Submarine Memorial Hits Snag
Efforts to put the sail of the USS Mariano G. Vallejo (SSBN 658) in a park in Vallejo, CA, have apparently hit a snag. Excerpts:
Before the city can consider a plan to move part of a former nuclear submarine to Alden Park, the island's master developer must report on the park's setting to determine the appropriateness of any proposed changes.The article goes on to say that they hoped to have the sail in place by the boat's next reunion in July, but that now looks problematic. Here's the crew website for more information on the Save Our Sail project.
Lennar Mare Island and city officials say the report is being prepared. City officials say it is anticipated in March, but a company spokesman said no schedule for its completion has been set..
Meanwhile, the Mare Island Historic Park Foundation's proposal is on hold. It was submitted to the Vallejo planning department in August, when the requirement was discovered.
The project involves placing a 43-foot-long, 18-foot-tall section of the Mariano G. Vallejo -- estimated to weigh 65 tons -- in a corner of the park. The sail, its periscope and control room are all that's left of a submarine that was longer than a football field when launched in 1965 and mothballed in 1995.
Have you ever been involved in an effort to get a memorial established?
posted by Bubblehead at 11:37 AM
50 Comments:
I wouldn't put a whole lot of faith in this actually getting done. The same outfit, Mare Island Historic Park Foundation, was attempting for years to get the last boat built at MINS (USS Drum SSN-677) placed at Vallejo as a museum. That never gained steam and Drum was being cut into razor blades at PSNS a few months ago.
On another subject, what are the odds that Mullen is actually a peter puffer?
12/02/2010 11:58 AM
I am a decommisioning plank owner on the Vallejo and Vallejo, CA has been trying for years to get part of the sub. If they don't get it done soon it will probably be turned into razor blades as well.
Vallejo treated us very nicely when we made a port call to Mare Island on our way to be defueled.
12/02/2010 12:21 PM
Short answer is YES. I am on the board that serves to get the USS RubberDucky built. There are some snags as well. His Buddies Mullen and roughead are holding things up a tad, but GW assures us it will be done.
Sinc
Bald Rhino
12/02/2010 12:55 PM
About the same as the odds that your are. If you're current Navy, shut the f up or resign or don't re-up (if enlisted). If you're not current Navy, nobody gives a crap what you think anyway.
Deal with it stud--women and gay folks are tired of paying their taxes to provide your toys (and pay your f'ing salary), then being told they're not welcome to play.
12/02/2010 1:38 PM
Mullen's wife Deborah is a mother, but is he simply making his job easier on himself?
The Pentagon survey indicated 30% to 50% of troops serving in combat units were concerned about serving alongside gays and lesbians. They complained that service members had not been asked in the survey whether they were in favor of lifting the ban on gays on lesbians. -Chicago Tribune
and,
Reservations were high among combat units, with 58 percent of Marines and 48 percent of the Army saying it would lifting the ban would have negative consequences. A substantial minority also said repeal could affect morale, training and whether they would stay in the military. Marines voice the loudest opposition, the survey found. -Miami Herald.
12/02/2010 1:49 PM
It may be time to propose a new corollary to Godwin's Law to be known as Bubblehead's Corollary:
As the comment thread of TSSBP grows longer, the probability of the conversation jumping to gays/women on submarines approaches one.
12/02/2010 2:02 PM
Excellent point, Lou. Back to the USS Mariano G. Vallejo (SSBN 658)--
MARCH 26, 2010 -" In 2008, Vallejo, Calif., was unable to pay its bills and declared bankruptcy.
U.S. bankruptcy judge Michael McManus held the city of has the authority to void its existing union contracts in its effort to reorganize. When it came to voiding pension contracts -- a major dpublic expense —the city of Vallejo hesitated.
The "workout plan" the city approved in December calls for cuts in services, staff
and even some benefits, such as health benefits for retirees.
---------------------------
Why would any reasonable person expect efforts to put SSBN 658's sail in a Vallejo park to encounter overwhelming obstacles?
Won't happen guys, unless Vallejo can convince some never-served-a-day congressmen to dole out a bunch of shovel-ready stimulus $$$.
12/02/2010 2:43 PM
Yep, a minority are against it. So, let that minority deal with it or get a new job.
If a jarhead or grunt has enough time to worry about a fire team or squad member's orientation, he's either NOT in combat, or he's a grave risk to his comrades if he is in combat 'cause his head's not on the mission.
It's interesting that vigilis is the one who comments on the likelihood of gay/female comments in long threads. Am I mistaken, or isn't he the guy who's paranoid about women on the boats (and the treatment of non-Annapolis sub officers)?
12/02/2010 2:57 PM
About the same as the odds that your (sic) are. If you're current Navy, shut the f up or resign or don't re-up (if enlisted). If you're not current Navy, nobody gives a crap what you think anyway.
What's that phrase, Hell hath no fury like ticked off Petty Officer Sissyfag? Lighten up, Francis. Or is it Francine?
12/02/2010 3:01 PM
Yep, a minority are against it. So, let that minority deal with it or get a new job.
You read th stats wrong - a majority are opposed to lifting DADT.
12/02/2010 3:02 PM
Anon @ 2:57 PM
At the bottom of this page is a simple chart you can understand. Skip all of the text above it and see if you understand the third panel.
To actually qualified dolphin owners, what do you think of this guy's bio claiming he qualified for SWO officer before there was an SWO?
I think he may be lucky to have his job by this time 2 years from now.
12/02/2010 3:43 PM
This comment has been removed by the author.
12/02/2010 3:53 PM
"To actually qualified dolphin owners, what do you think of this guy's bio claiming he qualified for SWO officer before there was an SWO?"
Once again (this has not changed since the last time this bullshit point was raised), individuals qualified as Fleet OODs (OOD-F) in a surface ship were considered qualified for the SWO pin when it came in. It wasn't automatic: you needed the qual letter in your record. OOD-F has never been an easy qual to get and this provision made sense.
I've no comment on Mabus, but as far as his warfare quals: nothing here, move on.
12/02/2010 3:55 PM
RD has moved on, buthe makes my point perfectly. The SWO pin recognizes competence and qualifications that pretty much had always existed and been recognized without another insignia needed.
It does not signify the obviously greater sacrifices submariners must make to qualify for dolphins.
Ray Mabus was never awarded an SWO insignia, was he? I am certain many readers must remember Admiral Boorda's small bronze "V" devices, which former CNO Elmo Zumwalt, his commander in Vietnam, later indicated Boorda was authorized to wear.
The Board for Correction of Naval Records, the ultimate arbiter of whether Boorda was entitled to wear the Combat V on both Medals, determined that he was not.
The Board for Correction of Naval Records could hardly determine Mabus was entitled to the SWO insignia without making a slew of other ex-surface officers entitled to it, as well (case-by-case basis).
Mabus ought not commit suicide, but in the interest of lawerly accuracy he should have his bio corrected!
12/02/2010 4:24 PM
I would like to take ADM Mullen up on his "shut up or get out" philosophy. Since I "balk" at showering with homosexuals I guess an adsep should be forthcoming. But wait Sec. Gates said that troops can't just get out. Sounds like a conundrum to me. Maybe adsep at the convenience of the govt will now take on a whole new meaning.
12/02/2010 5:46 PM
The SWo pin was and is a me-too pin, no question. But it did bring formality to what was pretty much a skipper-by-skipper call on becoming a Fleet OOD. Driving a CV? Big deal. Driving a minesweep? 'Hurry up and get the old man to sign you off so we can get out of port-and-starboard.'
The formality has been a good thing and the Smashed Bat is well earned. But don't knock the ship-drivers who came before. (My experience? Qualifying as OOD-F had about as much substance behind it in my CG in the Gulf as did submerged OOD in the FBM I qualified in. Responsibility at the same level.)
12/02/2010 5:49 PM
RD
No doubt; thank you for clarifying.
12/02/2010 5:59 PM
Stop quoting damn Miami Herald articles Vigilis and just read the lengthy report for yourself.
The history section on military racial integration I personally found very fascinating. Especially the parallels to the arguments against integration then (including quotes by Nimits & Eisenhower) compared to the arguments against repealing DADT today. To me, they all seem specious when looked at by modern eyes. I think the next generation of Sailors twenty years from now will say the same thing about DADT's repeal today.
I skimmed all the 270 or so pages that were released to the public the other day. The NAVY stats are wildly different from the Army & Marines. It would have been cool if they had further broken down the responses by communities for the Navy stats. Submariner survey responses (a little over a thousand tallied) accounted for like 5% of the Navy's input into the survey.
By and large, most of us (USN) frankly just don't give a crap what your orientation is as long as you can show up to work on time and do your job well, whether that's keeping the rock hot, driving the boat (as OOD or on the sticks), or whatever.
If you don't like it when it gets repealed (and it will), get out at the end of your contract. You won't be given a chance for an early sep because you don't like the change in policy. This is also addressed in the Working Group's Recommendations in the report.
___________________________________
BREAK BREAK
___________________________________
Back to our regularly scheduled topic on submarine memorials.
I donated money to the '41 for Freedom' memorial up in Bangor on the base & bought a few personalized bricks that surround it. Whenever I get up there it takes me forever to find the damn things.
Re-enlisted at the Parche memorial in Pearl on lower base, and donated money to the Bowfin museum next to Ford Island.
I'm working now with some SUBVETS to put a new submarine memorial up in Millington.
12/02/2010 6:17 PM
@RD "Driving a CV? Big deal. Driving a minesweep? 'Hurry up and get the old man to sign you off so we can get out of port-and-starboard."
In light of your recent postings concerning cheating/integrity with regards to training and qualification on subs, I find your comment quite hypocritical. The mentality of your quote expresses the exact futility that quite a few nukes have expressed on here. How is your comment different from the attitude of the BEQ research project (exam) or the make the training binder look good so that we can pass ORSE and deploy?
12/02/2010 6:26 PM
I am sure I have established several living memorials in places like the Philippines and Thailand! Ah, the memories of being a saior...just don't tell my wife!
12/02/2010 6:36 PM
12/02/2010 6:26 PM: What the hell do hypothetical JO attitudes in a minesweep have to do with cheating on nuke exams? Note the words 'get the old man to sign you off.' That was - until the SWO qual came in - precisely the process whereby one became an OOD-F: the skipper qualified you.
I'm not going to stand up for all the skimmer skippers over all time, but it was a very honest system. Motivated, the skipper: he wanted to get some sleep underway. So he wouldn't sign off some putz until and unless he thought he could do the job.
Let me decide when I'm going to be a hypocrite. Don't invent shit.
12/02/2010 6:46 PM
STSC @ 6:17 PM
You cannot give anyone commands here, bucko, so might as well drop your bluster. Of those complaining so far you are in the minority here.
If you think the Miami Herald and Chicago Tribune mischaracterized the survey, send them a letter with your own name and telephone number on it (both required).
You have not told us why you want DADT repealed. So we are left to guess. Vigilss spelled out why DADT should not be repealed --it will usher in an onslaught of litigation over equitable promotions and assignments. Taxpayers will bear the expense of any litigation.
This administration, which was helped into office by the deep pockets of trial lawyers, is pushing the repeal as a convenient way of garnering the favor of lawyers and gays.
By the way, not all the gays in the services want to "come out", DADT or not. Worse, some unscrupulous straights may just claim they are gay if the litigation bandwagon pays off well for gays.
No effect whatever on good order and discipline -- what a laugh!
Rex
12/02/2010 10:12 PM
The Mariano G. Vallejo's sail has been sitting at Mare Island for years and years; the first H&C may have still been open when it arrived. I have little faith that anything will happen until it rusts away.
