<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: World&#8217;s Biggest Aircraft Carriers</title>
	<atom:link href="http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/03/03/worlds-biggest-aircraft-carriers/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/03/03/worlds-biggest-aircraft-carriers/</link>
	<description>Why bother seeing the world for real?</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 19 Jul 2008 14:43:54 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: nova72</title>
		<link>http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/03/03/worlds-biggest-aircraft-carriers/#comment-201332</link>
		<dc:creator>nova72</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jul 2008 13:10:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/03/03/worlds-biggest-aircraft-carriers/#comment-201332</guid>
		<description>@ Jaz

Where are you talking about?   Could you provide a link?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ Jaz</p>
<p>Where are you talking about?   Could you provide a link?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jaz</title>
		<link>http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/03/03/worlds-biggest-aircraft-carriers/#comment-201324</link>
		<dc:creator>Jaz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jul 2008 22:17:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/03/03/worlds-biggest-aircraft-carriers/#comment-201324</guid>
		<description>Alot of carriers in 1 place on my google earth, the entire atlantic fleet at anchor (£ carriers CVN-71,CVN-75 and CVN-65 , with the 4 LHD Platforms, Plus the vinson and G H W B afloat, near half the fleet there!

I heard from a colleague that the reagan is transitting the Panama Canal in this version fof google earth but i am currently surveying this!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Alot of carriers in 1 place on my google earth, the entire atlantic fleet at anchor (£ carriers CVN-71,CVN-75 and CVN-65 , with the 4 LHD Platforms, Plus the vinson and G H W B afloat, near half the fleet there!</p>
<p>I heard from a colleague that the reagan is transitting the Panama Canal in this version fof google earth but i am currently surveying this!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: COOKIEMONSTER59</title>
		<link>http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/03/03/worlds-biggest-aircraft-carriers/#comment-199718</link>
		<dc:creator>COOKIEMONSTER59</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2008 02:18:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/03/03/worlds-biggest-aircraft-carriers/#comment-199718</guid>
		<description>I''ve read a lot of the comments above, but how many of you guys have actually been 'Bird Farm' sailors. I, for one, served on several. e.g.
U.S.S. Constellation CV-64, Mid-Pac '62, Far East Cruise '63
U.S.S. Forrestal, CV-59, Med. Cruises in '65 &#38; '66
U.S.S. John F. Kennedy, CV-67, Med. Cruises in '69, '70, '71, &#38; '72* (*a 6 month cruise that lasted 10 1/2 months due to our relief ship(s), the U.S.S. Independence, &#38; Saratoga being sent to Vietnam, and the U.S.S Forrestal's Admiral's Lounge &#38; C.I.C being set on fire by some disgruntled sailor who was afraid of being sent to Vietnam next!!
U.S.S. Midway, CV-41, Forward Deployed to Yokosuka, Japan, '76-'78
U.S.S. Independence, CV-62, Med. Cruise '79 &#38; RET-CONUS Cruise '86 as part of the pre-SLEP team working for Q.E.D. Systems, Va. Beach, VA 
    An Intelligence Officer on the U.S.S. J.F.K. once told me that in the event of WW-III, the life expectancy of a Forrestal Class Carrier was approximately 45 min. Just time enough to get the fighters off to keep the airways open so the bombers could clear the deck. And if ONE of those bombers got to their PRIMARY, SECONDARY, or THIRD priority target [with it's NECULAR weapon(s)], it was considered WORTH IT!! Now one of you guys try doing 20 yrs. with that in mind!! It damn sure wasn't for the pay, I can tell you that.
    
