Go Navy!

Discuss life, the universe, and everything with other members of this site. Get to know your fellow polywell enthusiasts.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

ltgbrown
Posts: 172
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 11:15 am
Location: Belgium

Re: Go Navy!

Postby ltgbrown » Sun May 06, 2018 7:34 pm

This is also part of the establishment of a third Joint Force Command within NATO. Something I have had a part in making happen.
Famous last words, "Hey, watch this!"

ladajo
Posts: 6168
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Re: Go Navy!

Postby ladajo » Mon May 07, 2018 11:32 am

It is too bad that the "Op" of OPNAV will never return. It has been fully outsourced to USFF.
Now, if we can get USFF to get out of the OP business, stand-up LANTFLT, put 2,4 (if it lives), & 6 under LANT, and then have USFF become the Man, Train, & Equip authority riding herd on the TYCOMs & Basic Phase executive functions, and doing Joint Force apportionment adjudications only, with LANT & PAC answering to to COCOMs, we just might have something. Integrated and Sustainment can/should be run by the operating forces.

As it is, and as it remains, there are too many competing interests and kingdoms fighting over the same crap. Where I tend to put world drama blame on the British, for USN drama I tend to lay it at the feet of USFF.

I was happy to see Joe Aucoin point the finger (more or less) where it needed to be pointed. The true crime here is how Davidson and others were protected, when they were square in the middle of what was wrong. It is still wrong that C3F, ATGPAC, and USFF were left "untouched". They had way more to do with it than SURFOR, who took a round, as well as PACFLT and C7F. The responsibility lays at their feet, not the customers' out forward. They failed to MTE. Period. <End Rant>.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)

paperburn1
Posts: 2349
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:53 am
Location: Third rock from the sun.

Re: Go Navy!

Postby paperburn1 » Wed May 09, 2018 5:05 pm

A U.S. Navy officer pleaded guilty to dereliction of duty Tuesday in the collision of a U.S. Navy destroyer that killed seven sailors last year. Lt. j.g. Sarah Coppock was sentenced to receive half-pay for three months and a letter of reprimand.

The plea was the result of an agreement between Coppock and military prosecutors before a special court-martial was supposed to begin at the Navy Yard in Washington.

Coppock is the first of four officers charged in the USS Fitzgerald's collision with a commercial ship off the coast of Japan in June. She was the officer of the deck at the time of the collision.

They went easy on her. very easy i wonder if they threw in a back rub. At least she proclaimed culpability
I am not a nuclear physicist, but play one on the internet.

ladajo
Posts: 6168
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Re: Go Navy!

Postby ladajo » Wed May 09, 2018 5:51 pm

They are probably hoping that she doesn't attack the system that put her there, under-trained, under-experienced, under-equipped, and overly tasked.
This was the defense that was used by the XO of the USS San Antonio, Sean Kearns, for the death that occurred on her maiden deployment. And it worked.
It was embarrassing to the navy that he was right, and he was vindicated.

https://pilotonline.com/news/military/local/article_6c2fc602-037b-52ce-8b49-af2aae96f1de.html
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)

What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)

Diogenes
Posts: 6945
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 3:33 pm
Location: Ft. Sill Oklahoma

Re: Go Navy!

Postby Diogenes » Wed May 09, 2018 9:16 pm

ladajo wrote:They are probably hoping that she doesn't attack the system that put her there, under-trained, under-experienced, under-equipped, and overly tasked.
This was the defense that was used by the XO of the USS San Antonio, Sean Kearns, for the death that occurred on her maiden deployment. And it worked.
It was embarrassing to the navy that he was right, and he was vindicated.

https://pilotonline.com/news/military/local/article_6c2fc602-037b-52ce-8b49-af2aae96f1de.html



I realized what happened when I saw the word "her" in an article on this topic.

Same thing that happened with Karen Hultgreen.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —

rjaypeters
Posts: 869
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2010 2:04 pm
Location: Summerville SC, USA

Re: Go Navy!

Postby rjaypeters » Fri May 11, 2018 9:53 am

//Break//

Last year the USN seemed very interested in rail-guns. Not so much this year.

Further, the rail-gun projectiles are being adapted to chemical propellant guns. Why the loss of interest in rail-guns? Anyone?

Thanks.
"Aqaba! By Land!" T. E. Lawrence

R. Peters

paperburn1
Posts: 2349
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:53 am
Location: Third rock from the sun.

Re: Go Navy!

Postby paperburn1 » Sun May 13, 2018 12:58 pm

https://www.financialexpress.com/defenc ... r/1165278/
Ski jump?
My guess is that the longer landing deck and catapult assisted ski jump are indicative of the age old problem of how much steam can you make.
I am will to guess (and show my ignorance) that their operation launch tempo is a third less than ours at max capacity. The ski jump limits loads and requires modded airframes limiting the aircraft as well.
It looks like they stole a russian design without the ability to make steam. "Short Takeoff But Arrested Recovery (STOBAR)"
And then applied the cheap chineseim method of making it work ,..sort of by adding a longer landing deck.
It does not look like to me they installed the electromagnetic launch system ( EMALS) they have been working on.

Thoughts anyone?
I am not a nuclear physicist, but play one on the internet.

ladajo
Posts: 6168
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Re: Go Navy!

Postby ladajo » Mon May 14, 2018 11:52 am

Officials of the Navy said, several aspects of the new carrier are different from those on the Liaoning. For example, the new ship’s island is shorter and the landing section is longer.


I would say they are trying to maximize takeoff weight by giving a little more run out as well. Also, the smaller island is probably to add one more spot or so on deck. A 50K MT hull is really not that big for air operations and embarked airframes. I am guessing that they are thinking to do some deck stows, given limited below decks space, which is probably also impacted by operating a conventional plant, thus requiring air intake and exhaust volumes, which in turn eat up interior volume. Interesting that they did not build a nuke powered platform. I guess they went for speed of construction.

And yes, as other nations can attest, ski jump decks do limit launch weights significantly. Which then ties to fuel and ordnance limits once airborne. I wonder how they intend to do tanking?

Meh. Not impressed.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)

What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)


Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests