Navy files homicide charges against commanders of 2 ships in deadly crashes

pleber16 said:
I’m not totally sure where the comparison was going, but the expected competency of a YP versus a Navy ship aren’t even comparable...
Click to expand...

Maybe not entirely unrelated. If this is how they train, it’s how they’ll play too.

We’re just a few years out from the news article praising USNA for bringing back celestial navigation.
 
I have no knowledge of what it takes to navigate a ship at sea, but would like to think that the Navy is better at selecting ship commanders than these incidents indicate. Is there a lesson that is transferable from the false ballistic missile alert?

It seems that only an idiot could accidentally send an alert informing 2 million people they are about to be vaporized. But upon seeing the choices on the Hawaii Emergency Management computer screen, the real idiot was the person who designed the user interface. The person who clicked on the 4th choice instead of the 1st was only half an idiot.

upload_2018-1-21_7-47-55.png
 
jl123 said:
I have no knowledge of what it takes to navigate a ship at sea, but would like to think that the Navy is better at selecting ship commanders than these incidents indicate.
View attachment 1331
Click to expand...

Competence at sea is not necessarily what gets you selected for command at sea. One of the problems is the lack of sea time these folks are afforded by the time they get to be a CO.

A typical first time civilian ship master is probably in his mid to late 30’s (if not older) with at that point at least 10-15 years of time in the industry of which they have probably spent at least 50% of that time actually on the ship. That means they have around 7-10 years of actual at sea time. A typical first time Navy CO would probably have half of that time actually underway at sea. It is a huge difference. And at least part of that time was spent doing something completely unrelated to bridge watch standing. Then, you take away the emphasis on ship handling by removing some of the SWO schools and you quickly realize the Navy was building towards a dangerous situation.
 
LineInTheSand said:
I remember a USNA YP doing MOB drills near the entrance to the Cape Cod Canal..... all while boats/ships were trying to enter the canal....
Click to expand...
pleber16 said:
I’m not totally sure where the comparison was going, but the expected competency of a YP versus a Navy ship aren’t even comparable...
Click to expand...

The first thing that popped in my head was LITS in a CGA dinghy on the Thames, being swamped by two Navy YP's and an attack class sub.
 
LurkingQuietly said:
The first thing that popped in my head was LITS in a CGA dinghy on the Thames, being swamped by two Navy YP's and an attack class sub.
Click to expand...

That’s assuming the Navy YPs can’t get lost on a river and a Navy sub hasn’t hit any fishing boats, but yes, it’s always best to keep your head on a swivel when Navy boats are around because they certainly aren’t paying attention.

At least the Thames isn’t near Iranian waters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rjb
So it seems to be a mystery exactly how the bridge of a Naval Vessel operates. I have this idealistic image that there are at least 3 people there at all times, The Officer in charge, someone behind the steering, and some some guy watching a radar screen blink. I'd imagine in the daylight hours there are a lot more. So, where am I going off base here?
 
LurkingQuietly said:
So it seems to be a mystery exactly how the bridge of a Naval Vessel operates. I have this idealistic image that there are at least 3 people there at all times, The Officer in charge, someone behind the steering, and some some guy watching a radar screen blink. I'd imagine in the daylight hours there are a lot more. So, where am I going off base here?
Click to expand...
I would assume the funding isn’t so bad that they don’t know that it’s important to have people on the bridge watching at all times.
 
LurkingQuietly said:
So it seems to be a mystery exactly how the bridge of a Naval Vessel operates. I have this idealistic image that there are at least 3 people there at all times, The Officer in charge, someone behind the steering, and some some guy watching a radar screen blink. I'd imagine in the daylight hours there are a lot more. So, where am I going off base here?
Click to expand...

3 would be more akin to a merchant ship (usually 2 on those). A vessel of war has way more people on the bridge, or assisting the navigating team. Then there is the whole combat control area that is also supplementing.
 
Big and obvious question here, does the Navy actually think there was true negligence or are they scapegoating people to coverup problems and mute the embarrassment? In my view criminal charges are excessive; don't forget the accused have had their careers ruined, will likely be forced out of the service and forfeit their retirement. That's pretty hefty punishment. Short of an entire bridge crew asleep or playing on their iphones seems like proving criminal negligence is difficult and good civilian lawyers can probably raise more than enough reasonable doubt.
 
conrack said:
Big and obvious question here, does the Navy actually think there was true negligence or are they scapegoating people to coverup problems and mute the embarrassment? In my view criminal charges are excessive; don't forget the accused have had their careers ruined, will likely be forced out of the service and forfeit their retirement. That's pretty hefty punishment. Short of an entire bridge crew asleep or playing on their iphones seems like proving criminal negligence is difficult and good civilian lawyers can probably raise more than enough reasonable doubt.
Click to expand...

Also important to remember... people died. Not in war.... not in some complicated operation....

Bad sailing.

“You’re fires” is hardly hefty for multiple deaths.
 
conrack said:
Big and obvious question here, does the Navy actually think there was true negligence or are they scapegoating people to coverup problems and mute the embarrassment? In my view criminal charges are excessive; don't forget the accused have had their careers ruined, will likely be forced out of the service and forfeit their retirement. That's pretty hefty punishment. Short of an entire bridge crew asleep or playing on their iphones seems like proving criminal negligence is difficult and good civilian lawyers can probably raise more than enough reasonable doubt.
Click to expand...
Capt. Hazelwood m/v Exxon Valdez was fined $50,00o and 100o hours of community service for being the captain on a ship that ran aground and spilt oil.
 
Sydney C. said:
Just ran across this in the past couple of days.
https://www.powerandmotoryacht.com/seamanship/lessons-learned-from-navy-tragedies
Click to expand...
Great read. I suspected that navigating a modern warship was slightly more complicated than what I experienced in a weekend sailing course.

It raises a question - Who should be held criminally negligent? The untrained officers sent to their assignments, the Captain of the ship who received so many untrained personnel, or the senior officers/civilian leaders who closed the SWOS.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top