|
| Page 1, 2, 3, 4 |
McCain to blame for the USS Forrestal mishap?
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 519453
10/7/2008 1:34 AM | | Re: McCain to blame for the USS Forrestal mishap? | Quote |
If you're interested in what actually happened on the Forrestal that day, read "Sailors to the End" by Gregory A. Freeman. It explains in great detail how a Zuni rocket fired from the other side of the flight deck because of a series of electrical malfunctions and crew errors, then the rocket hit McCain's plane. Love him or hate him, on this day McCain was just an innocent bystander when his plane got hit.
Or if you're not interested in the facts and just want want to defame McCain, carry on. Quoting: MikeAtlanta 414960
Hah. If that's what it takes to end eight utterly disastrous years of Republican "leadership" of our country ... then defame all day.
Nothing could be better for this country than to educate "conservatives." Except they are probably unable to be educated. Since they religiously believe in invisible "market forces" and believe that women should not be able to have rights over their own bodies which they have been exercising for THOUSANDS of years.
"Conservatives" do not actually conserve anything. They neither conserve US troops, nor budgetary funds, nor the environment, nor do they hold fast to any normal interpretation of their own religious texts (lets start with "thou shalt not kill").
If you are a "conservative" and/or a Republican please do our country a favor and become an hero by shooting yourself in the face. The world will lose an idiot and a fool, and your family will get over it. |
|
Obama
User ID: 520283
10/8/2008 12:19 AM | | Re: McCain to blame for the USS Forrestal mishap? | Quote |
Surviving crewmen and those who investigated the Forrestal fire case reported that McCain deliberately 'wet-started' his A-4E Skyhawk to shake up the guy in the F-4 Phantom behind his plane.
'Wet-starts', done either deliberately (the starter motor switch allowed kerosene to pool in the engine and give a wet start) or accidentally, shoot a large flame from the tail of the aircraft. 'Wet starting' was a common practice among young 'hot-dog' pilots.
In McCain's case, the 'wet-start' 'cooked off' and launched the M34 Zuni rocket from the rear F-4 that punctured the Skyhawk's fueltank, knocked the M-65 1000 lb bomb off it's 500 lb rated mount, and touched off the explosions and massive fire.
When the carrier Oriskany came along side to help the wounded McCain the son of an admeral was put in a chopper and whisked away before the wounded men were even evacuated to be treated. McCain was the only Forrestal crewman to be immediately transferred
Many claim McCain left for his own safety, because the crew wanted blood.
132 Navy sailors were killed and countless numbers were injured. |
|
gabby
User ID: 521095
10/8/2008 10:06 PM | | Re: McCain to blame for the USS Forrestal mishap? | Quote |
Surviving crewmen and those who investigated the Forrestal fire case reported that McCain deliberately 'wet-started' his A-4E Skyhawk to shake up the guy in the F-4 Phantom behind his plane.
'Wet-starts', done either deliberately (the starter motor switch allowed kerosene to pool in the engine and give a wet start) or accidentally, shoot a large flame from the tail of the aircraft. 'Wet starting' was a common practice among young 'hot-dog' pilots.
In McCain's case, the 'wet-start' 'cooked off' and launched the M34 Zuni rocket from the rear F-4 that punctured the Skyhawk's fueltank, knocked the M-65 1000 lb bomb off it's 500 lb rated mount, and touched off the explosions and massive fire.
When the carrier Oriskany came along side to help the wounded McCain the son of an admeral was put in a chopper and whisked away before the wounded men were even evacuated to be treated. McCain was the only Forrestal crewman to be immediately transferred
Many claim McCain left for his own safety, because the crew wanted blood.
132 Navy sailors were killed and countless numbers were injured. Quoting: Obama 520283
Did you read all the previous post before making your post? It has been proved that this information is incorrect. Please do not subscribe to the Right Wing Koolaid and verify facts first. |
|
Douggie
User ID: 520014
10/9/2008 3:57 AM | | Re: McCain to blame for the USS Forrestal mishap? | Quote |
proven? lmfao....by who?...you?
They have the power to create reality
I could explain it better but I would need charts, graphs and an easel.
By the way....which ones pink? |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 521300
10/9/2008 5:29 AM | | Re: McCain to blame for the USS Forrestal mishap? | Quote |
USS Liberty was NSA not USN.
It was a spy ship recording Israeli communications.
Israel had captured so many Arab prisoners, they had no idea what to do with them.
Several unit commanders had all prisoners killed, so they could move all forces to other operations.
USS Liberty could have exposed that massacre by Israel.
