Our Navy is non-functional

[thunder rising]

The real message of the Russians planting the flag at the North Pole is that the US Navy was not there.

Why do the Russians now have a sub fleet and we do not?

15 years ago they didn't move without a hunter on their tail. They could not have planted that underwater flag without pounding it through the deck plates of one of our subs. A year or so ago the Chinese surface a sub within a few miles of an aircraft carrier and now this.

Who'da thunk our traditional foes would use this President's greed to advance their holdings? This is what happens when career military planners and analysts (the ones we used to trust to focus outward) are replaced with political hacks.

Look Paris's doggie has a cute bow.

A little more info..
If you would like more information on how fantastic our Navy sub fleet capability was during the cold war please read "Blind Man's Bluff" The two events listed here are subtle warnings about our present capability and/or the degradation of our capability because of our infantile focus on supposed threats from countries that cannot attack us.

--update
This is not a knock at people that are IN the Navy, it's about the commanders and other leaders that assign missions; particular If our boomers (what's left of them) are parked off of Iran ... we need a serious reality check.

Here's the deal. If an opponent has no sub in that region then the torpedoes do not need to be very clever in picking a target. The same is true about air superiority and anti-aircraft missiles ... just find anything flying and blow it up. So if indeed all our fleet is floating about in one known area, Der Leader has lost his mind.

Meanwhile those WITH a known capability and motive to harm us are going unguarded. Not even a wave from a bridge to let them know we know.

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

1. Well...

It is most likely that they have our LA-Class attack subs stacked up like Ball Park Frankfurters in the case at the supermarket, in the Gulf and Indian Ocean. And the boomers.They probably had to install traffic signals for them on the ocean floor.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

2. It's the function of the Navy to plant flags on abyssal plains?

Here I was thinking they were there to protect shipping lanes and such.

Who knew?

[LWolf]

3. "and now this"

And now what? What new atrocity are you referring to?

Since I don't know what triggered your post, I'll mention that your thread title made me think of a conversation I had last week. Well, not much of a conversation, as I listened to two others talking and didn't butt in. It wasn't my conversation.

Two acquaintances were talking about a young woman (19 yo) they know who is in trouble. She drinks too much, she's wild, she's playing around with drugs, she has ODD, she's dangerous. She keeps getting fired from minimum wage jobs. One of the women speaking is trying to convince her to join the military, which will either "shape her up" or "kill her." Not what I'd suggest, but, again, it wasn't my conversation and I don't know the girl in question.

She said, "the problem is that she doesn't have her GED. Even if she did, she couldn't pass a test for the air force. I don't even think the army would take her. The only branch of the military that might take someone whose IQ is that low is the Navy."

I don't know what IQ has to do with it, or whether this woman has any clue what she is talking about. I was surprised to hear her automatic assumption that the navy was for the "dumbest" people. I've never heard that, but then again, I don't spend much time with people who have military experience.

[Phrogman]

5. The Navy is always looking for a few good mop pushers....

Why you think they call em' swabbies?

They're not picky.

[cherokeeprogressive]

6. HAHA That's some funny shit. Laughed... thought I'd die!

In ten years as a Sailor, I was never ONCE called a "swabbie". But maybe that's because I was a part of Naval Aviation.

Where'd you get your "knowledge" of what the Navy is or isn't? Episodes of McHale's Navy?

[MADem]

9. And, I'll bet, if you were enlisted

that you were in what was termed an Upper Mental Group (meaning you did well on your ASVABS) and if an officer you scored high on your ACTs.

You were quite possibly enrolled in a PRP program as well, requiring additional background checks to maintain your eligibility to continue in your area of expertise.

I often wonder from where this sort of shit is pulled? That 'Swabbie' stuff dates back to WWII. Too many old movies, perhaps?

We'd have had a lot more laughs if McHale had been around, though. More liberty, too~!

[cherokeeprogressive]

17. Enlisted

93 ASVAB. I was getting ready to go to school to be a Flight Engineer on P-3's until I blew out my ACL and was forced to have my second knee surgery. After that I was unceremoniously declared "unfit for continued service".

I surely would have stayed, and have a million "what if's" that I play in my mind every time I see someone display their ignorance vis-a-vis the military in general and the Navy specifically. I would have been eligible for retirement in 02, but would have been shootin' for 30.

NO women when I sailed on the USS America. It would be interesting to see how things have changed.

