Navy to scrap $277 million ship to avoid scraping reef

[Desperado]

A United States minesweeper ship that crashed into a coral reef due to inaccurate Navy maps will have to be cut into small pieces and removed in order to prevent harming the ocean’s ecosystem, according to the Navy and other reports.

Navy cuts up $277M minesweeper | Washington Free Beacon

Just when you thought the military could not find any new ways to waste your tax dollar.
Somebody should tell them that reefs do recover, and the damage to the reef would be confined minimal area. There is no more logic or common sense in the government.

 

[Borillar]

I'm just amazed that a freaking minesweeper costs over a quarter Billion dollars. These aren't especially high tech ships here. These defense contractors must be gouging the hell out of the government.

 

[hjmick]

My favorite line:

"It remains unclear how much the cleanup operation will cost U.S. taxpayers."

Well, we know it will cost us at least $277 mil...

 

[Mr Natural]

Inaccurate Navy maps?

There's no excuse for that.

 

[Borillar]

Inaccurate Navy maps?

There's no excuse for that.

Well, you can bet the skipper and OOD's careers are done. That or they will be manning a radar tower in the Arctic.

 

[Oldguy]

In the first place, this is a duplicate thread. You oughta learn how to use the search function:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/milit...d-on-philippine-reef-taking-in-water-bbc.html

In the second place, the reef is a Filipino National Park and a UNESCO World Heritage Site. We have treaty obligations to both the Philippines and the UN which legally cannot be ignored. Moreover, the Philippines is a valuable ally in the war against Muslim extremism and we have supported each other since before 2001.

Thirdly, the prow was the only part of the vessel originally on the reef, but wave action has since driven the entire ship onto the reef and it's plywood hull is ripped open.

Fourthly, and perhaps most damagingly, the Guardian was warned by radio that it was entering a restricted area and the ship responded "bring complaint to the US embassy."

As for the dig at Obama in the link and by certain Nutter's here? Totally predictable, totally meaningless and totally just another familiar, insipid, immaterial and irrelative Obama-bash. Often, y'all go to such ridiculous lengths to attach the President's name to any possible story that it would be downright humorous if not for the disturbing fact that you can vote.

Of course, y'all are "outraged" that the ship must be dismantled, no matter the circumstances, but consider what would be your response in this scenario: Another nation's military helicopter crash lands in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. It too is a protected park and a UNESCO World Heritage Site. We tell them, you'll have to dismantle it to prevent further damage to the park. And, THEY said, "Fuck you. We're gonna blast a path through the forest to our helicopter and haul it out intact."

One can only imagine what the Nutter's would say about that. It's basically the same thing, you know.

 

[Jarlaxle]

I would tell them, "Haul it out with a Chinook and a sling," actually.

 

[TruthSeeker56]

In the first place, this is a duplicate thread. You oughta learn how to use the search function:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/milit...d-on-philippine-reef-taking-in-water-bbc.html

In the second place, the reef is a Filipino National Park and a UNESCO World Heritage Site. We have treaty obligations to both the Philippines and the UN which legally cannot be ignored. Moreover, the Philippines is a valuable ally in the war against Muslim extremism and we have supported each other since before 2001.

Thirdly, the prow was the only part of the vessel originally on the reef, but wave action has since driven the entire ship onto the reef and it's plywood hull is ripped open.

Fourthly, and perhaps most damagingly, the Guardian was warned by radio that it was entering a restricted area and the ship responded "bring complaint to the US embassy."

As for the dig at Obama in the link and by certain Nutter's here? Totally predictable, totally meaningless and totally just another familiar, insipid, immaterial and irrelative Obama-bash. Often, y'all go to such ridiculous lengths to attach the President's name to any possible story that it would be downright humorous if not for the disturbing fact that you can vote.

Of course, y'all are "outraged" that the ship must be dismantled, no matter the circumstances, but consider what would be your response in this scenario: Another nation's military helicopter crash lands in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. It too is a protected park and a UNESCO World Heritage Site. We tell them, you'll have to dismantle it to prevent further damage to the park. And, THEY said, "Fuck you. We're gonna blast a path through the forest to our helicopter and haul it out intact."

One can only imagine what the Nutter's would say about that. It's basically the same thing, you know.

Of course, during Bush's eight years as President, you NEVER did any Bush-bashing, right?

 

[Oldguy]

In the first place, this is a duplicate thread. You oughta learn how to use the search function:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/milit...d-on-philippine-reef-taking-in-water-bbc.html

In the second place, the reef is a Filipino National Park and a UNESCO World Heritage Site. We have treaty obligations to both the Philippines and the UN which legally cannot be ignored. Moreover, the Philippines is a valuable ally in the war against Muslim extremism and we have supported each other since before 2001.

Thirdly, the prow was the only part of the vessel originally on the reef, but wave action has since driven the entire ship onto the reef and it's plywood hull is ripped open.

Fourthly, and perhaps most damagingly, the Guardian was warned by radio that it was entering a restricted area and the ship responded "bring complaint to the US embassy."

