Tag: News

• Netflix said it's buying Hollywood titan Warner Bros. in a blockbuster deal.
• Reacting to the news, several industry professionals raised concerns.
• Some said the acquisition could lead to job cuts, while others worried it could stymy creativity.

The critics have spoken, and the Netflix-Warner Bros. deal isn't getting rave reviews from Hollywood insiders.

Hollywood heavy hitters and rank-and-file industry workers alike have spoken out against the megadeal.

"If I was tasked with doing so, I could not think of a more effective way to reduce competition in Hollywood than selling WBD to Netflix," Jason Kilar, who previously ran Warner Bros. as the CEO of WarnerMedia, posted on X shortly after news of the deal broke.

The $72 billion acquisition, which requires regulatory approval, would reshape an industry that is still reeling from the introduction of streaming services nearly two decades ago.

By purchasing Warner Bros.' iconic studio, Netflix would knock out a major funder of TV and film projects, leaving creatives with fewer buyers and, potentially, audiences with a less diverse slate of content.

The consolidation could also result in fewer jobs for creative talent and crew members.

"All media mergers end up hurting writers, actors, directors, and everyone else who works in the industry," "Parks and Recreation" creator Mike Schur posted Friday on Bluesky. "Fewer companies means fewer jobs, period."

The Writers Guild of America's West and East branches said in a statement on Friday that the deal would "eliminate jobs, push down wages, worsen conditions for all entertainment workers, raise prices for consumers, and reduce the volume and diversity of content for all viewers."

And the Directors Guild of America said in a statement that the deal "raises significant concerns," specifically about hampering creativity and competition.

The deal would also mean the tech giant, which has historically snubbed theatrical releases, controls some of Hollywood's most storied pieces of IP, from "The Wizard of Oz" to the "Harry Potter" franchise.

Last week, James Cameron, the legendary director behind "Titanic" and "Avatar," said that such a deal "would be a disaster" on an episode of the podcast "The Town."

"Sarandos has gone on record saying theatrical films are dead," Cameron said, referencing Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos.

For its part, Netflix has said the deal will lead to "more jobs created across the entire entertainment industry" and that it "expects" to maintain Warner Bros.' existing operations, including its theatrical release pipeline. Sarandos also said that the deal would be "pro-worker."

Still, movie theater owners have echoed Cameron's concern.

The acquisition "poses an unprecedented threat to the global exhibition business," Michael O'Leary, the president of theater owner association Cinema United, said in a statement on Friday. UNIC, a European trade group of cinema owners, echoed the disapproval.

And theaters have reason to worry.

One veteran Hollywood producer, who spoke to Business Insider on condition of anonymity to avoid damaging their relationship with Netflix, said "Netflix is about to be a beast in the IP space," after years of having a deficiency in that part of its feature film portfolio. And in the process, it could strip movie houses of their beloved exclusivity to titles.

"Netflix can now drop a new 'Batman' movie or 'Harry Potter' on a 30-day theatrical window, maybe even day-and-date, and theaters will still want them because they are big movies," the producer said.

Studio movies currently play exclusively in theaters between 60 and 90 days; however, Sarandos said during a call with investors and press on Friday that "over time, the windows will evolve to be much more consumer-friendly, to be able to meet the audience where they are quicker."

There may have simply been no possibility for a Hollywood ending.

Before the deal was announced, Hollywood royalty Jane Fonda wrote an op-ed about the ripple effects of any deal, no matter the buyer.

"We don't need to know the final outcome to understand the danger," she wrote in The Ankler. "The threat of this merger in any form is an alarming escalation in a consolidation crisis that threatens the entire entertainment industry, the public it serves, and — potentially — the First Amendment itself."

• Carl Rinsch's fraud trial featured testimony about his luxury purchases.
• He bought a lot of Hermes goods and a $439,000 handmade mattress, witnesses said.
• Prosecutors say he defrauded Netflix of $11 million from funds meant for a sci-fi project.

After Carl Rinsch got an infusion of $11 million from Netflix to finish his passion project —  a futuristic television series — he could sleep well at night.

That's partly because he bought a $439,000 handmade mattress on what prosecutors say was on Netflix's dime.

At Rinsch's criminal fraud trial in Manhattan federal court on Friday, jurors heard more about the director's spending spree from some of the people who witnessed it firsthand. His former personal assistant testified that he compared himself to a character in a movie who had 30 days to spend $30 million — or lose it all. Prosecutors also called to the stand a salesman who waxed on about the handmade Swedish mattress he sold Rinsch, complete with a "sleep doctor" to massage it for him.

Rinsch liked the Hästens Grand Vividus mattress so much that he decided to buy a second one, the salesperson testified Friday.

Prosecutors in the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York allege Rinsch defrauded Netflix by misusing funds for the production of "White Horse" — a show about artificial beings who create their own society on Earth after a schism with humankind. Rinsch filmed portions of "White Horse," but went over budget and never finished a single episode.

On Friday, jurors heard more testimony from Maria Skotnikova, who worked as a personal assistant for Rinsch and made logistical arrangements for the filming of "White Horse."

Skotnikova said Rinsch made multiple luxury purchases after Netflix gave him an additional $11 million in March 2020 to finish the project, including a rush to buy Hermes goods.

"Get all that Hermes stuff now," Rinsch told Skotnikova in one August 2021 text message sent to the jury.

"This is your job," he texted her a short while later. "We have to do this. Or else the money goes bye-bye. Get it."

According to Skotnikova, Rinsch compared his situation to "Brewster's Millions" — the 1985 movie about a man who learns he received a $30 million windfall from a family member but must spend it all within 30 days. Skotnikova also testified Thursday about driving to meetings in Ferraris and Rolls-Royces, vehicles an FBI forensic accountant said Rinsch purchased using money that originally came from Netflix.

Skotnikova said Friday that Rinsch tried to purchase a large amount of furniture from the French designer Jacques Adnet, which he considered "interesting and underappreciated."

Rinsch, known for directing "Ronin 47" with Keanu Reeves, wanted to have a "monopoly" on the designer's furniture pieces so he could "control the price," Skotnikova testified.

The spending spree also included over 480 food takeout orders on Postmates and Uber Eats in a six-month span in 2022. The FBI forensic accountant previously testified that Rinsch moved the funds from Netflix through different accounts, invested a portion of it in the stock market and cryptocurrency, and spent other amounts on what appeared to be personal uses.

'Very special beds'

Later Friday, jurors heard from Johan Ericsson, who served as the top Hästens salesperson on the West Coast of the US. He said he met Rinsch in 2021, when the director went to the brand's Los Angeles store.

Rinsch purchased four mattresses for a total of $617,610.66, records show. He received a discount because he bought floor models rather than having them individually handmade in Sweden, Ericsson said.

The highlight was the Grand Vividus in the "black shadow" colorway. It was the top-of-the-line model that took over 700 hours to make, Ericsson said.

The Grand Vividus is not just a mattress, but a "sleep instrument" that includes a base and leather headboard, and comes with a "bed doctor" who visits your house to massage the mattress, according to Ericsson.

Rinsch was so pleased with it that he later modified his order to get an additional Grand Vividus mattress rather than three lesser Hästens models, according to Ericsson.

"These are two very special beds," Ericsson said.

US District Judge Jed Rakoff, who is overseeing the trial, chastised prosecutors for allowing Ericsson to spend so much time on the witness stand waxing lyrical about the qualities of Hästens mattresses.

"I was going to call it a sales pitch, but he obviously deeply believes in the brilliance of these mattresses," Rakoff said.

Ericsson said that Rinsch never spoke with him about using the mattresses for the production of "White Horse."

Rinsch's defense lawyers say he's innocent, and the case is really about a "creative genius" who was overwhelmed by the challenges of the project and didn't get the support he needed from Netflix.

In a deposition for a separate legal proceeding, which was entered into evidence in the criminal trial, Rinsch was asked why he purchased "a mattress that costs $450,000 for this production."

"Because it retains value," Rinsch said. "And a mattress that you spend $30,000 on is worth zilch, but a mattress that you spend $450,000 on — guess what? It's worth a hundred grand more now. So hey, what are you gonna do?"

Prosecutors told Rakoff they expect to finish presenting their case on Monday. Rinsch — an engaged and jittery presence in the courtroom — hasn't said whether he will take the witness stand while his lawyers present his defense case.

• Erika Roberts moved to Germany to study, partly because she didn't enjoy college in the US.
• She attends medical school in Munich and plans to become a doctor.
• The 27-year-old pays the equivalent of $100 per semester for tuition.

This story is based on a conversation with Erika Roberts, a 27-year-old medical student from Philadelphia who is studying in Munich. It has been edited for length and clarity.

When I was 16, I took part in a high school exchange program to Munich.

I loved everything about the city, especially the freedom that it gave to kids my age. Public transportation was safe and easily accessible, and I attended any cultural events that interested me.

I never expected to be living here a decade later.

Simple things in Munich were exciting for a teen

When I was a teen, my American and European friends and I would buy fresh bread from a bakery, sit by the river, and have a picnic. Even the simplest things felt exciting.

After graduating in June 2016, I wanted to do something interesting before college. I tried selling my dad on the idea of doing volunteer work in a developing country, such as Cambodia.

Then I realized that most of those projects need people with skill sets, not 18-year-olds with big dreams.

I followed the traditional route of touring colleges in the US. There were a lot of conversations about finding international and diverse environments where you can challenge yourself to grow.

I felt I'd already experienced that in Germany and thought of going back. But my dad was against it. We agreed that studying in the US was the less risky option.

Unfortunately, I never settled into my college in Massachusetts, where I studied biochemistry with a pre-med focus. I didn't have the independence I craved.

I wanted a work/life balance

I like to see different perspectives, and I wasn't connecting with people. Even though I got good grades, I didn't feel like I was becoming the adult I wanted to be.

While I knew that entering the medical profession would require a lot of effort, I also wanted to maintain a balance between work and my personal life. Part of my goal was to become a top doctor, but I longed to learn another language, travel the world, and see new cultures.

I finally decided to move to Germany in the summer of 2017. A close friend told me she'd applied to transfer to another school, which helped make up my mind. I also couldn't stop worrying about the expense of college in the US and student loans hanging over me.

Dad gave his blessing after seeing how motivated I was. He was impressed by my research on the lower cost of education in Germany, which is attributed to the country's public funding model.

Medical school tuition costs $100 per semester

I left the US in the fall of 2017 and spent a year learning German at a language school. Then, as someone from outside the European Union, I attended a preparatory college so that the German government would allow me to study medicine.

It was incredibly hard work, but I achieved the right grades to gain admission to medical school at the Technical University of Munich. I have a student residence permit, and the tuition costs $100 per semester.

I'm now in my second-to-last year, balancing studying for the boards with doctoral thesis research. I'm also collaborating with Move OverSeas Now by sharing online tips about relocating to Germany.

Meanwhile, the best things about living in Munich include the quality food and easy access to hiking in the Alps. There are numerous cultural events, and traveling to other parts of Europe is affordable and straightforward.

I miss my family

Of course, it has its cons like any other place. I find some of the bureaucracy annoying, and you have to get used to the shorter days in winter. I miss my family, too.

I have completed one of the three US medical licensing exams and must complete a residency in the US to have full freedom to practice in America.

Still, I've made lasting friendships and feel confident about my future. It was a huge step, but I made the correct decision when I crossed the Atlantic at the age of 19.

• Netflix became HBO faster than HBO could become Netflix.
• That's why Netflix is buying HBO.
• But assume the deal goes through, does HBO stick around, or get merged into Netflix? I have some thoughts.

Last month, HBO boss Casey Bloys stood in front of an auditorium full of reporters and told them what everyone already knew: Netflix had won the streaming wars.

"To Netflix's credit, as the first mover, they have become a utility. For consumers, it is the basic cable of today," he said.

But Bloys wasn't surrendering — he was pitching: HBO was still valuable, just like it was in the old cable days, when the only way you could get HBO was to get basic cable as well. "In today's world, consumers still want to add to their entertainment portfolio," he said.

Translation: OK, we know you're getting Netflix. But you should also buy HBO, too.

Now Netflix wants to take that idea to its logical conclusion: It will sell you Netflix and HBO.

First, of course, Netflix has to actually close its blockbuster $83 billion deal for HBO and the Warner studio.

But when that's done, what happens next? Netflix executives got a bunch of questions on an investor call Friday along those lines — both for HBO and the studio — and their answers on the HBO end amounted to "We think HBO is very valuable," which doesn't really clear anything up.

