If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Sen McCain blasts the Navy's Littoral Combat Ship program as a misguided waste of money, adds that back in his day sailors had to buy their sex toys with their own damn money   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 95
    More: Interesting, John McCain, U.S. Navy, surface ships, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, Senate Armed Services Committee, Secretary of Defense  
•       •       •

1354 clicks; posted to Politics » on 11 Apr 2014 at 11:57 AM (18 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



95 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-04-11 10:27:36 AM
A Littoral waste of money?
 
2014-04-11 10:34:41 AM
Maybe pay us back for all those planes you crashed first.
 
2014-04-11 10:56:18 AM

James!: Maybe pay us back for all those planes you crashed first.


This is the stupidest thing I've read on Fark all week.  Here's hoping it last the six remaining hours of my workday.
 
2014-04-11 10:57:23 AM
So this is a waste of money but another pointless Bengazi probe is a wise investment, right? Fark off old man.
 
2014-04-11 10:58:46 AM
The program may have issues, but at the same time we shouldn't be sending WW2 era ships around the globe to project influence.
 
2014-04-11 11:04:52 AM

FLMountainMan: James!: Maybe pay us back for all those planes you crashed first.

This is the stupidest thing I've read on Fark all week.  Here's hoping it last the six remaining hours of my workday.


Nonsense, I've read comments from you today.
 
2014-04-11 11:06:21 AM
Just STFU John
 
2014-04-11 11:09:55 AM
A republican wants to cut military spending? Well the senility finally kicked in.
 
2014-04-11 11:27:17 AM
I did not know that the nave was weaponizing single man canoes...
 
2014-04-11 11:42:21 AM

FLMountainMan: James!: Maybe pay us back for all those planes you crashed first.

This is the stupidest thing I've read on Fark all week.  Here's hoping it last the six remaining hours of my workday.


So, you haven't been on Fark much this week?
 
2014-04-11 11:54:47 AM

IgG4: I did not know that the nave was weaponizing single man canoes...


well you have to admit McCain has a point, what are the chances of the Navy actually paying attention to littoral regions anyway?, Even assuming they could even find them in the first place
 
2014-04-11 11:55:39 AM
How about not sending  US Naval War College sending students to Brazil to get laid, can we do that?
 
2014-04-11 12:11:38 PM

Magorn: IgG4: I did not know that the nave was weaponizing single man canoes...

well you have to admit McCain has a point, what are the chances of the Navy actually paying attention to littoral regions anyway?, Even assuming they could even find them in the first place


Just turn the lights out and cover them with hair.
 
2014-04-11 12:15:51 PM
Why does McCain hate (USS) Freedom!!??
 
2014-04-11 12:21:04 PM
The Clitoral Wombat on the other hand...
 
2014-04-11 12:24:39 PM
McCain, a senior Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said the Navy's poor planning had led to a new class of ships that could not survive in combat, cost far more than expected, provided less capability than earlier warships and had not demonstrated their utility after 13 years of development.
A longtime critic of the program, McCain used a speech on the Senate floor to back Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel's decision to limit LCS procurement to 32 ships instead of the 52 ships initially planned and called for a further cut to 24 ships.



These things don't work! So instead of building none of them, lets still go ahead and throw 24 of them together.
 
2014-04-11 12:27:26 PM
Good one Subby!
 
2014-04-11 12:28:14 PM

grumpfuff: FLMountainMan: James!: Maybe pay us back for all those planes you crashed first.

This is the stupidest thing I've read on Fark all week.  Here's hoping it last the six remaining hours of my workday.

So, you haven't been on Fark much this week?


No, been pretty busy, much to the relief of Fark, I'm sure.

DROxINxTHExWIND: McCain, a senior Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said the Navy's poor planning had led to a new class of ships that could not survive in combat, cost far more than expected, provided less capability than earlier warships and had not demonstrated their utility after 13 years of development.
A longtime critic of the program, McCain used a speech on the Senate floor to back Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel's decision to limit LCS procurement to 32 ships instead of the 52 ships initially planned and called for a further cut to 24 ships.


These things don't work! So instead of building none of them, lets still go ahead and throw 24 of them together.


