Skip to comments.
Alert: 8 Sailors hurt onboard The U.S.S John F. Kennedy
ABC Radio News
| 04 Feb 2002
| trueblackman
Posted on 02/04/2002 10:35:12 AM PST by Trueblackman
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-92 next last
To: AFVetGal
Pinging you. :)
To: Barry Goldwater
Why?
42
posted on
02/04/2002 11:13:28 AM PST
by
aomagrat
To: Trueblackman
some sailors where hit by lines that snapped They are lucky if there were just minor injuries. Those lines could take off a limb.
To: Trueblackman
Did you happen to know any E2-c pilots on the JFK in the early 90's?
44
posted on
02/04/2002 11:16:36 AM PST
by
Triple
To: cva66snipe
Thanks, my time aboard her was (slightly) before that (end '60s). She was in good shape then, and served as Flag 7th Fleet.
Greg
45
posted on
02/04/2002 11:16:47 AM PST
by
gwmoore
To: Barry Goldwater
So the German Navy can march in the shade.
To: Trueblackman
I was on the Kennedy in the early 70's. We lost a Phoenix missile, numerous F-14s, helicopters, and other planes, ran into the Belknap, lost an anchor w/chain, lost rudder numerous times during UNREP, and usually 4-6 sailors each cruise.
47
posted on
02/04/2002 11:20:11 AM PST
by
stuartcr
To: Trueblackman
That is what I heard too, that the U.S.S JFK was in DESPERATE need of repair. It was during the RAPIST's term that no funding was allocated for the ship. OH, BUT, bubba did have LOTS OF MOOLA galloping across the GLOBE with l00's of people as his guests compliments of the TAXPAYERS! GOSH, the more I think about it the more it PISSES ME OFF. Why aren't the pubbies shouting this from the roof tops!
To: Trueblackman
My prayers for these sailors.
I was a Gunners Mate on my Destroyer and know 1st hand the dangers of re-fueling at sea.
I stood bridge watches and many a watch at the helm.
I hope that the Navy Brass responsible for this don't skate like the Commander of the USS Greenville did.
To: Trueblackman
My prayers for these sailors.
I was a Gunners Mate on my Destroyer and know 1st hand the dangers of re-fueling at sea.
I stood bridge watches and many a watch at the helm.
I hope that the Navy Brass responsible for this don't skate like the Commander of the USS Greenville did.
To: semaj
You are mistaken. We used to have great capability and expertise to refuel at sea. Since 1990 the we have lost most of are oilers. Thats why the USS Cole had to go into port to refuel.
I served aboard the USS Caloosahatchee from 1979 to 1983 I've done hundreds of unreps. We never lost a man, but about 1980 we tried to run over the USS America, we had lost steering. We ended up lightly hitting each other.
About 1975 a destoyer lost steering and turned in front of us, we almost cut in in half and decommisioned it. This stuff happens, but when budgets are cut, it's more likely to happen.
51
posted on
02/04/2002 11:27:47 AM PST
by
ao98
To: stuartcr
I was on the Kennedy in the early 70's. We lost a Phoenix missile, numerous F-14s, helicopters, and other planes, ran into the Belknap, lost an anchor w/chain, lost rudder numerous times during UNREP, and usually 4-6 sailors each cruise. That's the harsh reality of life on a carrier. We lost about 5 A-6's our self on one cruise. The departed were taken to the aft walk in cooler till their remains were flown off. We even had a squid ran over by F-14's doing respots.
To: Trueblackman
The Kennedy did have a yard period back in the late 90's, but....the kicker might be the manning issues when the JFK was kept on the line as a deploying carrier. At the time a large portion of her crew was made up by TAR reservists who weren't too happy about making a deployment. Morale on that boat has been an issue ever since. As an aside..the carrier in Japan seems to get great service from the yards out there. The Japanese government funds a fair amount of the work themselves, and their yardbirds do a great job.
To: Mike Fieschko
I thought the JFK was in Mayport for refit.Me too. I thought they were squaking about how bad it is and they take it out for a spin?
To: Endeavor
No, she's conventional. She's just run down and overworked.
To: Trueblackman
What is more important ----- making the Navy PC or maintaining our ships? Thank God we now have a real commander in chief instead of the corrupt lip-biting rapist.
To: Trueblackman
Unfortunately the JFK lends credence to the notion of "jinxed ships" in the Navy. The carrier has had trouble throughout her history. Reportedly, morale is in the toilet ever since the carrier last went into the yards for overhaul--then, only chiefs and officers were supposedly allowed liberty after working hours to go home to wives and children and "JFK" became the acronymn for "Just For Khakis"! In the 70s the ship had two serious scraping incidents with refueling oilers; in the 80s she was once run aground in Norfolk. She was also was one of the first ships to bring aboard women, and paid a big price for it as she was on two occasions barely able to get underway due to a skyrocketing pregnancy rate. She is, IMHO, living up to its namesake as it tries to ply trouble waters: Sexual misconduct aboard, monumental mistakes, political miscues, etc. I expect the ship to be assassinated sometime in the future.
57
posted on
02/04/2002 11:35:15 AM PST
by
meandog
To: Non-Sequitur
the continuous commitments that the government keeps getting into meant that she had to stay an active carrier, regardless of how broken down she was.And she's our only conventionally-powered carrier, so when there's Pacific problems she's our only carrier who can put into port in Japan.
Sucks, doesn't it? Looks like somebody in the Klink Admin would have figured that out and scheduled her for the three year refit.
We need Subic Bay back, bad.
58
posted on
02/04/2002 11:41:35 AM PST
by
WarEagle
To: cva66snipe
Thanks for the heads-up. During her recent INSURV inspection, the Kennedy was unable to conduct a full-power steering test, since one of the ship's propeller shafts was inoperable and she was incapable of sustained speeds of more than 19.5 knots.
59
posted on
02/04/2002 11:42:04 AM PST
by
Al B.
To: ao98
"This stuff happens, but when budgets are cut, it's more likely to happen."
I am in training at the local Coast Guard Base as part of the Coast Guard Auxiliary.
Much of the equipment on the boats is old and needs replacement but they do not have the budget for it.
In March 2001 Congress and the President cut the Coast Guard budget by 10%.
However last week the President was at a Coast Guard Station on the East Coast
and said he would get them more money for equipment AND pay raises.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-92 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson