3 ms·
The ship was at sea, so presumably the full ship's complement? That's a bit over 300 people for an Aegis destroyer. Her point was that the accident wouldn't b
by jp57 4y ago
The ship was at sea, so presumably the full ship's complement? That's a bit over 300 people for an Aegis destroyer.
Her point was that the accident wouldn't be knowledge that could be kept confined to the bridge/CIC and soon everyone on board would know about it.
- busterarm 4y agoBut the claim in the suit isn't that the missile was fired from any ship, but from a land base in New Jersey. Navy ships compatible with these systems were still 5 years out... If you're referring to the naval radar scans, only the people present on the bridge (and really only a handful of those...) would need to participate in any coverup, and that's only if the official account differs significantly from what was recorded. If the official explanation is plausible enough based on the data, which it seems to be, then you don't need any participation from the ship at all.