But the most logical way this would play out would be something like this: Netflix continues to offer the service now called HBO Max to anyone who wants it — whether or not they subscribe to Netflix — and then offers it to Netflix customers at a discount. A real bundle. A Netflix version of "basic cable + HBO."

Again, Netflix executives didn't actually say that on the call. Instead, we got commentary like this, from co-CEO Greg Peters:

"We think the HBO brand is very powerful for consumers. We think that the offering could constitute and would constitute part of our plans and how we structure those for consumers. And then that gives us a lot of options to figure out how do you package things, in different ways to make sure that we're maximizing the value for consumers , and maximizing the value of the assets that we're then being able to present."

Shrug emoji.

I'm sure Netflix will consider some tweaks beyond simply running two different services at the same time and selling a discounted bundle.

For instance: what happens to the "Max" shows HBO Max has been making — the cheaper, high-volume series that were supposed to broaden HBO's audience? Do those migrate to Netflix, which already serves a much larger, more general-interest subscriber base?

But those are tweaks. The big picture is that Netflix could operate Netflix and HBO as two separate services for quite a while, sold to overlapping but distinct audiences. Which is basically how things already work. Netflix declined to comment.

What's the opportunity for Netflix, and for HBO?

Antenna, the analytics firm, estimates that 45% of HBO's US subscribers already have Netflix — but only 15% of Netflix subscribers also get HBO. That discrepancy is likely even wider outside the US, since Netflix is nearly global and HBO is still expanding internationally. Which means HBO could dramatically increase its reach simply by being attached to Netflix and its 300 million subscribers.

It's also worth remembering the original logic behind Warner Bros. Discovery — the 2022 mashup of what used to be called Time Warner and Discovery Inc. The whole idea was scale: Put Discovery's cheap basic-cable fare in the same container as HBO's prestige hits, and you'd have one super-service that lots of people would buy.

Didn't work. HBO viewers wanted "The White Lotus," not pimple-popping shows. And investors hated the amalgamation so much that WBD was preparing to break itself up before deciding instead to sell to Netflix.

So I'd be surprised if Netflix tries melting HBO into part of its giant, undifferentiated service. Much more likely: Turning it back into what it's always been: a premium channel you stack on top of whatever you already watch.

That used to be cable. Now it might just be Netflix.

• Netflix is set to acquire Warner Bros. in a $72 billion deal for its streaming and studios business.
• That means the streamer will own a slew of classic movies and TV shows from the WBD catalog.
• Titles that will be owned by Netflix include "Casablanca," "Friends," and the "Harry Potter" franchise.

In a deal that is sure to disrupt Hollywood, Netflix is buying Warner Bros. for $72 billion.

In the deal, the streaming giant will acquire WB's over 100-year vault of beloved film and TV titles.

That means that not only would current hits like "Sinners" and "One Battle After Another" be owned by Netflix, but so would classic movies like "Casablanca" and "The Matrix," as well as beloved TV shows like "Friends" and "The Wire."

Below are 30 Warner Bros. movies and TV shows that will soon be Netflix titles.

• A version of this story originally appeared in the BI Tech Memo newsletter.
• Sign up for the weekly BI Tech Memo newsletter here.

How much would you pay for a single AI killer app?

Hedge fund honcho Sam Leffell has views. I got to know Sam while researching ChatGPT's predictive abilities. He uses that leading AI tool constantly for work and in his personal life.

He also tried Google's Gemini earlier this year and became obsessed with a Gmail feature called Polish that uses AI to improve any email with at least 12 words in it. You just press Alt+H on Windows PCs, or Option+H on Macs, and Gemini swoops into action. (That's polish, the shining process, not Polish the language).

Sam said this was the most useful Gemini feature. "Writing emails now takes a fraction of the time it used to," he said. "I still make picky edits, but it's a lot quicker and better."

Here's the wrinkle: He turned off his Gemini paid subscription after a while because, anecdotally for him, it was not as good as ChatGPT. Then, the Polish feature from his Gmail suddenly disappeared. Unacceptable!

"That surprised me," Sam said. "So now I'm paying Google a certain amount each month, just to have this button to polish all my emails. That's how valuable this is."

The first paid tier of Gemini is $20 a month. That's a lot for one feature.

Sign up for BI's Tech Memo newsletter here. Reach out to me via email at abarr@businessinsider.com.

• The Netflix-Warner Bros. Discovery deal would be one of the biggest ever in the media industry.
• WBD CEO David Zaslav told employees not to worry in a town hall on Friday afternoon.
• "Netflix is an exceptional company" with "a great, sustainable future," Zaslav said.

Warner Bros. Discovery CEO David Zaslav presented an upbeat take on the company's new mega-merger with Netflix during a Friday all-hands with employees.

"This is a big day for Warner Bros.," Zaslav said at a company global town hall, a recording of which was obtained by Business Insider.

Netflix plans to buy the Warner Bros. studio and streaming assets in an industry-shaking $72 billion deal, the companies announced on Friday. WBD's TV networks like CNN and TNT will be part of a spinoff in mid-2026, as the media conglomerate had originally planned.

WBD's town hall on Friday afternoon at 1:30 pm ET seemed designed to answer employees' questions and assuage any fears about the Netflix deal. Zaslav also sent a memo to staffers, several of whom told BI they were worried about their job security as the company undergoes another major deal. That's especially true because Netflix has its own top-tier tech that could render some of WBD's obsolete.

"The intention is, they want to keep most people," Zaslav said of Netflix on the call.

WBD CFO Gunnar Wiedenfels, who will lead Discovery Global after it's spun off from the main company, said on the call that while the WBD as the world knows it will come to an end, he's excited for the future.

"It's an emotional day, I think, for all of us," Wiedenfels said.

What WBD execs said about the split, bidding war, and sale

Early on the call, Zaslav acknowledged that WBD and its employees had gone through a slew of changes since he engineered a merger between WarnerMedia and Discovery in 2021.

"In the end, we've gotten a lot more right than we've gotten wrong," Zaslav said.

The WBD CEO reiterated that the company had planned to split itself before Paramount expressed its interest with an unsolicited offer. As a public company, Zaslav explained that it was executives' duties to get the best possible offer.

"Our No. 1 focus is to drive shareholder value," Zaslav said.

As Netflix, Paramount Skydance, and Comcast put forth offers, Zaslav said that the bidding war got noisy.

"It was more public than we would have liked," Zaslav said of the bidding process.

WBD employees should be flattered by the interest from Netflix and other companies, Zaslav said.

"They wanted to figure out how to get into business with all of you," Zaslav said of WBD's suitors. He also said there may be more noise ahead, so "put your seatbelts on."

In the end, WBD executives told employees that they took the best offer on the table.

"Netflix is an exceptional company," Zaslav said. "I think it has a great, sustainable future."

As Netflix incorporates HBO Max content, Zaslav said that "more people will be getting nourished" by HBO and Warner Bros. content.

Netflix execs also explained their views on the deal

After announcing its blockbuster deal on Friday, Netflix also moved to answer questions from Wall Street analysts, investors, employees, movie-theater owners, and government regulators.

Here's what Greg Peters, the Netflix co-CEO, said about the deal on a call with analysts: "This acquisition will allow us to significantly expand our production capacity in the United States and keep investing in original content over the long term. That means more opportunities for creative talent; it means more jobs created across the entire entertainment industry."

This story is developing and will be updated.

• A version of this story originally appeared in the BI Tech Memo newsletter.
• Sign up for the weekly BI Tech Memo newsletter here.

OpenAI spread itself too thin, and CEO Sam Altman knows it.

His "Code Red" to employees this week marks a reset: Focus on improving ChatGPT, and pause lower-priority initiatives. The most striking pause is advertising. Why delay such a lucrative opportunity at a moment when OpenAI's finances face intense scrutiny?

Because in tech, nothing matters more than users.

Google built its Search empire on this principle. Every query and click fed a feedback loop: user behavior informed ranking systems, which improved results, which attracted more users. Over time, that loop became an impenetrable moat. Competing with it has proven nearly impossible.

ChatGPT occupies a similar position for AI assistants. Nearly a billion people now interact with it weekly, giving OpenAI an unmatched new window into human intent, curiosity, and decision-making. Each prompt and reply can be fed back into model training, evaluations, and reinforcement learning to strengthen what is arguably the world's most powerful AI feedback loop.