I loved McHale's. I saw Borgnine on TV the other day. He's 90! Looking very spry and he still has that Million Dollar (albeit gap-toothed) Smile.

[Captain Hilts]

22. Dad said some aspects of McHale's Navy were a documentary.

He knew versions of Capt. Binghampton and Lt. Carpenter.

[MADem]

32. Certainly--there are assholes in every major organization.

As well as clueless newbies like Ensign Parker.

And some of the comshaw stunts those guys pulled weren't impossible to imagine back in the day, either. But since the AVF, it's just not an accurate portrayal of the rank and file or the organizational structure. If it were, we'd have WAY more people signing up. McHale and crew certainly knew how to party!

[Cooley Hurd]

36. I loved that show!

In fact, I loved all the military comedies of the 50's, 60's and 70's. Shows like Sgt Bilko, Hogan's Heroes and CPO Sharkey were hilarious to me as a kid!:rofl:

[MADem]

39. It was one of my favorites, too!

I always thought that Quentin McHale had rather dynamic leadership skills that were worthy of emulation! He could certainly generate espirit de corps!!!

I agree with you on the military comedies--I enjoyed them as well, though I was quite surprised when the clever and affable Col. Hogan turned out to be such a pervert and was murdered so horrifically.

All I could think of was Schultz bellowing "I know NAaaaah-THEEEEENG...I seee NAAAaaah-THEEEEEEENG!!!"

[Cooley Hurd]

40. If you haven't seen the movie "Auto Focus," you should check it out...

Bob Crane was brilliant as Hogan, but man, did he have a DARK streak!:scared:

[MADem]

42. Yeah, I saw it...whatsisface who played Crane did a great job.

I'm thinking his rather oddly jealous pal killed him, even though that crime isn't officially solved yet--the guy was acquitted, I think.

[Captain Hilts]

49. My folks LOVED Sgt. Bilko and CPO Sharkey. nt

[TahitiNut]

12. "Swab" is what a 1st year cadet at the Coast Guard Academy is called.

Not "swabbie" ... "swab."

[Posteritatis]

14. Is that an official term or just academy slang? (nt)

[TahitiNut]

25. It's official slang ... used in Academy publications and on their website.

It's not 'official' in the sense of ranks and ratings but it's generally acknowledged and used, even in "polite company."

[Phrogman]

30. Naa, not McHales Navy, I did 2 years on the Kitty Hawk and..

6 years on SEAL Teams.
18 years more as an Engineer in the US Merchant Marine.

In the working Navy, everybody knows who the swabbies are...its us.

[MADem]

8. That's just not true. No high school diploma? Female? Good luck.

Criminal record? Alcohol abuser?

That's no sale.

[Captain Hilts]

21. That hasn't been the case for a l o n g time. nt

[MADem]

7. Well, it's not true, that assertion. It totally false, in fact.

In order of test scores, and force-shaping qualities (criminal record, drug use, etc) the standards go as follows:

Very strict: USAF;USCG
Strict: USN
Less strict: USMC
Come on down: USA/Guard/Reserve

The Navy has had their total force reduced, in order to plus-up the Army. So has the USAF. Both services have "Blue to Green" programs to toss their poor performers over to the Army--it's an "Over or OUT" program.

Because their force size is so small, they can afford to be picky. And they are. Call a USAF or USN recruiter, they'll give you the education, fitness, and moral standards for enlistment. They vary, FWIW, based on gender. Females have to meet higher standards, overall, than males.

[LWolf]

26. It didn't sound right to me, frankly.

I did have one ex bil in the navy, then coast guard for 25 years. Other than that, the service people I've known have been army and air force; not enough of them, and not recently enough, to have kept up with military business.

I just remembered the conversation when the OP posted about the Navy being "non-functional."

Whatever the true state of the navy is, it seems to be getting a bad rap from multiple directions.

[tabasco]

28. Blue to Green is a voluntary program.

The Army is not a dumping ground for the other services. Provide a source for your claims. The Army has a large force and high standards apply for many areas within the Army. The standards for an Army grunt and a Marine grunt are the same. The Navy and Air Force are not some kind of master races. Within the services, the greatest opposition to the Bush misadministration has been from the Army, because they do most of the fighting.

Iraq Casualties by Service:

Army: 2582
Marines: 948
USAF: 37
Navy: 82

http://icasualties.org/oif/Service.aspx

[Captain Hilts]

29. No, the Blue to Green is often a coercive program. They take folks with 15 years in....

and tell them if they want to get 20 years in - to get retirement benefits - they have to go to green or get out and not get retirement benefits.

