Sailors on USS Lincoln outside Iran are exhausted and suffering from poor morale on ship, families warn

Hawkeye10 said:
The state of the NAVY certainly is not.
Click to expand...
The biggest changes I've seen in manning and such are two:

The first happened with Obama. This was the reserve went from being an organization based on a total mobilization for a major war to one being a 'temp service.'

Prior to Obama, the reserve component was filled with prior active duty and professionals who saw it as doing part-time service in anticipation of getting a decent retirement out of their service eventually. With the Obama change, the reserves became more of a temp service. The professionals and skilled prior active-duty types retired as soon as they could where they were near retirement years or simply quit because the reserves now jeopardized their civilian jobs.

This happened because the reserves were now seen as a cheap way to get temporary workers to fill in for certain positions. On the enlisted side, these were typically low-skill jobs requiring only limited training. On the professional / officer side, call ups were to make up for shortages of active-duty personnel on a temporary basis. The stated expectation was you'd be called up for six months to a year every other year.

The Obama administration also introduced allowing persons with no prior service, or being the correct DEI mix, to join the reserves. This meant the junior enlisted ranks filled up with single moms, minimum wage worker bees of no particular talent, and all the previous skilled trades and professionals quit or retired. On the officer side, you'd get ones that would cycle in for a short time to get retirement points but the professionals like lawyers, doctors, nurses, and engineers, all retired or quit.

That has had a disastrous effect on the active-duty side as there are not skilled professionals in the reserves to back up the active-duty side of things.

The other shift, which occurred about the same time was maintenance by sailors was minimized. Instead of the ship's crew doing maintenance they were supposed to now be focused on "core skill areas" like operating their assigned equipment. Maintenance would be handled in port by civilians or by technicians sent out to the ship as needed.

This too has been a disaster. Stuff on a ship breaks down. That is normal. A carrier battle group should be able to fix something like 90% of the stuff that does break. But they can't because they lack the skilled personnel and parts to do it. Instead, everything is done half assed and cobbled together to keep the ship running.

The only service that tried damn hard to avoid that was submarines.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
The biggest changes I've seen in manning and such are two:

The first happened with Obama. This was the reserve went from being an organization based on a total mobilization for a major war to one being a 'temp service.'

Prior to Obama, the reserve component was filled with prior active duty and professionals who saw it as doing part-time service in anticipation of getting a decent retirement out of their service eventually. With the Obama change, the reserves became more of a temp service. The professionals and skilled prior active-duty types retired as soon as they could where they were near retirement years or simply quit because the reserves now jeopardized their civilian jobs.

This happened because the reserves were now seen as a cheap way to get temporary workers to fill in for certain positions. On the enlisted side, these were typically low-skill jobs requiring only limited training. On the professional / officer side, call ups were to make up for shortages of active-duty personnel on a temporary basis. The stated expectation was you'd be called up for six months to a year every other year.

The Obama administration also introduced allowing persons with no prior service, or being the correct DEI mix, to join the reserves. This meant the junior enlisted ranks filled up with single moms, minimum wage worker bees of no particular talent, and all the previous skilled trades and professionals quit or retired. On the officer side, you'd get ones that would cycle in for a short time to get retirement points but the professionals like lawyers, doctors, nurses, and engineers, all retired or quit.

That has had a disastrous effect on the active-duty side as there are not skilled professionals in the reserves to back up the active-duty side of things.

The other shift, which occurred about the same time was maintenance by sailors was minimized. Instead of the ship's crew doing maintenance they were supposed to now be focused on "core skill areas" like operating their assigned equipment. Maintenance would be handled in port by civilians or by technicians sent out to the ship as needed.

This too has been a disaster. Stuff on a ship breaks down. That is normal. A carrier battle group should be able to fix something like 90% of the stuff that does break. But they can't because they lack the skilled personnel and parts to do it. Instead, everything is done half assed and cobbled together to keep the ship running.

The only service that tried damn hard to avoid that was submarines.
Click to expand...
I am not reading all this....You have not proved to be worth...You dont keep up with reality.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
I am not reading all this....You have not proved to be worth...You dont keep up with reality.
Click to expand...
the-attention-span-of-a-goldfish-1200x630-cropped.jpg
 
T. A. Gardner said:
The biggest changes I've seen in manning and such are two:

The first happened with Obama. This was the reserve went from being an organization based on a total mobilization for a major war to one being a 'temp service.'

Prior to Obama, the reserve component was filled with prior active duty and professionals who saw it as doing part-time service in anticipation of getting a decent retirement out of their service eventually. With the Obama change, the reserves became more of a temp service. The professionals and skilled prior active-duty types retired as soon as they could where they were near retirement years or simply quit because the reserves now jeopardized their civilian jobs.

This happened because the reserves were now seen as a cheap way to get temporary workers to fill in for certain positions. On the enlisted side, these were typically low-skill jobs requiring only limited training. On the professional / officer side, call ups were to make up for shortages of active-duty personnel on a temporary basis. The stated expectation was you'd be called up for six months to a year every other year.

The Obama administration also introduced allowing persons with no prior service, or being the correct DEI mix, to join the reserves. This meant the junior enlisted ranks filled up with single moms, minimum wage worker bees of no particular talent, and all the previous skilled trades and professionals quit or retired. On the officer side, you'd get ones that would cycle in for a short time to get retirement points but the professionals like lawyers, doctors, nurses, and engineers, all retired or quit.

That has had a disastrous effect on the active-duty side as there are not skilled professionals in the reserves to back up the active-duty side of things.

The other shift, which occurred about the same time was maintenance by sailors was minimized. Instead of the ship's crew doing maintenance they were supposed to now be focused on "core skill areas" like operating their assigned equipment. Maintenance would be handled in port by civilians or by technicians sent out to the ship as needed.

This too has been a disaster. Stuff on a ship breaks down. That is normal. A carrier battle group should be able to fix something like 90% of the stuff that does break. But they can't because they lack the skilled personnel and parts to do it. Instead, everything is done half assed and cobbled together to keep the ship running.

The only service that tried damn hard to avoid that was submarines.
Click to expand...

Well said.

Also to be noted is that the Obama changes to the reserves provided for non-citizens to be used as reservists. Essentially Obama packed the reserves with illegals.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
The group that really suffers from prolonged sea periods on a carrier are the flight deck crew. The air wing and flight deck crew are almost entirely NOT part of the ship's company. They are a tenant command aboard to operate and maintain the aircraft. In port, they go ashore with their squadrons for the most part leaving most of the 03 deck (right below the flight deck) berthing empty.

The ship's company on the other hand are onboard regardless. The difference is, the ship's company has assigned jobs and get regular hours and watch rotation so being at sea isn't much different from being in port for them.

For the flight deck crew and squadrons, they have to work from call to flight quarters until that is secured each day. That could be 16 to 20 hours every day 7 days a week. The only break they might get is during an unrep period. Even then, a lot of the junior enlisted might be called on to handle stores so they don't get a break.

If you are junior, and you have one of the really shitty flight deck jobs like being a brown or purple shirt, you really just get fucked over for weeks at a time.
Click to expand...
I joined the Navy in the late 70's and it was announced then that women could serve aboard AC. I took a tour of the USS Constitution while stationed in Oahu, Ha. back then and I knew, It wasn't for me should it become a mandate serving on that big of a vessel. Closticphobia, breathing in tight quarters, I literally had panic attacks. Props to those that serve on these floating cities.
 
Guno צְבִי said:
During Nam' deployments were 9 months aboard ship, I remember powered eggs as fresh ran out, that said every few months we went off station to subic bay in the philippines for supplies and port call. Not a lot of room on a destroyer, no excuse for low provisions on a carrier or to be relieved of duty in the short term
Click to expand...
Thank you for your service.

There were deployments of aircraft carriers nearly as long as the current record during Vietnam, but they were different. The aircraft carriers were deployed just over the horizon from the Philippines. Supplies could be easily ferried to them, and sailors were ferried off the ship for leaves or to be discharged from the Navy.

Now, we are talking about 9 months without any leave, no easy access to supplies, and extending active service until the deployment ends... And Hegseth wants to have a two year deployment?

That would be two years without sailors having contact with their families, or even a day off. That would mean some sailors would have their service extended by a year and a half.

It would break sailors, and we are not even talking about what it would do to the equipment.
 
Guno צְבִי said:
During Nam' deployments were 9 months aboard ship, I remember powered eggs as fresh ran out, that said every few months we went off station to subic bay in the philippines for supplies and port call. Not a lot of room on a destroyer, no excuse for low provisions on a carrier or to be relieved of duty in the short term
Click to expand...
What real vet blog did you steal that from?
 
Diogenes said:
What service? Because he said he served?
Click to expand...
Lefties are indeed gullible. Liberals could give a flying fuck about anyone in the military. They must know their parties DSA stance on the military. And I guess Guno, who supposedly "served" in Vietnam has conveniently forgotten who was spitting on military when they came home......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top