An F/A-18E Super Hornet fighter jet assigned to Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 136 was lost overboard from the aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman (CVN 75) while operating in the Red Sea, the U.S. Navy has confirmed.
The incident occurred on 28 April 2025 as the aircraft was being towed within the carrier’s hangar bay. According to a Navy statement, “the move crew lost control of the aircraft,” resulting in both the fighter and its tow tractor plunging into the sea. Sailors towing the aircraft took immediate action to move clear before it fell overboard.
One sailor sustained a minor injury, but all personnel have been accounted for.
An investigation into the incident is currently underway. Despite the loss of the Super Hornet, the Navy emphasised that “the Harry S. Truman Carrier Strike Group and embarked air wing remain fully mission capable.”
The strike group, operating under U.S. 5th Fleet, comprises the flagship USS Harry S. Truman, the nine squadrons of Carrier Air Wing 1, three guided-missile destroyers from Destroyer Squadron 28, and the cruiser USS Gettysburg (CG 64).
USS Harry S. Truman (CVN 75) is a Nimitz-class nuclear-powered aircraft carrier of the United States Navy. Commissioned in July 1998, she is the eighth vessel in the Nimitz class and is named after the 33rd President of the United States, Harry S. Truman. The carrier is based at Naval Station Norfolk, Virginia, and forms part of the U.S. Atlantic Fleet. Her primary role is to support and conduct naval operations by providing a mobile and flexible platform capable of launching and recovering aircraft worldwide.
The ship measures approximately 1,092 feet (333 metres) in length and displaces around 100,000 tonnes fully loaded. Powered by two Westinghouse A4W nuclear reactors driving four steam turbines, Harry S. Truman can reach speeds exceeding 30 knots (56 km/h; 35 mph) and has virtually unlimited range due to her nuclear propulsion. The carrier supports an air wing composed of around 60 aircraft, including F/A-18 Super Hornets, EA-18G Growlers, E-2D Hawkeyes, and various helicopters, depending on the mission requirements.
Designed with survivability and sustained operations in mind, Harry S. Truman is equipped with defensive systems such as the RIM-7 Sea Sparrow missiles, Phalanx Close-In Weapon Systems (CIWS), and electronic countermeasures. The ship typically carries a crew complement of approximately 5,000 personnel, including air wing staff and ship’s company. As part of ongoing upgrades, the carrier has received improvements under the Refueling and Complex Overhaul (RCOH) programme, ensuring she remains capable of supporting U.S. naval operations well into the 2040s.
This should be interesting precisely how do you lose an aircraft and tug overboard whilst it’s inside the hanger ? Since WW2 USN carriers have closed hangers with deck edge lifts, so only way I can think of is during it being on one of the lifts (someone picked the wrong gear !).
More senior officers to be reassigned 🤷🏼♂️
Unless it went through the hull the only official openings at sea are the lifts.
So it has to be an accident placing it on the lift – at which point it is very exposed.
The fact the tug/tractor went over the side too is extraordinary as there is supposed to be a shearing link to stop that happening. Or is that old hat now? Just as there are shearing links in aircraft nose steering to prevent excessive forces.
In fairness it could just be a mechanical defect in the tug/tractor?
Re- the tug, I wonder how old they are… Like ever other Western navy the USN has been strapped for cash for years if not decades. If faced with the choice of buying more whiz bangs or aircraft on one hand or a fleet of tugs which one would a hard pressed Admiral go for I wonder..?
I only ask the question as I would have thought anyone deliberately driving towards the edge of a big ship moving at speed is going to be very very careful (one assumes there were flying ops in progress so the ship would have been running at speed)!
Be interesting to see the report on this incident.
Cheers CR
Hmmm…perhaps a sudden onset of Sea State 7 in the Red Sea? Strange occurrences of wx in the area previously documented in Exodus14:21-29. Not certain USN Safety Investigation Board (SIB) would accept a deus ex machina accident rationale, but, what the hell, multiple careers have already taken a full spread of torpedoes below the waterline…🤔😉😳🙄😱
Oops, shit happens, it shouldn’t but life has a way of surprising us all! Someone is going to re-think their career!
