The Navy now retires ships during the commissioning ceremony.

@Parents_of_Twins

3 жыл бұрын

"Maam please don't actually break the champagne bottle we will be using that for tomorrows farewell party"

@brandonkostinsky2373

3 жыл бұрын

@@Parents_of_Twins Who brought the soundtrack of a bottle breaking? I know I saw that on the budget

@eroy7781

3 жыл бұрын

*XD*

@codyg7936

3 жыл бұрын

It’s pitiful, my gfs dad works in the shipyard, it takes 5 years to build an aircraft carrier and they end up having to refit the entire electrical system from the designs because the systems used in planning are generations behind what will be available when they’re actually ready, then it ends up taking 6-7 years

@Dunkopf

3 жыл бұрын

@@codyg7936 sounds about right

Wait... So the US -Navy- Congress paid full price for open beta? Edit: strike through navy, add Congress, to correctly identify buyer per a reply.

@dunuhn

3 жыл бұрын

We're do you think the game industry got the idea from...

@Maverick-kk2qb

3 жыл бұрын

@@dunuhn *where

@jeffreyprosser3511

3 жыл бұрын

LCS 2 was non deployable

@fortusvictus8297

3 жыл бұрын

It was vaporware from the beginning, everyone who was paying attention at the time knew it was a rotten fish they just either went with it or got blocked when they tried to blow the whistle

@nickcara97

3 жыл бұрын

Everything’s in constant beta in this brave new world.

Any engineer should be aware of galvanic corrosion -- fire them all.

@Magnulus76

3 жыл бұрын

They were, but the Navy didn't listen to them. It's not the shipbuilders fault the Navy refused to pay for electroplating the metals.

@Niko-xt5bs

3 жыл бұрын

Just fuking execute them lol

@ericspecullaas2841

3 жыл бұрын

I would make them walk the plank or have them all on the ship then just sink it

@nunyabusiness5075

3 жыл бұрын

Yes, let's believe the simplistic explanation at how dumb US shipbuilders are.......from the guy with a Russian accent. LOL.

@lsixty30

3 жыл бұрын

Why would you fully outfit test ships

Congress:"here are the fund for this new ships" Military:"we don't need this, we need more destroyers" Congress:"are you questioning my expertise at naval warfare?" Military:"..." A few years later:

@bill5982

3 жыл бұрын

The Navy asked for these. Someone in Congress didn't invent them.

@dannyb3663

3 жыл бұрын

Some idiot: Battleships are obsolete. And too expensive to run. Lets replace them with a destroyer with just one gun, with ammo so expensive we'll never make a single round for it. So we no longer need a Battleship that carries more cruise missiles you can count, more shore bombardment than anything in history, more radar and other AA systems than ever. Etc.

@YukariAkiyama

3 жыл бұрын

@@dannyb3663 I friggin miss battleships man. Missiles just aren’t as badass as a huge main gun.

@dannyb3663

3 жыл бұрын

@@YukariAkiyama I hear ya. I mean, I wouldn't have minded too much if they really were obsolete. But with the modern missiles and AA systems, plus the massive guns, they can't really make the argument that they need 0 gun ships instead. Its pathetic. I mean, I understand Missouris were getting way too old. But they could've built a new battleship. Maybe some weird shaped stealth one. But still masive with armour and big guns.

@Thesupremeone34

3 жыл бұрын

@@dannyb3663 holdin out on a dream of a 9 railgun battleship of at least 14 inches in my lifetime

I remember when these ships were first made the hype around them was unreal. "The future of us naval operations"

@TheBooban

3 жыл бұрын

Singapore has built a top of the line class of LCS. That the US Navy messed up is their own fault.

@wshtb

3 жыл бұрын

They were not wrong; they never promised the future would be good.

@aceofhearts573

3 жыл бұрын

Wrong. I remember when the lcs was about to come out and everyone derided the ships as too small and lightly armed. They are useless back then and useless now

@DrFeltcher

3 жыл бұрын

It seems like in the Navy especially this keeps happening. At least with the JSF program they're sticking with it

@rawful502

3 жыл бұрын

@@TheBooban wasn’t the fault of the Navy, the cost of the ammo went up by 10000000% and is pretty much unaffordable.

As a great engineer once said: "The more they overthink the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain."

@cmj0929

3 жыл бұрын

That’s what you get for missing staff meetings.

@essexexile

3 жыл бұрын

🖖

@Steve17010

3 жыл бұрын

Mr. Scott, U.S.S. Enterprise NCC 1701

@johnnyfavorite1194

3 жыл бұрын

He also said “Up your shaft!”

@KatiePhongh

3 жыл бұрын

Yup, and in the end we are in such a bind to fill a major naval combat role that we had no other choice than to buy Italian designed frigates.

1st, I served in a naval war almost 40 years ago ( Falklands) we had warships with aluminium super structures. When they were hit by bombs & missiles that aluminum burned like a candle. What on earth is happening in the US navy, latest destroyers being phased out, littoral ships decommissioned, the Ford has plenty of problems.

@piotrd.4850

3 жыл бұрын

Very vaulable comment. What is happening? Well, US Navy and world move to "do all ships" - note, that frakin' FRIGATES licensed from Europe will be more capable and almost as large as first batches of Arleigh Burke destroyers.

@bertbergers9171

3 жыл бұрын

@@piotrd.4850 Europe’s frigates are actually nothing like frigates, they are destroyers. It’s names politics. Commander of a frigate is lieutenant at sea (literal dutch translation, not to wellversed in navy ranks in english), commander of a destroyer is a captain. So anytime a joint NATO flotilla of roughly equal ships is created, the US navy commander will be highest in rank. Another politics thing is that with a lot of the european public being kinda pacifists (due to cost or due to true pacifism is another question) it sounds better (cheaper) to build a frigate then a destroyer. And since voters inform themselves quite badly this strategy kinda works.

@mattheww2797

3 жыл бұрын

Zumwalt is useless, LCS is useless, Arleigh Burke does everything you can throw at it plus more, Constellation Frigates will have the firepower and detection systems to be actually useful, plus have enough crew to fight and maintain the ship

@winstonchurchill5892

3 жыл бұрын

@@mattheww2797 If the zumwalts gets the Hypersonic Missiles first then it could be something.

@b_de_silva

2 жыл бұрын

@@bertbergers9171 yeah, those FREMM are not frigates at all, they're destroyers.

50 years ago I served on the USS Lawrence DDG 4, which had an aluminum super structure and the hull was about 1/4 inch steel. No problems with galvanic stuff. We didn't worry simply because we were told our life expectancy in battle was one minute. We were to sacrifice our ship and take a torpedo meant for the bird farm we were escorting. Who worried about a little corrosion. The Lawrence served many years and was an excellent ship.

There’s a difference between a 58 year old versatile bomber And a 6 year old useless ship

@TKSubDude

3 жыл бұрын

Yeah, one was designed to do it's job and the other was designed to pamper some fucking admirals bank account.

@77thTrombone

3 жыл бұрын

@@TKSubDude Your cynicism is misplaced. [Unless the effectiveness of the IG is diminished from when I was in,] admirals don't make money from ships like this. Programs like this are often driven by congressional pork-barrel interests. I recall when I was in USN, there were stories about the P-3 Orion. There were several years when USN's requested budget was for no new P-3's, but the congressional budget authorization _required_ further aircraft purchases. Even worse is the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, whose domestic tasking is so politically influenced it should be called the Porcs of Engineers.

@TKSubDude

3 жыл бұрын

@@77thTrombone They make the money when they "retire" and take those lucrative jobs at defense contractors as lobbyists. The IG is a joke of a scam too. They rub the backs of the high brass ALL the time. They do go after low level offences but the O7 and above? HARDLY EVER unless its a massively flagrant violation like illegal orders or blowing off safety standards. Even then it usually only warrents a slap on the wrist and being sent to a desk job somewhere while they are waiting to retire.

