Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Cold-War Era Naval Vessels Up For Grabs

kdawson posted more than 5 years ago | from the yours-for-a-dock dept.

The Military 165

mcleland lets us in on a Wall Street Journal story about two cold-war era, formerly top-secret vessels the US Navy is trying to give away. At issue are the Sea Shadow (the ancestor of all modern naval radar-evading technology) and the Hughes Mining Barge (a floating dry-dock and more-or-less base for the Sea Shadow). While the ships are being 'given away,' there are multiple regulations involved, making the gift a very costly one. "A Naval Museum is 'a bloodthirsty, paper-work ridden, permit-infested, money-sucking hole,' warns the Historic Naval Ships Association. Because the Navy won't pay for anything — not rust-scraping or curating — to keep museums afloat, survival depends on big crowds."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

First Boats (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26974985)

I hope they come with sharks with lasers on their frikkin' heads.

Re:First Boats (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26975913)

Who has a handy list of sock puppets and low digit trolls? I hit the slashdot jackpot and have unlimited moderation points.

An Introduction to Anal Masturbation (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26974999)

It's four thirty a.m. and the house is asleep.

I. . . am not asleep.

I am crouched in the bathtub in a frog-like stance, small puddles of urine and liquid shit at my feet. I'm leaning forward, gripping the side of the tub and biting my knee, overwhelmed by a mixture of pain and pleasure as I piston a dildo in and out of my ass.

You see, I really love anal masturbation.

Ever try it? No? You should.

Doesn't matter who you are. God gave all of us, male and female, an abundance of nerve endings in our rectum - and one life to live. So why don't you go ahead and test out the equipment? Have some fun. No point in having a gun sitting on your shelf your entire life and never killing anyone, right?

But I realize there's a fairly persistent misconception among guys that I'm gonna have to dispel before we go any further:

Stimulating your own ass is not "gay."

That notion doesn't make a whole lot of sense. I mean, how could anything you do to your own body be gay? Nobody ever freaks out in the middle of jerking off like "Holy fuck, I've got a fistful of cock! I've gotta cut this gay shit out!" Well, what's the philosophical difference between playing with your dick and playing with your ass?

There is none.

Look fellas, here's the scoop:

If you have a girl wearing a foot long strap-on, smacking your face and screaming "WHO'S MY BITCH?!?" while she pounds your asshole until it bleeds, that would be a *heterosexual* act. Girl on guy. Simple.

Now if it's a guy that's fucking you, that would be homosexual. And if you're doing it to yourself, well, that's plain old masturbation.

But listen - if you're still sitting there being stubborn, all macho and uptight going "My ass. . . is EXIT ONLY!!!" then lemme just ask you a question.

You know that feeling you get when you take a really big shit?

You know what I'm talking about. You're sitting on the couch, eating Cheez-Its and watching Larry King, when all of the sudden you feel that familiar burning. . . so you get up and bound off to the bathroom all bow legged, clenching your sphincter real tight, and then you furiously rip off your boxer briefs and plop down on the seat just in time to let a huuuuuuge thick turd come sliding out of your ass?

Ahhhhhhhhh!!!!

That feeling.

That tingling, chills up your spine, this-is-absolutely-the-pinnacle-of-human-existence feeling.

Well guess what. That's the feeling of a massive rod moving through your rectum, tickling those wonderfully abundant nerve endings. You love it. It's okay. We all do. It doesn't make you a fag. Or at the very least, we're ALL fags. So indulge yourself.

(Yes, I understand that said feeling is partially due to the sensory experience of toxins leaving the body, which is unique to defecation - but the operative word here is "partially." You like the log movement, too. Don't try to argue.)

So anyway, now that you've decided to be bold, and not a homophobic pussy, and poke around the cornhole a little bit - good for you. But there's something you should remember. Anal masturbation is just like playing the accordion, or shooting a jumper, or really anything else that's worth doing. That is, it requires practice.

You see, back when I was a kid I would get curious and stick a finger or a toothbrush up there, but I wasn't fucking around with anywhere near the kind of pleasure I'm achieving now. It was uncomfortable even. So I worked on it.

And conversely, I know I'm still far from expertise in this particular discipline. I don't claim to be an ass master. There's a whole world of lengths, girths, textures, and vibrations that my eager browneye has yet to inhale.

But since I have honed my skills to a pretty decent level, I'll share with you my current technique. Without further ado:

Anonymous Coward's Anal Masturbation Technique

What You Need:

1. Lubricant of your choice
2. Fake cock (eight inches, approx.)
3. Ridged anal wand (seven inches, approx.)

Procedure:

1. Apply a generous amount of lube to your index finger, and swirl the lubricated finger lightly around your butthole. Add another drop or two of lube, and then simultaneously push your finger into your butthole while pushing back with your anus muscles.

2. Slide your finger into your ass up to the knuckle and feel around for turds. Unless you're an anorexic, you probably will come across one.

