Something smells about the media story re: USS Fitzgerald

Collision?  A Navy Vessel with the latest in technology gets rammed in her gut by a container ship. Am I the only one thinking this sure doesn’t make a lot of sense. Apparently not since American Thinker  shares the view too.Here tis:

we have to consider the possibility of an asymmetric warfare attack designed to disable missile defense of a carrier strike group, as North Korea demonstrates the ability to make exactly such attacks on a multibillion dollar warship carrying thousands of sailors.

Under no circumstances should a US Navy vessel possibly be damaged by a container ship at sea. Multiple systems exist to prevent this. Even CNN is noticing how little we know about the catastrophe that took the lives of seven sailors and almost caused a powerful warship to founder.Is there any substance to this – that the ACX Crystal disabled protective systems and rammed the Fitzgerald at high speed aimed at critical facilities? (evident from the damage)

 

Brian Joondeph yesterday noted how the media have distorted what really happened, by reporting a “collision,” as if the ships randomly bumped each other in the fog or something. The truth is that the ACX Crystal, a ship with murky provenance, into the Fitzgerald with calamitous results:

[Vice Adm. Joseph P. Aucoin of the 7th fleet] described the damage as “extensive,” adding that there was a big puncture and gash below the waterline on one side of the ship. He also said three compartments were severely damaged.

“The ship is salvageable … [it] will require some significant repair,” Aucoin said. “You will see the USS Fitzgerald back … It will take months, hopefully under a year.”

Here is what a mother wrote to us at American Thinker:

My son is assigned to the USS Fitzgerald. I am unable to share his rate with you.

The information is short and not so sweet. The implications are disturbing.

The ship is registered in the Philippines. We do not know who the owner is. The container ship neither had its running lights or transponder on. That is an action taken willfully. Furthermore, for the container ship to strike with such accuracy is troublesome. Given what some have done with cars in Europe, what a feather in the cap it would be to sink a U.S. Navy warship. Think on that.

My son missed being washed out to sea by the blink of an eye. He was on his way to one of the berthing areas that was rammed.

Yes, language is important. “Rammed” is the perfect word.

Loving and Concerned Navy Mother

.

 

Kerry, Ash Carter asked Iran to help when Navy boats had trouble, letting them be captured

I had to add another post today. If this is true, unbelievable. Or is this the real truth:

Kerry and his Iranian in-law relatives. Could he be black mailed?

BREAKING VIDEO: Iran state TV footage of moment of arresting 2 US boats & personnel

Iran holds two US Navy boats in Persian Gulf.

This is both stunning and insane. Thankfully, the sailors now appear to be safe. But this basically means that Kerry and Carter put them in captivity, at the whim of Iran.

Navy: Lincoln Refueling Delayed because of funding, yet pays $16 bucks a gallon

During the hearing with Panetta last week, I was ready to jump out of my chair as I watched the ignorance regarding the statement by Panetta that he cancelled the deployment of the Navy Carrier USS Truman because of budget concerns, no doubt, because of the GOP. Wink Wink. Now we learn we cannot fuel the USS Lincoln. So the truth of the matter is they can’t find biofuel and the Navy has wasted so much money going green. Of course delaying the retrofit of the ship should put more pressure on the GOP so the plan goes. I was waiting, waiting waiting for someone to ask about this idiotic behavior. Better yet would have been to question the Charmian of the Armed Services. So here we go, first the back story.

Navy buys biofuel for $16 a gallon

This is going to help the Defense Department weather looming budget cuts, for sure. Teaming up with the Department of Agriculture (which has a cheery Rotary Club ring to it), the Navy has purchased 450,000 gallons of biofuel for about $16 a gallon, or about 4 times the price of its standard marine fuel, JP-5, which has been going for under $4 a gallon.The why and more at Hot Air 

U.S. Navy going Green

By 2020, the Navy must learn to get at least 50 percent of energy from alternative sources, and 50 percent of the military vessels will have to try hard to zero out- that is to spend no more energy than they can produce. In other words, the sailors themselves have expressed doubts as to how efficient the vessels will be after the replacement of traditional fuels with alternative ones

The U.S. Navy will delay the refueling of the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN-72) for an unknown period because of the uncertain fiscal environment due to the ongoing legislative struggle, the service told Congress in a Friday message obtained by USNI News.

Lincoln was scheduled to be moved to Huntington Ingalls Industries’ (HII) Newport News Shipyard later this month to begin the 4-year refueling and complex overhaul (RCOH) of the ship.

“This delay is due to uncertainty in the Fiscal Year 2013 appropriations bill, both in the timing and funding level available for the first full year of the contract,” the message said.
“CVN-72 will remain at Norfolk Naval Base where the ships force personnel will continue to conduct routine maintenance until sufficient funding is received for the initial execution of the RCOH.”

The move by the navy is the second this week involving funding for carriers. On Wednesday it announced it would delay the deployment of the USS Harry S. Truman (CVN-75) to the Middle East do to the ongoing budget strife bringing the total number of carriers in U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) to one until funding normalizes. Ful story USNI

Senate passes amendment allowing biofuel refinery construction

The sheer madness continues. While the U.S. sits on more energy than we know what to do with, a Senate amendment that would block the waste of this biofuel nonsense by the defense dept. goes down.  Madness. Now even Defense is going to throw our money out the window to cronies. You would think we don’t have a drop of oil, coal or natural gas.

The federal government aids the development of advanced biofuels with $510 million of funding through the Defense Production Act. The act, which includes an industry match, aims to reduce the military’s dependence on foreign oil by strengthening the domestic fuel industry. Sure sounds good.