@kayemmell63

3 жыл бұрын

Not to mention all the aircraft that the USAF *has* retired, nor the ships still in service - but the B-52 *has* performed beyond expectations (maybe it was just over designed?). [Edit: corrected autocorrect]

@Tuning3434

3 жыл бұрын

@@kayemmell63 B-52 is still useful to have around, but it for sure is not retained for having the original mission SAC had in mind when ordering her. However, considering she is one of the few early-ish jet age planes that still has enough flight-hours to be in active surface, I suspect they've had a few comfortable safety-margins compared to 'standard' operational conditions.

Sounds like someone didn’t double clutch the uss freedom.

@logicbomb5511

3 жыл бұрын

Yeah well at least they aren't still coal fired like the Russian aircraft carrier. You dont see LCS having to go everywhere with a oceangoing tug.

@nicolascrescimone

3 жыл бұрын

Shifting like a granny

@jonlowrey

3 жыл бұрын

Lucky that hundred shot of NOS didn't blow the welds on the intake.

@alienclay2

3 жыл бұрын

@@jonlowrey sadly, nitrous would likely have been less troublesome.

@mikenewman4078

3 жыл бұрын

With modern propulsion systems there wouldn't have been a problem. Combiner gearboxes with vastly different input speeds an impulse characteristics, yeah that is gonna work. Electric propulsion is current technology and it has worked flawlessly since 1970. It is the 1870 technology that failed. Maybe just buy the propulsion system from Europe, Siemens and ABB have proven systems on the shelf, so much so the Russians even buy them. Regarding corrosion, so they omitted cathodic protection for the aluminium ships, why? Does anyone think steel ship will stay afloat more than a few months without cathodic protection? Is this foreseeable debacle sabotage?

They should have asked the Royal Navy about their experience with aluminum ships during the Falklands war.

Yes these are horrible warships. I worked on two of them and I can tell you they are expensive to maintain and fragile. I blame the Navy's "Institutional Memory," which I estimate to be about 15 years. Remember the USS Stark? When was that? An FFG aluminum ship, hit by two air launched Exocet missiles that hit the Stark but did not detonate. However, the missile engines heat and spilled fuel caused a huge fire that turned the berthing area into a furnace. Since the hit was at night, the berthing area was occupied by sleeping crew. They all died. The Aluminum structure of the ship conducted the heat through the entire ship so fast no one could walk on the decks with out their shoes melting, while trying to fight the fires. Lesson learned? Maybe, the Navy then came out soon after, with the the Arleigh Burk DDG, steel hulled destroyer. Time passes and memories lapse and bingo back to aluminum.

@TheBrainSquared

3 жыл бұрын

@OldSchool Oh they will eventually go back to Aluminum again, and relearn the same lessons again or create some news ones.

@LuizAlexPhoenix

3 жыл бұрын

Huh, IIRC, the Bradley had the same issue... It cooked people alive. Edit: It has come to my attention that it was indeed very good at that, so the intense suffering would be short and thus they would be cooked dead instead of alive.

@citizenerased1992

3 жыл бұрын

Even then, the Royal Navy learned these lessons years earlier in 1982. Ships superstructures and emergency staircases melting so men couldn't get off the burning ships as they sunk. The ability to not learn from prior mistakes in the world of buisness and big contracts is shocking and depressing.

@Ttavoc

3 жыл бұрын

If Aluminum melts it has well over 400 Celsius. Is it even possible to use a stair at that temperature?

@Ttavoc

3 жыл бұрын

@Spank A Leftist More of a detail but not the melting point of aluminum is the issue. Its the oxyd surface which it builts up. The best thing you can do is grinding the surface straight before you weld it as it builts up very fast. . I see why they want using aluminum on a ship. And I dont think that a hallway where it is hot enough that aluminium melts can be passed if it would have been made of steel. . Nevertheless its a dumb idea. Not because of the melting point. But aluminum is quite a formidable heat distributor. Aluminium can conduct heat 4-6 times better than steel and that means, that the fucking hallway which has 600 degrees celsius and is actually melting would have a temperature humans could actually survive if it would have been made of literally any other material. . In my industry we use Aluminum as material for heating tools to melt plastic material. Cause it is such a good conductor for heat. We use it of course not for all plastic materials. For example when you have glas fibres in the material or plastic material which melts beyond 300° you cant use it. Then we use steel which needs much more energy to heat up.

This is the result when you have free reign to spend someone else’s money with zero accountability

@davidanalyst671

3 жыл бұрын

This wasn't the NAVY's fault. It was General Dynamics from the beginning. They ordered a bunch, then cut it back when GD raised the price tag. Then it melts in the water, GD, then it stripped gears. GD.

@luisderivas6005

3 жыл бұрын

LOL! Before you jump on the NAVY for 4 ships, please count how many aircraft test beds have been built for the Air Force.

@markbass9402

3 жыл бұрын

@@luisderivas6005 Exactly right. This is how engineering standards are discovered. Engineers dont wake up with perfect designs in their heads. Like you say about the A.F.. Look at the automobile industry. How long to get to this point and how many failures did they have? Its all part of learning and striving for perfection.

@KuK137

3 жыл бұрын

@@AnonYmous-of8ep No you cretin, a single prototype fighter or bomber can easily cost 300+ mln $ (or 3 billon, if we're talking about B-2). That is cost of a destroyer hull, bigger ship than LCS...

@someguy5035

3 жыл бұрын

Ah yes, here come the internet experts....

In the case of the Independence class, the Galvanic corrosion issue was completely forseeable, in fact the shipmaker AUSTAL won a lawsuit the Navy brought against them because they had *specifically* warned the Navy about corrosion and recommended electroplating, but the Navy opted not to to save costs. Unsurprisingly, early builds of the ship began to corrode, rapidly. The Navy tried to blame the shipmaker, and failed.

@billrich9722

2 жыл бұрын

Keep your paperwork, kids.

@memyselfandi1300

2 жыл бұрын

@@billrich9722 that's something I learned while in the Navy. They would fuck paperwork up so much that I got 3 flu shots in 2 weeks... Or they would lose an entire unit's "drug test samples".

@billrich9722

2 жыл бұрын

@@memyselfandi1300 In construction, here. People WILL fuck a contractor over if they think they can get away with it. Take pictures of everything you're responsible for. It sucks but that's how it is.

@prion42

2 жыл бұрын

I am forced to wonder if someone in the Navy deliberately made a bad choice in order to sabotage the project.

@goofycker

2 жыл бұрын

I'd also like to go in early retirement.

I was on the freedom for 3 days. It was tiny, one hallway, like 3 full decks. They did their own dishes, (idk, I just found that so weird.) And everyone wanted to kill themselves.

I worked on the engineering design of the Freedom class for years. Because the shipbuilding industry in the US is so unstable employment wise (privatization religion), most workers are contingency "contractors, and lack really solid career development and training and advancement opportunities. They make a lot of mistakes. The designs and equipment can be very complicated, and equipment procurement often takes years and millions of dollars, so errors are often impossible to fix. Many of us working on this project knew it was problematic 10 years ago, but hey, no one cares what tech experts think in the world of pork barrel politics! The payola is spread all over the country and NATO world to get as much political support for these extremely expensive projects as possible. Engineering is a secondary concern. A large portion of the "defense" budget is corporate welfare and jobs politics.

@billrich9722

2 жыл бұрын

@Paul van Dinther I don’t know if you can call the single largest and strongest Naval power in the world “incompetent” in maritime matters. Every nation has its issues. Many people simply can not fathom just how big the US is. That size is a strength and a liability. It is much easier for, say, the UK to maintain all of its infrastructure (not that they do) when they occupy a similar amount of space as Alabama, but a single state in the US. The littoral combat vessels were a pet project of some brass who thought they knew better. The project was new and pushed untested and unrefined technology and techniques. It went over budget and people tried to cit costs where they could. This shit happens. It has happened. It will happen again. It is not unique to the US. Just look at the HMS Northumbria. You could, if you wanted to, also look at the HMS Hood. Or maybe you would like to set your sights on the entire Italian fleet during WWII. France, even, hasn’t had much luck with their toasty little carrier and Japan has two of the largest man-made coral reefs in the world to show for their naval aspirations. Perhaps Lebanon is more your style when an entire dock exploded. Point at a “traditional” maritime nation and you can find a history if incompetence and tragedy. That’s just part of learning. Or you can just keep being conceited, bigoted ass. Whatever… “floats your boat.”

@kelvin4833

2 жыл бұрын

Bill Rich look at china’s fleet? It has just surpassed the us in tonnage and it just started ramping its military recently. We need to be more efficient and worldclsss if we are to compete with the Chinese especially at the rate that they are producing modern ships right now

@billrich9722

2 жыл бұрын

@@kelvin4833 No, I haven’t looked at their fleet. There are too many travel restrictions right now. And fuck China’s fleet. They have more but most of it is littoral and short range craft. The only way it matters is if we go to them to pick a fight.

@michaellind3653

2 жыл бұрын

@@kelvin4833 Bzzzt! Most of china's fleet are fishing or commercial vessels that can be reflagged as PLA vessels in wartime. real tonnage of warships is much much lower.

@bobfg3130

2 жыл бұрын

Hey, it's either jobs or UBI and I mean sustainable income when it comes to UBI.

When i got my boat licence at the age of 16 ,50 years ago ,we learned about galvanic corrosion, i would think ship builders would be aware of the problems ????

@robertlaw4073

3 жыл бұрын

But aluminium canoes never corrode?! But seriously, someone in political appropriations, probably with ties to big aluminium industry folks, probably made that pitch... that Aluminum would be better than steel. Fact is, actually, that Aluminum cost a lot more than steel on the open market... so I'm not sure if this video is full of crap out what... or if this is a case of the $400 toilet seat where the Navy procures "special" steel with a "secret" formula / coatings / etc. that costs more than Aluminium, which is basically a commodity.

@Duschbag

3 жыл бұрын

THANK YOU...! Exactly what I was thinking as well. 🙄

@JacobTakaMisterT

3 жыл бұрын

@@robertlaw4073 aye if the canoe is just made out of aluminum it won’t corrode and will last for years upon years. The problem usually comes when water and dissimilar metals are added to the mix. For whatever reason it causes aluminum to corrode at a much greater rate. That’s not to say the designers shouldn’t have paid more attention of course

@merlemorrison482

3 жыл бұрын

@@JacobTakaMisterT the problem is that ship specs tell you what to use - the problem started way higher up the ladder. also, aluminum canoes don't usually go in salt water, fresh water is much kinder to dis similar metals.....

@JacobTakaMisterT

3 жыл бұрын

@@merlemorrison482 true dat my man. Not sure if I’m remembering this correctly but in space dissimilar metals almost instantly weld together too

Whenever something like this happens it’s because more politicians were consulted instead of sailors.

@kurosumomo

3 жыл бұрын

They asked sailors for the Zumwalt, they also asked them for the Ford carriers. Same results, taxpayers money flushed down a black hole.

@alexanderx3554

3 жыл бұрын

The pentagon's wars (movie) aXQ2lO3ieBA

@booradley6832

3 жыл бұрын

To be honest I verymuch doubt any sailors were consulted because they are only the end product user. It would be rare to be a career seaman and naval engineer. Its more a case of "This is what happens when the government tries to cut corners to save money." The exact same thing happened on the M16A1 rifle where the government declined to chrome plate the chambers and there were ultimately seizures of the action , soldiers died because of it, and had to be emergency retrofitted with the original design specifications at great cost, scandal and effort. Thats the exact same thing that happened in the galvanic corrosion incident, the designers heavily recommended countermeasures that would have made it a relative non issue. These recommendations were ignored.

@bernardfinucane2061

3 жыл бұрын

Yes, clearly sailors should rule the world. xD

@Nixz_Leon

3 жыл бұрын

Y'all are not the brightest right, things need to be tested before you can actually deploy it into service, with planes and tanks that easy, and when you hear of the test bed plane or tank being decommissioned no prob, but the second it's anything bigger you guys get in a fuss about government spending, as yes things should work on the first try, expect that's not how engineering works

It’s a shame these ships have been decommissioned. That said, as “test” vessels, I’m sure much was learned … like don’t make a ship out of aluminium and fail to protect for corrosion….

@terryacker9505

3 жыл бұрын

I'm sure much was learned. Just kinda curious which politicians will profit handsomely from that knowledge.

@superchargerone

3 жыл бұрын

hahah 4 complete ships with 3 more hulls to come... test vessels? really?? hahahha

@Rose.Of.Hizaki

2 жыл бұрын

Yeah... Except they didnt need to spend $360mil (estimated cost of building an Independence Class ship according to wiki...) to find out that saltwater corrodes aluminium. Almost anyone who sat through Design Tech: Resistant Materials classes in high school could have told them that Aluminium can start to corrode when exposed to salt water. People who own cars that live on or near to the coast is a great example of this. They didnt need to drive their cars into the ocean to find that out months or years later that corrosion had eaten their cars. Salt carried by moisture in the air is just the same and youre going to get a lot of that living on or near to the coast. But thats the problem. There probably was no accountability from the person within the government who signed off on all the paperwork to build these ships despite the ship builder telling them all the way that it wasnt a good idea. AUSTAL could have refused to build the ships but money is money and $360mil is a lot of money. Who was it that wanted to cut corners by building the ship out of aluminium rather than a marine grade stainless steel suitable for saltwater conditions? They obviously signed off on it so they should be on the hook for all the cost of the ship and all maintenance costs and any repairs that were as result of corrosion while the ship was in service. AUSTAL covered their ass real good

@michaellind3653

2 жыл бұрын

@@Rose.Of.Hizaki Austal has ZERO fault in that to cover their ass from. That was the US that told AUSTAL what to do even after AUSTAL told them it was a stupid idea.

@Rose.Of.Hizaki

2 жыл бұрын

@@michaellind3653 On the contrary, their ass was truly covered. If Austal hadnt told the Government that Saltwater eats aluminium for breakfast. Then they would have been on the hook. But the fact that *THERE WAS* back and forth between them about giving the sea a free all you can eat man made alloy buffet means that Austal's ass was covered. Otherwise it would have been easy for Government officials to push back against Austal and the problem with that is the system is already rigged for the Government to win. Regardless. Im sure that Government officials that signed the paperwork to greenlight the ship building also denied that Austal ever said anything to them about saltwater corrosion. And when pressure is put on these officials that signed all the paperwork. They will be looking for excuses or ways to push the responsibility from them to others because thats how everyone in Government rolls. They have to find a scapegoat. Its a game of he said she said unless you have the receipts to back it up and Austal had the receipts therefore Austal's ass was undeniably and truly covered from any legal pushback from the Government.

Soon as he said 'combine gears' I knew exactly how this was going to end. Someone probably said 'we want it to be fast but also fuel efficient' and the solution was the two powerplants one gearbox method. One day the navy is going to order a hybrid warship and it will end up electrocuting everybody on board like a squirrel chewing on a pole mounted transformer box.

@bobfg3130

2 жыл бұрын

😆 Hybrid ships don't electrocute anyone although you're not bright enough to figure that one out. There are hybrid submarines already. There have been for decades.

@DarthObscurity

2 жыл бұрын

The problem isn't the tech or the design, it's the fact that it's built by the lowest bidder.

@bobfg3130

2 жыл бұрын

Apparently this was done before on the 1960s. Not new. Still, they out in the wrong gear box.

should have went with The sharks with Lasers on their heads.

@deancarr5153

3 жыл бұрын

@xheralt you know something....Your Right!

@RatSpleam

3 жыл бұрын

Honestly it would be more cost efficient

@leftcoaster67

3 жыл бұрын

We have mutated sea bass......

@Penguin_of_Death

3 жыл бұрын

@@deancarr5153 *gone with, not went with...

@taw1967

3 жыл бұрын

Always a great option! Lol

Explains why the crews called them "Little Crappy Ships".

@micahgotracksplays340

3 жыл бұрын

Comedy gold

@FeelMyBirdie

3 жыл бұрын

They do look pretty cool tho

@boxhawk5070

3 жыл бұрын

You could simply sail up behind one and the crappy 57mm gun in the bow would be useless. 3 or 4 Iranian speedboats could probably render it useless.

@Lotek117

3 жыл бұрын

@@boxhawk5070 Uhh actually thatd be the worst spot for small attack craft to attack from, thats where the ciws is... it can engage the boats much faster and a much larger number of them over the 57mm main gun

@stealthcone

3 жыл бұрын

@@boxhawk5070 and the capitain would allow them to slowly close the distance and not to anything?

Honestly feels like they gave these design projects to university students with cad programs.

@MVMTV4Videos

2 жыл бұрын

lol. The navy Is good at waist tax Payer dollars - Love Ships, They have come a long way over the years An old retired US Navy Ship, USS Little Rock -kzread.info/dash/bejne/mp2Kw7qposqoitI.html

I have been searching for a good broker to trade with! Please sir how can I find one??

@tmera3157

3 жыл бұрын

Ohh I remember a friend of mine calling that name but didn't pay attention. But I will like to make some good investments with her.

@jameswilson7324

3 жыл бұрын

I have been scammed several occasions and it really hurts

@user-dm9ie8tb7y

3 жыл бұрын

@@jameswilson7324 That is why you need an expert like Mrs Elizabeth to handle your account so that you'll stop blowing off your money

@addamsphillip8621

3 жыл бұрын

@@user-dm9ie8tb7y How much exactly does she make of you in every trade don't mind me asking

@user-dm9ie8tb7y

3 жыл бұрын

@@addamsphillip8621 No exact amount but a profit range from $1000 to $3000 depending on the coin fluctuation in the market.

Ah yes, the oversized patrol boat.

@julwiezdeghorz5089

3 жыл бұрын

😂👍

@Kabir911

3 жыл бұрын

explain?

@adriandanu7617

3 жыл бұрын

@@Kabir911 probably because those ships are to big for a LCS and under equiped for a Frigate

@Kav.

3 жыл бұрын

@@adriandanu7617 so they are Corvettes then

@gunraptor

3 жыл бұрын

The Pegasus class was better...

Who builds a saltwater vessel without anti-corrosion paint and sacrificial anodes? That was grade 7 content when I was a kid.

@procatprocat9647

3 жыл бұрын

Don't underthink it, you yank dork.

@wbwam7710

3 жыл бұрын

when the hell were you a kid?

@uppitywhiteman6797

3 жыл бұрын

Agreed, every kid raise around ships and boats know it. I was surprised when the narrator said a systems sacrificial anodes "would" be applied.

@bertbergers9171

3 жыл бұрын

Somebody smart enough to sell dumb shit like that to some dumb general in the pentagon. An admiral it wasn’t, he should have known!

@Matt-yg8ub

3 жыл бұрын

That’s the problem, you have Aerospace engineers who’ve never actually served a day onboard a vessel at sea, designing the new class of super duper ship out of aluminum because that’s what they build planes out of.

Something tells me that naval ship yards have excellent lobbies.

@Kriss_L

3 жыл бұрын

These were built in private yards. The Naval Shipyards only work on nuclear ships.

The first thing that came to mind when I heard about the combination propulsion system I said to myself I hope they take no damage in engineering

If the designers had skillshare the ships wouldn't have these issues

@falcore91

3 жыл бұрын

Alright, that got a genuine laugh with me after scrolling through the comments from all the naval engineering “experts”.

@matute33

3 жыл бұрын

Lol

The whole LCS program was both boondoggle and fiasco.

@iankemp2627

3 жыл бұрын

No, it's what happens when the only way to get the funds you require as a government agency, is to effectively bribe Senators by promising them you'll get stuff built in their states. The end result is massive cronyism, incompetence and waste. NASA has already been down this road with the Shuttle and the SLS, now agencies that were previously considered integral to US safety like the Navy are getting the same treatment. The corruption and rot in the USA's politicians is what will doom that nation.

@Tuning3434

3 жыл бұрын

@@iankemp2627 I would like to say you are being to skeptic, but than I realized somebody got the Navy crazy enough to buy and operate TWO DIFFERENT SHIPS for exactly the same mission specs. The other half of the world sails in variation of the same basic design when building there OPV's, Corvette's and lighter duty frigates.

@medleyshift1325

3 жыл бұрын

I'd call it a big research grant, but if boondoggle is what we call experiments that aren't positives then sure.

@frosty3693

3 жыл бұрын

The Zumwalt Class may be next. Ships designed around special weapons that don't work. The navy seems to be having serious issues these days. Though it's not the time, the Mark 13 torpedo and Omaha class crusiers come to mind. Though they have had smaller ships that had dual power that worked, PBs, but they were sold off quickly too. If the navy wants to expand, and they may need to, they need to get better. Latest ships are being bought from the Italians. Thye may be good ships but weather or not it's what the nave needs long term remains to be seen. There also seems to be command, staff and enlisted people numbers problems as well.

@arthurmosel808

3 жыл бұрын

The prroblem was future threat analysis. Too many people no longer believed that we face peer forces. Result, plan for a smaller navy that needed fewer men and won't face a peer threat. Dumb, Dumb

The Royal Navy had some ships in combat that were made of aluminium, and they didn't fare well when hit by missiles (relative to steel vessels)

@Cuffsmaster

3 жыл бұрын

Royal Navy . aluminum .. didn't fare well. Yeah remember the Falkland Islands and the melt down of on aluminum British Ship when hit by an air to ship device

They all had galvanic protection, just NOT ENOUGH galvanic protection.

The type class was never needed and was poorly spec'd and designed. The equipment fitted was junk due to poor specs, design, and build quality. They were accepted by the Navy only to save face. These ships started with a "wouldn't it be cool if..." idea that was more of a naval speed boat than a warship. It had a loud radar signature, virtually no self protection, next to nothing for armament, and you might have to row the damn thing home.

@wesleyworley8982

3 жыл бұрын

Admiral LeFlur's brain-fart, like so many of the ideas still plaguing the Surface Navy today. The American equivalent of "Fisher's Funnies."

@jimmym3352

3 жыл бұрын

I'm worried that the electromagnetic catapults also suffer from the "wouldn't it be cool if..." idea after reading an article about the failures on the USS Gerald Ford in launching. They also have issues recovering as well. The Captain is defending it though, citing the high maintenance needs of steam catapults. I served on the Enterprise, an old bucket of bolts, but at least we could out perform the USS Gerald Ford in launches and recoveries. But maybe they will be able to fix the problems.

@wesleyworley8982

3 жыл бұрын

@@jimmym3352 The issues with the electromagnetic catapults and arrestor gear have been resolved. One of the advantages is that now there are no steam lines outside of the engineering spaces, and no accumulator tanks taking up valuable real estate in the bow. The less abrupt acceleration & deceleration will allow the aircraft to last longer too, due to less airframe fatigue.

@MM-fq9gi

3 жыл бұрын

what equipment was junk? the engine? the gas turbine? the waterjet drives? I can tell you I was there it the propulsion equipment is top notch, there was some issues with the operators though, that I heard directly.

@wesleyworley8982

3 жыл бұрын

@@MM-fq9gi The hull, the radars (you could tell how old the ship was by the CASREP updates), the ESM, Comms, - everything that made it a warship instead of a oil platform support ship. Then there are the basic issues of inadequate cruising speed on diesels (can't even keep up with an ARG), excessive fuel consumption - doubly bad if someone suggests starting the turbines, hull corrosion because of putting waterjet drives in seawater. Shall we go on? Just because individual parts work doesn't mean the entire platform isn't junk.

New sailor on his first day aboard: "Why do I keep hearing that weird flushing noise?" Captain: "Oh that... that's just taxpayer money going down the toilet. It's how we power our fleet."

@seifer918

3 жыл бұрын

We moved a long way from burning coal to burning cash.

@astroganov

3 жыл бұрын

Federal Reserve will print more, no worries

@Andrew58251

3 жыл бұрын

@@seifer918 honestly atleast coal ships worked lol

@MVMTV4Videos

2 жыл бұрын

lol well aid. I Love Ships, They have come a long way over the years.. An old retired US Navy Ship, USS Little Rock -kzread.info/dash/bejne/mp2Kw7qposqoitI.html

After successfully confirming that the old insight of not making ships from aluminium still holds true, the Navy is contemplating if wooden sailing ships have not become feasible since last they were used.

Some of our roads are like something from the Philippines, and we have money to throw around like the cost of these ships.

@amlecciones

3 жыл бұрын

Stop Democrat states from leaching federal budget

@_Aemse

3 жыл бұрын

hell some of your cities look like the god damn phillipines. (the detroit suburb experiment has come home to roost)

@garp2816

3 жыл бұрын

Roads are State not Government

@hardcore476

3 жыл бұрын

Roads don't win Wars or elections

@hardcore476

3 жыл бұрын

Hey somebody in the comment section actually knows how state governments work next somebody will say that politicians don't make jobs businesses do Witch is true

Some admirals are gonna get nice cushy consultants jobs when they retire.

@FlexibleToast

3 жыл бұрын

Isn't that what every O6+ does?

@garbo8962

3 жыл бұрын

Anither freaking lifer officier getting rich.

@snakeoo7ca

3 жыл бұрын

@@garbo8962 Yes god forbid someone who dedicated their life to public service, gets rich 🤦‍♂️

@adamsandifer5588

3 жыл бұрын

You mean people with vast amounts in knowledge, education, leadership and a track record of success use those highly desired skills to make more money after they retire? Yes, that exactly what they do and everyone else with a skill set business want regardless of military service.

@garbo8962

3 жыл бұрын

While serving in Nam saw too many piece of crap lifer officiers getting over. We had a coward CO. This major would fly 5000 feet above our helichopters and try to play commander until some enlisted guy mocked him. To get his $130 monthly flight play coward would fly to Saigon for lunch. We had a smart guy that would sign his name so maybe every 6 weeks we had somebody fly to Saigon or where ever to purchase great box of steaks. One lifer tried to write me up when I refused to jump for him. This is after I got stuck working 24 hours without a meal. Told him that I was going to go eat then drink a lot of beer. He insisted that me & my sargent mount about 40 spotlights pull thousands of feet of hevvy cable and have it up & running by midnight. Told him that I was tom the electrician not tom the magician and if I had 5 of the fastest sparkies in the world it would take at least a week. Of course he ripped me a new asshole and turned me in but it was worth it. Best officiers had the most kills and just did their job.

This was a nonsense ship project. Useless, less weapons and overpriced.

@nafisfuadayon6832

3 жыл бұрын

@Haze Gray Apparel Right

@MinhDucTa352150

3 жыл бұрын

But how can you launder money without such projects?

@picalhead

3 жыл бұрын

I mean... It gave some valuable data on how not to make a ship??

@martenkahr3365

3 жыл бұрын

@@picalhead It also kept the shipbuilding companies and contractors in business and allowed them to retain the specialized workforce needed for building warships during a period when the USN wasn't looking to add large numbers of new ships to the fleet.

The U.S. Navy should turn over the ships to the U.S. Coast Guard as the USCG’s ships are aging.

@warrenstemphly5756

3 жыл бұрын

The Coast Guard couldn’t afford the maintenance. The CG needs new ships built for its mission.

@paulnaughton9923

3 жыл бұрын

@@warrenstemphly5756 Actually littoral patrol around the US Coast is the main military mission of the Coast Guard, which is what these things were supposedly designed for.

@michaelmaddy278

3 жыл бұрын

I'm sure the Coast Guard wouldn't want that junk. Nobody would want a ship that breaks down in the middle of the ocean.

@warrenstemphly5756

3 жыл бұрын

@@michaelmaddy278 Exactly, it’d be an albatross.

@kevinstenger4334

3 жыл бұрын

They could use them on the Great Lakes to deter Canadian immigrants from trying to cross in rowboats in the summer months. They probably wouldn’t do too well with the winter ice though.

1:54 Did they just.. critique the American Navy? 'haha you cant use a ship for more than 6 years, how u ever gonna get a big fleet?' *stares at Arleigh Burke, Ticonderoga, Nimitz, Los Angeles..*

Maybe somebody finally realized that the whole point of that building program was to 1) Fund someone's retirement program and 2) to very quickly add to the amount of the ships that the Navy had on hand, regardless if it could really do any sort of warfighting at all. If it floated, then it was counted.

@robertlaw4073

3 жыл бұрын

The program was conceived before "securing our borders" was tainted with politcially incorrect connotations and charges of being a "trumpism". Fact is that you cannot deploy vessels that were designed to sink massive enemy ships to defend your border from insurgent groups conducting operations near your shores... unless the media and political climate change and you are allowed to sink the bad guys.

@Astrocat-od5cy

3 жыл бұрын

@@robertlaw4073 if that's the point of the ship then why is it so big

@sshep86

3 жыл бұрын

@@robertlaw4073 Wrong design for coastal patrols.

@robertlaw4073

3 жыл бұрын

@@sshep86 It's about south china sea patrols. kzread.info/dash/bejne/nJ1tp9R8itCYncY.html Not saying it's great or effective plan... just that's what they want these ships for. Pay close attention... a last-gasp deployment of LCS 's by Trump to SE Asia may be based on intelligence that China plans something "special" for Tiawan when Biden comes into office. Because Trump was a China hawk and made overtures to Taiwan that China is going to want payback for. Or it could just be Trump trying to show he can still get it up... I am just watching that region very closely. If you are a strategist in China watching USA play nanny state domestically over flu bug 2020, and you've got your country battened down and read for action, you would advise that this is once-a-centruy opportunity to establish unequivocal millitary dominion over Taiwan and get a lock over SE China sea shipping routes.

@tgiskardify

3 жыл бұрын

@@robertlaw4073 The whole problem with the LCS as a concept is that is isn't survivable enough for operations in east Asia.

I remember a scandal in the 80s about the ridiculous amounts charged by suppliers to the US armed forces. There was a cartoon that includes an item with a tag attached that said " Air transportable carcinogen extinguisher ". The item was an ashtray.

@madzangels

3 жыл бұрын

Yeah it's one thing I've always learned, about how the private industry rips off government contracts - 'competitors' actually collude in tendering process, sometimes I see them even 'take turns' and co-ordinate who gets what contract (So company A will sabotage tender A, cos they agreed with company B to do so, so company B wins it - lilkewise this will come back around and be reciprocated). The tendering, procurement of western governments - is criminal and we like to think we're above corruption. Hell no, corruption everywhere when it comes to goernments buying something they need.

@TUKByV

3 жыл бұрын

Solar powered laundry dryer! Made of space-age polymer! Clothesline.

All that naval experience... and they forget about corrosion and working gearboxes. What an incredible waste of capital.

I long for the good ol' days when the ships were made of wood ... *... and the sailors were made of iron!*

Screw ups like this cost taxpayers billions of dollars! There must be Naval engineers that know how to build a good ship!

@Ryarios

3 жыл бұрын

They were all retired...

@bestamerica

3 жыл бұрын

hi M M... ' why complain comment in here about currencys... not important

@theodoreolson8529

3 жыл бұрын

It’s not that we don’t know how. The process gets really political and problems along the way get brushed aside. These ship contracts are huge, provide lots of good paying jobs, and....votes.

@bestamerica

3 жыл бұрын

@@Ryarios hi R... ' who is a word - THEY -

@bigtuna4037

3 жыл бұрын

They are sent to build planes and rockets in Space Force.

What a waste of time and money.

@srs6461

3 жыл бұрын

I thought the point of building these ships was for research purposes?

@herbsewell4995

3 жыл бұрын

@@srs6461 They didn't need to build 4 ships to do research. They probably didn't even have to build one of them.

@benjaminkopecky4689

3 жыл бұрын

@@herbsewell4995 Models don't always work, and if you look at naval history (US dreadnoughts) they build two at a time for a class, no idea why the ordered so many though.

@arthurdaly4753

3 жыл бұрын

@@benjaminkopecky4689 to discover the constants and make sure no stone is unturned

@hudbenz1

3 жыл бұрын

@@benjaminkopecky4689 because the military is just like us public school system if they don't use all of budget allocate to them then it will decrease, so they will spend all of it so it won't decrease and will have the possibility to justify an increase in budget

There was the case in the late ‘90’s of a similar high-tech ship whose engines quit working because the computer software crashed - the program had a line of code that divided by zero. The ship had to be towed back to port.

Can we just a take a moment for the ending clip? I think I felt my bones rattle a bit in sympathy and awe.😯

There's your problem, they used ALUMINUM, they should have used ALUMINIUM.

@Gazmus

3 жыл бұрын

Alumilum?

@natalieorlando6583

3 жыл бұрын

@@Gazmus light weight and rust resistant. Aluminum.

@MlTGLIED

3 жыл бұрын

Nice one Tony 😂

@totalrobot

3 жыл бұрын

The latter is how Brits say Aluminum.

@TheArklyte

3 жыл бұрын

@@totalrobot I'm not sure that brits alone make up 80% of theglobe, but okay;)

Not the US Navy's finest hour: these were a mistake from the beginning.

@rpm1796

3 жыл бұрын

Then there is the F-35...being outfitted with hard-points.

@y0Milan

3 жыл бұрын

@@rpm1796 whats wrong with F35 being fitted with hardpoints?

@loyalist5736

3 жыл бұрын

@@rpm1796 Answer ?

@travistucker1033

3 жыл бұрын

@@y0Milan a stealth aircraft with hard points is a useless stealth aircraft.

@y0Milan

3 жыл бұрын

@@travistucker1033 it doesnt have to load them, and not every target has the cpablility to shoot down a jet so no need eg taliban/isis

Not what I thought! Thanks

They should give them to Greece or the Philippines or me. Although I'm surprised they built them from Aluminium after Britain's experience with Aluminium hulls and superstores in the Falklands war, aluminium burns.

@stavrostsitsopoulos2727

3 жыл бұрын

Greece's Navy already know these ships ain't worth shit.

US Navy: "Lets see just how janky we can build this ship!" US Senate: "Why do you want to retire this brand new ship?"

@kristianxoto

3 жыл бұрын

reason: if Russia can pack a half the size corvette with 30+missiles of both land attack and anti ship+anti air and anti sub while LCS cant even fire a anti ship missile or a land attack missile you got a problem. thats why the new LCS are loaded with launchers but still inferior to fx the Byan-m class corvette. even the newest russian patrol "boat" carries more weapons than a LCS and they are NOT ment for war but patrol.

@DivusMagus

3 жыл бұрын

@@kristianxoto the LCS weren't meant for war either they are meant for asymmetric warfare. basically against small local threats like pirates or drug runners.

@IpSyCo

3 жыл бұрын

@@kristianxoto Russian ships sail alone or in small groups. US ships sail in large groups with carriers and are there to help support the carriers.

@randy7068

3 жыл бұрын

@@DivusMagus I doubt they could even accomplish that. Soldiers deserve top notch equipment.

@antonyberry1632

3 жыл бұрын

This carrier is British

From my buddy who was a crewman on an LCS, they always broke. So I’m sure he’s happy

@davidanalyst671

3 жыл бұрын

it wasn't little crappy ships because they didn't have enough money to make it!!!

@TheTaquitoProject

3 жыл бұрын

@@davidanalyst671 it’s funny how they spend like crazy except on things that are actually important.

Never heard of Aluminum, sounds great. Please can I have material spec?

Why didn't anyone look at the Royal Navy , they ditched aluminium as it melts at far lower temperature than steel. Falklands war proved it on the Amazon class frigates superstructure I seem to recall . Ex RN and former shipyard welder. Just an observation. Big thank you for saving us in WW2

For everyone complaining about these ships. Look up the point of a littoral ship. The navy is trying to make these both littoral and deep water ships. They just need to pick 1 and go with it. A jack of all trade master of none is what is happening here

@robertlaw4073

3 жыл бұрын

You can't go around with a hammer and no screwdrivers. If you have to nail down small incursion threats in boundary waters, deal with shipping lane pirates who are increasingly organized, etc. then you need a littoral or something like it. Otherwise, you will get to "natural defenses" -- the videos where fishing vessels ram every potential threat and /or shoot the "pirates" playing Rambo.

@patrickweaver1105

3 жыл бұрын

@@robertlaw4073 No we never needed the littoral ships. Boundaries are the province of corvettes. Shipping lanes are in deep water and the responsibility of frigates and above.

@nicholaslee5473

3 жыл бұрын

The geography of the U.S. doesn't necessitate the existence of 'littoral ships' at all

@wesleyworley8982

3 жыл бұрын

I can tell you that the public - including those who watched the video - will never know the full truth of the disaster that this program is. They have no legitimate mission, no capability to perform any mission, and struggle just to go out and do maneuvering exercises with third-world navies. Even deployed they spend more time in maintenance pier-side than they do at sea.

@Tactical_Nightwach

3 жыл бұрын

Kinda like the f35 before they got its purpose fixed right

Yes, yes absolutely, it is exactly what we thought 👏 the ships where absolute garbage and incredibly unnecessary.

@vadapallichaitu8799

3 жыл бұрын

US has larger Navy than next 6 nations combined

@crazydiamondrequiem4236

3 жыл бұрын

@@vadapallichaitu8799 how is that related to his comment?

@jr-ft3oz

3 жыл бұрын

@@vadapallichaitu8799 totally unrelated comment, are u an America fanboy?

@EDARDO112

3 жыл бұрын

I thought the same thing, they are useless pieces of junk that are too expensive to repair

@mecolbeth158

3 жыл бұрын

They are not unnecessary as the navy's mission has moved from Blue water to Brown water asymmetrical warfare fighting. The real problem was the reduction in home grown navy engineering talent and the reliance in operational behavior contract specifications. Without the talent to evaluate contractor solutions. The same problem struck DG1000 development. The problem is rampant across Navy procurement.

The combined cost of regular maintenance, combating corrosion, and deficient systems is astronomical. Not to mention obsolescence upgrades. This was a good decision.

@MVMTV4Videos

2 жыл бұрын

I Love Ships, They have come a long way over the years.. An old retired US Navy Ship, USS Little Rock -kzread.info/dash/bejne/mp2Kw7qposqoitI.html

A relative serves on a littoral combat ship right now. It breaks down all the time, and some of those times there are no replacement parts.

To the late Admiral Rickover, thank you for the courageous insights and fearsome dedication which brought the Nuclear Navy into being. Today, creating such a project would be almost unfathomable.

You would think the reason they went for two completely different designs was to be sure if one failed, the other would be the one they kept building on. Instead, they kept building on two failed designs.

@kyle857

3 жыл бұрын

The first few were test beds. They have faulty engines. The classes are fine now.

@valsgardegaming68

3 жыл бұрын

They tested two and chose one. The first two of each class were test beds and received far greater wear than normal and needed to be retired. It's a simple concept yet many people can't grasp that when you beat a ship to death and don't know what's going to break or how to prevent damage you'll see more damage. These ships were sacrificed to find the weak points and learn how to extend the life of the others in the class. They've served their purpose.

@gabrielpalileo3294

3 жыл бұрын

@@kyle857 They're fine. But other countries have proved that you could build a much better platform for a lot less...

The general story that the public heard was- the littorals were under armed when compared to Arleigh Burke destroyers.

Didn't realize there were two classes of LCS. Thanks for this video

@Me-fm9zk

3 жыл бұрын

Independence and freedom class. Two different manufacturers.

"critics citing that the US Air Force can fly bombers over 60 years old bu the Navy is getting rid of a 6 year old ship." Iowa Class "Am I a joke to you?"

@KB4QAA

3 жыл бұрын

Bottom Line: 1. The USAF doesn't have to deal with salt water. 2. The USAF SAC force during the Cold War was ordered in VAST NUMBERS most of which sat on alert and hardly flew. That is why they still have 60 year old planes. (old navy flyer).

@arrow1414

3 жыл бұрын

Well to be fair the Iowa class Battleships have spent most of their lives in mothballs and now as museum ships. Iowa herself only had what, 16 years of actual operational service between 1943 and 1990? She has been in mothballs and then a museum ship for the last 30 years?

@KB4QAA

3 жыл бұрын

@@arrow1414 A "mothballed" ship stored in salt water is no comparison to airplanes maintained daily to full mission readiness and flown every week. Further, the complexity of ship dwarfs a single airplane. Stop propelling the fantasy that somehow these ships will sail again.

