Force]] viewed ''United States'' as a challenge to their monopoly on [[strategic nuclear weapon]]s delivery.<ref name=Elward>{{Cite book|last=Elward|first=Brad|title=Nimitz-Class Aircraft Carriers|year=2011|pages=6–8|publisher=Osprey Publishing|isbn=978-1-84908-971-5}}</ref>
USS ''United States'' was designed with the primary mission of carrying long-range bomber aircraft that could carry a heavy enough load to undertake nuclear bombardment missions. It would also carry long range escort fighters that would fly along and protect its bombers. The ship could also take on other roles, such as providing air support for [[Amphibious warfare|amphibious forces]] and to conduct sea control operations, but it was primarily to be a "bomber carrier".{{sfn|Friedman|1983|p=242}} It was thought it would operate in a task force coupled with traditional attack carriers, which would provide the air cover for the task force. That mission was virtually certain to make the ship a target of inter-service rivalries over missions and funding. The [[United States Air Force]] viewed ''United States'' as a challenge to their monopoly on [[strategic nuclear weapon]]s delivery.<ref name=Elward>{{harvnb|Elward|2011|pp=6–8}}</ref>


== Keel laying; cancellation ==
== Keel laying; cancellation ==
[[File:Workmen lay the keel plate of USS United States (CVA-58) on 18th April 1948.jpg|thumb|left|Keelplate laid]]
[[File:Workmen lay the keel plate of USS United States (CVA-58) on 18th April 1948.jpg|thumb|left|Keelplate laid]]
Looking to cut the military budget and accepting without question the Air Force argument on nuclear deterrence by means of large, long-range bombers, Secretary of Defense [[Louis A. Johnson]] announced the cancellation of construction of ''United States'', on 23 April 1949, five days after the ship's keel was laid.<ref name = "NAVY" /> Secretary of the Navy [[John L. Sullivan (U.S. Navy)|John Sullivan]] immediately resigned, and Congress held an inquiry into the manner and wisdom of Johnson's decision. In the subsequent "[[Revolt of the Admirals]]" the Navy was unable to advance its case that large carriers would be essential to national defense.<ref>{{Cite web|first=Andrew L|last=Lewis|url=http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/docs/98-166.htm|title=The Revolt of the Admirals|publisher=FAS.org|accessdate=16 December 2011}}</ref>
Looking to cut the military budget and accepting without question the Air Force argument on nuclear deterrence by means of large, long-range bombers, Secretary of Defense [[Louis A. Johnson]] announced the cancellation of ''United States'' on 23 April 1949, five days after the ship's keel was laid.<ref name = "NAVY" /> Secretary of the Navy [[John L. Sullivan (U.S. Navy)|John Sullivan]] immediately resigned, and Congress held an inquiry into the manner and wisdom of Johnson's decision. In the subsequent "[[Revolt of the Admirals]]", the Navy was unable to advance its case that large carriers would be essential to national defense.{{sfn|Lewis|1998|pp=32–35}}
[[File:The keel plate of USS United States (CVA-58) being laid in a construction dry dock on 18 April 1948.jpg|thumb|Commencement of construction]]
[[File:The keel plate of USS United States (CVA-58) being laid in a construction dry dock on 18 April 1948.jpg|thumb|Commencement of construction]]
Soon after Johnson and [[Francis P. Matthews]], the man he advanced to be the new Secretary of the Navy, set about punishing those officers that let their opposition be known.{{sfn|McFarland|1980|p=61}} Navy Admiral [[Louis E. Denfeld|Louis Denfeld]] was forced to resign as [[Chief of Naval Operations]], and a number of other admirals and lesser ranks were punished. The [[Korean War|invasion of South Korea]] six months later resulted in an immediate need for a strong naval presence, and Matthews position as Secretary of the Navy and Johnson's position as Secretary of Defense [[Louis A. Johnson#Failure in Korea|crumbled]], both ultimately resigning.
Soon afterward, Johnson and [[Francis P. Matthews]], the man he advanced to be the new Secretary of the Navy, set about punishing those officers that let their opposition be known.{{sfn|McFarland|1980|p=61}} Navy Admiral [[Louis E. Denfeld|Louis Denfeld]] was forced to resign as [[Chief of Naval Operations]], and a number of other admirals and lesser ranks were punished. The [[Korean War|invasion of South Korea]] six months later resulted in an immediate need for a strong naval presence, and Matthews' position as Secretary of the Navy and Johnson's position as Secretary of Defense [[Louis A. Johnson#Failure in Korea|crumbled]], both ultimately resigning.{{Uncited|date=June 2024}}