12/03/2010 12:36 AM
I hope they come up with the finances to make it happen along with the costs of maintenance over the years that the sail is to be displayed. The only two sails I've seen displayed like this are the 643 at K-Bay's main gate and the 683 in downtown Bremerton. Personally, I like the Bancroft display a little better than the Parche. Not because one is a missile boat and the other a fast attack, but because that entire museum was placed in a bad location. Way too much traffic and downtown Bremerton is not the best part of the city either.
In the next 20-25 years or so, we'll probably see a 726 sail on display somewhere. When that happens, I'll gladly send a check to help make it happen and fly in so I can see & touch it. If I help pay for it, I atleast get to touch it just once don't I?
12/03/2010 1:36 AM
"I hope they come up with the finances to make it happen along with the costs of maintenance"
'They' is us. Monuments and displays of this sort normally are paid for by donations. The city (etc.) often donates the land, but the rest is private money.
12/03/2010 3:56 AM
@mt1,
If you ever get the chance, check out the 644 at the Cold War Memorial at Patriots Point. This location is now the home of the new Amberjack Lost Boats Memorial too.
12/03/2010 7:32 AM
Anon @ 1:38: "Deal with it stud--women and gay folks are tired of paying their taxes to provide your toys (and pay your f'ing salary), then being told they're not welcome to play."
There's a lot of other people who are "paying their taxes", then being told they're not welcome to play: People too old, those with medical conditions, criminals (or those with criminal histories), too many dependents, etc., etc., etc.
Please do us the courtesy and show us where in the Constitution military service is a "right". (Hint: it ain't.)
I'm not so naive to think I didn't have gay/bisexual shipmates. One of them WAS bisexual and ended up HIV-positive in the late-80's. But he didn't make an issue of it, and neither did we, as it should have been. I've said it before, I'll say it again vis-a-vis homosexuals, women in combat/submarines/whathaveyou:
It's not a competence question, it's a readiness and good order and discipline question.
Deal with it, stud.
Strange that the guy most supportive of gays openly serving on submarines would be a Sonargirl, though...or not.
12/03/2010 10:14 AM
http://www.navytimes.com/news/2010/12/navy-panel-general-discharge-for-captain-holly-graf-120310w/
The panel's findings are in and they've decided to stew that butt-wad little bitch. Hopefully the HAG's prior misconduct will serve as an example of what not to do for future DHs, XOs and COs.
"The panel unanimously voted to recommend she be separated from the Navy with a general discharge and be allowed to retire as a captain for completing honorable service “for a period of no less than six months” at that rank."
Wow, they went easy on her. So Mabus has already signed off on women serving on boats. Talk about good timing since he's had to send Lisa Nowak packing and he's about to send the HAG home as well. Wonder what kinds of discipline problems we're going to have once the female JOs begin to board the boats not too long from now?
12/03/2010 1:29 PM
Anonymous @ 12/02 1158 said:
"On another subject, what are the odds that Mullen is actually a peter puffer?"
Listen - I tried to be reasonable and 'talk pretty' most of the time but in this case I think the follwoing is warranted:
"What the fuck's your problem asshole?" This thread has absolutely nothing to do with women/gays/animals/aliens/whatever. Your 'successful' troll serves no useful purpose and takes away from what this thread is supposed to be discussing.
If you want a discussion on TSSBP about DADT or any other topic, then send a message to Joel and ask him to start a new thread to cover that topic.
In the meantime, to everyone else that's been side-tracked: please don't feed the troll.
ETCS
12/03/2010 6:39 PM
RD is right, we are the ones to champion support for these tributes to our legacy. Why not consider posting a page of links to all of the existing and proposed cold war memorials.
12/03/2010 7:40 PM
I'm sure the city of Benecia--wife of Vallejo--just up the river would appreciate it.