That's not 'voluntary' at all.

ps. I'm typing this from Norfolk, VA.

[Posteritatis]

31. How would switching that late in the game even work?

I'd assume a sailor or airman with fifteen years in the service would have one or more shitloads of branch-specific training, to say nothing of whatever rank he's managed to accrue after that much time. Do they have to start from scratch, or is a somehow-equivalent or similar position found in the other service? Where would, say, a Navy CPO who specialized in sonar for the last twelve years go? What if someone got commissioned in that timeframe?

[MADem]

34. The services have been "purple" in many areas for some time.

If you do administrative work, well, the way the document might be prepared is slightly different, but no big deal. If you've worked joint service at all, you have to learn the "Army way" for a lot of things, anyway. If you do logistic work, same deal--it's very similar across services.

From what I understand, you keep your rank, and you're squeezed into a close fit for what you did, or retrained. The thing that is valuable with these Blue to Greeners insn't so much their technical expertise, but their LEADERSHIP talents.

They're also taking commissioned officers in Blue to Green. It's not just an 'enlisted' type program.

Details: http://www.goarmy.com/btg/index.jsp

There's no copyright on US government documents, thus, I can exceed the four paragraph rule in this instance.

ALLOWING YOU TO CONTINUE TO SERVE YOUR COUNTRY

(Gee, what sweethearts!!)


During this period of 'right sizing' the Air Force and Navy, the Army recognizes the need for our Armed Forces to retain highly qualified men and women in our ranks. Operation Blue to Green offers you an alternative to civilian life. Operation Blue to Green will allow you to continue to serve your country, to maintain the benefits of military service, and to expand your horizons by gaining new training and trying new things. It facilitates the transfer of qualified Air Force and Navy individuals to active duty in the Army, depending on your service's willingness to release you from your current active service obligation. Selected members of the United States Marine Corp or Coast Guard, who are otherwise qualified, may be eligible for opportunities in the Army. However, Marines and Coast Guard will be required to complete their current term of active service.


E-1 through E-5 will retain their grade and same date of rank.
All E-5's and above will have grade and MOS determined by EIS IAW with para 5 above
(E5s will retain current rank, unless, current MOS is over strength and they refuse to retrain in an MOS that allows E5 entry level training).
Training - AFSCs or Rates that convert to Army Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) will only undergo the four week Warrior Transition Course (WTC). View the current MOS conversion tables for Air Force, Navy, or Marines. Retraining into other Army MOS may be possible based on individual's qualifications and training vacancies. Applicants enlisting for an MOS that requires One Station Unit Training (OSUT) will be inserted into OSUT after completion of the WTC.
Bonuses may be available for selected Military Occupational Specialties that convert from an AFSC or Rate.
Assignments - may be available for AFSC or Rate that convert to an Army MOS.
Air Force and Navy personnel will be required to attend the Warrior Transition Course. (The Army developed this course to include Basic Combat Skills. This course will substitute for the current nine-week course in use to train Airmen, Sailors, and Coast Guardsmen enlisting in the Army.)

Officers will retain their grade and date of rank.
Officers will receive branch specific training as needed.


The Army is seeking qualified candidates for their Blue to Green program. Opportunities exist for commissioned officers, enlisted personnel and selected cadets from the Air Force and Navy interested in continuing their service to the military in the Active Army.


Must be physically fit.
Must meet Army height and weight standards
Minimum term of service is three years
Must have approved DD Form 368

...blah, blah, blah....

[Captain Hilts]

45. Exactly. In some cases they're sending them to Ft. Bragg for a week's training...

in firearms, then sending them to Iraq to guard convoys. No kidding.

They're taking submarine sailors and jet mechanics - whose training is very expensive - and converting them to 'soldiers'. Really. A few days firearms training, then off you go.

It's insane. I guess in some cases they can avoid enlistment bonuses, boot camp costs, etc. But it makes no sense whatsoever.

[MADem]

60. Enlistment bonus. Twenty grand. Boot camp - Twenty grand. OSVET training

(Other Service Veteran--a cheaper alternative to boot camp) Ten grand. PCS and personnel (housing, medical, family services) costs- Fifteen grand, at least, twenty five to thirty per annum if the individual is married.