Soon after she was canceled, the aircraft carrier's keel was dismantled. This freed up the drydock, allowing crews to immediately begin construction on the ocean liner [[SS United States|SS ''United States'']] (name coincidental).<ref>{{Cite book |last=Ujifusa |first=Steven |title=A Man and His Ship: America's Greatest Naval Architect and His Quest to Build the S.S. United States |publisher=Simon & Schuster |year=2013 |isbn=978-1451645095 |pages=240-241}}</ref>
⚫
The Navy soon found a means to carry [[nuclear weapon]]s at sea, placed aboard the aircraft carrier {{USS|Franklin D. Roosevelt|CV-42|6}} in 1950.<ref name = "FAS" /> Thus the question of which service would have primary responsibility for strategic nuclear strikes was not answered with Johnson's cancellation of USS ''United States''.

{{clear}} <!-- The clr tag prevents the picture from running into the next section. Please keep it at the bottom of this section. -->
⚫
The Navy soon found a means to carry [[nuclear weapon]]s at sea, placed aboard the aircraft carrier {{USS|Franklin D. Roosevelt|CV-42|6}} in 1950.<ref name="FAS" /> Thus the question of which service would have primary responsibility for strategic nuclear strikes was not answered with Johnson's cancellation of USS ''United States''.{{Uncited|date=June 2024}}

{{clear}}


==See also==
==See also==
⚫
{{Commonscat|USS United States (CVA-58)}}
{{Portal|United States Navy}}
* [[List of aircraft carriers]]
* [[List of aircraft carriers]]
* [[List of aircraft carriers of the United States Navy]]
* [[List of aircraft carriers of the United States Navy]]
* [[Naval aviation]]
* [[Naval aviation]]