USS Liberty had previously had a wounded crewman off Africa and crept upriver without clearance to get him to a hospital. (Imagine a foreign spy ship going up the Mississippi without clearance to understand)
When The government demanded to inspect the ship to make sure they were not running guns or drugs, the Liberty rammed blockading vessels at speed, causing many deaths. |
|
Toasty Tim
User ID: 527099
10/15/2008 2:12 PM | | Re: McCain to blame for the USS Forrestal mishap? | Quote |
I flew in Prowlers (NFO) in the 1980's.
I remember the Forrestal video well. I remember my surprise a year or so ago to discover the guy in the A-4 was John McCain.
I remember a guy in the training command we called "Lucky Bill." Lucky Bill had lost THREE NFOs in his career-
First he had a mid-air, near the ship- he ejected, the plane crashed into the water- the NFO was never seen again.
Then he had a ground fire- he and the NFO ejected 0/0- the NFO was a big guy and his neck was broken. THEN, Lucky BIll was involved in ANOTHER ground fire- he managed to escape and run for it...his NFO was BURNED ALIVE!
Was it his fault? Dunno- doubtful- but a lot of fliers are pretty superstitious. No one wanted to fly with Lucky Bill. |
|
Ed
User ID: 519660
10/16/2008 8:56 AM | | Re: McCain to blame for the USS Forrestal mishap? | Quote |
Pardon me, but are you aout of your mind? The Zuni rocket was fired from ACROSS THE DECK not anywhere near his plane. He was just unlucky enought to be in the plane it hit. If you don't like the guy, that's one thing, if you want to live in a socialist Obamanation, that's another. But man, get your facts straight and stop being a moron.
The claim has been made:
"Surviving crewmen and those who investigated the Forrestal fire case reported that McCain deliberately 'wet-started' his A-4E Skyhawk to shake up the guy in the F-4 Phantom behind his A-4. 'Wet-starts', done either deliberately (the starter motor switch allowed kerosene to pool in the engine and give a wet start) or accidentally, shoot a large flame from the tail of the aircraft.
"134 sailors were killed on the USS Forrestal in 1967.
It is believed by many crewmen and investigators that John McCain deliberately 'wet-started' his A-4E to shake up the guy in the plane behind his A-4. 'Wet-starts' shoot a large flame from the tail of the aircraft.
In McCain's case, the 'wet-start' apparently 'cooked off' and launched the Zuni rocket from the rear F-4 that touched off the explosions."
[ link to www.youtube.com] |
|
G. House
User ID: 527808
10/16/2008 9:06 AM
 | | Re: McCain to blame for the USS Forrestal mishap? | Quote |
The claim has been made:
"Surviving crewmen and those who investigated the Forrestal fire case reported that McCain deliberately 'wet-started' his A-4E Skyhawk to shake up the guy in the F-4 Phantom behind his A-4. 'Wet-starts', done either deliberately (the starter motor switch allowed kerosene to pool in the engine and give a wet start) or accidentally, shoot a large flame from the tail of the aircraft.
"134 sailors were killed on the USS Forrestal in 1967.
It is believed by many crewmen and investigators that John McCain deliberately 'wet-started' his A-4E to shake up the guy in the plane behind his A-4. 'Wet-starts' shoot a large flame from the tail of the aircraft.
In McCain's case, the 'wet-start' apparently 'cooked off' and launched the Zuni rocket from the rear F-4 that touched off the explosions."
[ link to www.youtube.com]
Doubtfull,
The Zuni rocket was pointed at McCains aircraft.
The explosive charge was closer to McCains aircraft than the propellant charge was.
Therefore the explsoive charge would have "cooked off" before the propellant charge.
"Wet" starts are not always intentional, sometimes the engine just doesn't fire immediately building up unburnt fuel. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 520681
10/16/2008 9:15 AM | | Re: McCain to blame for the USS Forrestal mishap? | Quote |
If you were there, were you aware that McCain crashed FIVE MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR aircraft--that this was just ONE--and got away with it? Do you know any other reverse aces who are allowed to continue to fly after that? Quoting: knightus 391128
yes. Chuck Yeager.
Stick that in your buttcheek and smoke it. |
|
tryHarder
User ID: 532528
10/22/2008 12:45 PM | | Re: McCain to blame for the USS Forrestal mishap? | Quote |
What is it with the need to go after the Jews for everything? You need to look beyond that all too easy scapegoat. The powerful elite in this country are not primarily Jewish, and that you think they shows how well manipulated you have been.
Cindy Lou was raised as a Congregationalist, and is now Baptist. That makes her a WASP all the way and a member of the ruling class of the US and the Western World.
That being said, McCain is still a wanna-be player propped up by his family connections, just like the "W." He crashed five planes! He only flew 20hrs over Vietnam, and was awarded 28 medals! A spoiled brat he remains. |
|
Apples
User ID: 534096
10/24/2008 1:59 PM | | Re: McCain to blame for the USS Forrestal mishap? | Quote |
I've seen this assertion on other web sites and its always the same theory that McCain "wet started" his A-4 and the resulting fireball hit a F-4 Phantom that was in back of him. Couple of problems with this theory. First if you view the actual film from the Forestall disaster, McCains A-4 and all the other A-4s
have their tails (i.e. exhaust) pointed out to sea, port side, and there is no aircraft behind any of the A-4s, Second problem, the F-4 Phantom that did indeed fire the Zuni missile was on the starboard side of the ship and was no where near the exhaust of McCains jet. If you are trying to do an attack on McCain at least try to make it plausible. This "wet start" theory is pure BS and you know it. |
|
Brwnstown
User ID: 526783
10/24/2008 2:02 PM | | Re: McCain to blame for the USS Forrestal mishap? | Quote |
We had to watch the Forrestal movie in boot camp during fire fighting school. "learn not to burn". Pretty cool actually. They have flight deck cameras that record every minute of flight ops. You get to see all the fuck ups they made. it's a wonder the ship stayed afloat. Lots of explosions.
What commands have you been on? I've been on Theodore Roosevelt and Cole.
FD Roosevelt (cva-42) here..... Quoting: DALE GRIBBLE
USS Flint (AE32) here |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 533977
10/24/2008 2:02 PM | | Re: McCain to blame for the USS Forrestal mishap? | Quote |
It would only take three witnesses to testify that "McCain deliberately 'wet-started' his A-4E Skyhawk to shake up the guy in the F-4 Phantom behind his A-4" to PERMANENTLY end this moron's career and put him behind bars where he belongs.
It's unbelievable that the jewsmedia picked HIM as their choice candidate--he's got more skeletons in the closet than Frankenstein.
Not when your daddy is the admiral ... Quoting: Noah
Thank you for pointing that out to the McTards. |
|
magoogle
User ID: 535507
10/26/2008 3:52 PM | | Re: McCain to blame for the USS Forrestal mishap? | Quote |
Check out Google McCain crashed five navy planes , and uss forrestal mccain and then coronel earl hopper videos of mccain the traitor and the vit vets against mccain.com site. Then tell me what you think of this "hero". |
|
Jim
User ID: 541001
11/2/2008 3:24 PM | | Re: McCain to blame for the USS Forrestal mishap? | Quote |
Scientifically Senator McCain could not have started the fire. All you McCain haters should look for another reason to dislike him, like decades of militarty service, loving our country, turning down the option to leave a POW camp because others were there longer, and putting country first.
A retired Marine or you could say Joe the Marine. |
|
Wrlaway1
User ID: 542050
11/3/2008 11:28 PM | | Re: McCain to blame for the USS Forrestal mishap? | Quote |
If you think McCain somehow was at fault for the Forrestal fire, your are a complete idiot and an ass. Being a complete idiot or an ass means you are an Obama Bush hater also.
McCains A-4 was aft if the waist catapults with the tail out over the deck. The F-4 was across the deck aft of the island. No way McCain caused the rocket to be launched from the F-4.
As a plane captain I have launched and recovered over 2000 aircraft from the Constellation, Ranger, and Independence. Who the hell came up with the stupid idea of a "wet start". There were no "wet starts". They were always windmill starts.
If your stupid enough to vote for Obama, then find some other reason to justify your insanity. Don't blame McCain for something he is not responsible. All of you Obama clowns sit down to piss! |
|
Mojavegreen
User ID: 551959
11/15/2008 7:04 PM | | Re: McCain to blame for the USS Forrestal mishap? | Quote |
Before you decide to start up something you know nothing about. You should do the research. Military aircraft can not be started by the pilot. They require an external power source called a (using military jargon) a huffer. This device warmes up the engine so that it will power up. The pilot can not cause a wetstart. As for the desaster that happened aboard my ship, the USS Forrestal. That was called by what we in the Ordinance community call a stray voltage check. The resulting explosion was caused by 5.0-inch, folding-fin rocket known as the Zuni. Which slammed in to a parked A-4 Skyhawk. That was loaded with its payload of non thermoly protected Mk 80 series bombs. That was preparing for the days missions aginst Vietnam. If you want to see the documentary on the Forrestal Fire then buy the tape or cd at [link to www.forrestal.org] OR [link to www.lancehatfield.com] The proceeds would go to help save the ship from it being turned in to a home for homeless fish and put in to a more important role of maritime museum. If you want to learn more about my former job in the U.S. navy, Aviation Ordinance. Then go to [link to www.ordnance.org] OR [link to www.aaoweb.org] Where you can learn more about the weapons as well as get an accurat description of the ordinance mishaps. It wasnt until after the Forrestal