Richard A. Moors, AQ1, U.S. Navy (Retired)

P.S. Newport News Shipyard is just across the river from the Norfolk Naval Shipyard, and can be seen from downtown Norfolk and downtown Portsmouth, VA. They built most of the Nimitz Class carriers that were built in the '80's.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8221;ve read a lot of the comments above, but how many of you guys have actually been &#8216;Bird Farm&#8217; sailors. I, for one, served on several. e.g.<br />
U.S.S. Constellation CV-64, Mid-Pac &#8216;62, Far East Cruise &#8216;63<br />
U.S.S. Forrestal, CV-59, Med. Cruises in &#8216;65 &amp; &#8216;66<br />
U.S.S. John F. Kennedy, CV-67, Med. Cruises in &#8216;69, &#8216;70, &#8216;71, &amp; &#8216;72* (*a 6 month cruise that lasted 10 1/2 months due to our relief ship(s), the U.S.S. Independence, &amp; Saratoga being sent to Vietnam, and the U.S.S Forrestal&#8217;s Admiral&#8217;s Lounge &amp; C.I.C being set on fire by some disgruntled sailor who was afraid of being sent to Vietnam next!!<br />
U.S.S. Midway, CV-41, Forward Deployed to Yokosuka, Japan, &#8216;76-&#8217;78<br />
U.S.S. Independence, CV-62, Med. Cruise &#8216;79 &amp; RET-CONUS Cruise &#8216;86 as part of the pre-SLEP team working for Q.E.D. Systems, Va. Beach, VA<br />
    An Intelligence Officer on the U.S.S. J.F.K. once told me that in the event of WW-III, the life expectancy of a Forrestal Class Carrier was approximately 45 min. Just time enough to get the fighters off to keep the airways open so the bombers could clear the deck. And if ONE of those bombers got to their PRIMARY, SECONDARY, or THIRD priority target [with it's NECULAR weapon(s)], it was considered WORTH IT!! Now one of you guys try doing 20 yrs. with that in mind!! It damn sure wasn&#8217;t for the pay, I can tell you that.</p>
<p>Richard A. Moors, AQ1, U.S. Navy (Retired)</p>
<p>P.S. Newport News Shipyard is just across the river from the Norfolk Naval Shipyard, and can be seen from downtown Norfolk and downtown Portsmouth, VA. They built most of the Nimitz Class carriers that were built in the &#8217;80&#8217;s.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Don Clark</title>
		<link>http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/03/03/worlds-biggest-aircraft-carriers/#comment-199346</link>
		<dc:creator>Don Clark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Mar 2008 20:02:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/03/03/worlds-biggest-aircraft-carriers/#comment-199346</guid>
		<description>The US navy used to deploy two carriers to the Westpac and two carriers to the Med. Sea. But when we face a crisis in the Persian Gulf, one carrier of each is sent to the Arabian Sea. While one can say the US has too many carriers with 12, in fact, there is barely enough for a peacetime rotation. Carriers and their escorts usually deploy for 6  months at a time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The US navy used to deploy two carriers to the Westpac and two carriers to the Med. Sea. But when we face a crisis in the Persian Gulf, one carrier of each is sent to the Arabian Sea. While one can say the US has too many carriers with 12, in fact, there is barely enough for a peacetime rotation. Carriers and their escorts usually deploy for 6  months at a time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Don Clark</title>
		<link>http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/03/03/worlds-biggest-aircraft-carriers/#comment-199345</link>
		<dc:creator>Don Clark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Mar 2008 19:40:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/03/03/worlds-biggest-aircraft-carriers/#comment-199345</guid>
		<description>I believe the US navy requires 12 carriers on a three per one deployed rotation, but only 11 carrier air groups, as one of the carriers will be in a long nuclear refueling process for quite some time. 

In a crisis the UN navy likes to have two carriers available to provide around the clock air capability. The carriers weakness is having only one flight deck crew. They won't last long without sleeping.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I believe the US navy requires 12 carriers on a three per one deployed rotation, but only 11 carrier air groups, as one of the carriers will be in a long nuclear refueling process for quite some time. </p>
<p>In a crisis the UN navy likes to have two carriers available to provide around the clock air capability. The carriers weakness is having only one flight deck crew. They won&#8217;t last long without sleeping.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Richard Muise</title>
		<link>http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/03/03/worlds-biggest-aircraft-carriers/#comment-199203</link>
		<dc:creator>Richard Muise</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Mar 2008 00:37:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/03/03/worlds-biggest-aircraft-carriers/#comment-199203</guid>
		<description>Here's a few more carriers:

The Russian-built, now in Chinese possession ex-Varyag:
http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&#38;ll=38.941787,121.643844&#38;spn=0.004873,0.006598&#38;t=k&#38;z=17

