5 ms·

Inside the Ghost Ships of the Mothball Fleet

141 points by valgaze 14y ago

rurounijones 14y ago
Very interesting. If these ships are supposed to be "reserve ready", but plainly appear to be floating wrecks, is there a potential scandal brewing here (Misrepresenting the status of an ostensibly viable fleet)? Also, what is the statutes of limitations for the photographers since they broke many laws to do this?
- rdtsc 14y ago
  > Also, what is the statutes of limitations for the photographers since they broke many laws to do this? I thought of the same thing. This amounts to a confession that they went there. The danger is if something happened to them and there had to be a rescue operation. Say if one of them fell or fractures a limb or something like that.
- anigbrowl 14y ago
  Not likely. It's common knowledge that this is a bunch of floating hulks (eg it's been a frequent topic of reporting in Bay Area newspapers the whole time I've lived here), the only scandal on the horizon is the Navy's potential liability for contaminating the bay by having all these ships gradually disintegrating in it.
- seany 14y ago
  There are various states of readiness for these ships. Some of them are floating wrecks as you say, others are actually sealed and have dehumidifiers running inside them to keep rust down etc. Then there is the Ready Reserve fleet which is staffed 24/7 and have a 5-10 day activation window. See NDRF ( bit.ly/108AKrG ) vs RRF ( http://1.usa.gov/107ak6i http://1.usa.gov/107ak6i )
- masklinn 14y ago
  > If these ships are supposed to be "reserve ready" They were supposed to be, that's why even in 2011 there were only 75 left from a highpoint of ~400. Most of the mothball fleet hasn't been considered reserve-ready in decades, although it really depends on the ship (e.g. the Sea Shadow has been maintained until 2006)
rwhitman 14y ago
In Philadelphia there was a similar mothball fleet, including multiple carriers and destroyers that was pretty clearly visible from I-95. Was always psyched to see that when I was a kid
- KC8ZKF 14y ago
  I got to "play" paintball in a cruiser of that fleet as part of Ship's Self-Defense Force training as a USN sailor. This was 1988 or 1989. First and last time I ever played paintball. I'll never understand why anybody would enjoy that game. Roaming around, looking at all the old tech was fun, though.
- smackfu 14y ago
  When I was a kid in the early 90s, my dad took us to a Navy retirement in Philly that was on the deck of a mothballed battleship. (Maybe the USS Iowa?) It was really cool, but the ship was also pretty much completely closed off. I think they had a couple of compartments open on the deck level to provide storage for chairs and stuff. So not too much fun for exploration.
zheng 14y ago
Note that this post is from 2011, making it much less interesting that he has pictures of a fully assembled Sea Shadow, given that it was scrapped in 2012. Before I saw the date, I was getting ready to put on my tinfoil cap...
th5 14y ago
wow... i've always dreamed of planning an exact mission like this. i've boated past the mothball fleet many a time... learned how to climb, rapel, bought all the gear, etc.. hoping one day i might work up the nerve to pull something like this off. hats off to these guys, amazing story and photos...
- seany 14y ago
  There's a relatively active urban exploration community in the bay area if you look in the right places...
gavanwoolery 14y ago
Interesting article, but it gets a little too political. It lashes out at the Bush Administration, but those ships have been there since the 50's; a mothball fleet is also not really much concern for any high-ranking officials. Also: “rusting and leaching toxic heavy metals" Is there any evidence of this? Most nuclear-class ships contain their reactors far from the hull, and the only two types of ships that have reactors are modern aircraft carriers and subs. Also I think there may be some security concerns here - usually we are very protective of sub designs (just sail around San Diego's facilities and you can see the measures they take to protect them) -- do you think they patrol these waters for such a reason?
- YokoZar 14y ago
  Well there was an entire lawsuit about the environmental impact of the ships which the government lost, so presumably there's SOME evidence that they're harmful.
- jlgreco 14y ago
  There is more to "toxic heavy metals" than radioactivity you know.
  - ams6110 14y ago
    The "toxic heavy metals" are probably mostly lead from paint peeling away from the hulls.
- larrydag 14y ago
  There are a lot more ships that have nuclear reactors than just carriers and subs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Naval_reactors http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Naval_rea...
- DanBC 14y ago