Altman's Code Red aims to protect that advantage. If ChatGPT becomes more useful, people will use it more, which strengthens the loop, which improves the product again — a compounding cycle that could make ChatGPT as unassailable in AI answers as Google is in search.

But that dominance is no longer assured. Google's Gemini 3 rollout has lured new users. If ChatGPT's quality slips or feels cluttered, defecting to Google becomes easier. Introducing ads now risks exactly that. Even mildly irritated users could view ads as one annoyance too many.

For now, OpenAI is betting on new model releases to reaccelerate ChatGPT's growth. Ads can wait, but not forever. Generative AI is expensive to run, more so than Search or social networks. OpenAI has already committed to spending hundreds of billions of dollars on infrastructure to serve ChatGPT at a global scale. At some point, those bills will force the company to monetize more aggressively.

If OpenAI manages to build even half of Google's Search ads business in an AI-native form, it could generate roughly $50 billion in annual profit. That's one way to fund its colossal ambitions.

But that future depends on the strength of today's feedback loop. For now, the priority is clear: make ChatGPT undeniably better, pull more users in, and keep the flywheel spinning. Ads can come later. User growth can't wait.

Sign up for BI's Tech Memo newsletter here. Reach out to me via email at abarr@businessinsider.com.

• I've been a server at a winery for years, so I've seen guests make their fair share of mistakes.
• For example, I often find that guests don't want to expand their horizons during a tasting.
• Additionally, some customers don't realize they should tip the staff in a tasting room.

As a server, I've always thought of wine tastings as opportunities to share my love for the beverage with others.

But after working at a winery for over seven years, I've seen almost everything, from wannabe wine sommeliers to guests who think a tasting is an excuse to get drunk with a view.

Here are some of the biggest mistakes customers make at tastings.

Refusing to try certain wines

One of the most common mistakes I've noticed is that people assume they know exactly what a wine will taste like based on its name or varietal.

I've had guests turn their noses up when I say "riesling" and immediately declare that they don't like sweet wines. In reality, not all rieslings are sweet — some are incredibly dry, with crisp acidity and minerality.

That's why I encourage guests to taste wine like it's their first time trying it. You might think you know what you'll like, but sometimes the name of the wine doesn't tell the whole story.

In my opinion, the best part of a wine tasting is discovering something unexpected that charms your taste buds.

Acting unruly when in a large group

Managing the expectations of large groups who come in for bachelorette parties, birthdays, or other celebrations can be challenging.

From what I've seen, the tasting-room staff have good reason to run and hide in the kitchen if someone walks in wearing a "bride" sash. Don't get me wrong — I love a good chance to day drink, but sometimes guests arrive expecting to do what they see in the movies.

They envision wine tastings as an opportunity to slam rosé and run through the vines, but an intimate tasting room isn't the space for that. It's a refined experience, focusing on savoring the wine and enjoying the setting.

I always recommend reserving a private tasting room for larger parties or calling ahead to establish proper expectations so everyone can enjoy the experience without stepping on any toes.

Not tipping the staff after a tasting

Many guests forget or don't realize that tipping is customary in a winery's tasting room. The setting is a bit more relaxed than at a restaurant, so some people often don't associate the tasting room with tipping.

However, the tasting-room staff work hard to make your experience enjoyable, and many of us rely on tips.

Tipping might not be required, but it's a small gesture that goes a long way in acknowledging a server's effort to make each tasting special.

• A critical system failed as a fighter jet was landing on an aircraft carrier earlier this year.
• The $60 million F/A-18 fell off the deck of the USS Harry S. Truman and into the Red Sea.
• A new Navy investigation shows how the landing unraveled in a matter of moments.

As the fighter jet landed on the aircraft carrier, a critical piece of the landing system blew apart, shot across the machinery room, slammed into equipment a sailor had been sitting at only moments earlier, and then hit the deck spinning “like the Tasmanian devil.”

"Something bad just happened," a sailor in the room said as he raced to get help. The other sailor who narrowly avoided catastrophe suffered a minor injury and had their headset ripped off in the incident.

One of the arresting gear cables — the tensioned wires that US Navy fighter jets hook onto during landings at sea — had broken as the crucial machinery that absorbs the landing plane's force came apart beneath the flight deck. The failure destabilized the F/A-18 Super Hornet that had just touched down.

