Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!xanth!ukma!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!osu-cis!att!cbnews!ugthomps@cs.buffalo.edu
From: ugthomps@cs.buffalo.edu
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Are Aircraft Carriers Obsolete ?
Message-ID: <3408@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 24 Jan 89 02:51:47 GMT
References: <3350@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM
Organization: SUNY/Buffalo Computer Science
Lines: 39
Approved: military@att.att.com


In article <3350@cbnews.ATT.COM> military@att.att.com (Bill Thacker) writes:
>>And third, carrier doctrine for dealing with chemical attack and nuclear
>>fallout is to button up tight, get through the contaminated area, and
>>then clean up and resume operations.  This was done because experiments
>>with operating in protective clothing etc. had truly dismal results.
>>Now, consider:  at least some persistent chemical agents are quite
>>difficult to clean off metal surfaces.  One cruise missile armed with
>>a spray tank instead of a warhead and the carrier is as good as sunk.
>
>I seem to recall reading that Enterprise (and, presumably, all later
>carriers) is equipped with a "hosedown" facility, to rinse the outside
>of the ship with seawater; originally, the intent was for decontamination
>following a nuclear attack.  I wonder if this can be used against
>chemical agents (if it does, in fact, exist).
>
>Of course, this implies an escalation to chemical warfare; while certainly
>a scenario worth considering, let us not forget that all parties in
>WWII (excepting, perhaps, the Japanese in Manchuria) refused to escalate
>to chemical warfare, even in their darkest hours.

More ships than just carriers are equipped with such a hose down facility.
The destroyer I am attached to has such equipment as well as all ships in
her class and many other classes as well.  However, the people in deck 
division are notorious for painting over the exit nozzles so that they
will not perform as desired.  :-(  Though this method of washdown is
effective against surface and air blasts (nuclear) and some forms of
chemical and biological attack, it is not effective against sub surface
blasts (if you survive) because you would be spraying contaminated water
all over your ship. 

I was about to comment on the Navy's readiness with relation to 
CBR warfare.  However, I have a feeling that I shouldn't. 

You can not seal up any ship entirely.  There are simply too many entrance
and exit points, too many places to wash down after the fact, and far too
many sailors who won't abide by regulations to do an effective job. 

                     - G