Critics Sink Trump's Bonkers Battleship Plans: 'Got The Design From G.I. Joe'

Great-White-Fleet-Roach-Painting.webp


b000a17b9f3d947b5b0c16d903df131e.jpg
 
You know what would totally piss the Left off is that like other Presidents, Trump gets an aircraft carrier named after him. A bad idea started with FDR, and carried on since. Our naval ships should NOT be named after politicians.
 
You know what would totally piss the Left off is that like other Presidents, Trump gets an aircraft carrier named after him. A bad idea started with FDR, and carried on since. Our naval ships should NOT be named after politicians.
It should bother you. Trump trying to put his name on everything just for his massive ego. And the cult cheers.
 
It should bother you. Trump trying to put his name on everything just for his massive ego. And the cult cheers.
It bothers me that any of our aircraft carriers are named for a President, Admiral, politician, or any other public figure. They used to be named for things more important to the nation than some fleeting political hack or another. Yet here we are, and because of it, Trump could end up with his name on one.
 
It bothers me that any of our aircraft carriers are named for a President, Admiral, politician, or any other public figure. They used to be named for things more important to the nation than some fleeting political hack or another. Yet here we are, and because of it, Trump could end up with his name on one.
At least Truman had accomplisments.
 
I think Gerald Ford did accomplish a few things.

Ford was a chair warmer put in to finish Nixon's term after he resigned. As a naval officer in WW 2, Ford was the Morale, Welfare, and Recreation officer on a light carrier.
As to the rest? Dunno about them.
You and me both.

Miller was a mess steward on a battleship at Pearl Harbor. He was heroic during the battle, but so were hundreds, if not thousands of other sailors, marines, and army troops. The ONLY reason they're naming a carrier for him is he is Black, and that is wrong.

Nimitz was the fleet admiral running the Pacific Fleet in WW 2.

Forrestal was a Secretary of the Navy of no particular note.

Vinson and Stennis were politicians of one stripe or another.
 
It bothers me that any of our aircraft carriers are named for a President, Admiral, politician, or any other public figure. They used to be named for things more important to the nation than some fleeting political hack or another. Yet here we are, and because of it, Trump could end up with his name on one.
T. A., ok, is off and running.

I hear him now. "First the lights go out, and then the tanks roll in."
 
Building huge battleships is more about Trump's ego than about national defense.

For the cost of that destroyer, we could add 3 or 4 missile frigates or something similar. Faster, more maneuverable and more difficult to track.
Smaller ships are often far less capable and for the US Navy, lack the range and on-station time to make them viable. The OHP (Oliver Hazard Perry) class frigates were pretty marginal ships du to those needs. Range and staying at sea took precedence. The result was a lightly armed ship suitable for commerce protection and ASW work in low threat environments.

The USN can't build and justify the sort of short-range frigates and corvettes many European and Asian nations build where they are on the frontlines so-to-speak.
 
Smaller ships are often far less capable and for the US Navy, lack the range and on-station time to make them viable. The OHP (Oliver Hazard Perry) class frigates were pretty marginal ships du to those needs. Range and staying at sea took precedence. The result was a lightly armed ship suitable for commerce protection and ASW work in low threat environments.

The USN can't build and justify the sort of short-range frigates and corvettes many European and Asian nations build where they are on the frontlines so-to-speak.

Range? How is range an issue? The fleet has underway replenishment down to an art. A ship can receive fuel (marine diesel and jet fuel), munitions, food, and all manner of parts and maintenance supplies. All while steaming towards a given destination.
 
Range? How is range an issue? The fleet has underway replenishment down to an art. A ship can receive fuel (marine diesel and jet fuel), munitions, food, and all manner of parts and maintenance supplies. All while steaming towards a given destination.
Range means fewer unreps. Range means more ability to operate on its own in independent missions. Unreps mean time off station, usually most of a day. Unlike you, I actually have a good understanding of those operations and what they entail for a ship having been part of them for years at sea.
 
Range means fewer unreps. Range means more ability to operate on its own in independent missions. Unreps mean time off station, usually most of a day. Unlike you, I actually have a good understanding of those operations and what they entail for a ship having been part of them for years at sea.

You think you are the only one that has been a part of such operations?

I was onboard the USS Savannah AOR-4. She was one of the supply ships that sailed with the fleet.

I am very well aware of the operations. Running fuel and supplies to two ships at a time alongside us, and running 2 helos doing the same.
 
You think you are the only one that has been a part of such operations?

I was onboard the USS Savannah AOR-4. She was one of the supply ships that sailed with the fleet.

I am very well aware of the operations. Running fuel and supplies to two ships at a time alongside us, and running 2 helos doing the same.
Ships I was on have unreped with Savannah. Flight ops are interrupted. Maneuvering is restricted. You don't do unreps in areas where you are likely to be attacked.
 
Back
Top