The insanity of defense contract spending.  McCain and Hagel are making lemons out of lemonade.
 
2014-04-11 12:28:31 PM
No matter what you actually think of McCain, he's right on this one.  The LCS program is an utter boondoogle- they tried to make a multi-role, inexpensive shallow water combat ship and ended up with a weak, vulnerable and expensive debacle.  Originally they were supposed to change mission by swapping out modules in a few hours which would really help flexibility.  The time's in months now, and the Navy doesn't expect to change the modules basically ever.

Of course, since there are multiple builders and thousands of contractors it's going to keep going forward even if the ships themselves are garbage.
 
2014-04-11 12:28:34 PM
McCain is absolutely correct.  It's immoral, IMHO, to send a ship to combat in the littorals (close to shore) that can't sustain damage from asymetric warfare and still fight.  It's configuration is different on each ship so far.  And they're going to build more than 25 of these units.  It lacks firepower and is currently ill-equipped to take over for one of the roles it is supposed to take on - mine counter measures (and those ships need to be retired as well).  Unless these areas are fixed, we'll be spending a significant portion (10% or more) of the USN budget trying to get these units working properly.  It was a poor concept then - it's a poor concept now.  Building these units so that ONLY the building yards could maintain them was a HUGE mistake - cheap to build, expensive to maintain.
 
2014-04-11 12:31:48 PM
just the ten ships from each company cost 6 bil and 7 bil (I don't know the cost of the first 4).  That's 13 bil that could've been put to good use somewhere else.
 
2014-04-11 12:32:37 PM

Lost Thought 00: The program may have issues, but at the same time we shouldn't be sending WW2 era ships around the globe to project influence.


You do realize there are only two ships from before 1965 still in active service. One is the Constitution, the other is USCGC Eagle
 
2014-04-11 12:38:50 PM

Glockenspiel Hero: The LCS program is an utter boondoogle- they tried to make a multi-role, inexpensive shallow water combat ship and ended up with a weak, vulnerable and expensive debacle.


So basically, it's the Navy boat equivalent of the F-35.

//Almost forgot the Navy also uses the actual F-35.
 
2014-04-11 12:41:26 PM

FLMountainMan: No, been pretty busy, much to the relief of Fark, I'm sure.


Of all the conservatives around here, you're one of the more pleasant ones, at least IMHO.
 
2014-04-11 12:44:44 PM
I thought Navy sailors' "sex toys" were other sailors.
 
2014-04-11 12:45:38 PM

IgG4: I did not know that the nave was weaponizing single man canoes...


The Nave is doing no such thing.

The Navy has wasted time and money on the Littoral Combat Ship.

The LCS is a poor ship design; the shape was rejected in the 1890's when an entire French-built, Russian battleship disappeared (by now, we can safely assume "sank") en route to be delivered.

This isn't even a "conservative" or "liberal" thing. It involves engineering, seaworthy vs. otherwise and some understanding of combat at sea.
 
2014-04-11 12:53:55 PM
I'm not usually into military-hardware porn, but I reckon that the Independence is a farking cool boat.
upload.wikimedia.org
You've got a stealthy trimaran that does +44knts and carries not one, but two SH-60s? That's pretty badass.

/shame about all the cost overruns
 
2014-04-11 12:59:58 PM
The Little Crappy Ship is an example of the sunk-cost fallacy.
 
2014-04-11 01:01:55 PM

Bad_Seed: You've got a stealthy trimaran that does +44knts and carries not one, but two SH-60s? That's pretty badass.


I don't see how a ship that large can ever be "stealthy". All you need is a few cheap recon drones to defeat that stealth, not to mention the least of our worries are enemy fleets with radar trying to track our ships (this isn't WWII FFS).
 
2014-04-11 01:02:15 PM
The ships themselves are fine. The problem is, the Navy asked for the LCS, gave the contractors the design requirements, the contractors built to design specs, the Navy accepted the designs, the first ships were built, and then the Navy said "hey, these won't replace the frigates. We wanted to replace frigates with these."

the ships are fine. The expected use had changed.
 
2014-04-11 01:02:19 PM

Foundling: IgG4: I did not know that the nave was weaponizing single man canoes...