==Citations==
==References==
{{Reflist|30em}}
{{Reflist}}


==Bibliography==
==Bibliography==
{{Refbegin}}
{{Refbegin}}
* {{cite book |last= Cracknell |first= W. H. |date= 1972 |title= USS ''Enterprise'' (CVAN 65) Nuclear Attack Carrier |series= Warship Profile |volume= 15 |publisher= Profile Publications}}
⚫
* Friedman, Norman ''U.S. Aircraft Carriers: An Illustrated Design History'' Annapolis Md, Naval Institute Press, 1983. {{ISBN|978-0-87021-739-5}}
* {{cite book |last= Elward |first= Brad |title= Nimitz-Class Aircraft Carriers |date= 2011 |pages= 6–8 |publisher= Osprey Publishing |isbn= 978-1-84908-971-5}}
* {{cite web|url=http://strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/parameters/Articles/1981/1981%20mcfarland.pdf |last=McFarland|first=Keith|title= The 1949 Revolt of the Admirals|work= Parameters: Journal of the US Army War College Quarterly Vol. XI, No. 2|pages=53–63|year=1980|accessdate=28 April 2014}}
⚫
* {{cite book |last= Friedman |first= Norman |date= 1983 |title= U.S. Aircraft Carriers: An Illustrated Design History |location= Annapolis, Maryland |publisher= Naval Institute Press |isbn= 978-0-87021-739-5}}
⚫
* {{cite book |title= Aircraft Carriers: A History of Carrier Aviation and Its Influence on World Events: Vol. II, 1946-2006 |last= Polmar |first= Norman |year= 2008 |publisher= Potomac Books, Inc. |location= [[Dulles, Virginia]] |isbn= 978-157488-665-8 |pages= |url=http://www.potomacbooksinc.com/Books/BookDetail.aspx?productID=69770|quote=}}
* {{citation|last=Friedman|first=Norman|title=U.S. Cruisers: an illustrated design history|publisher=Naval Institute Press|location=Annapolis, MD|year=1984|isbn=0-87021-718-6|oclc=10949320}}
* {{cite magazine |last= Gustafson |first= Phil |date= January 1949 |title= Why the Navy Wants Supercarriers |magazine= [[Popular Science]] |pages= 114–120 |url= {{Google Books URL|id=YyQDAAAAMBAJ|p=114}}}}
* {{cite thesis |last= Lewis |first= Andrew L. |date= April 1998 |title= The Revolt of the Admirals |publisher= Air Command and Staff College, Maxwell Air Force Base |author-link= Andrew L. Lewis (admiral) |url= http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/docs/98-166.htm |via= Federation of American Scientists}}
* {{cite journal |last= McFarland |first= Keith |date= 1980 |title= The 1949 Revolt of the Admirals |journal= Parameters: Journal of the U.S. Army War College Quarterly |volume= XI |number= 2 |pages= 53–63 |publisher= U.S. Army War College |url= http://strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/parameters/Articles/1981/1981%20mcfarland.pdf |access-date= 28 April 2014}}
* {{cite web |author= Naval Historical Center |date= 8 September 2001 |title= USS ''United States'' (CVA-58) |work= Online Library of Selected Images: U.S. Navy Ships |publisher= U.S. Navy, Naval Historical Command |via= HyperWar Foundation |url= http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/OnlineLibrary/photos/sh-usn/usnsh-u/cva58.htm |access-date= 16 August 2021 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20210807124253/http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/OnlineLibrary/photos/sh-usn/usnsh-u/cva58.htm |archive-date= 7 August 2021 |url-status= live}}
* {{cite web |last= Pike |first= John |date= 3 January 2000 |title= CVA 58 ''United States'' |work= FAS Military Analysis Network |publisher= Federation of American Scientists |url= https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/cva-58.htm |access-date= 16 August 2021}}
⚫
* {{cite book |last= Polmar |first= Norman |date= 2008 |title= Aircraft Carriers: A History of Carrier Aviation and Its Influence on World Events: Vol. II, 1946-2006 |publisher= Potomac Books |location= Dulles, Virginia |isbn= 978-157488-665-8}}
⚫
* {{cite DANFS |ref= {{SfnRef|DANFS ''United States''|2016}} |title= United States (frigate), 1797–1865 |date= 22 February 2016 |url= http://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/ship-histories/danfs/u/united-states-frigate.html |access-date= 16 August 2021}}
{{Refend}}
{{Refend}}
⚫
*{{DANFS|http://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/ship-histories/danfs/u/united-states-frigate.html}}


== Further reading ==
== Further reading ==
⚫
{{Commons category|USS United States (CVA-58)}}
⚫
* Jared A. Zichek: ''The Incredible Attack Aircraft of the USS United States, 1948–1949''. Atglen, PA: Schiffer Publishing, 2009. {{ISBN|978-0-7643-3229-6}}.
{{Refbegin}}

⚫
* {{cite book |last= Zichek |first= Jared A. |date= 2009 |title= The Incredible Attack Aircraft of the USS ''United States'', 1948–1949 |location= Atglen, Pennsylvania |publisher= Schiffer Publishing |isbn= 978-0-7643-3229-6}}
⚫
{{Use dmy dates|date=February 2011}}
{{Refend}}


{{DEFAULTSORT:United States (Cva-58)}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:United States (Cva-58)}}
Line 96: Line 110:
[[Category:Cancelled ships of the United States Navy]]
[[Category:Cancelled ships of the United States Navy]]
[[Category:Cancelled aircraft carriers]]
[[Category:Cancelled aircraft carriers]]
[[Category:Proposed ships of the United States Navy]]

Latest revision as of 14:41, 13 November 2024

For other ships with the same name, see USS United States.

Artist's rendering of the proposed USS United States handling McDonnell FH-1 Phantom fighters and Lockheed P2V-3C Neptune twin-engine bombers
Class overview
NameUnited States class
BuildersNewport News Shipbuilding
Preceded byMidway class
Succeeded byForrestal class
Planned5
Completed0
History
United States
NameUnited States
NamesakeUnited States
Ordered29 July 1948[1]
BuilderNewport News Drydock and Shipbuilding[2]
Laid down18 April 1949[2]
FateCancelled 23 April 1949[2]
General characteristics
TypeAircraft carrier
Displacement
Length1,090 feet (332 m) overall,[4] 1,030 feet (314 m) waterline,[5] 1,088 feet (332 m) flight deck[1]
Beam125 feet (38 m) waterline (molded), 190 feet (58 m) flight deck[4]
Draft37 feet (11 m)
Propulsion
  • Eight 1,200 psi (8.3 MPa) Foster Wheeler boilers,
  • four Westinghouse steam turbines totaling 280,000 hp (209 MW)
  • driving four 20.5 feet (6.2 m) diameter screws[1]
Speed33 knots (61 km/h; 38 mph)
Complement
  • 3,019 officers and crew;[4]
  • 2,480 air wing officers and crew[4]
Armament8 × 5 in (127 mm) / 54 caliber guns in single mounts, 16 × 76 mm / 70 caliber guns in eight twin mounts, 20 × Oerlikon 20 mm cannons in ten twin mounts[1]
Aircraft carried12 to 18 heavy bombers[1] and 54 jet engined fighter aircraft[1]

