- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Trump says USS Lincoln’s Extended Deployment “Not Nearly Long Enough”
Posted on 8/21/26 at 6:00 pm to Saint Alfonzo
Posted on 8/21/26 at 6:00 pm to Saint Alfonzo
quote:
Maintenance on systems and aircraft doesn't stop while deployed.
No fricking shite.
After a certain point, do airframe and other critical component maintenance items not exhaust what backup stores/on-ship capabilities have available?
The issue here was that we couldn’t just constantly resupply Lincoln with unrep. That’s a target. You can’t bring everything from shore by helicopter or osprey/COBD.
Yes, everything is stressed to its max at that level for that long with limited resupply. It’s honestly insane that so many seem to want to argue otherwise for no reason other than the media whining about crew accommodations—meaning Trump people apparently must reflexively say there’s nothing at all wrong and everything is perfectly fine.
Why can’t everyone just acknowledge simple reality that a carrier needs to be rotated out after 9 months on station in combat conditions? Why is that controversial? It has never been before in the history of the US navy.
This post was edited on 8/21/26 at 6:04 pm
1
Posted on 8/21/26 at 6:03 pm to RollingwiththeTide
quote:
Subs wasn’t meant for this old boy.
Me either my man. I got mad respect for those who serve on subs, but that ain't for this guy.
Posted on 8/21/26 at 6:05 pm to Tvilletiger
quote:
It’s an aircraft carrier. It’s like a base on water. Is there not a simple way to have sailors rotate in and out and never move the boat? Seems like that could happen with the right logistics of course. Have them constantly rotating every few months?
Holy shite. I take back my comment to the other poster about the most ignorant comment I’ve ever seen.
It wasn’t you, RFK, it was this guy and this comment
Posted on 8/21/26 at 6:07 pm to OchoDedos
I heard the Lincoln is being replaced by the George Washington. Imagine that. The ship named after the man who sent the Brits packing is in the theater where the Brits influence was recently destroyed.
Symbolism. Iran said they would pay for the assassination of POTUS Trump yet POTUS Trump had a CVN group in theater named after a POTUS who was assassinated.
That's what I voted for.
Symbolism. Iran said they would pay for the assassination of POTUS Trump yet POTUS Trump had a CVN group in theater named after a POTUS who was assassinated.
That's what I voted for.
Posted on 8/21/26 at 6:08 pm to Timeoday
quote:
heard the Lincoln is being replaced by the George Washington. Imagine that. The ship named after the man who sent the Brits packing is in the theater where the Brits influence was recently destroyed. Symbolism. Iran said they would pay for the assassination of POTUS Trump yet POTUS Trump had a CVN group in theater named after a POTUS who was assassinated. That's what I voted for.
Sigh. Troll effort was too weak. If you want to keep up the charade of being unreasonable, you must try harder than this
Posted on 8/21/26 at 6:53 pm to Indefatigable
Well dude freaking answer? Why can we not shift the crew in and out? Obviously not when there is risk of flights in and out being shot down. Legit question here
Posted on 8/21/26 at 7:10 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
I’m not wrong here. Trump is. But he also doesn’t know anything about it and just says things he hears from random people. He is wrong, the navy thinks he’s wrong, the builders think he’s wrong, Congress thinks he’s wrong.
There is no benefit to steam over EMALS. Not with our ships power systems and configurations. None at all.
Imagine resetting designs for a ship that’s about to be built, and compounding construction delays by years because you want to go back to old technology for no demonstrable reason
This was a real head scratcher. I waited for a few days for some rationale to be cited...but none came forward.
What's your guess for the reason? Even if someone DID get in Trump’s ear, I still can't imagine a justification.
Posted on 8/21/26 at 7:23 pm to RFK
Sorry RFK, this shows how soft the youth of today are. They aren’t in the same league as our WW1 and WWII soldiers. Not even close! It’s an embarrassment. If this story is true, they wouldn’t last a week under the conditions the sailors and Marines faced in those wars. No AC, no tv, no Cell phones, just bad arse soldiers.
Posted on 8/21/26 at 7:58 pm to Tvilletiger
quote:
Well dude freaking answer? Why can we not shift the crew in and out? Obviously not when there is risk of flights in and out being shot down. Legit question here
Not without docking, no. At least in any way that’s feasible in a combat area. There’s 4-5k people aboard, and the largest craft that can land on a carrier with any range holds like 40 guys max. And that assumes you have a fully trained carrier crew just hanging around ready.
Besides, the main point I’ve made a few times ITT already is that the mechanical and logistical fatigue is a bigger concern anyway. A brand new crew wouldn’t be able to apparate Harry Potter style onto this carrier and just continue indefinitely. Even if the ship were invincible, there’s 90 aircraft aboard that are eventually going to need something more serious or voluminous than can be supplied infinitely at sea.
This post was edited on 8/21/26 at 8:00 pm
Posted on 8/21/26 at 8:03 pm to IvoryBillMatt
quote:
What's your guess for the reason? Even if someone DID get in Trump’s ear, I still can't imagine a justification.
Honestly my best guess would be that he heard someone ranting about why the Ford was laid up for so long and latched on to her well-known cat problems. Those problems, of course, having been fixed for JFK and beyond.
Posted on 8/21/26 at 8:50 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
Those problems, of course, having been fixed for JFK and beyond.
Much obliged. Thanks for sharing your knowledge.
Posted on 8/21/26 at 9:14 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
No fricking shite.
Don't get snappy with me, bitch, relax.
quote:
After a certain point, do airframe and other critical component maintenance items not exhaust what backup stores/on-ship capabilities have available?
Such as? What critical components do you think aircraft maintenance runs out of? I've never seen it. Planes get pigged out to make sure other jets stay in the air. There's always at least one hangar queen that donates parts.
quote:
The issue here was that we couldn’t just constantly resupply Lincoln with unrep. That’s a target. You can’t bring everything from shore by helicopter or osprey/COBD.
What can't they bring by supply ship or COD?
quote:
Yes, everything is stressed to its max at that level for that long with limited resupply. It’s honestly insane that so many seem to want to argue otherwise for no reason other than the media whining about crew accommodations—meaning Trump people apparently must reflexively say there’s nothing at all wrong and everything is perfectly fine.
This is your overactive imagination. Everything isn't stressed to the max. Resupply isn't limited. Why is the media crying about crew accommodations, conditions, whatever? It's a made-up narrative done for political reasons. It actually does a disservice to Navy sailors, painting them in an unfavorable light.
quote:
Why can’t everyone just acknowledge simple reality that a carrier needs to be rotated out after 9 months on station in combat conditions? Why is that controversial? It has never been before in the history of the US navy.
Because that isn't reality. That ship is more than capable of staying on station, if need be, for longer than nine months.
Page 6 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News