@arrow1414

3 жыл бұрын

@@KB4QAA You obviously misunderstood my post if you think that. Firstly I was addressing Snaggletooth Scott's (who started this thread) idea that the Littoral ships were junk because they only lasted something like 12 to six years while the Iowas "lasted" some 77 years the implication being that they are superior when in reality they only had 16 years total actual service life so pointing out this as a sort of "they don't make them like they used to" meme is misleading because the Iowa's service life in years is not that much longer than the oldest Lattoral ships. As for comparing the Iowas to the B52s I never did that. And while it is a lovely fantasy to have the Iowas back in service I know it is not realistic.

@KB4QAA

3 жыл бұрын

@@arrow1414 My apologies. I would also point out the LCS ships were intended to be a "low mix" ship built to economy using commercial (non-USN) standards and equipment as an alternative to vastly more expensive frigates. One would not expect them to have 30 year service lives. Further, as a class they represent a experiment in both design, materials, and operations. Ship class commissionings are always made in a combination of national policy, politics, tactical and strategic threats, diplomacy, operational methods, Operational & Maintenance (O&M) costs and material condition. I would not consider these or other LCS ships as engineering design failures from any negligence or incompetence. BTW, the USN has well over half a century experience with aluminum hulls i.e. USS High Point in early 60's, Pegasus PHM class, and present LCAC's, and innumerable USMC amtracs.

Waste of money. Turn them into research ships. So we can get more use.

@Dweller415

3 жыл бұрын

The Sea Shepherd II

@AndrewAMartin

3 жыл бұрын

@@Dweller415 Apparently, the MV Brigitte Bardot is up for sale... Had a friend who was obsessed with Sea Shepherd for awhile, even went to Japan for a protest, but I think he grew out of that phase (he's kind of a strange dude)...

Just give em to the coast guard. They can use them in the Great Lakes fleet. We’ll eventually need them there..

I was working on the program when the issue surfaced. Part of the problem was the requirements published by the Navy stated the the ship shall have active or passive corrosion control. The contractor of a course went with the passive system that uses zincs. after the issues arose the contractor was pretty much forced to go to with the more expensive active system. This is a good example of poor requirements writing and poor risk based decision making.

WhenI first enlisted we were building a 600 ship Navy. That was in 85. In the Clinton years we decommed almost everything. All the tenders went away except a couple sub tenders overseas. I couldn't believe that they decommed the Shenandoah (AD-44) at 10 years old. I think the only tender left now is the Frank Cable on Guam. There may be one at LA Madelena, but Im not sure. The Cable was a POS.

@Joesolo13

3 жыл бұрын

Soviet Union collapsed, didn't make a ton of sense to upkeep the fleet size we had at that time with no real enemy

@Im_just_raquel

3 жыл бұрын

The two sub renders left are the USS EMORY S LAND (AS 39) & USS FRANK CABLE (AS 40), both out of Guam.

@ajbrant3296

3 жыл бұрын

My last year in the service was onboard the Cable. They were in Charleston at that time. The Navy was also closing the base then also. I thought the crew was nuts. I swear they were waiting for the dive command daily.

The entire LCS program was flawed from the beginning, and this was inevitable. It's not just the Navy though. The Air Force has had many planes that they bought then realized wouldn't work as intended.

@brucelamberton8819

3 жыл бұрын

Look no further than the F-35 JSF...

@Eirik36

3 жыл бұрын

@@brucelamberton8819 the pilots who fly the 35 swear by it like no other though. So it’s a weird dynamic

@TheFlatlander440

3 жыл бұрын

@@Eirik36 Of course they swear by it if they want to keep flying. The F-22 was a much better design once they got the O2 bugs fixed.

@Eirik36

3 жыл бұрын

@@TheFlatlander440 you’re trying to compare an air superiority fighter vs a multi role fighter. Different mission sets, so different designs

@n5uge12

3 жыл бұрын

The LCS program was not flawed. It functioned exactly as it was designed to do; that is, to funnel massive amounts of the Taxpayers money into the pockets of select individuals.

As the initial and longest serving XXXXXX, for the PC-1 Class ships, thanks for the honorable mention.

"Let's make it a hybrid propulsion system, but it needs both parts at 100% to go full speed" 🙄

@MVMTV4Videos

2 жыл бұрын

I Love Ships, They have come a long way over the years.. An old retired US Navy Ship, USS Little Rock -kzread.info/dash/bejne/mp2Kw7qposqoitI.html

I remember a video of this two classes of ships from Discovery channel when this ship wa still in trial phase, it was praised so much for its capability. And now declared as a failure.

@robertlaw4073

3 жыл бұрын

That is how the journalism enables these boondoggles. Then they will do a show about the next one the same way. How they did it with planes too. The only exception is when they can stoke public outrage over a really big price tag. Like the B2.

@kolinmartz

3 жыл бұрын

Because they were good on paper and performed really well when they were new.

@wesleyworley8982

3 жыл бұрын

@@kolinmartz No, they never performed well. In fact, they're probably more reliable now than they've ever been, but still absolutely useless.

@kolinmartz

3 жыл бұрын

@@wesleyworley8982 I’m talking about basic shit. Before there were any wear and tear.

@wesleyworley8982

3 жыл бұрын

@@kolinmartz So am I, and unlike Discovery Channel, I saw every report of break-downs, test failure, and inspection failure as they came in to my command. I spent years tracking the maintenance, readiness, and training of these ships.

Wait, you're tellin' me that the littoral combat ships are not LITERAL COMBAT SHIPS?!

@phiksit

3 жыл бұрын

The hulls were only built to commercial standards... not military.

@a_Minion_of_Soros

3 жыл бұрын

@@phiksit Do you not understand the concept of a joke?

@someguy7805

3 жыл бұрын

Underrated comment.

The LCS class of ship was a non-starter. There was never a specific mission in mind when they were created, instead they looked to make them fill a gap that doesn't exist. They were supposed to be modular so that a quick (2-3 month) re-fit could change their mission from patrol to ship-to-ship combat. None of which ever worked out.

I'll buy all of them for 2 grand

Yup, they're trash ships that were poorly thought out. More money into the pockets of greedy defense contractors.

@IrishAmerican17

3 жыл бұрын

Eisenhower and Kennedy both tried to warn the American public about the dangers of “military-industrial complex”.

@omegaRST

3 жыл бұрын

@@craigsandifer1573 *sigh* americans

@davidanalyst671

3 жыл бұрын

@@IrishAmerican17 the government of the USA gives more money in handouts than military.

@davidanalyst671

3 жыл бұрын

Everything wrong with these boats can be traced back to General Dynamics, the company that made these. They charged too much, so they cut the order back to 3ish. Then they melted in the water, GD. Then the gears stripped, thanks to GD.

Q - What's an LCS ? A - A hole in the water for the Navy to throw money into.

@blackrabbit212

3 жыл бұрын

Yes, but it's your money.

@topsmug3409

3 жыл бұрын

I’ll have you know that my father worked 3 jobs so I could go to collage and have more money to throw into the money hole!

@gregwallace9314

3 жыл бұрын

Add the Zumwalt class, several misc. million dollar foul ups. The additional ships for a 350 ship navy is getting further into the future.

Reminds me of the USS Monitor, the famous armored Civil War ship. A brilliant design, it nonetheless had needed naval attention to details. It was absolutely full of niggling or more major defects and this contributed, sadly, to its foundering off Cape Hatteras, NC while being towed to Charleston, SC.

Since Russia and China come out with hypersonic missiles US just don't retire the entire fleet to avoid mass panic.

When I first saw them in San Diego when I was in the Navy, retired in ‘14, I thought those LCS’s were POS’s then and a waste of tax payer dollars, this just solidifies my thoughts.

@johnlongstreth1525

3 жыл бұрын

I retired in '04, (congrats on yours) and work for NAVSEA. I never understood the big picture purpose of the LCS. I was always a blue water navy sailor (submariner to be exact) and from what I see they were a very limited platform at best.

@lucuix9901

3 жыл бұрын

sure you did.

@shinobi2119

3 жыл бұрын

Go China!!!!

@johnlongstreth1525

3 жыл бұрын

@@shinobi2119 There will be no freedom under the Chinese for anyone. You can have patriotic fervor but at least realize you will forever need to submit to Beijing once the CCP vision is in effect.