USS United States (CVA-58) was to be the lead ship of a new design of aircraft carrier. On 29 July 1948, President Harry Truman approved construction of five "supercarriers", for which funds had been provided in the Naval Appropriations Act of 1949. The keel of the first of the five planned postwar carriers was laid down on 18 April 1949 at Newport News Drydock and Shipbuilding.[2] The program was canceled in 1949, United States was not completed, and the other four planned carriers were never built.

Design

[edit]

The chief proponent for the new large carrier was Admiral Marc Mitscher.[6] He wanted a carrier that would be able to handle the most effective weapons of the day. Early design discussions centered around developing a carrier that would be able to support combat missions using the new jet aircraft. These were faster, larger and significantly heavier than the aircraft which the Essex- and Midway-class carriers were handling at the end of the Second World War. It was thought that the aircraft carried would have to have longer range to allow the carrier to operate farther away from the target. The deck would have to be able to handle the weight of the heavy jet aircraft landing on the deck. The implication was that the ship's strength deck would have to be the flight deck rather than the hangar deck, as had been the case for earlier U.S. carriers.[7] Armoring the flight deck would mean the ship would have a greater tendency to roll in rough seas, as a greater part of the ship's weight would be high above the waterline.

A preliminary design model undergoing seakeeping tests in a water tank

Based on the size of the aircraft that the new ship was to carry, the design of the carrier was to be flush decked, meaning that the ship would have no island control structure. This would be done to create more space for large winged aircraft.[8] The flush-deck design carried with it two major concerns. The first concern was over how smoke from the power plants would be diverted from the flight deck.[9] This had been a major issue with the US Navy's first aircraft carrier, USS Langley, in the 1920s when carrier development was first underway. The second concern was the placement of early warning radar equipment to allow the ship to detect incoming attacks. One solution was for a command ship to be close by which would carry the commander of the task force and the early detection radar. The command ship would radio electronic information and orders from its command center over to the carrier. This command ship role was termed a 'pilotfish' and the USS Northampton (CLC-1) would be built in part to fulfill this role.[10] A second solution was for the ship to carry aircraft that could fly the early warning radar. These would fly overhead and detect approaching aircraft.[8] In truth, the ship as designed would not be able to safely operate by itself, but would need to operate in conjunction with traditional fleet carriers as a complementary bomber-carrier. In fact, the ship was being designed on the basis of the aircraft that it was thought it would carry, and these were based on projections of what aircraft would be in existence in the period 1952 to 1960.[8]

Discussions included debate on the aircraft carrier's mission. One view was that it would carry a group of large bombers that would be secured to the flight deck, with no hangar for these aircraft, as they would be too large to move up and down in an elevator.[11] Though they would be built to carry large nuclear weapons, the total amount of space used for munition storage would be reduced as multiple strikes would not be likely. A small hangar deck would be available for a limited fighter escort and a small magazine for a small number of heavy nuclear weapons. Another plan was that it could be built with conventional attack capability with a large hangar deck for a large air wing and a large magazine.[12] The nuclear attack supporters won in the initial design stage, but the design was modified to carry more fighters. The flush-deck United States was designed to launch and recover the 100,000 pound (45 t) aircraft required to carry early-model nuclear weapons, which weighed as much as five tons.[4] The ship would have no permanently raised island or command tower structure.[8] It would be equipped with four aircraft elevators located at the deck edges to avoid decreasing the structural strength of the flight deck. Four catapults would be used to launch aircraft, with two at the bow and two others on the outer edge of the deck staggered back. The carrier was designed so that it could land aircraft at the rear while at the same time launching aircraft from the catapults at the bow and forward area simultaneously.[13] The construction cost of the new ship was estimated at US$189 million[1] (equivalent to US$1.92 billion in 2023).[14]