Earlier I had posted U.S. Navy going Green:

Navy buys biofuel for $16 a gallon

This is going to help the Defense Department weather looming budget cuts, for sure. Teaming up with the Department of Agriculture (which has a cheery Rotary Club ring to it), the Navy has purchased 450,000 gallons of biofuel for about $16 a gallon, or about 4 times the price of its standard marine fuel, JP-5, which has been going for under $4 a gallon.The why and more at Hot Air. Corruption reigns supreme.

By 2020, the Navy must learn to get at least 50 percent of energy from alternative sources, and 50 percent of the military vessels will have to try hard to zero out- that is to spend no more energy than they can produce. In other words, the sailors themselves have expressed doubts as to how efficient the vessels will be after the replacement of traditional fuels with alternative ones.

The Senate passed an amendment to the defense bill Thursday that would strike the prohibition on biofuel refinery construction. Individual breakdown of those voting : Vote here

The biofuels the Defense Production Act supports are made from non-edible feedstocks, such as algae and switchgrass. Advocates say those fuels could provide a sustainable way to power the nation’s vehicle fleet.

The amendment allows the Department of Defense to invest in refineries for “advanced” biofuels through a joint Agriculture, Energy and Navy Departments agreement.

Sen. Kay Hagan (D-N.C.) introduced amendment 3095, which passed on a 54-41 vote. She said the military’s reliance on oil subjects it to price shocks.

Republican Sens. Susan Collins (Maine), Chuck Grassley (Iowa), Mike Johanns (Neb.) and Dick Lugar (Ind.) voted with Democrats for the amendment, while Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.) opposed the amendment. The Hill

U.S. Navy going Green

Navy buys biofuel for $16 a gallon 

This is going to help the Defense Department weather looming budget cuts, for sure.  Teaming up with the Department of Agriculture (which has a cheery Rotary Club ring to it), the Navy has purchased 450,000 gallons of biofuel for about $16 a gallon, or about 4 times the price of its standard marine fuel, JP-5, which has been going for under $4 a gallon.The why and more at Hot Air. Corruption reigns supreme.

 This should indeed bankrupt us. When is the insanity going to stop?

The above is an update to an earlier post, info found over at Pravda RU back in August.

U.S. Navy going Green

By 2020, the Navy must learn to get at least 50 percent of energy from alternative sources, and 50 percent of the military vessels will have to try hard to zero out- that is to spend no more energy than they can produce. In other words, the sailors themselves have expressed doubts as to how efficient the vessels will be after the replacement of traditional fuels with alternative ones.

Straight from the former Soviet Union we learn what our Navy folks are up to.From Pravda RU. How many wasted billions are we pouring into the Navy going Green. How will the ships perform? How many of Obama’s favorite Green contractors will make out like bandits? Apparently, we are going to leave our ships at port to achieve the energy savings requirement. One can only imagine the cost of retrofitting all of our ships.

“However, it is not just about money and the desire to reduce dependence on oil and other energy commodities. Introducing the new “green” technology, Americans once again are trying to prove that in terms of technical solutions they are still very strong, at least in regard to the Navy”.

The military has one indisputable advantage: they do not have to worry about public opinion. Naval experts may come up with arbitrarily bold energy ideas that the civil cannot even dream of, but as the result the U.S. Navy apparently will not be chained to the docks because of lack of fuel.
However, the idea of ​​the supporters of “green fuels” looks more like a dream: by 2015, U.S. ships must reduce oil consumption by 50 percent.

In pursuing its objectives, the Navy can kill two birds with one stone: first, to achieve its “green” goals and obtain additional financing for the initiative, and share their own methods with the rest of the country. While politicians are crossing swords in the climate wars, and oil and alternative energy sources are separated by different poles, the Navy leadership understands that the nonsensical trick akin to the Republicans’ anti-energy one can be very expensive.   In any case, the “green way” will not be easy, but now the fleet is gradually improving the energy efficiency of its onshore facilities, largely due to the policy of mandatory provision of energy solutions for construction of such facilities. Pravda RU

Posted in Green. Tags: . 6 Comments »

U.S. Navy going Green

Straight from the former Soviet Union we learn what our Navy folks are up to.From Pravda RU. How many wasted billions are we pouring into the Navy going Green. How will the ships perform? How many of Obama’s favorite Green contractors will make out like bandits? Apparently, we are going to leave our ships at port to achieve the energy savings requirement. One can only imagine the cost of retrofitting all of our ships.

By 2020, the Navy must learn to get at least 50 percent of energy from alternative sources, and 50 percent of the military vessels will have to try hard to zero out- that is to spend no more energy than they can produce. In other words, the sailors themselves have expressed doubts as to how efficient the vessels will be after the replacement of traditional fuels with alternative ones.

However, it is not just about money and the desire to reduce dependence on oil and other energy commodities. Introducing the new “green” technology, Americans once again are trying to prove that in terms of technical solutions they are still very strong, at least in regard to the Navy.

The military has one indisputable advantage: they do not have to worry about public opinion. Naval experts may come up with arbitrarily bold energy ideas that the civil cannot even dream of, but as the result the U.S. Navy apparently will not be chained to the docks because of lack of fuel.
However, the idea of ​​the supporters of “green fuels” looks more like a dream: by 2015, U.S. ships must reduce oil consumption by 50 percent.

In pursuing its objectives, the Navy can kill two birds with one stone: first, to achieve its “green” goals and obtain additional financing for the initiative, and share their own methods with the rest of the country. While politicians are crossing swords in the climate wars, and oil and alternative energy sources are separated by different poles, the Navy leadership understands that the nonsensical trick akin to the Republicans’ anti-energy one can be very expensive.   In any case, the “green way” will not be easy, but now the fleet is gradually improving the energy efficiency of its onshore facilities, largely due to the policy of mandatory provision of energy solutions for construction of such facilities. Pravda RU

%d bloggers like this: