Was this explosion necessary?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
People complain about military spending until we REALLY NEED it.

Freedom isn't free

pete
 
These types of tests are absolutely required. There are extremely sensitive electronics onboard that need to be tested for shock resistance. Part of my job is certifying the landing systems onboard CVNs (the SPN-41B and SPN-46). Explosions like these can absolutely knock these systems out of battery, which would mean no precision landing capability for the Air Wing. We need to know that the equipment meets design specifications before we can declare it operationally ready.
 
In my some what limited knowledge of commissioning 13 billion dollar warships I say it’s completely necessary. You are welcome to your opinion but my freedom is worth this expenditure.
 
I guess the question is what would they do if it failed?!?! Lmao. (Go build another one? Make it into a cruise ship). Try to raise it from the ocean bottom and have every engineer submit their resignation?

That being said, I am sure the tech/engineering weenies knew it would be fine.

I think this may have been a message to folks like Iran that says “you can get close in a small craft suicide bomb run, but we will light you up with chain guns and it will have no effect other than to turn Tehran into a parking lot.

Im all for it
 
Dashash said:
These types of tests are absolutely required. There are extremely sensitive electronics onboard that need to be tested for shock resistance. Part of my job is certifying the landing systems onboard CVNs (the SPN-41B and SPN-46). Explosions like these can absolutely knock these systems out of battery, which would mean no precision landing capability for the Air Wing. We need to know that the equipment meets design specifications before we can declare it operationally ready.
Click to expand...


That's a good point, but could we assume there's a LOT more testing way before it gets to this kind of explosion? And wouldn't there be back up systems also?
 
Gotta love TF, so many questions about simple trawlers but question how to go about testing warships.
 
Last edited:
As the fish said, WTF??
 
Seevee said:
That's a good point, but could we assume there's a LOT more testing way before it gets to this kind of explosion? And wouldn't there be back up systems also?
Click to expand...

Testing a piece of equipment on a lab bench is one thing - testing it installed on a ship is another. You would be surprised (and probably horrified) to see how some of these sensitive electronics are mounted to the structure of the ship. The final steps of testing any new system, or system of systems, is to test it as it would be installed and operated in its final form.

I'd rather not go into a discussion of specifics regarding back-up systems/redundancy, etc. This topic gets sensitive very quickly.
 
Alisske said:
I guess the question is what would they do if it failed?!?! Lmao. (Go build another one? Make it into a cruise ship). Try to raise it from the ocean bottom and have every engineer submit their resignation?

That being said, I am sure the tech/engineering weenies knew it would be fine.

I think this may have been a message to folks like Iran that says “you can get close in a small craft suicide bomb run, but we will light you up with chain guns and it will have no effect other than to turn Tehran into a parking lot.

Im all for it
Click to expand...

The purpose of the test was not to see whether the CVN would sink!
 
These shock tests are EXTREMELY expensive; so you can assume it is not something done willy nilly. Such tests are ONLY done on one ship, usually the lead ship, per class. It is NOT a structural survival test of the ship's hull because just think about it; are we really gonna take such a risk? Near misses by enemy action and explosions of tactical nuclear weapons are a part of the risks of naval warfare, and you want to be sure that short of a direct hit your stuff will continue to function in order to fight back. If all the electrical breakers trip just because of a nearby explosion, your ship could be "down" long enough for the enemy to take advantage of your helplessness as systems are brought back on line. You should see what the Army does to it's new armored vehicles! It blows them to heck in an effort to find the weak spots.
 
Pete Meisinger said:
People complain about military spending until we REALLY NEED it.

Freedom isn't free

pete
Click to expand...

Maybe...

Blowing up and stress testing a vessel, that is designed to come under fire, to confirm its effectiveness makes sense to me. It's a few million dollars well spend ensuring lives will be saved.

$14,000 toiiet seats? Less so.
 
Ever here the full story on $14,000 dollar toilet seats?


I haven't heard them all but a few make perfect sense and sometimes the not so shameless government contractors manage to slip in a few over charges.


Kinda like a $5 part that is no longer OEM , now costs $99 with $50 shipping/handling charge from XYZ Marine website.
 
Dashash said:
The purpose of the test was not to see whether the CVN would sink!
Click to expand...

There are many reasons to do something. I believe it factored into the decision at a minimum, but what do I know? These tests are SOP but the Navy has commissioned several large ship recently without doing it.