Asymmetric forces threw the aircraft off-center. With no chance of regaining flight, the aviators ejected as it shot off the deck and into the sea. It all unfolded in a matter of seconds.

A new Navy investigation into the disastrous landing, reviewed by Business Insider prior to its release on Thursday, highlights how quickly routine carrier operations can go terribly wrong.

The May 6 incident, which injured two naval aviators, marked the second Super Hornet loss in a matter of days — and the third overall for the carrier USS Harry S. Truman's Middle East deployment.

The command investigation into the costly mishap details how one of the carrier's arresting cables failed to stop the fighter jet, which left a trail of sparks and flames as it flipped off the flight deck and into the Red Sea.

Rear Adm. Sean Bailey, commander of the Navy's Carrier Strike Group 8, led by the Truman, said in the investigation that the loss of the $60 million fighter jet was "entirely preventable."

A rough landing

The Truman and its strike group spent months in the Red Sea leading Navy combat operations against the Houthis, an Iran-backed rebel group in Yemen that had been attacking important Middle East shipping lanes.

Flight operations were running at a higher tempo, with the carrier launching and recovering aircraft dozens of times a day.

For aircraft recoveries, Nimitz-class carriers like the Truman typically have four arresting cables tensioned across the flight deck to catch the tailhook of a landing plane and decelerate it instantly.

On May 6, as the two-seater F/A-18F was landing that night, everything looked normal right up until the jet hooked the arresting cable.

Arresting gear sailors heard what sounded like an explosion, parts were flying around the machinery space, and on deck, sparks were shooting out of the jet, followed by flames.

It was dark, and the air boss overseeing the flight operations and landing signal officers, unaware that the cable had parted, thought the fighter's engine had ingested foreign object debris.

The aircraft was leaning left as it moved down the landing zone. "POWER!" the lead LSO called. "ROTATE, CLIMB!" The fighter jet was traveling too fast to stop, but not fast enough to take off. A back-up LSO realized the aircraft wasn't climbing and made the call.

"EJECT, EJECT, EJECT!" the officer called out.

The aircraft rolled and then knife-edged at 90 degrees. Moments later, it plunged into the Red Sea.

The "man overboard" call went out a minute after the plane first touched the deck. Sailors on the flight deck didn't see any parachutes deploy after their cockpit ejection amid the disarray, but a few minutes later, they saw the two aviators illuminate their flashlights in the water around 100 yards away.

Twenty minutes later, a rescue helicopter and swimmers arrived on scene to recover them. The aviators suffered minor injuries.

The 'critical point of failure'

The command investigation blamed the mishap on a mix of factors, including the ship's high operational tempo, understaffing, and errors by the arresting gear operator, who ensures the system is ready to counteract the landing aircraft's momentum.

According to the investigation, "the primary contributor in the chain of events that led to the mishap" was inadequate maintenance on the sheave damper crosshead and clevis pin, components of the arresting gear system.

The root cause, the investigation report said, was "the material failure of the clevis pin." The pin lacked a washer, a small part that helps keep the system in place. That maintenance oversight ended with a jet in the water and two aviators overboard.

It's possible this mechanism had been loosening for some time before the mishap, the investigation said. A missing washer could allow the pin in the arresting gear to work loose and shear off, ultimately causing internal parts in the gear to come apart under and the arresting cable to break.

Sailors across the board were poorly trained, the investigation determined, and a maintenance support sailor who was supposed to inspect the arresting cable and its mechanisms hadn't thoroughly done so.

Vice Adm. John Gumbleton, acting head of Fleet Forces Command, wrote in a letter attached to the investigation that Truman's leadership across all levels "allowed the air department's aircraft launch and recovery equipment maintenance program standards to decline, ultimately leading to a critical point of failure."

The May 6 incident was the fourth major mishap that the Truman and the rest of its strike group suffered during the monthslong Middle East combat deployment.

In December, the cruiser USS Gettysburg mistakenly shot down one of the Truman's F/A-18s. A few months later, in February, the carrier collided with a commercial vessel. And in April, just over a week before the arresting cable incident, a fighter jet and a tow tractor fell overboard as the carrier made a hard turn to evade incoming Houthi missile fire.