In a catastrophic breakdown of communication and hardware, a U.S. Navy cruiser shot down one of its own fighter jets, believing it to be an inbound threat.
According to Business Insider, on December 22, 2024, just days after arriving in the Red Sea, the USS Gettysburg launched missiles at two American F/A-18 Super Hornets, mistaking them for enemy fire from Houthi combatants in Yemen—destroying one aircraft and nearly taking out another.
The Gettysburg had just joined the USS Harry S. Truman-led strike group in the volatile Red Sea region when its surface-to-air systems targeted its own airmen. The destroyer's crew, operating amid faulty systems and communication blind spots, authorized lethal force without verifying what it was firing on.
Failure in Combat Systems and Protocol
The Super Hornets, part of VFA-11’s elite “Red Rippers,” were returning from a routine mission when the Gettysburg’s combat crew misread their radar signature as that of enemy anti-ship missiles. The result: one jet shot out of the sky, and two American service members were forced to eject. They survived—but barely. One of the aviators later told investigators he saw his “life flash before [his] eyes” before pulling the ejection handle in time to escape the incoming missile.
A second fighter was nearly downed, too. A misfired missile altered course mid-flight and exploded in the sea just feet from the jet's fuselage. A third aircraft was also misidentified, but by the grace of restraint—or plain luck—no missile followed that target.
Crew Exhaustion, Broken Systems, and Silos
According to the official investigation, the situation aboard the Gettysburg was a perfect storm of system breakdowns, crew fatigue, and fractured decision-making. Problems had already been documented in the ship’s core warfighting capabilities, including network coordination, target identification, and threat assessment.
In plainer English, this ship wasn’t deployment-ready. And still, it was operating in one of the most high-stakes naval environments on earth with only a patchwork understanding of who was friend or foe. To make matters worse, the Truman and Gettysburg had been operating independently for long stretches of their deployment, hindering coordination that is vital during fast-moving air operations.
Misjudgments from the Command Deck
The culpability didn’t just rest with the tech. The investigation made it clear: "the decisions to shoot were wrong when measured across the totality of information available," noting a disturbing “low situational awareness” on the part of Gettysburg’s commanding officer.
That officer, supported by a combat information center described as out of sync and underperforming, green-lit missile fire on pilots wearing the same flag patch on their shoulders. Let that sink in.
A nearby Navy helicopter had a front row seat to the moment the system failed. Its commander stated, “We saw the missile overhead and saw it flash.” Even more troubling, he noted there was “no warning before the shot was taken.” No red flags, just fire and forget.
Pattern of Dangerous Incidents Emerges
This was not an isolated lapse—just the deadliest. Earlier in 2024, a German naval vessel erroneously fired on a U.S. MQ-9 Reaper drone. Thankfully, technical issues prevented that missile from hitting its mark.
Over the course of its Middle East mission, the Harry S. Truman strike group experienced four major mishaps. From this friendly fire disaster to a cargo collision and multiple jet losses, the deployment reads more like a checklist of what can go wrong than a model of naval precision. One F/A-18 was lost in April 2025 due to towing issues. Another went down in May due to a botched landing approach. That’s not a coincidence—that's a trend no whiteboard jargon can explain away.
Leadership Promises Change—Again
Vice Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jim Kilby responded to the investigation by stating, “The Navy is committed to being a learning organization.” He also stressed the importance of “investing in our people” to ensure mission readiness.
Noble sentiment. But it begs the question—how many lessons does it take before proper risk mitigation and accountability become standard, not slogans? We ask our military to operate under pressure. They deserve better than malfunctioning tools, flawed protocols, and sleep-deprived leaders making snap decisions with lives hanging in the balance.
