Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Lee-Lee

(6,324 posts)
48. I've actually done military logistics
Wed Sep 27, 2017, 05:31 PM
Sep 2017

Is not as easy as "get them out".

First, you need a defined destination. "Out" isn't a defined destination. If you take a plane load of sick people with medical needs out and have no clue where they are headed now they are dropped off at a flight line somewhere with nobody to care for them or anywhere to go. You haven't fixed a problem, just created new ones.

Second, you can't do "supplies in people out" fast on planes like C-17's. The C-17 configured for passengers can carry a lot of people very uncomfortably- imagine the worst airline seat ever set up so you have way less legroom than the worst civilian airline. But you have to understand that when cargo comes in a C-130 or C-17 it's all loaded on special aluminum pallets- A 463L pallet if you want to Google and see one- that lock into the floor and get rolled out. Your problem is that your seats for carrying passengers are aso set up on these same type pallets so they can set them up for passengers by just locking the seats into the floor. So if you are carrying cargo you don't have the passenger seat pallets. The same goes for configured to medical flights, it is all on pallets.

So if a flight is to carry people off it has to arrive configured for passengers, because there is not a huge stock of extra seat pallets there.

So every flight in to move people can't move in supplies. You can't do supplies in-people out. It's either cargo in, empty back (maybe a few people) or empty seats over and people back.

More people are helped by a flight full of cargo on than are helped by a flight of people out.

Same goes for ships hauling people- we don't have "troop transports" for moving bulk people, and the ships there do far more good moving people and goods ashore than trying to get people off the island- and once again, where do they go if you do? Drop them off at the beach in Florida and wave goodbye?

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Don't be sorry for saying it again. MontanaMama Sep 2017 #1
Big ideas come with annoying details. For example, fly them WHERE? Florida?! WinkyDink Sep 2017 #2
i suspect that most who want to get out have family elsewhere in the us. mopinko Sep 2017 #5
You want to provide door to door transportation for milliions of people over thousands of miles? gilbert sullivan Sep 2017 #37
fine. that does not negate the need to do what we can, for who we can. mopinko Sep 2017 #42
We used to be able to pull off the Berlin Air Drops and save people from dying. DK504 Sep 2017 #54
I agree TexasBushwhacker Sep 2017 #3
This. Yes. Weekend Warrior Sep 2017 #4
It's not possible localroger Sep 2017 #6
Informative post. Thanks. bluepen Sep 2017 #7
ffs. just like the post i put up before the storm hit- no, you cant evacuate 3.5M. mopinko Sep 2017 #8
Well, you can evacuate the hospitals and nursing homes. Got to start somewhere. Ninsianna Sep 2017 #13
and- for everyone who stays mopinko Sep 2017 #9
Sigh, you really have no clue to the difficulty of what you want Lurks Often Sep 2017 #17
the navy transports the marines. mopinko Sep 2017 #18
It's not controversial, its just a really poorly thought out knee-jerk idea. FLPanhandle Sep 2017 #22
So how many people do you think want to leave PR? Lurks Often Sep 2017 #27
if they are bringing supplies in, presumably they are going back empty. mopinko Sep 2017 #41
As always you have no real plan Lurks Often Sep 2017 #46
i have to have a plan? i'm just calling for all available resources to help mopinko Sep 2017 #50
See post #48 for ANOTHER explanation of why what you want isn't realistic Lurks Often Sep 2017 #51
The C-40 is basically a Boeing 737. MineralMan Sep 2017 #21
So how many people do you think want to leave PR? Lurks Often Sep 2017 #34
I have no idea, of course, how many want to leave. MineralMan Sep 2017 #38
From an article dated 9/23/17 "Aid begins to flow to hurricane-hit Puerto Rico" Lurks Often Sep 2017 #40
from your link- mopinko Sep 2017 #43
Get back to me when you can supply a plan that addresses all the issues Lurks Often Sep 2017 #47
so all available c-17s should be there. mopinko Sep 2017 #36
Im sorry but that idea is simply batshit nuts. gilbert sullivan Sep 2017 #39
A navy ship can probably pull 40 or 50 barges, how many people per a barge? snooper2 Sep 2017 #23
Maybe we would deploy a fleet of blimps Orrex Sep 2017 #24
thanks you saved from pulling out my calculator... Locrian Sep 2017 #16
+1 FLPanhandle Sep 2017 #19
No more and no less than their "expert" critics. LanternWaste Sep 2017 #25
Post one good example FLPanhandle Sep 2017 #29
katrina mopinko Sep 2017 #44
That's a storm name FLPanhandle Sep 2017 #45
Just for discussion - pangaia Sep 2017 #53
. mopinko Sep 2017 #10
. mopinko Sep 2017 #11
. mopinko Sep 2017 #12
Until Trump tries to put a travel ban on refugees from Puerto Rico. Binkie The Clown Sep 2017 #14
i have to wonder if that is not the whole problem. mopinko Sep 2017 #15
Not necessarily against, but take them where? Adrahil Sep 2017 #20
Drop them off at a cruise ship dock in Miami apparently jberryhill Sep 2017 #28
where ever the hell they want to go. they are americans, not refugees. mopinko Sep 2017 #31
I have seen requests for private planes to help evacuate seriously ill patients from the hospitals. redstatebluegirl Sep 2017 #26
just not right. mopinko Sep 2017 #33
Absolutely, if this were Houston it would be. redstatebluegirl Sep 2017 #35
Well, it's not like the odds are good... yallerdawg Sep 2017 #30
and i reckon that price just went way the fuck up. mopinko Sep 2017 #32
I've actually done military logistics Lee-Lee Sep 2017 #48
Good post FLPanhandle Sep 2017 #49
dang du. who woulda thunk that aiding americans in distress could mopinko Sep 2017 #52
gee mopinko Sep 2017 #55
Stage 1 would be setting up the dreaded FEMA camp for 2 million people and arranging to process them Not Ruth Sep 2017 #56
much easier to do here than in pr. mopinko Sep 2017 #57
Of course they need sponsors Not Ruth Sep 2017 #58
it would be nice but these are americans. mopinko Sep 2017 #59
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»i'm sorry, but i will say...»Reply #48