3. Circle your finger around your anal walls pressing outward, as if you were an umpire signaling a home run. You should be near the toilet, because this is intended to stimulate a bowel movement. Once you've shit, and your rectum is empty, then you're ready for some heavy duty fun.

4. Lube up a second finger and slip them both into your poopchute. Let your asshole get comfortable with the new mass, and then begin to pump a little. Repeat with a third finger if you so desire.

5. Slather lube all over the ridged anal wand. Squat over your tool and press the tip to your now greasy anus. Just as you've done with your fingers, ease the dildo into your cornhole as you push back onto it with your ass muscles. Go slowly, stopping at each ridge and letting your ass adjust to the increase in width, until you have it in as far as it will go.

6. Now it's time to start pounding. I'm not gonna get more specific than that. Do it your own way. Experiment with different positions and rhythms until you find what you like.

7. Once your ass has been thoroughly fucked by the anal wand, it's time to move up to the larger dildo. Again, you're going to repeat the process that you've done twice already, with your fingers and the wand. Entering slowly, pushing back on it, letting yourself adjust, and then starting to pump.

8. At this point your asshole is really loose, gaping even, and it's time to move on to my favorite part. Crouch down, or get into whatever position you feel comfortable with, and hold the fake cock in one hand and the wand in the other. Work the fake cock in and out, building the pace until you are doing a high intensity rectal plundering. Slide it in really deep, pause, then pull it out all the way - quickly jamming in the anal wand to fill its place. The rapid transition from smooth to ridged textures will send waves out of pleasure rippling through your entire body. Then give yourself a nice hard fuck with the anal wand, and repeat as many times as you'd like.

*In carrying out these steps - even if you take the dump at the beginning - you still might at some point fuck the shit out of yourself. This is why I recommend doing it in a bathtub, or on some other surface that is easy to clean. Now at first you might be squeamish about the poo, but I think that as you get hardcore into the pleasure of all this, you'll just naturally get desensitized. Kind of like a heroin addict quickly gets over his fear of needles.

In fact, I've found that the right kind of poo can easily be incorporated into the festivities. Sometimes while I'm pounding away I will feel a sudden rush of heat travel through my ass, and I'll know that I'm coating the dildo with a somewhat viscous liquid shit. At this point in the ass ramming, my pain tolerance is rather high, so I'll simply jam the shitty dildo back up my ass, and let the sudden decrease in lubrication create an effect similar to the aforementioned smooth-to-ridged transition. As a matter of fact, this is probably the most intense sensation that I've come across in my entire anal masturbatory experience.*

So that's how it's done. Quite the activity, I must say. Maybe next time you're feeling bored and restless, you can give it a shot. Unless you're a fucking prude, in which case I'd recommend suicide. Or do a goddamn crossword puzzle, I don't really care.

One more thing I want to say on the subject: I really think anal penetration should be an Olympic sport. Wouldn't that be neat? I mean for Christ sakes, we've all seen how much those little Japanese bastards can eat - can you imagine how much they could stuff up the other end? It could even be a team sport where one of them has to take their partner's entire head up their ass.

Well. . . I don't really know how much support I'm gonna get for my petition to add competitive rectal insertion to the Olympic Games, we'll have to see - but seriously, speed walking? FUCKING CURLING?!? It would be far from the dumbest event on the schedule.

Re:An Introduction to Anal Masturbation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26975455)

Once...just once I want to see a first post similar to these kinds of stories get modded +5 informative.... that would make my day.

Re:An Introduction to Anal Masturbation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26975511)

And that is where the genius of metamoderation comes into play. You never make a mod like that because you'll get metamodded into oblivion.

Re:An Introduction to Anal Masturbation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26975695)

Of course because metamoderation isn't flawed, not in the least.

-- A troll who metamoderates regularly

Re:An Introduction to Anal Masturbation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26975737)

I was wondering why I never seem to get modpoints these days :)

Re:An Introduction to Anal Masturbation (1, Insightful)

Kagura (843695) | more than 5 years ago | (#26976167)

Metamod yesterday (the first time I've metamodded in a long time) asked me to give a thumbs up/thumbs down to COMMENTS themselves. Not moderations of comments, it was actually asking me to decide whether the comment was good or not. I know this because 1) It told me flat out to vote whether the comment is good or not, and 2) only ONE of the comments I thumbed up or down had any type of moderation on it! The rest were just Score: 1 comments.

What in the hell happened to the old metamod system?

Re:An Introduction to Anal Masturbation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26976713)

I sometimes post high moderated stuff and I sometimes troll and I sometimes even use my regular excellent log-in to post. I metamod all the time and there's a handful of trolls that I click negative even when it's something valid. Thinking of you, spun (one of twitter's sockpuppets).

Re:An Introduction to Anal Masturbation (1)

Kagura (843695) | more than 5 years ago | (#26977233)

What the heck does this have to do with my post, aside from the fact that you metamod based on the identify of the person at times?

I'm also perplexed as to why I was modded troll above, unless somebody doesn't like offtopic yet meaningful chatter?