12/03/2010 8:37 PM
@ETCS: Several weeks ago, I would have agreed with you in your smackdown, but the subject is extremely topical at the moment, with the Senate hearings, and the likelihood that resolution may be imminent. I'm sure Joel has his reasons for not posting a topic, and I suspect I know some of them, but out of respect for him and the job he generally does with this blog, I'll try not to be a jackass by speculating - he can speak for himself. There is new material now though, with the Pentagon's report, and the misrepresentation of it by much of the media, not to mention some curious characterizations by the SecDef. While anon was trolling, and most of want an adult tone here, I respectfully believe Joel is making a mistake in not addressing the issue at this point head-on, and persons attempting to insert it on their own is a natural result.
12/03/2010 8:57 PM
I also suggest that it's past time to begin a thread on wikileaks, both the first amendment questions (bated breath waiting for the duck to weigh in, there) and the connection (random, or no?) to DADT.
12/03/2010 11:50 PM
@MM1 - Mark, I don't necessarily disagree with you. I too have been checking in to see if Joel would post something about DADT or Wiki; both topical, as you mentioned. However, we must respect whatever decision he makes. To 'override' his decision by interjecting these topics into a thread that has nothing to do with them is poor form and a violation of blog etiquitte. None of us are perfect, but this 'violation' was so blatant that I felt the need to speak up. For controversial issues, such as Women In Submarines, Joel has offered to link to other blog sites that might be discussing those issues.
12/04/2010 11:12 AM
So, what I'm getting out of this is that the cities typically donate the land, but the maintenance and other setup fees and costs are for the most part private donations?
If that's the case, a proper PR campaign and donation drive theoretically could get the Vallejo sail in place (bureaucracy aside)
What I don't see is why the city would be supporting the cost of land donation and time processing the paperwork when it is dealing with bankruptcy. Seems to me this project is probably DOA
In my pre-navy time I helped build a memorial park on old Camp Adair in Oregon. If the Vallejo has a hard time finding a place in a heavily regulated city, I'm sure there is probably a small rural community that would love to have a nice little park put together with a sail to remember the heroes of the cold war.
---
MM1/SS
12/04/2010 12:54 PM
rudder amidships-
The Mariano G. Vallejo sail is already in Vallejo. I don't see it leaving.
The land should be a non-issue- there are plenty of places to put it, including all of fucking Mare Island itself. Whether the stupid deal with Lennar contains obstacles, I dunno. But paperwork processing won't break the city, it takes stupid short-sighted labor deals to do that.
But Vallejo has a dwindling core of shipyard connected people, a large population of others who don't give a fuck and would smoke grapes and deface it if placed on the waterfront, and city government run for decades by a succession of people who can't plan their way out of a piss-soaked paper bag.
12/04/2010 5:17 PM
Topic was a good one. Too much anger on this site. I'll move to a better class of bloggers. Regards.
12/04/2010 9:34 PM
Too much anger??..well you never served on a boat now didja'? Try growing a thicker skin you ridiculous dude.
12/05/2010 12:20 AM
Adios 623;.. May you find what your looking for... May he be all you ever dreamed of after the midnight showing of Gas Pump Girls.A much beloved underway movie of the early 80's...
12/05/2010 7:07 AM
@623: 'To much anger'? That's priceless. I am laughing my ass off. Don't let the water-tight hatch hit your ass on the way out!
12/05/2010 7:22 AM
Point proven. It didn't take long for the Anonymous coward(s) to emerge. This is likely one guy who is in a self gratifying muttering loop with himself.
12/05/2010 12:06 PM
Cowards huh? You sure about that pal? I don't believe you are.
As an outsider, you've clearly displayed a view of a misunderstanding as to how we live and how we view life in general. We maintain an angry temperament and a thick skin for a reason.
What reason might that be, you may ask?...Because it's completely illogical for close to 160 of us to actively move several fathoms under the water. You can't see us, you can't hear us. but at the same time most us of do display our emotions based on pride and prior experience because we've perfected the method of going below, observing and then coming top side eventually without being caught.
Stay below for 70 days straight and see what you experience. Trust me, you'll feel & see some frustration and anger built up from limited contact from the surface.
As for anger, shut up and go away. In our case, it's called patience and trust. 623, is there any chance you're a skimmer? You sure as hell sound like one.