  Anti-fouling paints are pretty nasty environmental pollutants. I have no idea if these were used for military vessels. Marine paints often contained heavy metals as a pigment and a biocide. This website has a pretty horrific list of stuff that you wouldn't want to be eating that has been added to paints in the past. (http://events.nace.org/library/corrosion/seawater/anti-fouling.asp http://events.nace.org/library/corrosion/seawater/anti-fouli...) > Also I think there may be some security concerns here It's amazing how much stuff is 'protected' by scary looking fence and a warning sign and little else. A man hopped over a wall, climbed up a drain pipe and into a window, then walked along a corridor into a bedroom. (and this was in Buckingham Palace. He had a nice chat with the Queen.)
frozenport 14y ago
I wonder if the local security simply didn't care?
- seany 14y ago
  There is a patrol boat, but it can only cover so much ground at once.
lcrs 14y ago
Went on a similar mission to a smaller ghost fleet in france last year... pics by a friend: http://www.silentuk.com/?p=3985 http://www.silentuk.com/?p=3985
- seany 14y ago
  Awesome stuff. Interesting that they left weapons on board.
  - gwern 14y ago
    I don't think they left any weapons on board. Are you referring to the props left over from the ship's time as a museum?
    - scoot 14y ago
      You don't consider a 16" gun a weapon? (Or are you talking about the munitions?)
      - MiguelHudnandez 14y ago
        Assuming you mean 16 feet (not inches), the barrel can be intact but that does not mean you have a working gun. The firing mechanism on a gun that size is incredibly complicated and bulky, and would be easy to disable by removing, locking, and/or welding key parts.
        scoot 14y ago
        No, 16", as in 16"/50 caliber.
      - tanzam75 14y ago
        On the ammunition point -- The shells and propellant for the 16" guns are leftovers from World War II. The Navy had been operating a 27-battleship Navy during the War, so they had a huge quantity of supplies remaining after the battleship fleet was decommissioned. When all four ships in the Iowa class were reactivated in the 1980s, the Navy calculated that the stockpiled supplies were enough to last for the remaining life of all four ships. It was this World War II-era propellant that ignited in 1989 and killed an entire turret crew on the USS Iowa. The cause is believed to have been identified, and the Iowa-class battleships subsequently fired the 16" guns without incident. But that was back when the ammunition was 40-50 years old. Today, the ammunition is 70 years old!
Aardwolf 14y ago
Do you remember these levels in an upside down sunken ocean liner in Tomb Raider II? That.
smoyer 14y ago
There are actually several reserve fleets - I've seen the fleet at James River VA (from dry land). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Defense_Reserve_Fleet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Defense_Reserve_Fleet
dia80 14y ago
Isn't this guy opening himself up to prosecution?
- artmageddon 14y ago
  I kind of wonder the same thing; he's more or less admitting to trespassing and providing all the evidence. I will admit, this takes guts and I applaud it.
cryofan 14y ago
I helped mothball one of the ships shown there, I suppose. The link above is dead. But if that is the american mothball fleet, I once had a job in a shipyard as an auxiliary electrician helping to mothball one of those ships. THat was 20 years ago.
ChuckMcM 14y ago
Awesome, I have wondered at how interesting it would be to wander around those ships. Most look to be in pretty bad shape as you would expect. I'm guessing that it wasn't possible to get inside the Iowa at the time, as I recall back in 2011 it was probably still fitted with an existing combat information center (CIC) and wandering around inside would have violated a number of national security rules no doubt. I wondered about why security would leave them alone if they had spotted them but it was pointed out to me that there are a number of folks who fish (inadvisably of course) around that bay. One wonders if there were any changes once this went public back in 2011.
- seany 14y ago
  On the deck. This photo is on the iowa http://scotthaefner.com/beyond/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/fleet/fleet-25.jpg http://scotthaefner.com/beyond/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/fl...
  - ChuckMcM 14y ago
    Saw that, and no interior shots of the Iowa. My only guess on why they would have an exterior shot and no interior shots is that they didn't actually get inside. I would presume that the Iowa would be locked up fairly tightly because I don't think it had been de-militarized (code for rendered incapable of warfighting) at the time. EDIT: I take it back, Wikipedia says she was decommissioned again in 2006, and donated to the museum duty in 2011.

