Sympathy to countries hit by earthquake

Two more carriers

Do you have any clue what it takes to keep a carrier at sea? It takes months of preperation to get one ready and then millions if not billions to keep them there. Then it takes weeks to get them on site. A carrier task force group isn't even close to an economical or practical means of providing aid for what they can do. A helicopter carrier can do almost as much for a fraction of the cost, saving money to be better spent elsewhere. If one is there or close fine. If not it is a waste of time and money to send one.

 

Hi Bill,

No hostility here. To me Uncle Janko appears to point out the hypocrisy of the hate the United States first crowd.

DTechBA,

The ships are able to provide much needed fresh water right away.

"The Navy is immediately moving five freshwater-producing ships from Guam to the region, Conway said. "Each ship can produce 90,000 gallons of fresh water a day, and of course that'll be extremely valuable," he said. Pacific Command is sending two additional freshwater-producing ships from Diego Garcia that can also produce 90,000 gallons daily."


http://www.allamericanpatriots.com/m-news+article+storyid-4195.html

 

Read my post

Maybe sending the water producing ships to the area makes sense but sending an carrier task force to the area to produce freshwater is ridiculous. A carrier task force is a carrier and dozens of support ships designed to support the carrier. All that to purify water?

Even then, if you have a ship producing how do you get it where you need it? A carrier task force is to support the carrier so you cannot have all of those ships travelling around the are individually delivering water. Who secures the carrier? The idea is neither practically or tactically sensible. You are spending billions of dollars to do the same thing that a couple of C-5's carrying a couple helicopters and water purifier's could probably do better.

My point is what is needed here are small ships, boats and helicopters not multibillion dollar carriers desgned to blow things up. Lets concentrate our resources where it can be best used and not waste our efforts on showboating...

 

Navy ships and other resources have been utilized many times to help with disaster relief efforts both overseas and within CONUS.

I doubt that a couple of water purifiers could come close to producing the amout of fresh water produced by a Nimitz Class carrier.

 

India rejects foreign aid for relief work

"Right now we not only have adequate resources but have gone out and mounted a huge relief effort for Sri Lanka and Maldives. We could not have done this if we were facing a problem in Indian relief operations."

The Indian government says it has sent warships, helicopters and aircraft to distribute food, medicines and blankets to neighbouring Sri Lanka and the Maldives and has promised over 23 million dollars in monetary aid.

http://sify.com/news/othernews/fullstory.php?id=13638871

 

Well and good.

In other words, the prior spending decisions of the Indian government (before the disaster) have precisely nothing to do with its ability and willingness to aid the victims of this terrible tragedy. The same thing applies to the United States, too.

The prior national security decisions of the United States, like those of India, bear no relationship to the current crisis.

The wading-through-treacle governing and crisis-response style of certain other nations, however, may well not be in the best interests of their suffering citizens. Time will tell.

 

Point Number One: Iraq is not an international effort; thus, the U.S. should bear most of the cost.

Point Number Two: The earthquate relief is an international effort; thus, the U.S. should not bear either most or a large portion of the cost.

Point Number Three: When it's all said and done, the U.S. will end up bearing most of the cost.

 

No warning system in the Atlantic

Some geologists and oceanographers believe a major tsumami could wipe out much of the US eastern seaboard. Should the Atlantic rim countries install a warning system?
And would such a system be practical in terms of evacuating people from Atlantic coastal plains?

 

Re: Read my post

The carriers not only provide water, but also much needed doctors and medical supplies. They also carry the personel and equipment nessecary (like those helicopters) to transport them to affected areas.

 

Re: Read my post

The beauty of aircraft carriers is that they carry aircraft. I don't know how many helicopters are included in a normal carrier air group, but I know that the aircraft mix can be varied according to need. During the Afghanistan campaign, one of the carriers was operating an air group composed entirely of helicopters, so I know that's possible.

Where would the C-5s land? Yesterday CNN showed a couple of light Cessna-type planes barely able to land on Maulabon's (a small city in west Sumatra almost erased by the disaster) badly damaged runway. The stricken areas can't support large fixed wing aircraft, and roads and ground transport are impassable.

Probably the most effective naval force in this instance would be one of those amphibious landing groups, built around those amphibious assault ships that are essentially mini-aircraft carriers. Not only do they carry lots of Marine helicopters able to deliver vehicles and heavy objects onshore from the air, they also carry many small landing craft capable of entering small fishing harbors, remote islands and the like.

But the clock is ticking here. If a task group especially designed for this disaster has to gather itself up and sail from San Diego, it might not arrive where it's needed before many of those who currently need help most desperately die. My understanding is that the carrier group that's being sent was already operating in the South China Sea area and can get to the stricken area much more quickly.

 

Re: No warning system in the Atlantic

More on this topic at http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20041231/ap_on_go_ot/tsunami_warning&e=3

 

I just read on AP that the US Air Force is staging operations out of the Thai air base at Utapao (once used by the USAF in the Vietnam war).

Nine American C-130s departed today from there, flying supplies to southern Thailand, Indonesia and Sri Lanka. Australia and New Zealand also have C-130s flying in supplies, along with all the local air forces and planes from many other countries as well. Indonesia announced that 42 flights from 18 countries flew into Sumatra.

But Indonesia also said that aid was stacking up in Banda Aceh because of a shortage of trucks and road damage.

The US Navy has two battle groups steaming towards the area, led by the carrier USS Abraham Lincoln and the amphibious assault ship USS Bonhomme Richard. Together they are said to have some 40 helicopters embarked. The Bonhomme Richard group has amphibious landing craft as well, able to reach isolated coastal villages.

 

That's an awfully old ship.

 

It's George Bush's fault.

No Unk, they aren't sending John Paul Jones' revolutionary war flagship.

They are sending this baby, which apparently was over in the western Pacific taking part in the Westpac 2004 naval maneuvers.

http://www.lhd6.navy.mil/

According to the ship's website, it was commissioned in 1998, operates out of San Diego, displaces 40,500 tons full-load, and carries 42 CH-46 Sea Knight Marine assault helicopters, 5 AV-8B Harrier attack jets and six anti-submarine helicopters. It also has a well-deck that can support landing craft and amphibious vehicles.

I guess that the Navy likes to keep historic names alive, assigning them to generations of ships. This apparently is the Navy's latest 'Bon Homme Richard'.

It's interesting that the website says that the Continental Congress got the original ship as a gift from France, as a result of Benjamin Franklin bending the King of France's ear in 1779. (The King lost his head soon after, I guess.) The name was inspired by Franklin's 'Poor Richard's Almanac'. Command was handed to the young officer assigned to get an American navy going, and it became John Paul Jones' flagship.