It ain't cheap. People always argue with me, though they shouldn't, when I point out that personnel costs are the biggest piece of the wartime or peacetime pie. It's why they go with the shitty Halliburtons and Blackwaters and so forth--pay more now, pay less over the long haul.

[MADem]

33. Not really. The USN/USAF are, like other services, UP OR OUT.

If you 'Fail of Selection' you can save your ass if you're on the downhill slide to retirement by going Blue to Green. Sure, it's 'voluntary'--if, when you don't promote, you voluntarily decide to give up that retirement check when you have only a few more years to qualify for it. Otherwise, it's pack your seabag and request permission to leave the ship for the Army base.

And no, the standards are NOT the same. They vary by service. And the variation is significant. Pick up your phone and call your local recruiters. They'll tell ya.

No one is saying (except YOU, perhaps) that the USAF and USN are a "Master Race." If you read what was written here, instead of taking reflexive offense, you'd realize that the reason those services can be picky is because their recruiting requirements, due to the fact that they've seen substantial DOD-mandated personnel cuts, are SMALLER. They can afford to refuse people, and only take the highest quality people, because they have fewer billets to fill. Even at that, the Air Force, like the Marines, are waiving more drug use than they used to.

It's the law of supply and demand. People who want to join the military, but don't want to die in the sandbox, will go first to the USAF and USN. If they make the intellectual and moral grade, they'll choose one of those two services.

Why you post those casualty figures, as though they are apropos of anything to do with recruiting standards, is beyond me. Everyone knows who is doing the heavy lifting in Iraq. It's not a fucking secret. But it's also true that the Army has more criminals in it now than it has had in decades, and no amount of spilled blood will change that fact.

Oh, but wait--you wanted some of that famous DU "PROOF"--as though I'd lie about something like that, for sport or something. OK, here ya go: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/14/us/14military.html?ei=5088&en=06c953182b1c51bb&ex=1329109200&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&pagewanted=print

Army Giving More Waivers in Recruiting

By LIZETTE ALVAREZ

Correction Appended

The number of waivers granted to Army recruits with criminal backgrounds has grown about 65 percent in the last three years, increasing to 8,129 in 2006 from 4,918 in 2003, Department of Defense records show.

During that time, the Army has employed a variety of tactics to expand its diminishing pool of recruits. It has offered larger enlistment cash bonuses, allowed more high school dropouts and applicants with low scores on its aptitude test to join, and loosened weight and age restrictions.

It has also increased the number of so-called “moral waivers” to recruits with criminal pasts, even as the total number of recruits dropped slightly. The sharpest increase was in waivers for serious misdemeanors, which make up the bulk of all the Army’s moral waivers. These include aggravated assault, burglary, robbery and vehicular homicide.

The number of waivers for felony convictions also increased, to 11 percent of the 8,129 moral waivers granted in 2006, from 8 percent....The Defense Department has also expanded its applicant pool by accepting soldiers with criminal backgrounds and medical problems like asthma, high blood pressure and attention deficit disorder, situations that require waivers. Medical waivers have increased 4 percent, totaling 12,313 in 2006. Without waivers, the soldiers would have been barred from service.

In the last three years, the percentage of moral waivers for all new enlistments in the four services combined has fallen 3 percent, with spikes in the Army and Air Force. In all, 125,525 such waivers have been issued since 2003. The Marine Corps issues far more moral waivers than the Army — 20,750 in 2006 — but only because it has a stricter policy on drug use. It requires waivers for one-time marijuana use while the other services do not. Rules on waivers vary by service.....


Here's a slightly more blunt assessment: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2006/10/01/ING42LCIGK1.DTL

U.S. is recruiting misfits for army
Felons, racists, gang members fill in the ranks

...In 2004, the Pentagon published a "Moral Waiver Study," whose seemingly benign goal was "to better define relationships between pre-Service behaviors and subsequent Service success." That turned out to mean opening more recruitment doors to potential enlistees with criminal records.

In February, the Baltimore Sun wrote that there was "a significant increase in the number of recruits with what the Army terms 'serious criminal misconduct' in their background" -- a category that included "aggravated assault, robbery, vehicular manslaughter, receiving stolen property and making terrorist threats." From 2004 to 2005, the number of those recruits rose by more than 54 percent, while alcohol and illegal drug waivers, reversing a four-year decline, increased by more than 13 percent.