141 points by valgaze 14y ago

Very interesting. If these ships are supposed to be "reserve ready", but plainly appear to be floating wrecks, is there a potential scandal brewing here (Misrepresenting the status of an ostensibly viable fleet)? Also, what is the statutes of limitations for the photographers since they broke many laws to do this?

rdtsc 14y ago
> Also, what is the statutes of limitations for the photographers since they broke many laws to do this? I thought of the same thing. This amounts to a confession that they went there. The danger is if something happened to them and there had to be a rescue operation. Say if one of them fell or fractures a limb or something like that.
anigbrowl 14y ago
Not likely. It's common knowledge that this is a bunch of floating hulks (eg it's been a frequent topic of reporting in Bay Area newspapers the whole time I've lived here), the only scandal on the horizon is the Navy's potential liability for contaminating the bay by having all these ships gradually disintegrating in it.
seany 14y ago
There are various states of readiness for these ships. Some of them are floating wrecks as you say, others are actually sealed and have dehumidifiers running inside them to keep rust down etc. Then there is the Ready Reserve fleet which is staffed 24/7 and have a 5-10 day activation window. See NDRF ( bit.ly/108AKrG ) vs RRF ( http://1.usa.gov/107ak6i http://1.usa.gov/107ak6i )
masklinn 14y ago
> If these ships are supposed to be "reserve ready" They were supposed to be, that's why even in 2011 there were only 75 left from a highpoint of ~400. Most of the mothball fleet hasn't been considered reserve-ready in decades, although it really depends on the ship (e.g. the Sea Shadow has been maintained until 2006)

rwhitman 14y ago

In Philadelphia there was a similar mothball fleet, including multiple carriers and destroyers that was pretty clearly visible from I-95. Was always psyched to see that when I was a kid

KC8ZKF 14y ago
I got to "play" paintball in a cruiser of that fleet as part of Ship's Self-Defense Force training as a USN sailor. This was 1988 or 1989. First and last time I ever played paintball. I'll never understand why anybody would enjoy that game. Roaming around, looking at all the old tech was fun, though.
smackfu 14y ago
When I was a kid in the early 90s, my dad took us to a Navy retirement in Philly that was on the deck of a mothballed battleship. (Maybe the USS Iowa?) It was really cool, but the ship was also pretty much completely closed off. I think they had a couple of compartments open on the deck level to provide storage for chairs and stuff. So not too much fun for exploration.

zheng 14y ago

Note that this post is from 2011, making it much less interesting that he has pictures of a fully assembled Sea Shadow, given that it was scrapped in 2012. Before I saw the date, I was getting ready to put on my tinfoil cap...

th5 14y ago

wow... i've always dreamed of planning an exact mission like this. i've boated past the mothball fleet many a time... learned how to climb, rapel, bought all the gear, etc.. hoping one day i might work up the nerve to pull something like this off. hats off to these guys, amazing story and photos...

seany 14y ago
There's a relatively active urban exploration community in the bay area if you look in the right places...

gavanwoolery 14y ago

Interesting article, but it gets a little too political. It lashes out at the Bush Administration, but those ships have been there since the 50's; a mothball fleet is also not really much concern for any high-ranking officials. Also: “rusting and leaching toxic heavy metals" Is there any evidence of this? Most nuclear-class ships contain their reactors far from the hull, and the only two types of ships that have reactors are modern aircraft carriers and subs. Also I think there may be some security concerns here - usually we are very protective of sub designs (just sail around San Diego's facilities and you can see the measures they take to protect them) -- do you think they patrol these waters for such a reason?