Comments will be interesting….
When our F35 had the takeoff mishap the RN was denounced as useless.
These things happen in such a dangerous environment.
Let’s see how many agendas are on show, or not.
I’d love to see the video if this one…..
It is a whole different level of ooophs.
You can just about understand how the blanking plugs were left in place due to stress/overwork/poor procedures.
How you push a plane over the side is really, really ….special?
As I said above it could be a mechanical issue with the tug/tractor….
Re the F35B incident, I read the report and I’d summarise it in classic H&S Accident Investigation methodology.
Immediate cause was failure to remove the blanking plug and no one noticed.
Underlying cause was lack of sufficient experienced, properly trained /qualified ground crew / maintainers working with completely inadequate procedures and unsafe working practices.
Looking at the numbers going on CSG25 it seems the RAF/FAA have upped the numbers to match those of the USMC (@21 per Aircraft).
That is a lot of extra people to train.
And a lot of extra cost on that cost centre.
ABC, what were the unsafe working practices?
Whatever the reason at least everyone is safe, could have been a whole lot worse.
Aeroplanes are replaceable, people are not.
Cheers CR
With the amount of aircraft movements, on a very confined space, and an extremely dangerous operating environment. Incidents at sea like this are extremely rare. But incidents do and will happen. Aircraft carrier operations are extremely complex. And despite the cost.The complexity of air operations at sea is the main reason why so few countries can do it. Decades of blood, sweat, and tears have gone into perfecting carrier flight operations. But we are humans. And people make mistakes. Despite how thorough the operations manual and procedures. The Russians have lost far more aircraft at sea. The Chinese will also go through the same pain. Guaranteed.
I totally agree.
If it was easy everyone would do it.
Our SME has spoken.
But the Chinese won’t tell anybody so we will never know and their fanboys will tout the 100 percent record as a genuine testament to the magnificence of Chinese military ops.
Well there goes another commanding officer…
‘Sailors towing the aircraft took immediate action to move clear before it fell overboard’ I love the way that’s presented as a great success in a coordinated, calm and calculated response. I rather suspect they just ran like bats out of hell in reality.
Aye, it happens. Someone’s going to bed red faced
I can remember being brake number on 814 NAS Sea Kings aboard HMS Hermes in the ‘70s. Many times being pushed by flight deck tractor onto the side lift and watching the lift deck edge disappear from view as the cockpit overhung the platform and the sea slipped by. I had every confidence in the chock head movements team and the squadron chock numbers!
Trumpty Dumpty won’t like this….
How much does it cost
How many tug/tractors on board? I’m thinking the loss of one is quite a big percentage.
Per USNI, “Truman was conducting an “evasive maneuver” during the incident, a U.S. defense official confirmed to USNI News on Monday. A second defense official told USNI News the Super Hornet was being loaded onto the aircraft elevator on Truman when the strike fighter slid over the edge.”
CNN are reporting that the carrier was under Houti attack at the time, made a sharp evasive turn and the F-18E was ejected out the side from the hanger after the move crew lost control.
Normally you’d get a calxon warning if hard rudder was being applied?
Sometimes the forces applied are so huge that you can’t control them when in motion.
Which it could be if the obverse [inside of turn] screw was reversed in thrust but not rotation as a brake. Probably easier to do on a QEC with IEP?
Does that mean they might be retrieving it under fire too?
Several reports that the Houti’s attacked, firing missiles etc
Causing it to take a sharp evasive turn
And in that case, what happened to the layer of defences the ships have around it🤔
Someone’s in big trouble…
Interesting that the Houthi are claim a missile and drone attack against the carrier and reports are the aircraft was lost due to a har evasive manoeuvre.
Clearly CBG25 is sailing into a less than benign environment as it makes it way to the pacific..we live in an increasingly dangerous world..