@shinobi2119

3 жыл бұрын

@@johnlongstreth1525 You don't have freedom of speech either. You only think you do. Try organising an anti-lockdown protest; try talking about interracial rape statistics; try talking about racial IQ differences.

The should just hand them over to the Coast Guard.

@abdiganiaden

3 жыл бұрын

too expensive and not nimble enough

@TheWizardGamez

3 жыл бұрын

@@abdiganiaden NOT NIMBLE ENOUGH, well looks like our tax dollars were just wasted,

@CRAZYHORSE19682003

3 жыл бұрын

@@abdiganiaden They are far more nimble than the next generation cutter.

@oculosprudentium8486

3 жыл бұрын

I really don't think it could even safely endure any of the hazards and challenges that the Coast Guard faces daily. Sad to say, that the whole point of the program was to add many small ships as fast as possible to show any increase in numbers. See my earlier posts.

@CRAZYHORSE19682003

3 жыл бұрын

@@oculosprudentium8486 What was supposed to make the LCS's revolutionary was the interchangeable mission packages. Anti Surface, Anti Submarine, and Anti Mine. To my knowledge not one of those mission packages has ever been fielded due to technical issues. If I was the navy I would remove almost all the electronics from the ship, strip them of all aviation facilities and turn that massive flight deck into VLS cells and turn the LCS into an arsenal ship. Their only job is to sail with a battle group and serve as a floating magazine for Arleigh Burke class destroyers. With the right data link the Burkes could fire and guide the missiles. You could fit 120 missiles easy maybe even more. A quick and cheap way to increase firepower for a battlegroup.

Right. Heard about this. The idea was that you could use stored electrical energy to shoot bullets with. High energy pulse lasers came along (without sounding too much like Star Trek) and were easier to work with, a lot cheaper (apparently), and these laser devices could be made in smaller more land based mobile forms. ... multiple birds with the same rock.

That’s handy. I’m in the market for a nearly new decommissioned alooominum trimaran warship.

@68404

3 жыл бұрын

You misspelt alooominum. It's actually spelt alooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooominum

A poorly designed, jack-of-all-trades/master of none, underequipped, overpriced, and an overall malfunctioning boondoggle of a ship? - Canadian Navy: We'll take 50

@declankell597

3 жыл бұрын

were you talking about the ships or the f35 lightning I couldnt tell

@AirShark95

3 жыл бұрын

@@declankell597 At least the F-35 is actually maturing into a very capable jet. It has had the same growing pains every other fighter jet has gone through. Even the legendary F-14 and F-15 were at one time called overpriced, unreliable and overrated jets. Look at them now. To compare the LCS to the F-35 is a disgrace to the F-35, and that is saying a lot.

@jimmym3352

3 жыл бұрын

@@AirShark95 Agreed, The F35 can perform well. Their computer systems in identifying and targeting is a huge step up from previous platforms. This piece of junk has a huge flaw in the gearing systems, and that's something that cannot be easily fixed. I don't know exactly how their gearing systems worked, but I served as a machinist mate (Engineering Laboratory technician 3386 NEC), and I just know steam plant reduction gears are designed to last the life of the ship. They aren't something that can be replaced. I'm sure these aren't nearly as big as reduction gears, but just from the description, it does sound complex.

@cubeeism

3 жыл бұрын

F-35

@declankell597

3 жыл бұрын

@@AirShark95 Hold on still cant fire my main gun in combat ... waiting on a software upgrade....

It is exactly as I thought. LCS program has always been troubled and sailors generally avoid orders to them.

when building ships like this, at the expense they cost, there should be a requirement as part of the lifespan plan of the ship, that it must have a well defined secondary role that can be served that will extend its lifespan instead of just wholesale retirement.

When you put it like that, i see why they decommissioned. Hope they got "Better versions" still active

Could have built submarines with that investment ... which is the only game in town. There are only two types of ship: 1. Submarines 2. Targets

@benjaminkopecky4689

3 жыл бұрын

Heli-carrier is probably in the works somewhere.

@sshep86

3 жыл бұрын

What about anti-submarine Frigates?

@beerustheblack2846

3 жыл бұрын

Laughs in p8 Poseidon

@Joshua_N-A

3 жыл бұрын

ASROC ftw

@johnlongstreth1525

3 жыл бұрын

@@sshep86 Submariner here... Frigates were never an issue for any of my 5 boats.

thats a shame, I really liked the look

@Somerando8282

3 жыл бұрын

Many issues to it tho.

@UnitedPebbles

3 жыл бұрын

Probably destealth technology thanks to S Africa advanced radar breakthru??

@johnlavery3433

3 жыл бұрын

How, they were both ugly as sin

@CaptainM792

3 жыл бұрын

and the Independence Class appeared in one of the Cars movies

@seavibesz689

3 жыл бұрын

@@johnlavery3433 this is my opinion

Reminds me a lot of the B47. Tested a lot of new concepts at the time for the combination of layout, propulsion, wing loading, payload, range, and so on. But it ultimately was flawed in many respects, and lessons learned brought to bear more fully with the B52 paid off as the tech and research matured. The LTS can serve a similar place in history as both a relative failure and important stepping stone IF the right lessons are learned for future applications. I'm not entirely confident that will be the case but we shall see.

When you got a lemon. Get rid of it. But you should also get rid of those involved in procuring a lemon.

They should have never been built. They should've built a new class of frigate to replace the Perry Class.

@J_Caban

3 жыл бұрын

They ended up doing that anyways smh

@canadiandrumer

3 жыл бұрын

@@J_Caban and the zumwalt is another example of how much money the navy can spend for very little return on investment

@J_Caban

3 жыл бұрын

@service@cal1.net that’s just dumb relax. They should have done the new frigate program from the start though instead of messing around with the zumwalt to begin with

@1chish

3 жыл бұрын

And when they did come to that conclusion they excluded the worlds most advanced AWS frigate the UK's Type26 - 32 of which have been ordered by Canada, the UK and Australia. 3 of the '5 Eyes' intelligence and security group (with the USA and New Zealand). What did they buy? Oh its a 13 year old Italian / French Frigate.

@J_Caban

3 жыл бұрын

@@1chish I think the italian frigate will be fine, it'll be upgraded and it'll be more useful than the fucking zumwalt thats for sure. I am just glad they at least went with a frigate that is already in service and isnt going to need 20 yrs of R&D

Back in the day we used to have to use a plastic like filament to separate the dissimilar metals of say a 42 degree gearbox, and the mounts on the skin of a helicopter, to keep the dissimilar metals from causing corrosion for old cobras and hueys that had seen action in Nam, and were over 20 years old at the time.

@joeguy5989

2 жыл бұрын

@@Qballpinstriping Nice detail. Thanks. Staying on top of corrosion control was a really big deal, and flightline, metal shop, and corrosion control did a great job of preventative maintenance on all the birds. I rarely remember even seeing any corrosion other than pictures of what corrosion looked like.

@joeguy5989

2 жыл бұрын

@@Qballpinstriping I know I am forgetting a lot, but if you can remember (and just out of curiosity) which model was it?. I know the ones from MAG 39 were maintained so well, that I never saw anything as bad as this. I remember Bush SR. had flown (Piloted a TOW Cobra) with HMA 169 (mow HMLA 169). back in the day. I wonder if the bird you had worked on was an older model that, perhaps had a hard landing, and was sitting for awhile.

@joeguy5989

2 жыл бұрын

@@Qballpinstriping That's why they use Halon bottles, which put out fires that start. The Helicopters I worked on had Magnesium skins as well.

If you want a B-52 longevity, you better start using some Curtis Lemay thinking when it comes to design.

People act like naval superpowers have never built a 50 ton anchor before.

"We didn't get to kill anyone with them, and they were testbeds to see how flawed they really were." Yeah, that's how you get a bigger budget next year.

My ship was returning from deployment and we saw the Freedom in port in singapore in 2013. we heard they broke down *again* but had no idea what their issues were. the LCS' were always having issues. shame, cuz the concept of a modular ship that can swap out mission modules is pretty neat, and the hull designs were pretty cool.

That view from shore at 4.05

lol i was on the detroit when it broke down last november..... was stuck in port in Panama for over a month just sitting there