As for the dig at Obama in the link and by certain Nutter's here? Totally predictable, totally meaningless and totally just another familiar, insipid, immaterial and irrelative Obama-bash. Often, y'all go to such ridiculous lengths to attach the President's name to any possible story that it would be downright humorous if not for the disturbing fact that you can vote.

Of course, y'all are "outraged" that the ship must be dismantled, no matter the circumstances, but consider what would be your response in this scenario: Another nation's military helicopter crash lands in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. It too is a protected park and a UNESCO World Heritage Site. We tell them, you'll have to dismantle it to prevent further damage to the park. And, THEY said, "Fuck you. We're gonna blast a path through the forest to our helicopter and haul it out intact."

One can only imagine what the Nutter's would say about that. It's basically the same thing, you know.

Of course, during Bush's eight years as President, you NEVER did any Bush-bashing, right?

Sure I did. But, I didn't have to make up shit or create some kind of tenuous and flimsy connection to do it! He gave us plenty of LEGITIMATE opportunities!

Y'all are grasping at increasingly stupid straws.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Inaccurate Navy maps?

There's no excuse for that.

They want us to believe they have these giant paper maps they unroll and plot their course with. How long have they been using GPS now?

No one believes that, well except maybe OldGuy.

 

[depotoo]

My favorite line:

"It remains unclear how much the cleanup operation will cost U.S. taxpayers."

Well, we know it will cost us at least $277 mil...

what do you bet if they replace it, it will be more than double that price?

 

[Redfish]

I'm just amazed that a freaking minesweeper costs over a quarter Billion dollars. These aren't especially high tech ships here. These defense contractors must be gouging the hell out of the government.

having spent over 40 years building ships for the navy and coast guard, I can tell you that shipbuilders are lucky if they make 5-7% profit. the reason for the high cost is mostly the requirements put in the contracts by the government----for example, why do hammers and coffee pots need to be tested for EMP and nuclear blast?

A Navy destroyer takes around 5 years to build from keel laying to commissioning. It is a small city that can destroy submarines, surface ships, aircraft, and shore batteries. It has a useful life of 30-40 years. These are not just large fishing boats or cruise ships. They are state of the art military weapons.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Well I think I've found the cause of the accident.....a chick was driving.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Guardian_(MCM-5)

Look under History...

 

[rightwinger]

I'm just amazed that a freaking minesweeper costs over a quarter Billion dollars. These aren't especially high tech ships here. These defense contractors must be gouging the hell out of the government.

having spent over 40 years building ships for the navy and coast guard, I can tell you that shipbuilders are lucky if they make 5-7% profit. the reason for the high cost is mostly the requirements put in the contracts by the government----for example, why do hammers and coffee pots need to be tested for EMP and nuclear blast?

A Navy destroyer takes around 5 years to build from keel laying to commissioning. It is a small city that can destroy submarines, surface ships, aircraft, and shore batteries. It has a useful life of 30-40 years. These are not just large fishing boats or cruise ships. They are state of the art military weapons.

Hammers are not tested for for EMP or nuclear blasts

Coffee pots are not either. They may be tested for EMI if they are in areas with sensitive electronic equipment

 

[Jarlaxle]

I'm just amazed that a freaking minesweeper costs over a quarter Billion dollars. These aren't especially high tech ships here. These defense contractors must be gouging the hell out of the government.

having spent over 40 years building ships for the navy and coast guard, I can tell you that shipbuilders are lucky if they make 5-7% profit. the reason for the high cost is mostly the requirements put in the contracts by the government----for example, why do hammers and coffee pots need to be tested for EMP and nuclear blast?

A Navy destroyer takes around 5 years to build from keel laying to commissioning. It is a small city that can destroy submarines, surface ships, aircraft, and shore batteries. It has a useful life of 30-40 years. These are not just large fishing boats or cruise ships. They are state of the art military weapons.

And yet...an Essex-class CV could go from an empty slipway to a working carrier in a year! A light carrier could do it in nine.

 

[Borillar]

I'm just amazed that a freaking minesweeper costs over a quarter Billion dollars. These aren't especially high tech ships here. These defense contractors must be gouging the hell out of the government.

having spent over 40 years building ships for the navy and coast guard, I can tell you that shipbuilders are lucky if they make 5-7% profit. the reason for the high cost is mostly the requirements put in the contracts by the government----for example, why do hammers and coffee pots need to be tested for EMP and nuclear blast?

A Navy destroyer takes around 5 years to build from keel laying to commissioning. It is a small city that can destroy submarines, surface ships, aircraft, and shore batteries. It has a useful life of 30-40 years. These are not just large fishing boats or cruise ships. They are state of the art military weapons.

We are talking Minesweepers here though. Not a high tech Destroyer with the latest in propulsion, Aegis, VLS, etc. Heck, when I was in the Navy in the 70's, a Nimitz class carrier was only ~ 1 billion dollars. Have the ships gotten that much more complex, or is it that our money just isn't worth much any more?

 

[Rozman]

Well if the Libs get their way we aren't going to have to worry about our Navy.
there won't be too much of it left.