“Navy considers major aircraft carrier revamp to better suit Trump’s aesthetic”

A

archives

Verified User

Trump wants to make major structural changes because he doesn’t like the looks of the modern Navy carriers, he wants a more less efficient WWII looking vessel

You can’t make this up, this is the President of the country, one stuck in a war he started and he can’t get out of, focused on the looks of Navy vessels

What’s left to say?
 
archives said:
Not a lie, Trump said it, and it is not hating Trump, rather pointing out his stupidity and MAGAs gullibility, comical
Click to expand...

Of course it's a lie. Everything you post is a lie to smear the object of your insanity.

The myriad failures in EMALS systems have left Ford level carriers impotent for months on end as engineers scramble to debug the software and networking failures. Despite the lie in the headline of the sHill article, the issue is purely the catapult launch system used. Steam powered catapults are 99.9% reliable. EMALS has a track record of about 62% reliability.

Yes, a lot of people make a lot of money selling the new systems, but for craft we depend on for defense, it's a bust.

www.bgr.com

Which Aircraft Carrier Catapult Is More Effective: Steam Or Electric? - BGR

Electromagnetic aircraft catapults are superior to steam on paper, but the reliability issues that plague them could be more trouble that they're worth.
www.bgr.com www.bgr.com
 
T. A. Gardner said:
So, you admit you know shit about the Navy. Your honesty is refreshing.
Click to expand...
T. A. Gardner said:
So, you admit you know shit about the Navy. Your honesty is refreshing.
Click to expand...
And how precisely does “your Messiah wants to piss away billions because he doesn’t like the looks of existing ships, and this coming from a guy who knows shit about the Navy” imply I know nothing about the Navy?

And I don’t, don’t have to, as the “Hill” says Trump is doing this for aesthetic reasons, his aesthetic reasons, because Trump thinks the look of the WWII carrier looks better
 
archives said:
And how precisely does “your Messiah wants to piss away billions because he doesn’t like the looks of existing ships, imply I know nothing about the Navy?

And I don’t, don’t have to, as the “Hill” says Trump is doing this for aesthetic reasons, his aesthetic reasons, because Trump thinks the look of the WWII carrier looks better
Click to expand...
Buddha doesn't care about such things. That aside you stated: "and this coming from a guy who knows shit about the Navy” That is first person narrative if you ask me, which implies you are the "guy" who knows shit about the Navy. Maybe word things better next time. You left yourself open to sarcastic ridicule.

Trump, on the other hand, is a temporary thing. He's gone in a little over two years and somebody else will replace him. When he leaves office, the Left will totally forget about him, just like everybody else.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
It's more doable than swapping out EMALS catapults for steam ones.
Click to expand...
2 are built, 2 are being built....any such change of the 2 being built ranges from super expensive to impossible.....and that is almost certainly it.....the Empire is crumbling and even if it were not carriers are obsolete.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
2 are built, 2 are being built....any such change of the 2 being built ranges from super expensive to impossible.....and that is almost certainly it.....the Empire is crumbling and even if it were not carriers are obsolete.
Click to expand...
To swap EMALS out in a built carrier would be to scrap it and start over. Moving the island is doable, if expensive.
 
The claim was that building two carriers on one contract would save time and money.

It certainly has not worked out that way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top