12/05/2010 6:10 PM
"Too much anger on this site."
Versus which may we ask, 623 ---
complacency, aloofness, or surrender of principle?
Rex
12/05/2010 9:12 PM
Regarding the expense of having the Vallejo sail at the park: How much can it cost? The tiny little town of Arco, ID has the ex-Hawkbill sail sitting in a park. I am confident that Arco's budget is dwarfed by Vallejo's.
12/06/2010 6:38 PM
OK, guy, a few facts about the Save Our Sail project at Mare Island. I am closely involved with that effort.
The project has its own Website, still in development:
The SOS project has its own Website, still under development:
saveoursail.com
Check out the Blog link on this site for additional photos & information.
- The Mare Island Museum has the SSBN 658 sail, major elements of the control room consoles, the anchor chain, and 3 periscopes from the 658 (2 installed and one spare). These were obtained from the Navy in 1995 when the boat was dismantled at Bremerton & transported to Mare Island.
- The control room & periscopes are on display in the Museum. The 658's sail is sitting on Building Ways 2 on Mare Island. It was repainted last spring and looks pretty good for a big pile of submersible steel.
- It is the case that our application with the City of Vallejo to establish a permanent memorial site for the sail in Alden Park on Mare Island is on hold, pending completion of something called a Cultural Landscape Report (CLR), and public review & approval by the City's planning department. We, too, have heard of a March date for completion of the CLR, but that is speculative at best.
- The requirement for the CLR was established as part of the master planning for Mare Island's reuse after the shipyard's closure in 1996. While Lennar is responsible for having the CLR done and will pay for it under its agreements with the City of Vallejo, it is NOT a requirement established by Lennar. Given that Alden Park is City-owned and is not any responsibility of Lennar, we view Lennar as neutral in their view of this project.
- We did look at other Mare Island locations for the sail, but a consensus was established to pursue the northeast corner of Alden Park as the site, across the street from the Mare Island Museum and less than 200 yards from where the Mariano G Vallejo SSBN 658 was built in 1964-65 & launched to great fanfare.
- Fundraising efforts have been ongoing for many months, with the former 658 crewmembers' organization demonstrating remarkable generosity toward this effort. The former 658 crew is holding their next national reunion in Vallejo in early July, 2011, less than 6 months from now.
- It was true that the Mare Island Historic Park Foundation/Museum tried to get the USS Drum, but the $10 million pricetag set by the Navy was too great an obstacle, and other difficulties contributed to the surrender on that effort.
Just a bit off-subject, another organization here has been trying to get the USS Iowa to Mare Island as a museum ship--it is the only one of the 4 Iowa-class battleships stuck in this kind of limbo. Some $15-20 million will be needed to make that happen, and there is competing interest for the Iowa in southern California. This great ship sits a few miles from Mare Island in the Suisun Reserve Fleet.
I hope this clears up some of the speculation about this effort.
Chris Rasmussen
Mare Island
1/17/2011 1:07 AM
OK, guy, a few facts about the Save Our Sail project at Mare Island. I am closely involved with that effort.
The project has its own Website, still in development:
The SOS project has its own Website, still under development:
saveoursail.com
Check out the Blog link on this site for additional photos & information.
- The Mare Island Museum has the SSBN 658 sail, major elements of the control room consoles, the anchor chain, and 3 periscopes from the 658 (2 installed and one spare). These were obtained from the Navy in 1995 when the boat was dismantled at Bremerton & transported to Mare Island.
- The control room & periscopes are on display in the Museum. The 658's sail is sitting on Building Ways 2 on Mare Island. It was repainted last spring and looks pretty good for a big pile of submersible steel.
- It is the case that our application with the City of Vallejo to establish a permanent memorial site for the sail in Alden Park on Mare Island is on hold, pending completion of something called a Cultural Landscape Report (CLR), and public review & approval by the City's planning department. We, too, have heard of a March date for completion of the CLR, but that is speculative at best.