The sister ship, still operational in Russia, is here:
http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&#38;ll=69.03946,33.069749&#38;spn=0.008966,0.026393&#38;t=h&#38;z=15

The French Charles de Gaulle:
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&#38;ll=43.112074,5.90116&#38;spn=0.009148,0.013196&#38;t=h&#38;z=16

The Brazilian (ex-French) Sao Paulo:
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&#38;ll=-22.894204,-43.170497&#38;spn=0.005772,0.006598&#38;t=h&#38;z=17

Italian Giuseppe Garibaldi:
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&#38;ll=40.443579,17.251582&#38;spn=0.002384,0.003299&#38;t=h&#38;z=18</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here&#8217;s a few more carriers:</p>
<p>The Russian-built, now in Chinese possession ex-Varyag:<br />
Placemark: <a href="http://googlesightseeing.com/maps?p=1810&amp;c=199203&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;ll=38.941787,121.643844&amp;spn=0.004873,0.006598&amp;t=k&amp;z=17" rel="nofollow">Google Maps</a> / <a href='http://googlesightseeing.com/gearth/comment/199203.kml'>Google Earth</a></p>
<p>The sister ship, still operational in Russia, is here:<br />
Placemark: <a href="http://googlesightseeing.com/maps?p=1810&amp;c=199203&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;ll=69.03946,33.069749&amp;spn=0.008966,0.026393&amp;t=h&amp;z=15" rel="nofollow">Google Maps</a> / <a href='http://googlesightseeing.com/gearth/comment/199203.kml'>Google Earth</a></p>
<p>The French Charles de Gaulle:<br />
Placemark: <a href="http://googlesightseeing.com/maps?p=1810&amp;c=199203&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;ll=43.112074,5.90116&amp;spn=0.009148,0.013196&amp;t=h&amp;z=16" rel="nofollow">Google Maps</a> / <a href='http://googlesightseeing.com/gearth/comment/199203.kml'>Google Earth</a></p>
<p>The Brazilian (ex-French) Sao Paulo:<br />
Placemark: <a href="http://googlesightseeing.com/maps?p=1810&amp;c=199203&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;ll=-22.894204,-43.170497&amp;spn=0.005772,0.006598&amp;t=h&amp;z=17" rel="nofollow">Google Maps</a> / <a href='http://googlesightseeing.com/gearth/comment/199203.kml'>Google Earth</a></p>
<p>Italian Giuseppe Garibaldi:<br />
Placemark: <a href="http://googlesightseeing.com/maps?p=1810&amp;c=199203&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;ll=40.443579,17.251582&amp;spn=0.002384,0.003299&amp;t=h&amp;z=18" rel="nofollow">Google Maps</a> / <a href='http://googlesightseeing.com/gearth/comment/199203.kml'>Google Earth</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nova72</title>
		<link>http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/03/03/worlds-biggest-aircraft-carriers/#comment-199184</link>
		<dc:creator>nova72</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2008 16:16:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/03/03/worlds-biggest-aircraft-carriers/#comment-199184</guid>
		<description>@Force of Freedom

Thanks for the clarification on those.  

unfortunately there are supposed to be columns and everything should line up, but due the small comment window here i had to try to squeeze things close, did make things a little confusing.

On the list for USS Midway I put "not found"  under what is supposed to be the G.E. column.

And for Oriskany, it can be seen in G.E. at Corpus Christi as noted in the link in the above comment, TX and seen in Beaumont in Live Maps.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Force of Freedom</p>
<p>Thanks for the clarification on those.  </p>
<p>unfortunately there are supposed to be columns and everything should line up, but due the small comment window here i had to try to squeeze things close, did make things a little confusing.</p>
<p>On the list for USS Midway I put &#8220;not found&#8221;  under what is supposed to be the G.E. column.</p>
<p>And for Oriskany, it can be seen in G.E. at Corpus Christi as noted in the link in the above comment, TX and seen in Beaumont in Live Maps.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Powerful Force for Freedom</title>
		<link>http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/03/03/worlds-biggest-aircraft-carriers/#comment-199183</link>
		<dc:creator>Powerful Force for Freedom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2008 13:25:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/03/03/worlds-biggest-aircraft-carriers/#comment-199183</guid>
		<description>My previous comment seems to have been eaten, so here goes again. I had been clarifying some of the information on nova72's list of US Navy carriers.

Midway's (CV 41) berth in San Diego as a museum ship is currently not visable in Google's data set, but &lt;a href="http://maps.yahoo.com/#mvt=s&#38;lat=32.714024&#38;lon=-117.17468&#38;mag=1&#38;q1=32.7135%2C%20-117.17424" rel="nofollow"&gt;Yahoo Maps has her&lt;/a&gt;, as does &lt;a href="http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&#38;cp=pfk2d1571sxh&#38;style=o&#38;lvl=1&#38;tilt=-90&#38;dir=0&#38;alt=-1000&#38;scene=6271600&#38;encType=1" rel="nofollow"&gt;Virtual Earth&lt;/a&gt;.

And USS Oriskany was not sunk off Corpus Christi, TX, but instead off Pensacola, FL in May 2006. Her location as an artificial reef and dive spot in the Gulf of Mexico is &lt;a href="http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&#38;hl=en&#38;geocode=&#38;q=30.043,+-87.006&#38;ie=UTF8&#38;ll=30.05394,-87.008629&#38;spn=1.062628,1.851196&#38;t=h&#38;z=9" rel="nofollow"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;. She is, however, still afloat in &lt;a href="http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&#38;hl=en&#38;geocode=&#38;q=27.8305,+-97.498&#38;ie=UTF8&#38;ll=27.830974,-97.497997&#38;spn=0.016964,0.028925&#38;t=h&#38;z=15" rel="nofollow"&gt;Google' data set&lt;/a&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My previous comment seems to have been eaten, so here goes again. I had been clarifying some of the information on nova72&#8217;s list of US Navy carriers.</p>
<p>Midway&#8217;s (CV 41) berth in San Diego as a museum ship is currently not visable in Google&#8217;s data set, but <a href="http://maps.yahoo.com/#mvt=s&amp;lat=32.714024&amp;lon=-117.17468&amp;mag=1&amp;q1=32.7135%2C%20-117.17424" rel="nofollow">Yahoo Maps has her</a>, as does <a href="http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&amp;cp=pfk2d1571sxh&amp;style=o&amp;lvl=1&amp;tilt=-90&amp;dir=0&amp;alt=-1000&amp;scene=6271600&amp;encType=1" rel="nofollow">Virtual Earth</a>.</p>
<p>And USS Oriskany was not sunk off Corpus Christi, TX, but instead off Pensacola, FL in May 2006. Her location as an artificial reef and dive spot in the Gulf of Mexico is Placemark: <a href="http://googlesightseeing.com/maps?p=1810&amp;c=199183&amp;f=q&amp;hl=en&amp;geocode=&amp;q=30.043,+-87.006&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;ll=30.05394,-87.008629&amp;spn=1.062628,1.851196&amp;t=h&amp;z=9" rel="nofollow">here</a> / <a href='http://googlesightseeing.com/gearth/comment/199183.kml'>Google Earth</a>. She is, however, still afloat in Placemark: <a href="http://googlesightseeing.com/maps?p=1810&amp;c=199183&amp;f=q&amp;hl=en&amp;geocode=&amp;q=27.8305,+-97.498&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;ll=27.830974,-97.497997&amp;spn=0.016964,0.028925&amp;t=h&amp;z=15" rel="nofollow">Google&#8217; data set</a> / <a href='http://googlesightseeing.com/gearth/comment/199183.kml'>Google Earth</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nova72</title>
		<link>http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/03/03/worlds-biggest-aircraft-carriers/#comment-199168</link>
		<dc:creator>nova72</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2008 14:20:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/03/03/worlds-biggest-aircraft-carriers/#comment-199168</guid>
		<description>@vanbarel and cookie monster
This carrier in dry dock is not G. R. Ford.  Construction on CVN 78/ G.R. Ford began in early 2007.  See Article Here -  http://hamptonroads.com/node/241601  
The ship in dry dock is too far along to be Ford.  

