3 ms·

And here we go with everyone losing their minds about what is almost certainly two unrelated incidents that happened to happen in quick succession. Just becaus

• echoangle 1y ago
  Do you think it’s more likely that these are really unrelated compared to being common cause (for example bad fuel)?
  • psunavy03 1y ago
    Yes, because bad fuel would likely have affected a lot more of the air wing than just two aircraft. I'm sure they'll look into it, and it's a possibility. But it is also possible that those two aircraft just picked that time to break for unrelated reasons.
• bandrami 1y ago
  IDK, I think finding a related cause would be reassuring. If you start seeing multiple sequential unrelated failures in a system you usually conclude the root cause is systemic.
  • psunavy03 1y ago
    Bad fuel isn't impossible. I'd just expect it to affect more than two aircraft. But if I also had two unrelated malfunctions in a fighter and a helicopter, I'm not jumping to conclude there's a systemic cause either. Sometimes lightning just strikes twice. Now if two F/A-18s crashed, that's more suspicious and could indicate a systemic issue in F/A-18 maintenance or operations. But there's a large difference between a helo and a fighter. Different parts, different maintenance procedures.
    • bandrami 1y ago
      Right, the worrying part is that the only thing in common is the ship's crew. Overworked crews make mistakes; it happens. But when sailors decide a ship is unlucky, things get really bad.