← Back to context

Comment by venusenvy47

3 years ago

I'm also annoyed at the company for all the public emergency resources being forced to help rescue this contraption.

6 comments

venusenvy47

Reply
Robin_Message  3 years ago

I thought about this, and came to the conclusion that the coastguard and especially military see it as a good opportunity to test their equipment and procedures for real.

And seafarers have a strong code of ethics about helping other seafarers.

As long as they aren't brown.

kbos87  3 years ago

Budgets are unfortunately a zero sum game, and I have to wonder if there are much more obvious ways to save lives more efficiently with the amount of money it’s costing the US government to undertake a massive and technically complex search for 5 people.

  • emsixteen  3 years ago

    If you're going to go down that route, please direct it at the cost of the US military's unfathomably high spending.

  • ethbr0  3 years ago

    There's capital and then operational costs.

    If a Coast Guard ship heads out of St. John's or a Navy aircraft/ship/submarine transits to the area, they burn fuel but already existed with all their trained personnel.

    So most of the cost is moving things into position. Expensive, but the asset probably would have been moving somewhere anyway.

TeamMCS  3 years ago

Whilst I agree, and I hope the vessel had adequate insurance for such an eventuality, it's a excellent "training" exercise.

Real world scenarios which don't involve any enemy combatants are invaluable to keep everyone at peak readiness