 
     |
| In San Diego, the Bonnie Dick is burning.. (Page 4/5) |
|
Raydar
|
DEC 01, 12:01 PM
|
|
Apparently, NCIS is investigating a sailor for arson.
Hope he/she's not just being made a scapegoat. (I'm not too cynical, but this could help to eliminate a bunch of accusations of "ineptitude", or whatever you might want to call it. Too simplistic?)
Link
|
|
|
|
randye
|
DEC 01, 09:07 PM
|
|
|
|
|
Patrick
|
DEC 01, 09:31 PM
|
|
|
|
|
Monkeyman
|
DEC 01, 09:39 PM
|
|
Read that the other day, too. $2.8B to repair v $1.9B to build a new one although the new one might not be of equal quality (see one of MJs posts above comparing new to old).
|
|
|
|
maryjane
|
DEC 02, 12:33 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by Monkeyman:
Read that the other day, too. $2.8B to repair v $1.9B to build a new one although the new one might not be of equal quality (see one of MJs posts above comparing new to old). |
|
"Quality" may be not the correct way to look at it Dave.
With the current and ongoing 'pivot to the Pacific' thing, there is a great deal of discussion about water borne amphibious operations. The Marines are quickly moving to air transport via Osprey and next generation heavy lift helicopters instead of traditional landing craft and if that comes to pass (I think it will) the need for many well deck ships will be greatly reduced if not completely done away with.
CMC has certainly signed on to this type operations and that is partly reflected in him moving for USMC to no longer have tanks and greatly reduce their heavy arty.
|
|
|
|
Monkeyman
|
DEC 02, 09:00 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by maryjane:
"Quality" may be not the correct way to look at it Dave.
With the current and ongoing 'pivot to the Pacific' thing, there is a great deal of discussion about water borne amphibious operations. The Marines are quickly moving to air transport via Osprey and next generation heavy lift helicopters instead of traditional landing craft and if that comes to pass (I think it will) the need for many well deck ships will be greatly reduced if not completely done away with.
CMC has certainly signed on to this type operations and that is partly reflected in him moving for USMC to no longer have tanks and greatly reduce their heavy arty.
|
|
Quality wasn't really the word I was looking for, Don. Different configuration and a smaller boat, too, I think. Maybe not quite as capable as the current model. From what I've read (and you know I was Army, not Navy so all I know about this stuff is what you post and what little I've read in the media), a reconfiguration would have been a better option than a new boat (ship? craft?) but since that can't be done...........
|
|
|
|
maryjane
|
JUL 30, 02:23 AM
|
|
Looks like the USN has (sorta) charged an unidentified sailor for starting the blaze...or found a scapegoat..
https://www.foxnews.com/us/...onhomme-richard-fire
It will be interesting to see what transpires at the preliminary hearing.
Vice Adm. Steve Koehler, commander of the U.S. Third Fleet, is considering court-martial charges. He has ordered a preliminary hearing at which an impartial hearing officer will make determinations and recommendations required by the Uniform Code of Military Justice, including "whether or not there is probable cause to believe an offense has been committed and to offer a recommendation as to the disposition of the case," the statement said.
|
|
|
|
RWDPLZ
|
JUL 30, 08:51 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by maryjane:
..or found a scapegoat.. |
|
This is basically everyone's first reaction, and it is amazing/pathetic that's what this has become. How exactly does ONE person start a fire on a metal ship that completely disables it for days? If that's true, who needs missiles and torpedos?
|
|
|
|
Jake_Dragon
|
JUL 30, 10:43 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by RWDPLZ:
This is basically everyone's first reaction, and it is amazing/pathetic that's what this has become. How exactly does ONE person start a fire on a metal ship that completely disables it for days? If that's true, who needs missiles and torpedos? |
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...owa_turret_explosion
| quote | | The first investigation into the explosion, conducted by the U.S. Navy, concluded that one of the gun turret crew members, Clayton Hartwig, who died in the explosion, had deliberately caused it. During the investigation, numerous leaks to the media, later attributed to U.S. Navy officers and investigators, implied that Hartwig and another sailor, Kendall Truitt, had engaged in a romantic relationship and that Hartwig had caused the explosion after their relationship had soured. In its report, however, the U.S. Navy concluded that the evidence did not show that Hartwig was homosexual but that he was suicidal and had caused the explosion with either an electronic or chemical detonator. |
|
Its always about who is to blame.
|
|
|
|
maryjane
|
JUL 30, 12:24 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by RWDPLZ:
This is basically everyone's first reaction, and it is amazing/pathetic that's what this has become. How exactly does ONE person start a fire on a metal ship that completely disables it for days? If that's true, who needs missiles and torpedos? |
|
It wouldn't be all that hard, especially on one that is in port with a skeleton crew and undergoing a refit. X-ray or yoke.
You might be surprised just how much flammable material is on any warship, even at sea under normal conditions.
|
|
|
|
