Naval History and Heritage Command

[Randy Daytona]

Our own historical website - thought others might like the link to it.

https://www.history.navy.mil/

Amazing to look at US Ship Force Levels, especially at the end of World War II:
23 Battleships
72 Cruisers
377 Destroyers
and 99 fleet and escort carriers

6768 ships total.

THE SEA IS OURS.

https://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/ship-histories/us-ship-force-levels.html

https://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/ship-histories/danfs.html

U.S. Navy Battleship Division 2 in line abreast formation, 7 June 1954, in the Virginia Capes operating area, on the only occasion that all four Iowa-class battleships were photographed operating together. The ship closest to the camera is USS Iowa (BB-61). The others are (from near to far): USS Wisconsin (BB-64); USS Missouri (BB-63) and USS New Jersey (BB-62).

Too bad we can't send this into the South China Sea with a few carriers for air cover.

 

[Blaze1]

Hi

This is my first post, but I visited NHHC back in 2011, it was great with very friendly and helpful staff. I didn't get to see as much as I'd like (time constraints), but I plan on going back.

 

[GroundPounder]

Our own historical website - thought others might like the link to it.

https://www.history.navy.mil/

Amazing to look at US Ship Force Levels, especially at the end of World War II:
23 Battleships
72 Cruisers
377 Destroyers
and 99 fleet and escort carriers

6768 ships total.

THE SEA IS OURS.

https://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/ship-histories/us-ship-force-levels.html

https://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/ship-histories/danfs.html

U.S. Navy Battleship Division 2 in line abreast formation, 7 June 1954, in the Virginia Capes operating area, on the only occasion that all four Iowa-class battleships were photographed operating together. The ship closest to the camera is USS Iowa (BB-61). The others are (from near to far): USS Wisconsin (BB-64); USS Missouri (BB-63) and USS New Jersey (BB-62).

Too bad we can't send this into the South China Sea with a few carriers for air cover.

Stupid SWO question. Are there anything like NOTAMs or MOAs that are set aside for Navy ships to train in areas that commercial shipping is advised ( or must ) stay clear of?

 

[Griz882]

The Navy HHC is a fine organization that has just weathered a few very rough years and came out better for it. I work in a similar business and their web work is well respected. Sadly, the command and the “national” museum are well hidden behind the walls of the DC Navy Yard and that leads to too few visitors and dated exhibits. Also, they got rid of their museum ship (USS Barry) a year or so ago and how can you have a naval museum without a ship?

My hope is that the Navy will get a true national museum in the next few years.

 

[Uncle Fester]

Stupid SWO question. Are there anything like NOTAMs or MOAs that are set aside for Navy ships to train in areas that commercial shipping is advised ( or must ) stay clear of?

NOMARS (Notice to Mariners). Same idea.

 

[Duc'-guy25]

NTMs (Notice to Mariners). Same idea.

FIFY

Stupid SWO question. Are there anything like NOTAMs or MOAs that are set aside for Navy ships to train in areas that commercial shipping is advised ( or must ) stay clear of?

Hmmmm yessish. Major events like gun shoots and missile launches are usually put out in the NTM's. On the government side we used to get message traffic if there was going to be a gun shoot or something in a specific block so we would know to avoid it (on government use charts the blocks are actually defined), whereas on the NTM's it just gives a lat/long that the area is bounded by and a general time that block is going to be in use. As far as non kinetic exercises, there is really nothing stopping commercial traffic from just plucking on through. There isn't anything like a MOA defined on a normal chart. I used to stumble in the surface and carrier groups all the time in the VACAPES. It was usually a shitty day since warships typically request a stupid unnecessarily large CPA. I get maintaining a tactical footing, but I'm painted gray too guys... My favorite was when they requested a 5 mile CPA when we were rendezvousing for an UNREP .

 

[HH-60H]

My hope is that the Navy will get a true national museum in the next few years.

The new(ish) director is working very hard to make that happen. Not to say previous leadership hasn't tried. I just read their white paper that recounts 20 years of missed opportunities.

 

[Griz882]

The new(ish) director is working very hard to make that happen. Not to say previous leadership hasn't tried. I just read their white paper that recounts 20 years of missed opportunities.

I know their pain. It is a heavy lift and takes an amazingly strong fund raising foundation to get the job done. I would love to see it.