In June, the Chicago Sun-Times reported that, under pressure to fill the ranks, the Army had been allowing into its ranks increasing numbers of "recruits convicted of misdemeanor crimes, according to experts and military records." In fact, as the military's own data indicated, "the percentage of recruits entering the Army with waivers for misdemeanors and medical problems has more than doubled since 2001."

One beneficiary of the Army's new moral-waiver policies gained a certain prominence this summer. After Steven Green, who served in the 101st Airborne Division, was charged in a rape and quadruple murder in Mahmudiyah, Iraq, it was disclosed that he had been "a high-school dropout from a broken home who enlisted to get some direction in his life, yet was sent home early because of an anti-social personality disorder." ......Law enforcement officials report that the military is now "allowing more applicants with gang tattoos," the Chicago Sun-Times reports, "because they are under the gun to keep enlistment up." They also note that "gang activity maybe rising among soldiers." The paper was provided with "photos of military buildings and equipment in Iraq that were vandalized with graffiti of gangs based in Chicago, Los Angeles and other cities."

Last month, the Sun-Times reported that a gang member facing federal charges of murder and robbery enlisted in the Marine Corps "while he was free on bond -- and was preparing to ship out to boot camp when Marine officials recently discovered he was under indictment." While this recruit was eventually booted from the Corps, a Milwaukee police detective and Army veteran, who serves on the federal drug and gang task force that arrested the would-be Marine, noted that other "gang-bangers are going over to Iraq and sending weapons back ... gang members are getting access to military training and weapons." ....

[Captain Hilts]

46. The navy was told to cut 30,000 in three years below current force levels.

So, natural attrition couldn't cover it.

The navy and air force - who are to defend us against China - are being ruined.

[MADem]

48. Then they'll recall all of the poor retired and fleet reserve baastids

And discover that we're all fatter, out of shape, and have "attitude."

It's not good, what's happening to all the Services.

[Captain Hilts]

4. The navy has been financially eviscerated by the Bush Admin. The sub force especially.

The navy has the fewest number of hulls since BEFORE the First World War.

[MADem]

10. Which is why they are extremely PICKY right now--they have the fewest billets

to fill since then, too. Thus, they can select from the cream of all applicants. It is a simple fact that the better educated and the fewer moral issues/waivers an applicant has, the better they do, not just in boot camp but also once they're sent to the fleet.

When you have many billets to fill, like the Army has, you take what you can get. Criminals, non-high school grads, gang members, anyone. The standards have plummeted for the Army.

[Submariner]

11. BTDT - Chicken of the Sea days with the Soviets are over

I was on the pigboats in the late 60s.

The Bush junta has gutted todays Navy and especially the submarine forces.

[Solo_in_MD]

18. The gutting of the subs started well before the current administration

and will continue after it.

[Captain Hilts]

23. NO other admin proposed 35 attack boats. None ever went that low.

The drawdown with the collapse of the Soviet navy made sense. We no longer needed 108 attack boats.

[Captain Hilts]

20. Time for everyone's favorite sub photo!

That's my dad sitting on the left in the skipper's seat. That's Brad Mooney standing up. Brad was on Trieste and Alvin and did deep sea stuff. He's gotta be irked over what Russia just did!

[Posteritatis]

13. Alternately, they simply don't care

The flag-planting is just a histrionic publicity stunt. Could simply be that the military'd prefer to waste money demolishing Iraq rather than waste money shuffling an attack sub to the pole just so they can ping the Russians while they're wasting their resources. Given the option I'd not bother with either unless I expected the Russians were planning to do something outrageous like attack shipping in the region. (Oh look! There is none!)

As for the Russian sub fleet in general, I have my doubts as to whether even half of the paper fleet is seaworthy. Most of their major combatants have been big pretty harbour buoys for years.

The entire thing boils down to Putin hopping up and down and shouting "PAY ATTENTION TO MEEEEEEE!" and that's about it for now.

[cherokeeprogressive]

19. "pretty harbour bouys" LOLOL Too True! eom

[MADem]

35. Yeah, remember the KURSK? He couldn't bother to stop golfing when that happened...

Now he gives a shit about his Silent Service all of a sudden? Hmmm.

[Captain Hilts]

53. That's EXACTLY right. Small compensation for not getting to the moon! nt

[peacetheonlyway]

15. love this post

i've been worried about the redirection of our limited navy aircraft carriers to middle east siphoning boats from other parts of world.

specifically I heard we only have 2 large scale carriers in asia sea? can that be for real?

would we be that stupid to leave that part of the world so underguarded and underrepresented by the navy?

it's odd that nobody in the navy gets that and yet they have ships docked on hawaii all the time but not for asia, for middle east.

