Not quite a mission kill....

[Graham Kennedy]

Source

The US Navy's newest and mightiest nuclear aircraft carrier, the USS George H W Bush, has been plagued by continual failures in its lavatories, according to reports. Sailors have been forced into increasingly desperate measures to relieve themselves.

The Navy Times, following up initial stories of the problems appearing on blogs, quotes members of the 5,000-strong ship's complement as stating that at times there hasn't been a single working head – as lavs are known at sea – anywhere aboard the entire mighty hundred-thousand-ton warship. Reportedly the Bush is fitted with no less than 423 thrones, but it appears that problems with the suction flushing system can easily knock out large numbers of these at once – or even all of them.

According to the NT's unnamed sources, crewpersons aboard the carrier have struggled to cope with the situation. It seems that desperate sailors must often hunt for long periods to find a functioning head, and if they do discover one there may be a lengthy queue. Some of the unfortunate matelots have apparently resorted to urinating in sinks or showers, or in some cases off the towering sides of the ship (parts of it are as high above the waves as a 20-story building). The latter is a risky practice, however, as it is against regulations: at least one sailor has been put under punishment for doing so.

Other Bush crewmen have reportedly taken to the use of bottles in some private location, following which the containers are smuggled to a suitable point for surreptitious tipping overboard. Unfortunately this "can soil the side of the ship or the hangar deck, aircraft or fellow sailors, depending on how it catches the wind", the NT reports.

According to a statement supplied to the naval newspaper, there are breakdowns in the Bush's heads three or four times a day, though many of these only involve a few units and can be fixed relatively swiftly. Nonetheless the ship's engineering personnel have expended no less than 10,000 man-hours on fixing busted bogs during the carrier's current overseas deployment. It was admitted that one ship-wide breakdown required a 35-hour effort to fix, with the relevant technicians working flat out throughout with no rest.

Naval commanders blamed the problems on inappropriate objects such as clothes or feminine hygiene products being flushed down the heads.

The $6.2bn George Bush, when functioning on top line, is perhaps the most powerful warship in the world. Its air group of more than 90 planes and choppers could defeat many national air forces or navies on its own, and it can steam at a speedboat-like 30+ knots for 20 years without refuelling.

However it must be suspected that the mighty vessel's efficiency is somewhat degraded at the moment.

Wacky fun on the Bush...

[Tsukiyumi]

Our carriers don't take no shit!

Of course, that is a bit of a problem in this case...

[RK_Striker_JK_5]

I simultaneously wish to laugh and cry reading this.

[McAvoy]

I have been on that ship during it's workups. The ship was practically built out of spare parts and was hurried up to be finished as early as possible. Not only that but it has new water saving features in the heads as well. My thoughts back then were that they were not sailor proof (not durable enough to deal with thousands of sailors).

Not to mention, the heads on any ship will break down. I once took a shower in coolant on the JFK because somehow it got into the fresh water system. Then again, the water on that ship always had a faint taste of jet fuel.

[mwhittington]

I wonder, if they named it the George W. Bush, would it already be full of sh*t in the head?

[Graham Kennedy]

I have been on that ship during it's workups. The ship was practically built out of spare parts and was hurried up to be finished as early as possible.

That's interesting, I'd love to hear more details. This was all budget driven, I assume? I believe the Bush is a stepping stone to the next carrier, which is of a new class - was the idea to use up stocks of Nimitz class parts that would otherwise go to waste or something?

[Mikey]

I'd call never flushing a most definite "water-saving feature."

[McAvoy]

I have been on that ship during it's workups. The ship was practically built out of spare parts and was hurried up to be finished as early as possible.

That's interesting, I'd love to hear more details. This was all budget driven, I assume? I believe the Bush is a stepping stone to the next carrier, which is of a new class - was the idea to use up stocks of Nimitz class parts that would otherwise go to waste or something?

Only the standard parts. Not everything in the new carrier class is going to have totally different parts.

There are new features in the carrier such as the aressting gear. First time we ever did CQ for the ship (training for flightdeck crew) we found out the new arresting gear was 'too efficient' when the bugs caused the crew to delay each carrier landing by two minutes apart.

I'd call never flushing a most definite "water-saving feature."

Well it does save water right?

These new toilets use very little water and more air vacuum to flush as opposed to the other carriers. Also, toilets in Navy ships use saltwater which once in a while does cause buildups in the pipes especially mixed with urine.

[Deepcrush]

The Bush family name is a curse on this planet. Absolutely horrible idea to use it on a ship. A rushed ship with a bad name out at sea is just poking fate in the nose to cause a horror. Damn sure I never want to sail aboard her.

[JudgeKing]

I wonder, if they named it the George W. Bush, would it already be full of sh*t in the head?

Actually, it's named after former 41st president George Herbert Walker Bush, who was a naval aviator during World War II.

[Captain Seafort]

The Bush family name is a curse on this planet. Absolutely horrible idea to use it on a ship.

I wouldn't go that far. HMS William Bush would be a pretty cool name for a warship.

[Mikey]

The Bush family name is a curse on this planet. Absolutely horrible idea to use it on a ship.

I wouldn't go that far. HMS William Bush would be a pretty cool name for a warship.

I don't think warships generally get named after former presidents' brothers or uncles/venture capitalists who profit from Pentagon contracts while their nephews are sitting presidents.

[Captain Seafort]

If they did, I doubt they'd have the prefix "HMS".

[Mikey]

If they did, I doubt they'd have the prefix "HMS".

Yeah, that's even weirder. Why would you want to name a RN ship after W.'s uncle?

[Captain Seafort]

Bloody hell. How many of that family are there?

In any event it isn't - it's named after Hornblower's 2iC.