Fire occured that the navy Department looked had in to the proceedures of handeling ordinance aboard ships. as well as how fires aboard ships are fought. On a Carrier, the fires on the flight deck are fought by the personell that are on the flight deck. Crash and smash (also known as Crash and salvage) is soley responsible for getting the pilot out of the jet and relocating the wreckage. The fire destroyed everything from the number four elevator (which is the second one behind the island) to the fantail of the ship and as far down as the second deck of the ship. all that structure had to be rebuilt. The 134 deaths that occured happened from the flight deck on down to the starboard steering compartment at the bottom of the ship. As for the ship surviving that day. That was done buy the hard work of the ships company. Instead of spreading hate and discontent about a very honorable person and whom I greatly respect you should do your research and get the fact straight before you show your true IQ to the rest of the world. Do the research on Senator McCain and learn the fact. I dare anyone with an ounce of intelligence to do that. Then maybe you'll stop bashing people with as good a character as his. That kind of patriotism is unfortunatly a dying commodity in this screwed up country...... |
|
Mojavegreen
User ID: 551959
11/15/2008 7:10 PM | | Re: McCain to blame for the USS Forrestal mishap? | Quote |
Had I known that most of my post wasnt going to get posted, As there are no indications as to post length. Which means the moderator didn't want the truth. I would have never wasted my time.... |
|
Old Navyman
User ID: 556174
11/21/2008 3:31 PM | | Re: McCain to blame for the USS Forrestal mishap? | Quote |
Some of you morons need to check your facts. The A-4 Skyhawk McCain was in was parked aft on the port side the only thing behind his aircraft was water not an F-4 Phantom. Also the other aircraft parked around mcCains A-4 were other A-4's. So you idiots really should get you facts correct before you attempt charactor assasination. |
|
Chuck D
User ID: 637252
3/17/2009 11:38 PM | | Re: McCain to blame for the USS Forrestal mishap? | Quote |
It is funny, many of you said you watched the video and still do not remember what your eyes have seen. The Zuni rocket was ignited from the excust of from a huffer starting an F-4 in the very front of fly 1. The rocket struck a bomber in fly 3 on the waist side of the ship. The name of the film was learn or burn. I was a flight director of fly 2 on the FID from 80 to 84. I also was a trainer and watched that film over 100 times. |
|
Percy
User ID: 625790
3/18/2009 12:23 AM | | Re: McCain to blame for the USS Forrestal mishap? | Quote |
I served aboard the USS Eisenhower. I saw the film in boot camp as well. When I got to the fleet, I was in Aviation Ordnance.
What happened was the the rack holding the Zuni wasn't checked for stray voltage. When it was plugged up, KABOOM!!!
It was the ordnance man's ( redshirt )responsibility to have checked the rack for the stray voltage. |
|
dr peppers
User ID: 622548
3/18/2009 12:47 AM | | Re: McCain to blame for the USS Forrestal mishap? | Quote |
well if he was meant to be president he lost worse than Bob Dole than one armed freak from Kanasas |
|
Sub Guy
User ID: 98017
4/9/2009 3:08 PM | | Re: McCain to blame for the USS Forrestal mishap? | Quote |
I have long said that the "average American" is a complete moron. I have caught much flak over the years for this view. Then...message boards came along. Thank God, because they prove my point each and every day (with notable exceptions, of course, as it is with all things, there are no absolutes). I do want to say up front that I realize this is a site dedicated to the fringe, and I am perfectly good with that. In fact, I like the forum here very much. Two posters in particular caught my attention this trip, "knightus" and "anonymous". You two seem fairly well educated, and I expected more from you guys. I don't know if you just come here to vent, or if you actually believe that horse manure you are presenting here by the shovel full. As with all of the military folks who have posted responses here, I too saw the USS Forrestal fire film (over and over again) in boot camp. Everyone is free to draw their own conclusions, but to blame McCain for this event in any way, shape, or form is simply ridiculous. As a nuclear submarine guy, I didn't get exposed to too much surface ship firefighting technique, but the basics of firefighting don't change with the platform. Of course there were some mistakes made while combatting the casualty (such as washing the AFFF away with water), but that's exactly why it is a training aid. And to think that John McCain got any kind of preferential treatment due to the fact that he had two Admirals in the family is also off-base. If anything, the sons (and daughters) of brass get it worse than the average! That is my experience, at least.
The sheer amount of bullshit spouted out on this topic from various idiots is stupifying. Almost all of the discussions here can be settled with a minimal amount of research. At least try to gather some FACTS (I assure you, they are out there) before running your mouths. Wouldn't you rather have an informed discussion? Maybe you wouldn't...  |
|
| Page 1, 2, 3, 4 |
|
