Little Crappy Ship Shock Trials Were Rigged.

Discussion in 'Warfare / Military' started by APACHERAT, Dec 6, 2016.

  1. APACHERAT

    APACHERAT Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    38,026
    Likes Received:
    16,042
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The system is RIGGED !!!

    The U.S. Navy's first politically correct warship without urinals and requires a tugboat escort went through it's first shock trials and the trials were rigged.

    Was the Navy scared that the politically correct gender friendly toilets can't survive in combat ???

    The LCS program should have been canceled back when the first two Little Crappy Ships were still in the shipyards under construction.




    Navy defends existing LCS design that breaks down very time the LCS puts too sea and has to be towed back to port by a tugboat.
     
  2. JakeJ

    JakeJ Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 5, 2015
    Messages:
    27,360
    Likes Received:
    8,062
    Trophy Points:
    113
    These are serious problems with the ship:

    1. It is WAY too fast at 54 mph capable of planing. No warship should be able to plane. It should be a displacement hull capable of no fast that 25 mph for it's length. It absolutely should be slower than smaller patrol boats as the best way to avoid combat damage is to not be able to engage the enemy. If it is was made much heavier with more armor it would be safer not only for the armor but unable to engage adversaries.

    2. It's flight deck is way too large. The cowardly practice of using aircraft to locate the enemy, defend the ship and attack adversaries first began as a major tactic in WWII and needs to be discontinued. Nor do ground troops need or ever want air support or medivac by air. True naval vessels should not have any self provided air support no offer air support to any other ship or ground personnel.

    3. It's range is too far. It should be much heavier with simpler motors consuming more fuel to reduce it's capability to reach any combat zone or situation. It is far too fuel efficient giving it too great a range and too low operational costs. By the design allowing reaching Hawaii or Europe non-stop allows it go more likely to be put into harms way. The maximum range should limit it coastal patrols of the continental United States when it can be protected by the Air Force. It is far to dangerous to give it the range to operate worldwide. The world is far to dangerous for naval warships to venture into.

    4. It carries landing craft. No warship should have them.

    5. It has rapid fire smaller guns and - far worse - missiles including anti-aircraft missiles. No REAL warship has missiles but only big artillery guns to limit combat range to 20 miles and the only honorable way to shoot down aircraft is with bullets. Making the ship unable to catch adversaries, unable to reach adversaries and unable to engage any adversary not within visual sight. and limited to USA coastal waters would most likely prevent the ship ever being in combat - making it far safer for the crew. Ideally, it should be designed to limit its areas of operation to the Great Lakes and Gulf of Mexico for safety purposes.

    The design forgot the #1 priority of a naval warship - to avoid being capable of engaging any combat every way possible. All naval personnel should be assured that military service is among the safest of all professions. Obviously the designers do not understand the goal of warships is to make it as unlikely as possible to be even able to engage in any actual combat for the purpose of the safety of the crew. The design also is seriously flawed as it is designed to be able to support and interact with other branches of the military.
     
  3. JakeJ

    JakeJ Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 5, 2015
    Messages:
    27,360
    Likes Received:
    8,062
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If any military ship, aircraft, tank or any other new military design does not perform perfectly in it's first trial, the design should be abandoned and any under construction should be scraped. If any firearm in the military arsenal ever jams or misfires, all such firearms must immediately be retired. Anything short of initial and ongoing perfection is unacceptable.

    Quantity and worldwide coverage is wrong thinking. WWII proved that who has the biggest and best designs will win the war. That's why Germany and Japan so rapidly won the sea war with the Bismark and Yamato, Germany defeated Allies ground forces with their big Tiger tanks and won the air war with their jet aircraft.

    Upon this lesson, the USA should scrap all their crappy little ships and use the money for ship construction on just two mega billion dollar big gun ships of the Missouri class, one in Virginia for the Atlantic and one at Pearl Harbor for the Pacific. Being the clearly superior warships in the world, we would have the superior navy. Having crappy little ships spread around the world is nonsense and could potentially result in a sailor's lose of life. If anything, military service should be safe.
     
  4. JakeJ

    JakeJ Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 5, 2015
    Messages:
    27,360
    Likes Received:
    8,062
    Trophy Points:
    113
    My messages are satire and sheering of course.

    No conflict with another major power such as Russia or China is going to be decided by surface warships. It is going to be decided by nuclear weapons. Even if the conflict remains non-nuclear, it will foremost be decided by missiles and bombs, not cannons and rifles.

    This ship is designed for low cost, low personnel demands rapid response and patrolling to lesser potential adversaries, as well as serving as a convey transport task force accompanying ship - similar to destroyers and frigates in WWII that went along with transport convoys in WWII. In operations, the bulk of supplies and materials have to be transported still by ship, not aircraft, and this new design is ideal in being capable of dealing with lesser potential adversaries. It's high speed allows it to reach a trouble spot very quickly. It's flight deck and landing craft is ideal to rush in - or recover - special forces units along with some ground equipment that could not be delivered by submarine.

    A major responsibility of the Navy rarely considered by anyone is transporting large quantities of materials and supplies around the world. It isn't just heavy armor that has to be transported by ship - transport ships who must have some escort protection. They do not need a carrier task force or battle fleet for this, nor would that be personnel or economically viable. This ship could fill such a role.

    The low profile to radar does not make it radar invisible. However, the small signature makes anti-missile defensive systems far more effect. To no surprise, the full defensive capabilities of the ship are not divulged. As example, Air Force, Army and Navy cargo aircraft routinely fly in and out of war zones. It is not rare for them to come under ground based missile attack. But their defensive (meaning diversionary) defensive systems are so proven effective these missiles NEVER reach the aircraft. Missiles also are THE danger to naval ships and if the signature is kept low - rather than ship size - the same defensive systems that works for our aircraft will work for these low-radar signature ships. It makes FAR more sense in every way to design ships capable of preventing being hit by missiles than building massively expensive, extremely slow, high operational costs warships designed to receive missile hits without sinking the ship.

    The speed and multi-use capabilities of the ship, combined with its long range for its size and low radar signature appear to have been the goals - and the ship meets those goals. This collection of goals was not easy to obtain. Anyone who understand the difference between a displacement hull and a planning hull - and understands how fast 54 mph is for an ocean going SHIP particularly that isn't very long recognized this is one kick-ass FAST ship made possible by planning ability. For planning, the motors literally have to lift the ship out the water - meaning weight is critical. It would be nice is aircraft had 4 inches of steel armor plate - but obviously then couldn't fly. The same weight challenge applies to any planing hull - whether a ship or a boat. The heavier the boat or ship, the more horsepower and fuel it must have. The bigger the motors and more fuel it has - the bigger the boat or ship must be - making it still heavier and needing still more horsepower and fuel - so must be still bigger - and bigger and bigger.

    Simply put, power-to-weight factors are as critical to HIGH SPEED small ships are they are to aircraft. This ship is 20 miles per hour faster than a displacement hull of the same length. In real terms, this ship can travel about 500 miles more per day than it's predecessors. At flank speed it can travel more than 200 miles in 4 hours - bring aircraft, landing craft, equipment and missile support with it. That is actually quite amazing. If it's low radar profile gives it the same defensive capabilities are our slow big cargo aircraft against missile attack? Then it doesn't matter if the ship is survivable if hit because it won't be hit. And for it's speed and missile range, no fast patrol boats such as used by Iran and most secondary powers could ever even get within range to engage it.

    In terms of support of special forces? This ship means drop-off, pick-up, evacuation or land, medivac and resupplying can occur within hours rather than tomorrow. Those hours difference can decide the outcome or decide life and death challenges and mission goals.

    It is not a capital warship. It is a support ship, a convey ship, a resupply ship and special forces ship - and at that the design is outstanding. If their are construction flaws of unreliable equipment or other modifications or adjustments that need be made, that is what sea trials are for.

    That it can get in and out of an area quickly is a huge plus in terms of usefulness.

    As for the ship failing sea trials, that is what the trials are for - to find the flaws and construction errors.
     
  5. Questerr

    Questerr Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    63,174
    Likes Received:
    4,995
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Don't forget: it has to have urinals. Failure to have urianls means it can get sunk the first time a female sailor steps on board.

    For that matter, there should be no female sailors.
     
  6. APACHERAT

    APACHERAT Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    38,026
    Likes Received:
    16,042
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I concur, no female sailors should ever step foot on the deck of a warship. If they can't perform the duties of combat damage control, the ship is likely to sink.

    Every U.S. Marine is a rifleman first and in the U.S. Navy every sailor is a fireman.

    The following, quoted by Brian Mitchell in his book Women in the Military: Flirting With Disaster (Regnery, 1998) and widely known to students of the military, are results of a test the Navy did to see how well women could perform in damage control -- i.e., tasks necessary to save a ship that had been hit.

     
  7. Questerr

    Questerr Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    63,174
    Likes Received:
    4,995
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And because a percentage of women fail those tests, all women should be banned from being sailors.

    Likewise, because a percentage of men fail those tests, all men should be banned from being sailors.
     
  8. APACHERAT

    APACHERAT Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    38,026
    Likes Received:
    16,042
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Only 4% of the male sailors failed carrying a P-250 fire pump down the ladder. Other wise every male sailor passed every other part of the damage control test.

    So yes, the 4% of the male sailors who failed the carrying down the ladder a P-250 pump should be keeled hauled and then transferred to the Army ASAP.

    I own a P-250 pump, you can break a sweat trying to start that freaking pump.
     
  9. Questerr

    Questerr Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    63,174
    Likes Received:
    4,995
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No no no. We have to ban all males from being sailors because a percentage of them fail the test.

    We have to apply the same logic you do with female sailors.
     
  10. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    150,180
    Likes Received:
    62,817
    Trophy Points:
    113
    no kidding, the was the main thing the story seemed to have issue with
     
  11. JakeJ

    JakeJ Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 5, 2015
    Messages:
    27,360
    Likes Received:
    8,062
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Every U.S. Marine is a swordsman, everyone US Army soldier is a horseman, and in the US Navy every Sailor is a rower.
     
  12. JakeJ

    JakeJ Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 5, 2015
    Messages:
    27,360
    Likes Received:
    8,062
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No REAL warship has urinals or toilets. For thousands of years TRUE warships had sailers pee and poop off the front of the ship, ie "the head." The US Navy should return to proven naval traditions. It also was tradition for most great naval powers that most sailers couldn't swim.
     
  13. Deckel

    Deckel Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2014
    Messages:
    17,608
    Likes Received:
    2,043
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Glad you clarified. I was looking for Whoop Ass Opener ;)
     
  14. APACHERAT

    APACHERAT Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    38,026
    Likes Received:
    16,042
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You are a SNL clown.
     
  15. Questerr

    Questerr Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    63,174
    Likes Received:
    4,995
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And you are an out of touch dinosaur.
     
  16. JakeJ

    JakeJ Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 5, 2015
    Messages:
    27,360
    Likes Received:
    8,062
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Now you're just getting down right nasty. :smile:
     
  17. APACHERAT

    APACHERAT Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    38,026
    Likes Received:
    16,042
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    But if a sailor had a tattoo of a rooster on one leg and a tattoo of a pig on the other leg he wouldn't drown so they say.

     

Share This Page