Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!att!cbnews!cbnews!military
From: bunge@wam.umd.edu (Robert David Bunge)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Carrier questions
Message-ID: <1991Mar13.002334.6570@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 13 Mar 91 00:23:34 GMT
Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (william.b.thacker)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 33
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: Robert David Bunge <bunge@wam.umd.edu>

I submitt the following:

swilliam@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Steve Williams) writes:
 
(In nice listing of operational U.S. aircraft carriers)
 
> the KITTY HAWK class:                                                       
>   CV-67    USS JOHN F. KENNEDY (actually an improved KITTY HAWK carrier)   
 
I've often seen this written like this.  Does anybody know just what
improvements where made to the JFK (especially ones that haven't been done
to the other KITTY HAWKs in twenty plus years of shipyard overhauls) to
make it worthy of a separate listing?  Before you start listing visible
characteristics like the JFK's tilted stack, please realize that all four of
these ships look different from one another.
 
 
> 2. USS LEXINGTON will be replaced by a FORRESTAL class carrier         
>    in the near future.                                                 
            ^^^^
Hasn't the navy been saying this for YEARS?   Anybody know if there are
concrete plans to finally do this?  If so, will the new ship be based out of
Pensacola?  I've always heard the channel there was too shallow for any of
the other carriers (including the Midway class).
 
Just wondering.
 
Bob Bunge
bunge@wam.umd.edu