Aside from the technical justifications (which i avoided in purpose since i have no qualification) this test also lets folks know our capabilities. (Which can be a deterrent)

Whats the purpose of publicizing it then? Everything is done for a a reason.
 
Alisske said:
There are many reasons to do something. I believe it factored into the decision at a minimum, but what do I know? These tests are SOP but the Navy has commissioned several large ship recently without doing it.
Click to expand...




I do believe it is a first of class type of test.
 
HTurner said:
I do believe it is a first of class type of test.
Click to expand...

Yes. I agree. I believe they did not do it for the newly designed littoral class ships. (There was some sort of controversy surrounding it something where they only used 10k worth and delayed it until after commissioning)
 
Last edited:
This is not the first time they've done it. One time, an earthquake was reported offshore of Daytona and it turned out to be the Navy testing one of these tests... I felt the vibration and the windows rattled like a NASA launch... and I was 80 miles from Daytona.
 
Alisske said:
Yes. I agree. I believe they did not do it for the newly designed littoral class ships. (There was some sort of controversy surrounding it something where they only used 10k worth and delayed it until after commissioning)
Click to expand...

The littorals would crack up if they did that. They have never been able to traverse the panama canal without an incident... Great to have a ship so expensive that they had to cancel the ammunition because we can't afford it.

Never let government contractors tell you what they think you need.
 
The whole Littoral Combat Ship concept with its never built multiple replaceable combat systems modules and swappable crews has come under fire as unworkable because it was never funded sufficiently. Many blue water warrior, myself included, see more problems with it than can be sufficiently resolved to make them truly useful. The million-dollar (or whatever $) toilet seat some contractor may have slid by absolutely pales in comparison to this miscalculation, and yet we continue to build them. I predict that as soon as the new ocean-going frigate comes on line, the LCSs will disappear.
 
Just took my morning walk and did some thinking....

Maybe this was an explosives test disguised as a carrier test. maybe the carrier was there to monitor the explosion :confused:
 
stubones99 said:
Never let government contractors tell you what they think you need.
Click to expand...

I spent 24 years on active duty bad-mouthing defense contractors as leeches, and then I spent another 22 years in the contracting SERVICES (note, not hardware) world with some time teaching the Tomahawk Missile System to prospective Tomahawk-equipped ship commanding and executive officers, a bit of time as a chief mate on a Navy-owned ocean surveillance ship, and a bunch of time on their bridges running acoustic trials on cruisers, destroyers, and frigates and even the occasional carrier.

I was what we called a field engineer lots of the time, and I can say without reservation that the US Navy could not have performed the service we gave them with any active duty personnel because the Navy simply does have the budget, time, nor interest to do so. Within the narrow area of my purview, I often found myself telling the Navy just exactly what it needed, and I and my co-workers worked our tails off for less pay than I earned in my last years of active duty to make sure the Navy got fair value for our services.
 
ofer said:
Just took my morning walk and did some thinking....

Maybe this was an explosives test disguised as a carrier test. maybe the carrier was there to monitor the explosion :confused:
Click to expand...

Negative. It was a shock test for the CVN.
 
makes me think about the last scene of Hunt for Red October.

You've lost another nuclear submarine???
 
15137813251247815335merica-meme.med.png
 
rgano said:
These shock tests are EXTREMELY expensive; so you can assume it is not something done willy nilly.
Click to expand...


Why would one assume that, it's the government...
 
Alisske said:
That being said, I am sure the tech/engineering weenies knew it would be fine.
Click to expand...

Without these skilled technical people you would have nothing but a wooden stick in you hand. Not sure why you choose to denigrate them.
 
Brooksie said:
Why would one assume that, it's the government...
Click to expand...

I assume that snarky remark was just you being funny and not bothering to read my dissertation on why this test was necessary to protect our crews.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
US Navy operating astern of touchscreens
Replies
9
Views
1K
psneeld
psneeld
billblack
New(?) Anti-corrosive
Replies
16
Views
2K
gettaway
G
Greg QS
Quick gyro
Replies
7
Views
1K
Greg QS
Greg QS
T
Hi I'm Tom
Replies
1
Views
242
Comodave
Comodave
D
interpretation of fuel sample result
Replies
5
Views
512
dcolman
D

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom