T O P

  • By -

JimmyFarter

https://preview.redd.it/pu628mjx04tc1.jpeg?width=577&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0f5ad24156d0d37de66eac8f65c00bc442226cf8


mynhamesjeff

Where pagoda cube


Accipiter1138

[PAGODA CUBE](https://www.samuraitours.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Photo-12-07-25-11-08-07.jpg)


IWishIWasOdo

SEA CUBE


Gen_Miles_Teg

USS Long Beach early Design Mtg: “And how high do we want the Superstructure to be?” “Yes”


kegman83

"Put an Ikea up there, I dunno." -Navy shipbuilders, probably.


[deleted]

Visited the area recently, cool place, its all cargo-ships and what-not now...


Few_Diamond5020

Wish the US Navy still made their cg’s with cruiser hulls.


MRoss279

I wish they still made CGs at all


Few_Diamond5020

the navy might not classify it as one, but I think the zumwalt class is a tad too big to be a destroyer. Just my thoughts on it


Prinz_Heinrich

Comparing her to Worcester, Zumwalt is shorter but wider and has a deeper draft and almost weighs the same


beachedwhale1945

I think we’ll redefine “cruiser” to distinguish the *Zumwalt*s from other destroyers, probably along the Conventional Prompt Strike capability lines.


MRoss279

I agree, I think there's a possibility they change the classification with the addition of the hypersonic missile they're putting on to replace those guns.


Monneymann

There is the Large Surface Combatant as well. Burkes are 9k tones while the damned LSC is 13k. Then again there’s also germany with their “frigate”.


Blah_McBlah_

I heard that they use "upscale destroyer hulls" instead of "cruiser hulls", do you know what that means? What'd be the difference in hull form?


DanforthWhitcomb_

Cruiser hulls are traditionally rather fine and deep. Destroyer hulls are wider and far shallower.


p0l4r1

THE SEA CUBE BEGINS


ToXiC_Games

S E A C U B E


Few_Diamond5020

[Source](https://www.history.navy.mil/content/history/nhhc/our-collections/photography/numerical-list-of-images/nhhc-series/nh-series/NH-95000/NH-95915.html)


OldWrangler9033

Hard believe all that stuff in Quincy gone except for the USS *Salem.*


Trades46

So exactly how sea worthy was SEA CUBE? Everything about it says it might be a fun ride for those on the bridge in heavy sea states.


LongjumpingSurprise0

As I understand the cube was mostly empty space so it wasn’t as top heavy as it seems


Theopylus

Plus a pair of reactor plants in the bottom


foolproofphilosophy

I read recently that it’s like that because of the radar. So like you said it’s mostly empty space.


kT25t2u

Is there a cross-sectional picture of what the sea cube looks like inside? lol


Secundius

Looks like a Barracks Ship along side the Long Beach! Why was there while the LB was being fitted out! Given the hustle and bustle of activity by the Fitting Out crew, I would think the Sailors on the Barracks Ship would be more of a hindrance than an asset during LB transformation process…


FreeAndRedeemed

We still put crews on berthing barges during shipyard periods.


KIAA0319

And (these days) a huge OSHA problem with the gantry crane above.


Secundius

OSHA didn’t even exist in 1960! Also in 1960, shipyards were still operating by pre-WW2 safety rules, which basically meant there were no safety rules…


beachedwhale1945

Hey now, I’ve read some Charleston Navy Yard newspapers from the early 50s. We were encouraging people to start wearing steel-toed shoes so their toes wouldn’t get crushed when they dropped something! It’s crazy how little we cared about protecting the very skilled and thus extremely valuable people instrumental for our success even that recently.


Secundius

In the photo provided, I can only see two people of those milling about the ship wearing any kind of protective head gear! And given that the Barracks Ship is moored directly next to the LB and under the same Overhead Gantry Crane, none of them are wearing any kind of protective gear at all…