As others have already pointed out, the key word in my post was 'operational'. Museum pieces that are old as dirt? Sure, but not anything still a front-line asset.Just curious, does that mean that it would take a metric ton of money to get them right, or basically they were so worn out and/or with obsolete innards that you'd be better off starting from scratch if you wanted that capability?
My outsider guess would be that at some point a ship, no matter how well you maintain it is just done at some point. Even the one someone is getting ready to post to prove me wrong.
I think part of the problem with bringing the S-3 back is no one really has a clue just how much it would cost. As I mentioned earlier, the first S-3 for VX-30 that went through depot was not only a learning process but also a contant stream of surprises behind every other panel or part they pulled. Stuff was often deteriorated, in the wrong place or just not there.Have they really done the math lately, or are they just sticking to a flawed decision made in the heady 90s when some people in the Navy thought it was the end of history and savings could be found by killing VS.
There are certainly examples of aircraft pulled out of the boneyard after a long period, NASA pulled a WB-57F from the boneyard after it was there for 41 years (a record), but they are almost always unique and still operational.