Re:An Introduction to Anal Masturbation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26975769)

Good, solid advice, however, I would rather think about your breathing

make a lego version then (2, Funny)

CHRONOSS2008 (1226498) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975033)

maybe they could make a giant replica out of lego?

That bad, eh? (5, Funny)

truthsearch (249536) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975039)

A Naval Museum is 'a bloodthirsty, paper-work ridden, permit-infested, money-sucking hole,' warns the Historic Naval Ships Association.

But tell us what you really think. Don't hold back.

ARR!!! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26975407)

That quote really sounds awesome if you say it with a pirate voice!

Re:That bad, eh? (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975449)

Sounds like somebody forgot to do some paperwork a while back....

Re:That bad, eh? (5, Interesting)

Darth_brooks (180756) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975667)

Dealing with the Navy on issues of museums is a bona fide pain in the ass. As far as they're concerned, there is nothing, zip, zero nada, nil that they have ever 'lost.' Whatever it was, where ever it is, it is still theirs and will gladly tie you up in court for the rest of your life to prove this point. They stick to the following excuses when it comes to the issue of recovering one-time Naval Aircraft:

-It's a war grave (the excuse they've given for blocking the recovery of Grumman TBM Avenger dive bombers in Lake Michigan. That the pilots may have survived in most cases makes no difference. They're all war graves.)

-It's still Navy property that they've never bothered to finish recovering (the excuse that's being used after a North Carolina man recovered pieces of an FG-1, a Goodyear-built Corsair. Never mind that the Navy last visited the crash site in 1945.)

-It just plain doesn't exist at all (the excuse that was given for years when attempts were made to recover one of several B-29's that were being used as target practice at China Lake, even after recovery groups showed recent satellite photographs of B-29's out in the desert, the Navy simply responded by saying that they did not, nor did they ever, possess B-29's.)

There is purportedly still one, more-intact-than-most-B-29's B-29 that was moved to a hangar sometime in the 1990's, but the Navy refuses all inquiries regarding that aircraft. To their credit, the Navy also had some bad experiences with allowing warbird recoveries at China lake, as the last group that was allowed in supposedly stuffed their B-29 full of whatever happened to be lying around, instead of just grabbing 'their' plane and leaving. There are a few hundred thousand versions of that story floating around, changing by the minute.

The Navy is an institution unto themselves when it comes to loaning items to museums. Hell, They Scrapped the USS Enterprise [wikipedia.org] . Perhaps it's the type of person that the Navy assigns to handling museum requests, or perhaps its the hundreds of years of Maritime Salvage law that they have to contend with, but based on everything I've heard, they are a bureaucratic nightmare directly out of 'Brazil.'

Re:That bad, eh? (2, Insightful)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975759)

I have never heard of most of these stories. The Navy did allow the recovery of at least one F4F in the Great Lakes. They do protect war graves but that should be understandable.
As far as dealing with museums and ships well think about it. Ships tend to be large complex steel machines that sit in saltwater. Just not a good mix. They often full of nasty chemicals and fuel. And some of them are very very large.
The Navy give these multimillion dollar machines away making them safe and clean is up to the people that get them.
Setting up a floating museum is very expensive.

Re:That bad, eh? (2, Insightful)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975793)

They do protect war graves but that should be understandable.

Not when you're "protecting" those graves from the families of those KIA.

Look it up if you don't believe me.

Re:That bad, eh? (2, Funny)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 5 years ago | (#26976151)

What part of I have not heard of this did you not understand. I never said that it didn't happen. The simple rule is that it is war grave you don't mess with it. Did they tell the family that they couldn't try and recover the body or that they couldn't recover the TBM?
Also the TBM has a crew of three. Did they get permission from all the families?
Could it just be possible that they are trying to keep somebody's fourth cousin twice removed from making a fast buck by grave robbing?
You make these claims and then tell me to go look them up. Why not post the links yourself?

Re:That bad, eh? (1)

Darth_brooks (180756) | more than 5 years ago | (#26977189)

You're absolutely right on both points. But the Navy being open to any sort of museum request outside of their direct control seems to be the exception rather than the rule.

Re:That bad, eh? (1)

Sponge Bath (413667) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975775)

...they are a bureaucratic nightmare directly out of 'Brazil.'

Yeah, but they got really snappy uniforms.
That's why the USMC is so jealous of the Navy.

Re:That bad, eh? (1)

tlhIngan (30335) | more than 5 years ago | (#26976131)

-It's still Navy property that they've never bothered to finish recovering (the excuse that's being used after a North Carolina man recovered pieces of an FG-1, a Goodyear-built Corsair. Never mind that the Navy last visited the crash site in 1945.)

I don't know for certain, but unlike regular seafaring vessels that sink (and thus become the property of whomever finds it), vessels owned by a country (e.g., military) remain the property of their respective governments. Even if you find some British sucken vessel, if it belonged to the Crown, it and all the contents (gold, etc) are still the property of the Crown.