The Nave is doing no such thing.

The Navy has wasted time and money on the Littoral Combat Ship.

The LCS is a poor ship design; the shape was rejected in the 1890's when an entire French-built, Russian battleship disappeared (by now, we can safely assume "sank") en route to be delivered.

This isn't even a "conservative" or "liberal" thing. It involves engineering, seaworthy vs. otherwise and some understanding of combat at sea.


That distant "boom" noise was the sound of IgG4's joke going over your head at 44,000 feet at Mach 3.
 
2014-04-11 01:05:03 PM

Bad_Seed: I'm not usually into military-hardware porn, but I reckon that the Independence is a farking cool boat.
[upload.wikimedia.org image 640x427]
You've got a stealthy trimaran that does +44knts and carries not one, but two SH-60s? That's pretty badass.

/shame about all the cost overruns


and also is corroding away into nothing

pornographic!
 
2014-04-11 01:06:18 PM

Bad_Seed: I'm not usually into military-hardware porn, but I reckon that the Independence is a farking cool boat.
[upload.wikimedia.org image 640x427]
You've got a stealthy trimaran that does +44knts and carries not one, but two SH-60s? That's pretty badass.

/shame about all the cost overruns


it's useless though. You can usually tell when something's main purpose is "anti terrorist operations" that the military is just trying to find a justification for its existence.
 
2014-04-11 01:07:55 PM
This ship will blow our enemy's mind

img.fark.net
 
2014-04-11 01:12:41 PM
They should start selling the mothballed fleet to bored billionaires to make up some of the money.

/Every time I drive past the navy yard in philly I am just sad at all the rows of retired battleships...
 
2014-04-11 01:14:38 PM

Frank N Stein: it's useless though. You can usually tell when something's main purpose is "anti terrorist operations" that the military is just trying to find a justification for its existence.


Yeah, because it's not like there are any terrorists about. Or pirates, or drug-smugglers, or any other multitude of small or non-state actors who could be countered by a boat like this. I'd look at it the other way, the Navy (and guys like McCain) think they want all aircraft carriers and other impressive Big Ships to fight big classical naval battles that haven't happened since WWII. They don't want to think about all the small missions against a unglamorous opponents with improvised gear and tactics.

upload.wikimedia.org
Not particularly useful against piracy.
 
2014-04-11 01:15:05 PM

Dalrint: They should start selling the mothballed fleet to bored billionaires to make up some of the money.

/Every time I drive past the navy yard in philly I am just sad at all the rows of retired battleships...


;_; Iowa

If I ever became mega rich I would rehab some old destroyer inter my personal yacht. Though I would keep the outside all gun metal grey and cool.
 
2014-04-11 01:17:47 PM

Chagrin: I don't see how a ship that large can ever be "stealthy". All you need is a few cheap recon drones to defeat that stealth, not to mention the least of our worries are enemy fleets with radar trying to track our ships (this isn't WWII FFS).


You don't understand stealth. Its not about being invisible, it's about reducing the radius a given sensor can detect an object.

If Radar X can detect a OH Perry class frigate at 300 km, and Radar X can detect a Freedom class LCS at 150 km, then the Freedom class is stealthy compared to a frigate
 
2014-04-11 01:17:56 PM
As a Marine Budget Officer (the hardest of the hard, I know), all I can say is bravo, sir.  Keep it up.  There are way too many pet projects that need to be killed, and we also need to start telling our commissioned officers to chip in a few bucks a month for our ridiculous health care plans.
 
2014-04-11 01:18:02 PM

Bad_Seed: Frank N Stein: it's useless though. You can usually tell when something's main purpose is "anti terrorist operations" that the military is just trying to find a justification for its existence.

Yeah, because it's not like there are any terrorists about. Or pirates, or drug-smugglers, or any other multitude of small or non-state actors who could be countered by a boat like this. I'd look at it the other way, the Navy (and guys like McCain) think they want all aircraft carriers and other impressive Big Ships to fight big classical naval battles that haven't happened since WWII. They don't want to think about all the small missions against a unglamorous opponents with improvised gear and tactics.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 320x212]
Not particularly useful against piracy.


