Recent PostsForum Rules
Next Topic Sign In to ReplyPrev Topic
$30 Billion, 16 years, and the littoral mystery still eludes men.
1. Author: pacman357Date: Sun, 7/21/2019, 8:24PM EST
So the Navy wanted ships that could handle shallower (littoral) waters and intercept and otherwise occupy and divert traffic that might seek to do harm to their big, bad, miles-long deeper water vessels. You don't want small vessels just running out and ramming into you crafts without preparation. Turns out that other than the things not working, being WAY over budget, and leaving promises unfulfilled left and right...and left and right, the program is just going around in circles. You could probably do more harm with, say, a small man in a canoe. The Navy has wisely decided that it needs a different approach, but apparently Congress (official motto: we'll tell you what you need, sweetheart, not the other way around) is ordering more of these things to be built.

This cannot be terribly surprising, Congress telling the Navy what they can do with vessels it refers to as "her". After all, Congress has been telling women whether they can vote, whether they can hold office, what they can do with their bodies, etc., for years. However, rather than admit they can't find the best way to dominate the littoral waters, naturally they ignore their partners and order that more of the things be built in their districts.

No wonder some men are afraid to be alone with women in the same room.

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/navy-spent-30b-16-years-fight-iran-littoral-combat-ship-ncna1031806?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link&ICID=ref_fark
2. Author: frankj1Date: Sun, 7/21/2019, 9:27PM EST
Congress.
Built in their district(s).
Reelection.
3. Author: WhistlebritchesDate: Sun, 7/21/2019, 9:28PM EST
pacman357 wrote:
So the Navy wanted ships that could handle shallower (littoral) waters and intercept and otherwise occupy and divert traffic that might seek to do harm to their big, bad, miles-long deeper water vessels. You don't want small vessels just running out and ramming into you crafts without preparation. Turns out that other than the things not working, being WAY over budget, and leaving promises unfulfilled left and right...and left and right, the program is just going around in circles. You could probably do more harm with, say, a small man in a canoe. The Navy has wisely decided that it needs a different approach, but apparently Congress (official motto: we'll tell you what you need, sweetheart, not the other way around) is ordering more of these things to be built.

This cannot be terribly surprising, Congress telling the Navy what they can do with vessels it refers to as "her". After all, Congress has been telling women whether they can vote, whether they can hold office, what they can do with their bodies, etc., for years. However, rather than admit they can't find the best way to dominate the littoral waters, naturally they ignore their partners and order that more of the things be built in their districts.

No wonder some men are afraid to be alone with women in the same room.

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/navy-spent-30b-16-years-fight-iran-littoral-combat-ship-ncna1031806?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link&ICID=ref_fark



I agree the LCS platform looks like a waste of money on a very limited platform.My personal opinion is they should've just looked to some of us brown water guys for insight.Whats wrong with a MK V outfitted with harpoon missiles,a phalynx and a stinger shooter...…..we usually run in pairs so a standard outfitted MK V could handle all the up close and personal work.
4. Author: pacman357Date: Sun, 7/21/2019, 10:54PM EST
You'd think that after $900 hammers and $1300 toilet seats, we (as a nation) would have learned something about spending and efficiency. Unfortunately, we put civilians in charge of the military, or at least at some of the key points. Any good military needs oversight, but that is a far cry from actively meddling in something when you have someone who knows better. Personally, I'd trust the skipper of the ferry to get me to the other dock in a safe manner before I'd trust the head of the janitorial service that cleans the bathrooms of the things when they are docked at night. But that's just me.
5. Author: USNGunnerDate: Sun, 7/21/2019, 11:08PM EST
Whistlebritches wrote:
I agree the LCS platform looks like a waste of money on a very limited platform.My personal opinion is they should've just looked to some of us brown water guys for insight.Whats wrong with a MK V outfitted with harpoon missiles,a phalynx and a stinger shooter...…..we usually run in pairs so a standard outfitted MK V could handle all the up close and personal work.


Yeah, the Little Crappy Ships are a complete freaking disaster. Just like the PC's. To big for rivers, too small for oceans. The Teams hated them, so did the boat guys. The LCDR/Dept head pools love them. It was a command slot. Freaking BS.
6. Author: tamapatomDate: Sun, 7/21/2019, 11:12PM EST
Wasn't this the original purpose of a "marine corps"?
7. Author: danmdevriesDate: Mon, 7/22/2019, 12:05AM EST
pacman357 wrote:
You'd think that after $900 hammers and $1300 toilet seats, we (as a nation) would have learned something about spending and efficiency. Unfortunately, we put civilians in charge of the military, or at least at some of the key points. Any good military needs oversight, but that is a far cry from actively meddling in something when you have someone who knows better. Personally, I'd trust the skipper of the ferry to get me to the other dock in a safe manner before I'd trust the head of the janitorial service that cleans the bathrooms of the things when they are docked at night. But that's just me.


When I worked in a factory, only a handful of us could make the milspec stuff.

Wasn't any different than our regular stuff, save for part number stamping every x inches.

But we had to certify "specialized" workers, and charged thousands for a $50 part.
8. Author: jespearDate: Mon, 7/22/2019, 5:53AM EST
frankj1 wrote:
Congress.
Built in their district(s).
Reelection.


By ANY means possible !
9. Author: dstiegerDate: Mon, 7/22/2019, 8:33AM EST
Nothing new here. The MIC should really be referred to as the CMIC, Congress-Military-Industrial-Complex. Nothing terribly complex about it, though. Aside from corruptly protecting and promoting industries in their jurisdictions purely for votes, Congressmen and women get millions in donations from defense contractors. Civilian control of the military might protect us from a coup, but what is the check or balance of Congress and their donors?
LCS, Abrams, C-40s....endlessly throwing money without a strategic thought at National Guard.....
Congress gets the added incentive of being able to say they are strong on defense, simply because they stuffed the Pockets of the contractors.
10. Author: WhistlebritchesDate: Mon, 7/22/2019, 7:50PM EST
USNGunner wrote:
Yeah, the Little Crappy Ships are a complete freaking disaster. Just like the PC's. To big for rivers, too small for oceans. The Teams hated them, so did the boat guys. The LCDR/Dept head pools love them. It was a command slot. Freaking BS.



I was attached to SBU-12 when we first heard about the Cyclone PC's.........I remember a bunch of boat guys just looking at each other in total astonishment when our LT announced they'd be 180 footers.Of course all he saw was a future command under his belt.Had a couple buddies end up on them later in the Gulf..........according to them we should've just turned them over to Iran,it'd be in our strategic interest.
Sign In to Reply
Next TopicJump to TopPrev Topic