And they retain that ownership indefinitely. So even if it turns into a pile of rust, that pile of rust still belongs to the government.

Re:That bad, eh? (1)

dwye (1127395) | more than 5 years ago | (#26976607)

> And they retain that ownership indefinitely. So even if it turns into
> a pile of rust, that pile of rust still belongs to the government.

Or at least, so they will claim. And they normally have more lawyers, guns, and money than anyone disputing that. OTOH, I knew someone who spent time around WWII salvaging a German battleship, so they can be flexible about that (at least for other people's navies). Also, if true, no one could salvage wrecked Spanish gold ships in the Caribbean.

Re:That bad, eh? (1)

GooberToo (74388) | more than 5 years ago | (#26976283)

Dealing with the Navy on issues of museums is a bona fide pain in the ass.

Hopefully they fair better than the air force which may at a later date, after the aircraft in question has been fully restored, decide they will steal it back despite contracts clearly stating the current owners. Case is going to before a judge last I heard.

If poked, I imagine I can dig up a link.

right (1)

N3wsByt3 (758224) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975049)

first post?

Anyway, it's not "giving" it away, if they ask 25 million for it...

Don't settle for the mining barge... (4, Funny)

Chris Mattern (191822) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975077)

...hold out for an exhumer, man!

Re:Don't settle for the mining barge... (1)

TheGeniusIsOut (1282110) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975111)

Heh, they won't be giving a Hulk away for a while yet. At least until they get the T3 mining barge developed.

Re:Don't settle for the mining barge... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26975323)

Because everyone knows the best way to make money in New Eden is to open a Hulk museum.

Re:Don't settle for the mining barge... (3, Funny)

Alzheimers (467217) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975555)

Typhoon:

Highs:
4x Miner IIs
4x Arbalest Cruises

Mids:
2x Shield Expander II
2x Invuln Field II

Lows:
7x Cargohold Expander II

Drones:
5x Ogre II

That is how you mine.

Re:Don't settle for the mining barge... (1)

RESPAWN (153636) | more than 5 years ago | (#26976377)

I'm not sure which is sadder. The fact that you're referencing Eve Online here on /. Or the fact that I know you're referencing Eve Online.

Who needs exhumer when.... (1)

ztcamper (1051960) | more than 5 years ago | (#26976321)

you can get a stealth ship that can pewpew n00bs with cruse missiles and nukes! A gank of thease would pwn ur exhumer before you can press omgwtf key! lo1!1

Batleships for sale too (2, Interesting)

drewzhrodague (606182) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975093)

There are battleships for sale also. $15 jeeps, old broken trucks -- the government tries to sell whatever it can. I used to visit a computer junkyard, and they'd buy tractor-trailors full of decommissioned computing equipment. We got all kinds of neat toys from there, including some pretty standard usable stuff. What I want, is to buy the SS Consoleeza Rice [wikipedia.org] , and park it in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch [wikipedia.org] , and live there. However, anything that is large enough and floats should be okay.

Re:Batleships for sale too (3, Insightful)

tekrat (242117) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975639)

In all seriousness, where are those $15 jeeps?

I'd buy a dozen right now at that price. I've never been able to locate any of that stuff at a reasonable price, only via "army/navy" resellers who jack up the price 1000% so they can make a healthy profit.

Even "Cheaperthandirt" isn't all that cheap.

Re:Batleships for sale too (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26975933)

Not as awesome as you'd think. They somehow get classified as munitions, and so they're not sold in working order. If they are in working order at the time of sale, they will be rendered non-functional in a way that should be very costly to reverse, if it's even possible.

Re:Batleships for sale too (2, Interesting)

drewzhrodague (606182) | more than 5 years ago | (#26976013)

They don't work, and you have to travel to some fly-over state in order to pick it up. Then you have to transport it. Floating things are probably about as annoying an a jeep, especially if the useful equipment and parts have already been stripped from the unit.

Still, if you pay attention, some of these disposals are useful. They have real estate, missile silos, airports in nowhere, etc.

Re:Batleships for sale too (4, Informative)

couchslug (175151) | more than 5 years ago | (#26976415)

"In all seriousness, where are those $15 jeeps?"

They were scrapped carcasses back many decades ago. For example, M151s were demilled by being torchcut into chunks. "Jeeps" of the actual "Jeep" persuasion are ancient history.

http://www.govliquidation.com/ [govliquidation.com]

is where to directly bid online for much of what Uncle Sugar no longer needs, but bulk buyers drive up costs quite a bit. If you collect military vehicles, large trucks are often bargains, but fun stuff like CUCVs tend to go high. Lots of interesting stuff, and well worth a browse.

Re:Batleships for sale too (2, Interesting)

Unordained (262962) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975677)

As noted later in the same wikipedia entry [wikipedia.org] The SS Condoleeza Rice was renamed the Altair Voyager. It's currently headed for Brisbane, it seems [marinetraffic.com] .