[Captain Hilts]

24. Yes, we have, and no, it's not smart. The 'Shitty Kitty' is projecting our force in Asia! nt

[MADem]

37. And they're on the downhill slide too--to be replaced by the Geo. Washington...

She'll be decommed, 'so they say', when the USS GHW BUSH (who would want to serve on that vessel?) comes online...

[Cooley Hurd]

38. On a related note, why did they decomm the JFK BEFORE the Kitty Hawk??

The Kitty Hawk was seven years older than the JFK. Was it because the JFK was named after a man that was whacked by the current President's poppy?

;)<-kinda-sorta...

[MADem]

41. Could it have been that Shitty Kitty was a more recent beneficiary of SLEP?

That's a big chunk of change, and almost like getting a new carrier if done right. In any event, she's on her way to razor blades, eventually...so they say.

[Cooley Hurd]

43. I checked NAVSOURCE to see when each was SLEPed...

...unfortunately, no word of when, but it still begs the question - why was the Kitty Hawk SLEPed before (or in place of) the JFK?:shrug:

[MADem]

44. Timing for when they trasitioned from attack to ASW/ multi-mission, maybe?

The only other reason that strikes me is that Shitty was a WESTPAC carrier, and JFK was East Coast...they probably didn't want to bother to transition.

[Captain Hilts]

50. The Shitty Kitty had a recent port visit to Sydney and the natives got really excited about it....

Kinda neat to read how excited our Ozzie cousins got. Check out the articles about it in the Sydney Morning Herald.

And let's not forget that a diesil Oz sub 'sank' one of our nuke boats in war games a couple of years ago!

[Captain Hilts]

47. I had a chat with a former JFK chief recently, and he said...

x years ago Big John was converted to be a 'reserve' carrier. So, the navy reserve was responsible for financing its upkeep. Needless to say, it couldn't afford it. That was the problem when the captain was relieved because the ship was not seaworthy. This chief had a lot of sympathy for the skipper.

It was a disaster thereafter.

The JFK was kept in service also because, as the East Coast's only non-nuke carrier, it put up a good show at fleet week in NYC.

I remember in 1990, before the invasion, seeing SIX carriers all lined up at the pier in Norfolk, and Coral Sea in the yard for seven. Amazing.

[MADem]

51. You're RIGHT. That's IT. I'd forgotten about that. nt

[Captain Hilts]

52. I don't know who made that decision, or when it was made.

I guess as the last non-nuke, it was no longer a priority. I miss all the "big John's Back in Town" signs all over Norfolk when it got back to port.

But this guy really felt for the skipper. I had asked him about it because the news articles at the time just made no sense.

Now, with all the skippers being relieved, it's also a supply-demand thing. There are very few commands to be had now, so, if you use the wrong fork at a formal dinner, you're out.

[MADem]

54. If you use the wrong fork at a formal dinner, you're out.

:rofl: :rofl:

I'd be fucked!! I got out in the nick-o-time!!!!!!

[Thothmes]

56. JFK

Slack Jack was towed into Norfolk on Monday. Think she will sit out the hurrican season here, then she will go to the inactive ship facility at Philadelphia

[VTMechEngr]

57. The JFK required massive restroration to maintain certification.

It was cheaper to retire it. An inspection revealed such corrosion damage in key areas that it would cost millions to repair, and then it would still need modernization. IIRC, the flight deck was not going to be able to be certified because of the corrosion. So imagine an aircraft carrier that cannot land planes.

[Thothmes]

55. Why

The catapult launch systems, elevators, and aircraft arresting gear machinery were in very bad condition.
The Hawks systems were in better condition.

[Captain Hilts]

58. I did not know that about JFK, but I can believe it. Thanks! nt

[Zywiec]

16. Don't tell the people who have been predicting the attack on Iran

from all the carriers in the area.

[walldude]

59. No kidding...

some really weird posts here today. People just pulling shit out of their ass. If the OP would like to know how the Navy is spending it's submarine budget he should read Palast's Armed Madhouse and pay careful attention to how much we are spending to retro fit subs so that they can fire troops of Marines out of the torpedo tubes. Think I'm kidding? Read the book. It's the governments way of justifying a "submarine budget" during a war in the desert...

[UTUSN]

27. Oh?!1 n/t