Once hailed as a crown jewel of American naval power projection, the USS Harry S. Truman is now drawing serious scrutiny after suffering yet another aviation mishap—the second F/A-18 Super Hornet lost in just over a week, and the third major incident involving aircraft during its current deployment in the Red Sea.
This latest event, involving what is being described as an “arrestment failure” during a routine landing, led to the jet plunging off the carrier’s deck and into the Red Sea. Thankfully, both the pilot and weapons systems officer were able to eject and were safely recovered by helicopter, sustaining only minor injuries. But the loss of a $60 million tactical asset—yet again—has many questioning the operational condition of the Truman, its crew readiness, and whether the supercarrier is plagued by systemic failures or simply a stretch of catastrophic bad luck.
This is not an isolated case. The USS Harry S. Truman is quietly amassing a record that would make even seasoned naval commanders uneasy:
-
December 2024: A Super Hornet launched from the Truman was shot down in a friendly fire incident by the USS Gettysburg, part of the same strike group. Both aviators ejected safely.
-
Late April 2025: Another F/A-18 was lost while under tow in the hangar bay, a ground-handling failure that led to the aircraft rolling overboard.
-
May 6, 2025: The latest Super Hornet was lost due to an apparent arresting gear failure—either the tailhook failed to catch the wire, or the wire snapped or malfunctioned. The Navy has launched an investigation.
These aren’t just statistical anomalies. In the rigid, high-stakes world of carrier aviation, even one aircraft loss is a big deal. Three in five months—two in two weeks—is virtually unheard of without wartime combat engagement. These mishaps collectively paint a picture that can’t be ignored.
The Truman had already lost its commanding officer following a collision with a merchant vessel, an incident that further undermined confidence in the ship’s operational oversight. In Navy culture, when a commanding officer is relieved, it typically reflects either a critical error in judgment or loss of confidence in leadership—a scarlet letter for any vessel.
With repeated aviation failures now adding to the ship’s checkered deployment, whispers are growing louder inside and outside the Navy: Has the Truman become a bad-luck ship—or worse, a bad-command ship?
To be fair, the Truman is operating in one of the most volatile maritime theaters in the world. Since late 2023, U.S. naval forces in the Red Sea have come under near-continuous assault from Houthi-launched missiles and drones, prompting multiple real-time combat responses, including the activation of Phalanx Close-In Weapon Systems (CIWS)—a last-ditch defense system rarely used outside direct combat.
Add to that constant aerial operations, complex coordination with allies, long deployments under wartime conditions, and high political stakes, and it’s clear the Truman is under extreme operational stress. But even under such conditions, the Navy’s bar for safety and precision remains high—and the Truman appears to be falling short.
The Navy has a long memory, and ships carry reputations that can last decades. There’s an old line—possibly apocryphal—credited to a WWII submarine commander: “If you’re not lucky, we can’t use you.” It was meant half-jokingly, but it reflects a brutal truth of naval warfare: luck is a factor—but luck alone doesn’t explain patterns.
The Truman’s recent record raises questions that go beyond chance. Is the arresting gear system failing inspection standards? Is flight deck crew training slipping under deployment fatigue? Are command-level oversight mechanisms deteriorating? These are not speculative concerns—they’re fundamental to carrier operations.