Re:Batleships for sale too (1)

sgt scrub (869860) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975915)

ROFLMAO! If I only had mod points I'd use 5.

Poor Howard Hughes (3, Interesting)

iluvcapra (782887) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975095)

He really believed Nixon when he told him there was all that gold in the continental shelf.

I keed I keed! To be fair, this wouldn't be the first time they've sold off K-129 salvage gear. The Glomar Explorer herself is leased out and operated for commercial deep-sea oil drilling.

Sea Shadow would be ultimate party boat (3, Insightful)

HangingChad (677530) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975117)

Rough water stabilized, diesel electric propulsion and radar stealthy. Me likely. I want to live on it. Too bad it would probably cost a fortune to move and retrofit. The ultimate party boat, though it would be a little tough to fish off the back.

And you could always fit it with missiles and have endless fun making the great navies of the world think they were shooting at one another.

Re:Sea Shadow would be ultimate party boat (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26975193)

The funnest would be anchoring off and sleeping for the night, and then as the fog rolls in some guy not seeing you on his radar rams right into you killing you and your innocent friends and family.

Re:Sea Shadow would be ultimate party boat (5, Funny)

Spectre (1685) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975411)

None of my friends and family qualify as "innocent". It's all good.

Re:Sea Shadow would be ultimate party boat (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26976295)

The funnest would be anchoring off and sleeping for the night, and then as the fog rolls in some guy not seeing you on his radar rams right into you killing you and your innocent friends and family.

So your the "BAWWWWW my glass is empty fill me another" type aye

Re:Sea Shadow would be ultimate party boat (3, Funny)

Nos. (179609) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975257)

And you could always fit it with missiles and have endless fun making the great navies of the world think they were shooting at one another.

Be careful who you do that to, since the presumed guilty party might surrender, stopping the planned war. After being convicted of the crime, he could escape, return to his ship, hunt you down, and at the last minute find a way around your cloaking technology and blast you out of the sky, er, water. Oh yeah, and his personal physician will be with him.

Re:Sea Shadow would be ultimate party boat (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26975613)

All while irritatingly quoting Shakespeare at you?

Re:Sea Shadow would be ultimate party boat (2, Funny)

dgatwood (11270) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975655)

No, to get the comparison right, you have to be irritatingly quoting Shakespeare at the presumed guilty party. Oh, and they have to lock up the presumed guilty person in a prison of no escape in the middle of an ice moon. Siberia, perhaps?

Re:Sea Shadow would be ultimate party boat (1)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 5 years ago | (#26976313)

The hard part is finding someone with their family jewels attached to their kneecaps.

Re:Sea Shadow would be ultimate party boat (2, Interesting)

HTH NE1 (675604) | more than 5 years ago | (#26976653)

Rough water stabilized, diesel electric propulsion and radar stealthy. Me likely. I want to live on it. Too bad it would probably cost a fortune to move and retrofit. The ultimate party boat, though it would be a little tough to fish off the back.

Who says you have to keep it in the water? I'd put it on land and park my car underneath it. Or maybe on a tower with an elevator inside to take you aboard, perhaps rigged to turn it to face any direction you wanted. Not that there'd be any kind of view from inside.

Still, 12 bunks and only a small microwave, refrigerator, and table? Hopefully those bunks include restroom facilities.

Hmmmm... (5, Funny)

Thelasko (1196535) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975195)

What if I didn't put them as a Museum? Instead, I'll use them as part of my dastardly plot [wikipedia.org] to steal missiles from a British vessel lost in the South China Sea [wikipedia.org] due to tampering with the GPS signal. [slashdot.org] Then use those missiles to provoke a war between China and Great Britain.

Do you think they will still let me have it?

Re:Hmmmm... (4, Funny)

0racle (667029) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975301)

Oh come on now, that idea is so stupid that no one would ever think it would be a good movie, let alone actually attempt it.

Re:Hmmmm... (5, Funny)

jollyreaper (513215) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975365)

What if I didn't put them as a Museum? Instead, I'll use them as part of my dastardly plot to steal missiles from a British vessel lost in the South China Sea due to tampering with the GPS signal. Then use those missiles to provoke a war between China and Great Britain.

Do you think they will still let me have it?

It depends. You've already established that you have have a criminally-inclined genius and a ruthless, murderous streak. But more is required.

1. Can your organization's name be turned into a suitably menacing acronym?
2. Henchmen with unusual and remarkable deformities?
3. Henchwomen with names both unlikely and sexually suggestive?
4. Do you have a white persian cat?
5. Do you enjoy monologuing?
6. Can you credibly threaten the destruction of western civilization while maintaining a PG-13 rating?

Re:Hmmmm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26975431)

That was a dumb movie. How long would it take the Chicoms to defeat the UK? 5 whole seconds?

Re:Hmmmm... (1)

meringuoid (568297) | more than 5 years ago | (#26976771)

That was a dumb movie. How long would it take the Chicoms to defeat the UK? 5 whole seconds?