- The requirement for the CLR was established as part of the master planning for Mare Island's reuse after the shipyard's closure in 1996. While Lennar is responsible for having the CLR done and will pay for it under its agreements with the City of Vallejo, it is NOT a requirement established by Lennar. Given that Alden Park is City-owned and is not any responsibility of Lennar, we view Lennar as neutral in their view of this project.
- We did look at other Mare Island locations for the sail, but a consensus was established to pursue the northeast corner of Alden Park as the site, across the street from the Mare Island Museum and less than 200 yards from where the Mariano G Vallejo SSBN 658 was built in 1964-65 & launched to great fanfare.
- Fundraising efforts have been ongoing for many months, with the former 658 crewmembers' organization demonstrating remarkable generosity toward this effort. The former 658 crew is holding their next national reunion in Vallejo in early July, 2011, less than 6 months from now.
- It was true that the Mare Island Historic Park Foundation/Museum tried to get the USS Drum, but the $10 million pricetag set by the Navy was too great an obstacle, and other difficulties contributed to the surrender on that effort.
Just a bit off-subject, another organization here has been trying to get the USS Iowa to Mare Island as a museum ship--it is the only one of the 4 Iowa-class battleships stuck in this kind of limbo. Some $15-20 million will be needed to make that happen, and there is competing interest for the Iowa in southern California. This great ship sits a few miles from Mare Island in the Suisun Reserve Fleet.
I hope this clears up some of the speculation about this effort.
Chris Rasmussen
Mare Island
1/17/2011 1:07 AM
I am writing this as one who is closely involved with the 658 Save Our Sail effort at Mare Island.
The SOS project has its own Website, still under development:
saveoursail.com
Check out the Blog link on this site for additional photos & information, and certainly feel free to contribute to that blog with questions & comments, though I recognize that the shy & retiring manner you guys show on this blog might hold you back! LOL
- The Mare Island Museum has the SSBN 658 sail, major elements of the control room consoles, the anchor chain, and 3 periscopes from the 658 (2 installed and one spare). After much wrangling, these were obtained from the Navy in 1995 when the boat was dismantled at Bremerton & transported to Mare Island.
- The control room & periscopes are on display in the Museum. The 658's sail is sitting on Building Ways 2 on Mare Island. It was repainted last spring and looks pretty good for a big pile of submersible steel.
- It is the case that our application with the City of Vallejo to establish a permanent memorial site for the sail in Alden Park on Mare Island is on hold, pending completion of something called a Cultural Landscape Report (CLR), and public review & approval by the City's planning department. We, too, have heard of a March date for completion of the CLR, but that is speculative at best.
- The requirement for the CLR was established as part of the master planning for Mare Island's reuse after the shipyard's closure in 1996. While Lennar is responsible for having the CLR done and will pay for it under its agreements with the City of Vallejo, it is NOT a requirement established by Lennar. Given that Alden Park is City-owned and is not any responsibility of Lennar, we consider Lennar as neutral in their view of this project.
- We did look at other Mare Island locations for the sail, but a consensus was established to pursue the northeast corner of Alden Park as the site, across the street from the Mare Island Museum and less than 200 yards from where the Mariano G Vallejo SSBN 658 was built in 1964-65 & launched to great fanfare.
- Fundraising efforts have been ongoing for many months, with the former 658 crewmembers' organization demonstrating remarkable generosity toward this effort. The former 658 crew is holding their next national reunion in Vallejo in early July 2011, less than 6 months from now.
- It was true that the Mare Island Historic Park Foundation/Museum tried to get the USS Drum, but the $10 million pricetag set by the Navy was too great an obstacle, and other difficulties contributed to the surrender on that effort.
I hope this clears up some of the speculation.
Chris Rasmussen
Mare Island
1/17/2011 1:18 AM
I write this as one who is closely involved with the Save Our Sail project at Mare Island.
The SOS project has its own Website, still under development:
saveoursail.com
Check out the Blog link on this site for additional photos & information.