Proposed operations

[edit]

USS United States was designed with the primary mission of carrying long-range bomber aircraft that could carry a heavy enough load to undertake nuclear bombardment missions. It would also carry long range escort fighters that would fly along and protect its bombers. The ship could also take on other roles, such as providing air support for amphibious forces and to conduct sea control operations, but it was primarily to be a "bomber carrier".[15] It was thought it would operate in a task force coupled with traditional attack carriers, which would provide the air cover for the task force. That mission was virtually certain to make the ship a target of inter-service rivalries over missions and funding. The United States Air Force viewed United States as a challenge to their monopoly on strategic nuclear weapons delivery.[1]

Keel laying; cancellation

[edit]
Keelplate laid

Looking to cut the military budget and accepting without question the Air Force argument on nuclear deterrence by means of large, long-range bombers, Secretary of Defense Louis A. Johnson announced the cancellation of United States on 23 April 1949, five days after the ship's keel was laid.[3] Secretary of the Navy John Sullivan immediately resigned, and Congress held an inquiry into the manner and wisdom of Johnson's decision. In the subsequent "Revolt of the Admirals", the Navy was unable to advance its case that large carriers would be essential to national defense.[16]

Commencement of construction

Soon afterward, Johnson and Francis P. Matthews, the man he advanced to be the new Secretary of the Navy, set about punishing those officers that let their opposition be known.[17] Navy Admiral Louis Denfeld was forced to resign as Chief of Naval Operations, and a number of other admirals and lesser ranks were punished. The invasion of South Korea six months later resulted in an immediate need for a strong naval presence, and Matthews' position as Secretary of the Navy and Johnson's position as Secretary of Defense crumbled, both ultimately resigning.[citation needed]

Soon after she was canceled, the aircraft carrier's keel was dismantled. This freed up the drydock, allowing crews to immediately begin construction on the ocean liner SS United States (name coincidental).[18]

The Navy soon found a means to carry nuclear weapons at sea, placed aboard the aircraft carrier USS Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1950.[4] Thus the question of which service would have primary responsibility for strategic nuclear strikes was not answered with Johnson's cancellation of USS United States.[citation needed]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ a b c d e f g h Elward 2011, pp. 6–8
  2. ^ a b c d DANFS United States 2016
  3. ^ a b Naval Historical Center 2001
  4. ^ a b c d e f g Pike 2000
  5. ^ a b Polmar 2008, pp. 47, 474
  6. ^ Friedman 1983, p. 230.
  7. ^ Cracknell 1972, p. 56: "The main armor carried on Enterprise is the heavy armored flight deck. This was to prove a significant factor in the catastrophic fire and explosions that occurred on Enterprise's flight deck in 1969. The US Navy learned its lesson the hard way during World War II when all its carriers had only armored hangar decks. All attack carriers built since the Midway class have had armored flight decks."
  8. ^ a b c d Friedman 1983, p. 244.
  9. ^ Friedman 1983, pp. 241–243.
  10. ^ Friedman 1984, p. 340.
  11. ^ Friedman 1983, p. 241.
  12. ^ Gustafson 1949, p. 115.
  13. ^ Friedman 1983, p. 188.
  14. ^ Johnston, Louis; Williamson, Samuel H. (2023). "What Was the U.S. GDP Then?". MeasuringWorth. Retrieved 30 November 2023. United States Gross Domestic Product deflator figures follow the MeasuringWorth series.
  15. ^ Friedman 1983, p. 242.
  16. ^ Lewis 1998, pp. 32–35.
  17. ^ McFarland 1980, p. 61.
  18. ^ Ujifusa, Steven (2013). A Man and His Ship: America's Greatest Naval Architect and His Quest to Build the S.S. United States. Simon & Schuster. pp. 240–241. ISBN 978-1451645095.

Bibliography

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
Wikimedia Commons has media related to USS United States (CVA-58).
  • Zichek, Jared A. (2009). The Incredible Attack Aircraft of the USS United States, 1948–1949. Atglen, Pennsylvania: Schiffer Publishing. ISBN 978-0-7643-3229-6.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=USS_United_States_(CVA-58)&oldid=1257154527"