YokoZar 14y ago
Well there was an entire lawsuit about the environmental impact of the ships which the government lost, so presumably there's SOME evidence that they're harmful.
jlgreco 14y ago
There is more to "toxic heavy metals" than radioactivity you know.
- ams6110 14y ago
  The "toxic heavy metals" are probably mostly lead from paint peeling away from the hulls.
larrydag 14y ago
There are a lot more ships that have nuclear reactors than just carriers and subs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Naval_reactors http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Naval_rea...
DanBC 14y ago
Anti-fouling paints are pretty nasty environmental pollutants. I have no idea if these were used for military vessels. Marine paints often contained heavy metals as a pigment and a biocide. This website has a pretty horrific list of stuff that you wouldn't want to be eating that has been added to paints in the past. (http://events.nace.org/library/corrosion/seawater/anti-fouling.asp http://events.nace.org/library/corrosion/seawater/anti-fouli...) > Also I think there may be some security concerns here It's amazing how much stuff is 'protected' by scary looking fence and a warning sign and little else. A man hopped over a wall, climbed up a drain pipe and into a window, then walked along a corridor into a bedroom. (and this was in Buckingham Palace. He had a nice chat with the Queen.)

frozenport 14y ago

I wonder if the local security simply didn't care?

seany 14y ago
There is a patrol boat, but it can only cover so much ground at once.

lcrs 14y ago

Went on a similar mission to a smaller ghost fleet in france last year... pics by a friend: http://www.silentuk.com/?p=3985 http://www.silentuk.com/?p=3985

seany 14y ago
Awesome stuff. Interesting that they left weapons on board.
- gwern 14y ago
  I don't think they left any weapons on board. Are you referring to the props left over from the ship's time as a museum?
  - scoot 14y ago
    You don't consider a 16" gun a weapon? (Or are you talking about the munitions?)
    - MiguelHudnandez 14y ago
      Assuming you mean 16 feet (not inches), the barrel can be intact but that does not mean you have a working gun. The firing mechanism on a gun that size is incredibly complicated and bulky, and would be easy to disable by removing, locking, and/or welding key parts.
      - scoot 14y ago
        No, 16", as in 16"/50 caliber.
    - tanzam75 14y ago
      On the ammunition point -- The shells and propellant for the 16" guns are leftovers from World War II. The Navy had been operating a 27-battleship Navy during the War, so they had a huge quantity of supplies remaining after the battleship fleet was decommissioned. When all four ships in the Iowa class were reactivated in the 1980s, the Navy calculated that the stockpiled supplies were enough to last for the remaining life of all four ships. It was this World War II-era propellant that ignited in 1989 and killed an entire turret crew on the USS Iowa. The cause is believed to have been identified, and the Iowa-class battleships subsequently fired the 16" guns without incident. But that was back when the ammunition was 40-50 years old. Today, the ammunition is 70 years old!

Aardwolf 14y ago

Do you remember these levels in an upside down sunken ocean liner in Tomb Raider II? That.

smoyer 14y ago

There are actually several reserve fleets - I've seen the fleet at James River VA (from dry land). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Defense_Reserve_Fleet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Defense_Reserve_Fleet

dia80 14y ago

Isn't this guy opening himself up to prosecution?

artmageddon 14y ago
I kind of wonder the same thing; he's more or less admitting to trespassing and providing all the evidence. I will admit, this takes guts and I applaud it.

cryofan 14y ago

I helped mothball one of the ships shown there, I suppose. The link above is dead. But if that is the american mothball fleet, I once had a job in a shipyard as an auxiliary electrician helping to mothball one of those ships. THat was 20 years ago.

ChuckMcM 14y ago

Awesome, I have wondered at how interesting it would be to wander around those ships. Most look to be in pretty bad shape as you would expect. I'm guessing that it wasn't possible to get inside the Iowa at the time, as I recall back in 2011 it was probably still fitted with an existing combat information center (CIC) and wandering around inside would have violated a number of national security rules no doubt. I wondered about why security would leave them alone if they had spotted them but it was pointed out to me that there are a number of folks who fish (inadvisably of course) around that bay. One wonders if there were any changes once this went public back in 2011.

seany 14y ago
On the deck. This photo is on the iowa http://scotthaefner.com/beyond/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/fleet/fleet-25.jpg http://scotthaefner.com/beyond/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/fl...
- ChuckMcM 14y ago
  Saw that, and no interior shots of the Iowa. My only guess on why they would have an exterior shot and no interior shots is that they didn't actually get inside. I would presume that the Iowa would be locked up fairly tightly because I don't think it had been de-militarized (code for rendered incapable of warfighting) at the time. EDIT: I take it back, Wikipedia says she was decommissioned again in 2006, and donated to the museum duty in 2011.