- The Mare Island Museum has the SSBN 658 sail, major elements of the control room consoles, the anchor chain, and 3 periscopes from the 658 (2 installed and one spare). These were obtained from the Navy in 1995 when the boat was dismantled at Bremerton & transported to Mare Island.
- The control room & periscopes are on display in the Museum. The 658's sail is sitting on Building Ways 2 on Mare Island. It was repainted last spring and looks pretty good for a big pile of submersible steel.
- It is the case that our application with the City of Vallejo to establish a permanent memorial site for the sail in Alden Park on Mare Island is on hold, pending completion of something called a Cultural Landscape Report (CLR), and public review & approval by the City's planning department. We, too, have heard of a March date for completion of the CLR, but that is speculative at best.
- The requirement for the CLR was established as part of the master planning for Mare Island's reuse after the shipyard's closure in 1996. While Lennar is responsible for having the CLR done and will pay for it under its agreements with the City of Vallejo, it is NOT a requirement established by Lennar. Given that Alden Park is City-owned and is not any responsibility of Lennar, we view Lennar as neutral in their view of this project.
- We did look at other Mare Island locations for the sail, but a consensus was established to pursue the northeast corner of Alden Park as the site, across the street from the Mare Island Museum and less than 200 yards from where the Mariano G Vallejo SSBN 658 was built in 1964-65 & launched to great fanfare.
- Fundraising efforts have been ongoing for many months, with the former 658 crewmembers' organization demonstrating remarkable generosity toward this effort. The former 658 crew is holding their next national reunion in Vallejo in early July, 2011, less than 6 months from now.
- It was true that the Mare Island Historic Park Foundation/Museum tried to get the USS Drum, but the $10 million pricetag set by the Navy was too great an obstacle, and other difficulties contributed to the surrender on that effort.
Just a bit off-subject, another organization here has been trying to get the USS Iowa to Mare Island as a museum ship--it is the only one of the 4 Iowa-class battleships stuck in this kind of limbo. Some $15-20 million will be needed to make that happen, and there is competing interest for the Iowa in southern California. This great ship sits a few miles from Mare Island in the Suisun Reserve Fleet.
I hope this clears up some of the speculation about this effort.
Chris Rasmussen
Mare Island
1/17/2011 1:33 AM
I write this as one who is closely involved with the Save Our Sail project at Mare Island.
The SOS project has its own Website, still under development:
saveoursail.com
Check out the Blog link on this site for additional photos & information.
- It is the case that our application with the City of Vallejo to establish a permanent memorial site for the sail in Alden Park on Mare Island is on hold, pending completion of something called a Cultural Landscape Report (CLR), and public review & approval by the City's planning department. We, too, have heard of a March date for completion of the CLR, but that is speculative at best.
- The requirement for the CLR was established as part of the master planning for Mare Island's reuse after the shipyard's closure in 1996. While Lennar is responsible for having the CLR done and will pay for it under its agreements with the City of Vallejo, it is NOT a requirement established by Lennar. Given that Alden Park is City-owned and is not any responsibility of Lennar, we view Lennar as neutral in their view of this project.
- We did look at other Mare Island locations for the sail, but a consensus was established to pursue the northeast corner of Alden Park as the site, across the street from the Mare Island Museum and less than 200 yards from where the Mariano G Vallejo SSBN 658 was built in 1964-65 & launched to great fanfare.
- Fundraising efforts have been ongoing for many months, with the former 658 crewmembers' organization demonstrating remarkable generosity toward this effort. The former 658 crew is holding their next national reunion in Vallejo in early July, 2011, less than 6 months from now.
- It was true that the Mare Island Historic Park Foundation/Museum tried to get the USS Drum, but the $10 million pricetag set by the Navy was too great an obstacle, and other difficulties contributed to the surrender on that effort.
I hope this clears up some of the speculation about this effort.
Chris Rasmussen
Mare Island
1/17/2011 1:36 AM
Thanks for the post, pretty worthwhile info.
11/16/2011 12:37 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home