LCS have pea shooters and CIWS. Hell, I'm sure there's pirates out there can tan take it down. Your precious USS Independence is a multi billion dollar mine sweeper.
 
2014-04-11 01:19:50 PM

daveUSMC: As a Marine Budget Officer (the hardest of the hard, I know), all I can say is bravo, sir.  Keep it up.  There are way too many pet projects that need to be killed, and we also need to start telling our commissioned officers to chip in a few bucks a month for our ridiculous health care plans.


And you need to stop approving frivolous spending at the end of the fiscal year because of a fear of getting your unit's budget cut
 
2014-04-11 01:21:25 PM

Bad_Seed: I'm not usually into military-hardware porn, but I reckon that the Independence is a farking cool boat.
[upload.wikimedia.org image 640x427]
You've got a stealthy trimaran that does +44knts and carries not one, but two SH-60s? That's pretty badass.



Reminds me very much of:

img2.wikia.nocookie.net
=Smidge=
 
2014-04-11 01:21:57 PM

Frank N Stein: Dalrint: They should start selling the mothballed fleet to bored billionaires to make up some of the money.

/Every time I drive past the navy yard in philly I am just sad at all the rows of retired battleships...

;_; Iowa

If I ever became mega rich I would rehab some old destroyer inter my personal yacht. Though I would keep the outside all gun metal grey and cool.


A man I know slightly named Doug Humphries who once owned a Company called Digex that Worldcom bought for a bajillion dollars  did just that although IIRC it was a WWII era British frigate..
 
2014-04-11 01:23:01 PM

Bad_Seed: Frank N Stein: it's useless though. You can usually tell when something's main purpose is "anti terrorist operations" that the military is just trying to find a justification for its existence.

Yeah, because it's not like there are any terrorists about. Or pirates, or drug-smugglers, or any other multitude of small or non-state actors who could be countered by a boat like this. I'd look at it the other way, the Navy (and guys like McCain) think they want all aircraft carriers and other impressive Big Ships to fight big classical naval battles that haven't happened since WWII. They don't want to think about all the small missions against a unglamorous opponents with improvised gear and tactics.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 320x212]
Not particularly useful against piracy.


Depends on how you look at it. Having enough planes/munitions to sink a small fleet of pirate ships could be pretty effective, as sinking them prevents them from pirating.
 
2014-04-11 01:30:12 PM

Fubar: The ships themselves are fine. The problem is, the Navy asked for the LCS, gave the contractors the design requirements, the contractors built to design specs, the Navy accepted the designs, the first ships were built, and then the Navy said "hey, these won't replace the frigates. We wanted to replace frigates with these."


I've been on IT projects like that.
 
2014-04-11 01:30:51 PM

Glockenspiel Hero: No matter what you actually think of McCain, he's right on this one.  The LCS program is an utter boondoogle- they tried to make a multi-role, inexpensive shallow water combat ship and ended up with a weak, vulnerable and expensive debacle.


And to be fair to the left, the Obama administration agrees with him (which should eliminate some of the knee-jerk McCain bashing).  I suspect the only people supporting the ship are the profligate hawks on the right and whatever Democrats whose home districts help build this thing.
 
2014-04-11 01:31:41 PM

Frank N Stein: LCS have pea shooters and CIWS. Hell, I'm sure there's pirates out there can tan take it down. Your precious USS Independence is a multi billion dollar mine sweeper.


You shouldn't let your personal insecurities get in the way. 57mm is plenty of gun if you know how to use it.
 
2014-04-11 01:33:10 PM

menschenfresser: I thought Navy sailors' "sex toys" were other sailors.


Marines.
 
2014-04-11 01:33:11 PM

Bad_Seed: Frank N Stein: LCS have pea shooters and CIWS. Hell, I'm sure there's pirates out there can tan take it down. Your precious USS Independence is a multi billion dollar mine sweeper.

You shouldn't let your personal insecurities get in the way. 57mm is plenty of gun if you know how to use it.


it's an expensive ship that's armed like a coast guard cutter
 
2014-04-11 01:36:25 PM
When you say "Sen McCain blasts Navy's Littoral Combat Ship program", I assume you mean figuratively?
 
Displayed 50 of 95 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »





Report