The premise is stupid, but not for that reason. The Chinese Army can't attack the UK - there's an awful lot of Russia in the way for a start, and at the time that film came out I'm not sure there was any British soldier within a thousand miles of China (Hong Kong I think had already been returned). I don't think either air force would have the range to reach the adversary. The Chinese Navy would end up playing the game of spot-the-submarine, and they'd probably do about as well as did the captain of the General Belgrano, and then bugger off back to port; not that this would much advantage the Royal Navy, who probably wouldn't want to park carriers off the Chinese coast because they know perfectly well about Exocets and the Chinese likely have plenty of home-grown or Soviet-derived equivalents.

The only way that the UK and China could do each other serious military damage would be by ICBM. And it would take an awful lot more than a Bond villain's crappy plot for them to go that far.

Re:Hmmmm... (2, Funny)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975469)

No good. Likely, some guy who looks like that guy from Remington Steele would stop you with the assistance of one or more lovely ladies and some high-tech wizardry, all-the-while drinking martinis.

Re:Hmmmm... (2, Funny)

Thelasko (1196535) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975517)

No good. Likely, some guy who looks like that guy from Remington Steele would stop you with the assistance of one or more lovely ladies and some high-tech wizardry, all-the-while drinking martinis.

There goes that idea... to the scrap yard with it then!

Re:Hmmmm... (1)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975983)

right, we should remember the most important rule about show business, "give the people what they want".

Re:Hmmmm... (2, Funny)

hAckz0r (989977) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975607)

I don't know if they would give it to you or not, but at only 12 mph it would be real hard to 'get away with it' unless you change the plot a little, like adding a worm hole or something. But if you were to take two of the Littoral Combat Ship's Rolls-Royce MT30 36MW gas turbines and retrofitted it with those then you would really be cooking!

Just one problem. Where do all your scantly clad women go sunbathing on that thing? That's got to get real hot in the sun...

Re:Hmmmm... (1)

Mr. Roadkill (731328) | more than 5 years ago | (#26976191)

I don't know if they would give it to you or not, but at only 12 mph it would be real hard to 'get away with it' unless you change the plot a little, like adding a worm hole or something.

What, something like a salvaged Cthonian relic that wants to wipe out the Deep Ones and their fish-people spawn and doesn't approve of insanity in its minions because it "makes their souls taste funny"?

So, (3, Funny)

nobodylocalhost (1343981) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975651)

The Chinese Federation is challenging our Holy Britannian Empire?

Very well, The stake is the world, prepare for battle...

All Hail Britannia!!

Temp Ban kdawson (0, Troll)

T Murphy (1054674) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975293)

to keep museums afloat

He deserves it for this one.

Re:Temp Ban kdawson (2)

ArcherB (796902) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975393)

to keep museums afloat

He deserves it for this one.

To be fair, he was quoting the Historic Naval Ships Association.

However, you missed the symbiotic relationship.

...to keep museums afloat, survival depends on big crowds.

and the survival of big crowds depends on the museum staying afloat!

Floating base! (3, Funny)

LoRdTAW (99712) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975399)

Step 1: Acquire free Naval floating base.
Step 2: Fill said base with servers, generators and networking gear.
step 3: Profit!

Companies looking to build floating data centers could be the people to unload these things to. That or have your very own Sea World like base if you can anchor it in international waters. Properly cleaning them up would be the most cost prohibitive as I am sure they are filled with asbestos.

Re:Floating base! (3, Insightful)

AKAImBatman (238306) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975541)

If all you need is a hull that floats, there are a lot cheaper ways of getting one than acquiring Navy hardware. Check out the standard crew complement of just about any naval vessel sometime and you'll come to understand that these are overly complicated beasts that are not designed for civilian use.

(As an aside, a few non-superpowers tried to float aircraft carriers after WWII. They proved to be so expensive to operate, that most were decommissioned [wikipedia.org] .)

Re:Floating base! (1)

nobodylocalhost (1343981) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975723)

Yes, carrier is a protoss only unit!

Re:Floating base! (1)

ImYourVirus (1443523) | more than 5 years ago | (#26976097)

Yes, carriers are a protoss only unit!

here let me fix that for you(tm)

Re:Floating bed and breakfast (1)

SethJohnson (112166) | more than 5 years ago | (#26976493)

Spain did get a hand-me-down Aircraft carrier from the US after WWII-- the USS Cabot. Operated it from 1967 to 1989.

Then some folks tried to set it up as a floating museum in America. It leaked a big slick of oil somewhere, and the coast guard charged the non-profit group $2 million for the cleanup. Not having the funds, they had to sell the Cabot in an auction for a winning bid of $187,000 as scrap. George Bush Sr. and some other ex-Navy big-wigs got involved and tried to purchase it at the Auction. No luck. The winner was an overseas scrapyard who was planning on towing it to India or some such place to chop it up. Perhaps at Bush's bidding, the federal government forbade the overseas company from towing it into international waters because it contained asbestos, which would violate international law to transport toxic waste in international waters or some such agreement.

Finally, the Cabot got chopped up on the Gulf coast of Texas.

Would have been cool to operate as a bed-and-breakfast out in the Gulf. Or perhaps a theme cruse ship where old Navy guys could dress in uniform and sail over to the coast of Japan where they could shout insults at their defeated enemy. Where is Disney when you need an investor with out-of-the-box thinking capabilities?!?

Seth

Re:Floating base! (1)

Joe Sick (1188523) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975549)

Sounds like a job for SeaCode! :) http://www.sea-code.com/ [sea-code.com]

Re:Floating base! (1)

lelitsch (31136) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975755)

step 4: add a wireless satellite uplink

Re:Floating base! (2, Interesting)

DeadDecoy (877617) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975813)

You should talk to the guys over at The Pirate Bay. Not only would it be deliciously ironic, turning them into real sea-faring pirates, but the *IAA would go crazy trying to issue them region-relevant subpoenas wherever they go.

Re:Floating base! (1)

AKAImBatman (238306) | more than 5 years ago | (#26976501)

the *IAA would go crazy trying to issue them region-relevant subpoenas wherever they go

No they wouldn't. The Pirate Bay's business is effectively non-regional. Which means that there is no difference between the servers sitting in Sweden, Germany, Switzerland, or the high seas. The actual laws under which they are held responsible would generally be determined by their home port and/or under which flag they fly.

(See: Flag of convenience [wikipedia.org] )

Re:Floating base! (1)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 5 years ago | (#26976633)

You should talk to the guys over at The Pirate Bay. Not only would it be deliciously ironic, turning them into real sea-faring pirates, but the *IAA would go crazy trying to issue them region-relevant subpoenas wherever they go.

Yeah, and maybe they could (stupidly) decide to operate off the shores of Somalia and get boarded so we could see a direct side-by-side comparison between "pirates" and honest-to-God-real pirates!

Re:Floating base! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26977197)

F the subpoenas, issue missile strikes!

Re:Floating base! (1)

mewsenews (251487) | more than 5 years ago | (#26976649)

That or have your very own Sea World like base if you can anchor it in international waters.

Sea World? Will Shamu be there?

Re:Floating base! (1)

failedlogic (627314) | more than 5 years ago | (#26977215)

Hardy, har har, it sounds like you want to start a Pirate Bay floating server.

Skunk Works (2, Informative)

SnarfQuest (469614) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975491)

This boat is described in the book "Skink Works". The navy didn't want it because it didn't have a paint locker.

Re:Skunk Works (1)

idontgno (624372) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975689)

"Skink Works"?

There was a book about stealth projects developed at a facility named after a small ground-dwelling lizard? [howstuffworks.com]

That's the Navy for you. At least the Air Force always went to the right place [wikipedia.org] .

(Yes, I know it was a typo. It's just a very funny typo.)

Re:Skunk Works (4, Informative)

DerekLyons (302214) | more than 5 years ago | (#26976631)

No, the Navy didn't want it because it was very expensive and of limited combat utility. It might have been of some use to a primarily coastal defense navy, but it's useless to a power projection navy like the USN.

The paint locker story reflects Ben Rich's ignorance of the Navy and inability (or unwillingness) to listen to people other than himself. Had he asked, he'd have found that the paint locker is an important space on a warship - because the paint locker is where volatiles and flammables are stored. It has special ventilation and fire fighting provisions, something quite important on a ship that goes in harm's way.

Re:Skunk Works (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26977177)

The paint locker story reflects Ben Rich's ignorance of the Navy and inability (or unwillingness) to listen to people other than himself.

I read Skunk Works.

He said that no one in the Navy was very interested in the ship. He speculated that it was partially because the crew complement was too small; he said that in the Navy you get promoted for commanding lots of people. He used the paint locker story as an example of how Navy guys were focusing on petty details and not paying attention to the big picture: that this was a ship that could sneak up on a task force, wreak serious havoc, and slip away again unchallenged.

His conclusion was that he was better off dealing with the Air Force, because they actually were interested in advanced stealth technology.

It could be that he was unwilling to listen to others, but I'd like a citation on that.

Is sneaking up on a superior force and blowing the heck out of it inconsistent with a power projection Navy? I'd like that one explained, too. The US Air Force has gotten good use out of stealth aircraft to blow up air defense systems before the non-stealth aircraft make their attacks; is there some reason this sort of thing doesn't work for the US Navy? Or do you just believe the ship doesn't work as advertised?

Obligatory Dr. Jones (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26975537)

"That ship belongs in a museum!" ...

"So do you!"

Pirate Party! (1)

TaoPhoenix (980487) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975545)

What are the regulations in Sweden?

The jennifer morgue (2, Informative)

lessthan (977374) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975601)

What is really weird is that I'm reading the Jennifer Morgue [amazon.com] right now. The book starts with the operations.

Re:The jennifer morgue (1)

Arkem Beta (1336177) | more than 5 years ago | (#26977045)

If I had Karma I'd mod you up.
I too am reading the Jennifer Morgue and found it a bit creepy that the USN is giving away the ship that forms the premise of the book.

Just goes to show.... (3, Funny)

Rick Zeman (15628) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975617)

TANSTAAFS. :-)

Too late (1)

Is0m0rph (819726) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975675)

I called it. It's going in my backyard.

Anyone else intereted in forming a Naval Fleet? (3, Informative)

ipc0nfig (1486043) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975729)

From the webpage: http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2006/09/fr091406.html [fas.org] Other ships that are currently available for donation include: (1) Patrol Combat ex-CANON (PG 90), Philadelphia, PA. (2) Guided Missile Destroyer ex-CHARLES F. ADAMS (DDG 2), Philadelphia, PA. (3) Destroyer ex-CONOLLY (DD 979), Philadelphia, PA. (4) Destroyer ex-EDSON (DD 946), Philadelphia, PA. (5) Submarine ex-TROUT (SS 566), Philadelphia, PA. (6) Guided Missile Cruiser ex-TICONDEROGA (CG 47), Philadelphia, PA. (7) Aircraft Carrier ex-RANGER (CV 61),Bremerton, WA.

USS Ranger to Portland (hopeful) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26977111)

There's an organization that's trying to raise funds and navigate the bureaucracy in order to get the Ranger moved to Portland to form part of a new Naval museum. Frankly, I think their chances of success are slim, but it would be pretty cool if they got it all worked out.

I'm surprised the Ticonderoga is on there. The Aegis cruisers are still a major part of the fleet, although there have been a host of improvements since Ticonderoga was commissioned.

Survival Depends On More Than Big Crowds +1, Fun (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26975789)

Survival depends on the military-industrial-Congressional complex [ourfuture.org] .

Good luck in your gulag.

Seditiously As Always,
Kilgore Trout

oh a floating data centre (1)

naeone (1430095) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975811)

microhoo or googlesoft should take this and make it a floating data centre and close all its ports to keep it stealthy

Had to go there - I'm just that guy (1)

concoursrider (1405071) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975949)

All your base are belong to us

Breaking News, Slashdotters...! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26975959)

I just heard some sad news on talk radio - Horror/Sci-Fi writer Stephen King was found dead in his Maine home this afternoon. There were not any more details. I'm sure everyone in the Slashdot community will miss him - even if you did not enjoy his work, there is no denying his contributions to popular culture. Truly an American icon.

Pass on this one... (3, Interesting)

rickb928 (945187) | more than 5 years ago | (#26975973)

I asked my brother in-law AND my ex-brother-in-law, who both work for Bath Iron works.

You don't want this boat. Even for free.

One of them mentioned some ancient wisdom about being given boats for free...

Re:Pass on this one... (1)

sr180 (700526) | more than 5 years ago | (#26976233)

Boats, aircraft and women are the three things that are better to rent than to own.

Re:Pass on this one... (1)

rickb928 (945187) | more than 5 years ago | (#26976735)

As if you can really own women.

They rent you.

What's the difference? (1)

GatheringDust (1165347) | more than 5 years ago | (#26976147)

Sounds like any other government project to me...

Thinking small (1)

RyoShin (610051) | more than 5 years ago | (#26976149)

to keep museums afloat, survival depends on big crowds

Why just make it a museum? I'm not familiar with navy tech, but I'd bet you could fix it up and turn it into some sort of roving marine research center or an interesting themed-cruise liner for the fairly-rich.

For the research center, with a floating dry dock you could probably modify it to also hold an unmanned underwater vessel.

For the cruise liner, you have something along the murder-mystery parties, but now it's a spy-theme. Everyone pays $X,000, and if you figure out who the spy is and what they're after, you get a prize of some sort (perhaps an extra cruise above the Shadow?).

Or combine the last two: a roving museum. Over a few days on the open seas, not only do you learn about the whole project and get to see some stuff in action, but you are also taken to various spots of interest. Sure, there won't be much to see out on the ocean, but I'm sure an enterprising individual could figure out how to keep attention for those moments. Everything in between is like a normal cruise liner, though I don't think they'd be able to install a pool on the ship.

one (compound, recently coined) word: seasteading (1)

mr_mischief (456295) | more than 5 years ago | (#26976371)

Forget a naval museum.

  1. Anchor the barge out in international waters.
  2. Put a fancy hotel on barge
  3. Claim independence as your own nation
  4. legalize gambling, marijuana, and hashish
  5. ferry people to it in the ship
  6. wait for some pirates or a prudish navy to attack
  7. ???
  8. profit!

The ??? in this case has something to do with fending off the invasion claiming you're not a legitimate nation, but it's still a ??? because I have no idea how you're going to do that indefinitely.

Donate it to GreenPeace (1)

carld (460344) | more than 5 years ago | (#26976423)

Bunk space for 12 and a microwave is more then adequate.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?