bob_2:
The misogynistic, homophobic and racist comments on the article aren’t good either. Apparently the problems in the navy would be solved at a stroke if they didn’t allow women, gays or black people on the ships.
Well, considering there would not be enough people left to actually crew them even at the current overstretched levels, they would be safely tied up at port. There’s that.
Lowered standards is not about women/black/gay, it’s about misguided cost-cutting and recruiting challenges due to a more competitive labor market vs. the pay and work conditions.
Quartz
June 7, 2018, 12:32pm
322
You’re right but why are you ignoring the other comments that call BS on those comments?
bob_2
June 7, 2018, 1:03pm
323
Yes there are some, but that was the impression I got from a quick scan. How could I have put it better? It was those comments that stood out to me.
Leo_Bloom:
Followups:
Troubling US Navy review finds widespread shortfalls in basic seamanship
Imagine if war broke out in that region. Our state of preparedness is in jeporady.
bob_2
June 7, 2018, 3:03pm
325
Keeping a warship at sea is an incredibly expensive business. It’s likely that the American Navy is no better or worse than any other. The Royal Navy has been drastically cut back in recent years and when their new carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth was launched, more than half the crew had never even been to sea before. They will soon be landing F15s on her deck; I just hope that all their simulated training will make then competent.
As for other navies, I doubt that the Russians are any kind of threat, so I do wonder who the potential enemy is.
China has been aggressively building their Navy for a decade. Even constructed an artificial island to give them a presence in a disputed area.
That region is where the Fitz and McCain’s fleet patrol.
Two US B-52 bombers flew within the vicinity of the contested Spratly Islands in the South China Sea on Tuesday, according to a statement from US Pacific Air Forces, which oversees air operations in the region.
bob_2
June 8, 2018, 1:00pm
328
Dave.B:
F-35s, not F-15s.
OOps - thanks for the correction.
F-15s are cool but they ain’t carrier-capable!
The McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle is an American twin-engine, all-weather tactical fighter aircraft designed by McDonnell Douglas (now part of Boeing). Following reviews of proposals, the United States Air Force (USAF) selected McDonnell Douglas's design in 1969 to meet the service's need for a dedicated air superiority fighter. The Eagle first flew in July 1972, and entered service in 1976. It is among the most successful modern fighters, with over 100 victories and no losses in aerial combat...
The Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II is an American family of single-seat, single-engine, all-weather stealth multirole combat aircraft that is intended to perform both air superiority and strike missions. It is also able to provide electronic warfare and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities. Lockheed Martin is the prime F-35 contractor, with principal partners Northrop Grumman and BAE Systems. The aircraft has three main variants: the conventional takeoff and landing ...
Quartz
June 22, 2018, 12:50pm
331
Misogyny was mentioned upthread. I’m saddened to see that it’s been continued , alleging a cover-up of lowered standards.
Heaven forfend that it merely be basic incompetence. From the government’s case:
In an 11-hour hearing, prosecutors painted a picture of Lt. Irian Woodley, the ship’s surface warfare coordinator, and Lt. Natalie Combs, the tactical action officer, as failing at their jobs, not using the tools at their disposal properly and not communicating adequately. They became complacent with faulty equipment and did not seek to get it fixed, and they failed to communicate with the bridge, the prosecution argued. Had they done those things, the government contended, they would have been able to avert the collision.
I don’t see anything sex-related in that.
Quartz:
Misogyny was mentioned upthread. I’m saddened to see that it’s been continued , alleging a cover-up of lowered standards.
Heaven forfend that it merely be basic incompetence. From the government’s case:
I don’t see anything sex-related in that.
I saw that too, but didn’t post it here, because it was obviously garbage viewed seriously by who-cares-as far as this thread is concerned*, like any other off-shoot of radical nonsense, of any social commentary, on the wide-open Internet.
*Not a knock on you. Just that every single GQ OP could have this type of a relevant citation.