 

[DanMa1156]

The Navy HHC is a fine organization that has just weathered a few very rough years and came out better for it. I work in a similar business and their web work is well respected. Sadly, the command and the “national” museum are well hidden behind the walls of the DC Navy Yard and that leads to too few visitors and dated exhibits. Also, they got rid of their museum ship (USS Barry) a year or so ago and how can you have a naval museum without a ship?

My hope is that the Navy will get a true national museum in the next few years.

Color me uneducated on this topic - what's the short story behind this?

 

[Griz882]

Color me uneducated on this topic - what's the short story behind this?

It was a leadership issue about five years ago - a bad command climate. To paraphrase the report, "The History and Heritage Command’s leadership has not been using due diligence to ensure that naval commands and fleets are creating historical records of their ongoing activities. Moreover, according to the IG report, the Navy’s professional historians, archivists, curators, and librarians who work for the history command feel “disenfranchised” because of “their marginalization in decision processes and lack of advancement opportunity.”

In the end, the IG ripped the command apart and several changes were made. Sadly, a great deal of valuable historical, archival and artifact material was lost or damaged. The term the report used was that the entire program was "at risk."

 

[squorch2]

Hi hey hello there, AWers. Former NHHC action officer here.

The IG report, begun during RADM DeLoach's term as Director, identified numerous areas of concern - HR, sailor programs, conservation, curation, and archive operations, museum oversight, etc. etc. Many pieces in NHHC's art collection were ruined through storage in non-climate-controlled warehouses, papers and artifacts were routinely damaged or pilfered, museums operated as small fiefdoms with little to no oversight or contribution to the overall NHHC mission.

So yes - the Navy's history was at risk.

The solution was to fire a lot of people (most notably DeLoach), transition the director position to someone with experience in running civilian-heavy organizations and an interest in history, cut loose those museums that did not align with the new comprehensive outreach strategy, digitize NHHC's collection, increase NHHC's budget, and revisit everything in 5 years.

That was in 2012.

In 2014-2015, a lot of progress had been made, and there was still a long ways to go, with several toxic hangers-on still making their influence felt at both the HQ level and the museum level. By and large, those people are now elsewhere. CNO Greenert and then-DNS VADM Swift were big NHHC fans and supported our out-year budget requests to maintain the progress made since the nadir of the IG report. (Remember, this was the age of sequestration, so any budget plus-ups were highly scrutinized.)

After addressing the issues the IG report laid bare, NHHC HQ turned its attention towards a new National Museum of the US Navy. I was one of the authors on that 20 year retrospective - and saw so much time, money and goodwill wasted on obvious no-go plans. Again, the people behind those wasteful periods are gone, and I'm optimistic about the possibilities for a new museum outside the Navy Yard walls.

(For a great example on how museums can be quickly and efficiently capitalized, look to the Coast Guard's effort. They were similarly stalled, but with the right people and the right timing, are well on their way to beginning construction on an amazing, sustainable, accessible museum that tells the Coast Guard story. I remain very impressed by their progress.)

 

[Uncle Fester]

After addressing the issues the IG report laid bare, NHHC HQ turned its attention towards a new National Museum of the US Navy. I was one of the authors on that 20 year retrospective - and saw so much time, money and goodwill wasted on obvious no-go plans. Again, the people behind those wasteful periods are gone, and I'm optimistic about the possibilities for a new museum outside the Navy Yard walls.

Very informative post, @squorch2 . The Navy has a piece of Nauticus in Norfolk, yes? I was very impressed with that museum...I thought it was better than any 'official' Navy museum I've visited, with the exception of Pensacola. Seems like partnering-expanding there would be the way to go, rather than start from scratch.

 

[squorch2]

NHHC has a long-term lease from the City of Norfolk for part of Nauticus as the Hampton Roads Naval Museum.

The future vision is to make it the National Surface Warfare Museum - think SWO equivalent of the National Naval Aviation Museum in Pensacola or the Submarine Force Library and Museum in Groton.

There are several COAs for the National Museum of the USN (NMUSN)- one awesome but now unavailable one would have put the new museum across the street from the Nats stadium and kept the Barry there. (She was scrapped because 1) there was no sponsor for upkeep, 2) the new bridge across the Anacostia would have trapped her there forever, and 3) scrapping in-place is $$$.

I can say that NHHC did conduct lots of due diligence on where to put the new NMUSN, and DC came out on top in both studies. (Chicago and Philadelphia came in second place.)

NHHC's vision requires $400M in capital funds to realize, so yeah, it's a big lift. 2015 plan was for $250M of that to come from private donations, the rest from small Navy outlays.

NHHC is at the intersection of a lot of very interesting parts of the Navy, the federal government, and civilian life. I continue to look forward to seeing what they have up their sleeve next.

 

[Griz882]

Hi hey hello there, AWers. Former NHHC action officer here.

The IG report, begun during RADM DeLoach's term as Director, identified numerous areas of concern - HR, sailor programs, conservation, curation, and archive operations, museum oversight, etc. etc. Many pieces in NHHC's art collection were ruined through storage in non-climate-controlled warehouses, papers and artifacts were routinely damaged or pilfered, museums operated as small fiefdoms with little to no oversight or contribution to the overall NHHC mission.

So yes - the Navy's history was at risk.

The solution was to fire a lot of people (most notably DeLoach), transition the director position to someone with experience in running civilian-heavy organizations and an interest in history, cut loose those museums that did not align with the new comprehensive outreach strategy, digitize NHHC's collection, increase NHHC's budget, and revisit everything in 5 years.

That was in 2012.

In 2014-2015, a lot of progress had been made, and there was still a long ways to go, with several toxic hangers-on still making their influence felt at both the HQ level and the museum level. By and large, those people are now elsewhere. CNO Greenert and then-DNS VADM Swift were big NHHC fans and supported our out-year budget requests to maintain the progress made since the nadir of the IG report. (Remember, this was the age of sequestration, so any budget plus-ups were highly scrutinized.)

After addressing the issues the IG report laid bare, NHHC HQ turned its attention towards a new National Museum of the US Navy. I was one of the authors on that 20 year retrospective - and saw so much time, money and goodwill wasted on obvious no-go plans. Again, the people behind those wasteful periods are gone, and I'm optimistic about the possibilities for a new museum outside the Navy Yard walls.

(For a great example on how museums can be quickly and efficiently capitalized, look to the Coast Guard's effort. They were similarly stalled, but with the right people and the right timing, are well on their way to beginning construction on an amazing, sustainable, accessible museum that tells the Coast Guard story. I remain very impressed by their progress.)

Great summation. Thanks.

 

[Griz882]

NHHC has a long-term lease from the City of Norfolk for part of Nauticus as the Hampton Roads Naval Museum.

The future vision is to make it the National Surface Warfare Museum - think SWO equivalent of the National Naval Aviation Museum in Pensacola or the Submarine Force Library and Museum in Groton.

There are several COAs for the National Museum of the USN (NMUSN)- one awesome but now unavailable one would have put the new museum across the street from the Nats stadium and kept the Barry there. (She was scrapped because 1) there was no sponsor for upkeep, 2) the new bridge across the Anacostia would have trapped her there forever, and 3) scrapping in-place is $$$.

I can say that NHHC did conduct lots of due diligence on where to put the new NMUSN, and DC came out on top in both studies. (Chicago and Philadelphia came in second place.)

NHHC's vision requires $400M in capital funds to realize, so yeah, it's a big lift. 2015 plan was for $250M of that to come from private donations, the rest from small Navy outlays.

NHHC is at the intersection of a lot of very interesting parts of the Navy, the federal government, and civilian life. I continue to look forward to seeing what they have up their sleeve next.

For the USCG Museum, getting the land was the first big step. The Army peeled off a bit of real estate from Fort Belvoir to allow for the construction of the National Museum of the US Army but the construction funds were all privately raised. The "guts," all the exhibits, mounts, interpretive panels, education programing and so on is all funded with federal dollars. This is the only way these things can work. Moreover, if you build a museum on a base it automatically limits the number of people who can visit.

If I could waive my magic wand I would love to see NPS donate all of Jones Point in Alexandria VA for the museum. Sure, the Woodrow Wilson Bridge would split the campus, but you could park just almost anything that floats with a little dredging and infrastructure. Keeping the old light house there would add some ambiance and there is plenty of room for a massive building. The views would be good the access is easy. But, since I am waiving magic wands, I guess I would have to raise it a foot or so for potential flooding. All my goofy dreaming aside, I would love to see a NMUSN built.

Thanks for the info @squorch2!