Scratch one MAKE THAT TWO F18s -Truman 'failed arrestment/eject'

So on this deployment thus far the Truman has lost three F/A-18s, one from friendly fire while returning to the ship, one fell out of the hangar bay into the sea when the ship made an evasive maneuver and this one had an apparent arresting cable malfunction. Along the way the CO was replaced after the carrier bumped into a cargo ship. Is this the worst trip the Truman has ever been on? Is it cursed? Why not just bring them home and start over?


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSAoEf1Ib58
 
Lawman said:
Protecting the multi billion dollar commerce corridor alongside a multinational task force.

We have a 200+ year old tradition of not letting people “F with our boats.”
Click to expand...
So…you’re saying that our federal government doing federal government things comes at a price to the taxpayer, and sometimes (like when we scratch 3 $70M jets due to accidents/incompetence) that might look pretty wasteful from the outside, especially with no experience in the arena. Cool. We’re in agreement on that. We had a whole ass conversation on it. Now can we find some common ground on entire programs that also benefit the taxpayers and/or are part of federal government’s basic functions that are getting cut wholesale? Not having dead weight positions cut, not being made more efficient, but eliminated entirely? Can we at least agree that that’s bad?

Or, you can just keep your status quo and wonder why everyone here stereotypes you so strongly.
 
Last edited:
Roger Roger said:
So…you’re saying that our federal government doing federal government things comes at a price to the taxpayer, and sometimes (like when we scratch 3 $70M jets due to accidents/incompetence) that might look pretty wasteful from the outside, especially with no experience in the arena. Cool. We’re in agreement on that. We had a whole ass conversation on it. Now can we find some common ground on entire programs that also benefit the taxpayers and/or are part of federal government’s basic functions that are getting cut wholesale? Not having dead weight positions cut, not being made more efficient, but eliminated entirely? Can we at least agree that that’s bad?
Click to expand...
Global Economic Transport > State and National Park Rangers.

Like those aren’t even in the same universe as priorities of effort the Federal Government has a responsibility to perform. Bitching about the one needing money and comparing it to the other just makes you look petulant.

They are literally out there (with partner nations) conducting actions with inherent risk far and above normal to maintain the freedoms of the seas. That’s the exact reason nations have wanted to have a Navy since the age of sail.
 
Last edited:
Lawman said:
Global Economic Transport > State and National Park Rangers.

Like those aren’t even in the same universe as priorities of effort the Federal Government has a responsibility to perform. Bitching about the one needing money and comparing it to the other just makes you look petulant.

They are literally out there (with partner nations) conducting actions with inherent risk far and above normal to maintain the freedoms of the seas. That’s the exact reason nations have wanted to have a Navy since the age of sale.
Click to expand...
So, your response is basically “shut up about everything else we need to fund the military and eff you for complaining”. The exact attitude that spawns more of the anti-military sentiment in voters. Got it. I thought we’d reached a bit more common ground but I guess not.
 
Roger Roger said:
So, your response is basically “shut up about everything else we need to fund the military and eff you for complaining”. The exact attitude that spawns more of the anti-military sentiment in voters. Got it. I thought we’d reached a bit more common ground but I guess not.
Click to expand...
Man, that’s not what he said. Cmon.
 
killbilly said:
Man, that’s not what he said. Cmon.
Click to expand...
*shrug* sure comes across this way.

Doesn’t really matter I guess, now we have a cease fire with the houthis maybe we can make it a month or so without throwing $70M straight into the ocean which would be nice.
 
This isn't to say that mishaps are great, or that we shouldn't have 0. But attrition is actually built into the production budget. Most years since I have been paying attention, we lose at least 1-2. Some years have been 4 or more, some very few. I'm not a statistician, and I haven't crunched the numbers myself, but this doesn't seem too far out of the norm......its just a little startling that two of them happened in the span of as many weeks.
 
///AMG said:
This isn't to say that mishaps are great, or that we shouldn't have 0. But attrition is actually built into the production budget. Most years since I have been paying attention, we lose at least 1-2. Some years have been 4 or more, some very few. I'm not a statistician, and I haven't crunched the numbers myself, but this doesn't seem too far out of the norm......its just a little startling that two of them happened in the span of as many weeks.
Click to expand...
I’d love to hear our resident critics show us the operational Navy with a lower per hour accident rate for carrier ops. Particularly if like to hear about the one that can do operations in degraded visual or night environments.

Until then crying about this spending costing money to be spent elsewhere is like listening to somebody bemoan how all that money spent building a fire department costs the city budget to open that dog park or public pool they really wanted. You can be passionate about your desires for funding, but we don’t have to take you seriously if you can’t see or acknowledge one being a much greater public service requirement than the other.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top