The dry dock ship is actually CVN 70/ Carl Vinson. The ship is undergoing a Refueling Complex Overhaul (RCOH) See Articles Here - http://www.navysite.de/cvn/cvn70hist.htm 
and 
http://www.navsource.org/archives/02/70.htm 
and very cool video of the flooding of the dry dock in mid 2007 http://www.news.navy.mil/management/videodb/player/video.aspx?id=9538 

You can barely see the numbers on the ship in Live Maps 
Here is the "7"
http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&#38;cp=q4yr928mwm2f&#38;style=o&#38;lvl=2&#38;tilt=-90&#38;dir=0&#38;alt=-1000&#38;scene=23597427&#38;encType=1
and here is the "0"
http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&#38;cp=q4yr018mwjq0&#38;style=o&#38;lvl=2&#38;tilt=-90&#38;dir=0&#38;alt=-1000&#38;scene=23597426&#38;encType=1</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@vanbarel and cookie monster<br />
This carrier in dry dock is not G. R. Ford.  Construction on CVN 78/ G.R. Ford began in early 2007.  See Article Here -  <a href="http://hamptonroads.com/node/241601" rel="nofollow">http://hamptonroads.com/node/241601</a><br />
The ship in dry dock is too far along to be Ford.  </p>
<p>The dry dock ship is actually CVN 70/ Carl Vinson. The ship is undergoing a Refueling Complex Overhaul (RCOH) See Articles Here - <a href="http://www.navysite.de/cvn/cvn70hist.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.navysite.de/cvn/cvn70hist.htm</a><br />
and<br />
<a href="http://www.navsource.org/archives/02/70.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.navsource.org/archives/02/70.htm</a><br />
and very cool video of the flooding of the dry dock in mid 2007 <a href="http://www.news.navy.mil/management/videodb/player/video.aspx?id=9538" rel="nofollow">http://www.news.navy.mil/management/videodb/player/video.aspx?id=9538</a> </p>
<p>You can barely see the numbers on the ship in Live Maps<br />
Here is the &#8220;7&#8243;<br />
<a href="http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&amp;cp=q4yr928mwm2f&amp;style=o&amp;lvl=2&amp;tilt=-90&amp;dir=0&amp;alt=-1000&amp;scene=23597427&amp;encType=1" rel="nofollow">http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&amp;cp=q4yr928mwm2f&amp;style=o&amp;lvl=2&amp;tilt=-90&amp;dir=0&amp;alt=-1000&amp;scene=23597427&amp;encType=1</a><br />
and here is the &#8220;0&#8243;<br />
<a href="http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&amp;cp=q4yr018mwjq0&amp;style=o&amp;lvl=2&amp;tilt=-90&amp;dir=0&amp;alt=-1000&amp;scene=23597426&amp;encType=1" rel="nofollow">http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&amp;cp=q4yr018mwjq0&amp;style=o&amp;lvl=2&amp;tilt=-90&amp;dir=0&amp;alt=-1000&amp;scene=23597426&amp;encType=1</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cookie monster</title>
		<link>http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/03/03/worlds-biggest-aircraft-carriers/#comment-199167</link>
		<dc:creator>cookie monster</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2008 12:39:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://googlesightseeing.com/2008/03/03/worlds-biggest-aircraft-carriers/#comment-199167</guid>
		<description>I'm no military genius but to me it seems daft to have such a huge aircraft carriers which, God forbid, should ever suffer a fatal attack would leave a big hole in the USA's military resources. Surely wouldnt it be more practical to have more, smaller carriers that arent such big targets and perhaps wouldnt be missed as much a these huge ones if one was to be lost
Perhaps i should write to G W Bush telling him of my idea.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m no military genius but to me it seems daft to have such a huge aircraft carriers which, God forbid, should ever suffer a fatal attack would leave a big hole in the USA&#8217;s military resources. Surely wouldnt it be more practical to have more, smaller carriers that arent such big targets and perhaps wouldnt be missed as much a these huge ones if one was to be lost<br />
Perhaps i should write to G W Bush telling him of my idea.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
