USS John McCain collision

[SF_BHT]

Well 7th fleet is down one admiral. They just announced his relief for loss of confidence........

[The Reaper]

Not a Navy guy, but why don't they post watches to keep an eye out for traffic during limited visibility transits of congested areas?

Assuming the bridge watch cannot see 360 degrees.

You would think a vessel that can see and hit a ballistic missile at more than 1,000 miles would be able to see and avoid a 30,000 ton vessel moving at a few knots.

Is there some reason the radar is not picking up the merchant vessels?

RIP, Sailors.

TR

[BigJimCalhoun]

Originally Posted by LarryW

Please check out this video

Thank you for sharing. I learned something from this. I can see how a collision can happen. About 8-1/2 minutes in, it warns the views that many ships may not have the ATS (?), or it may be turned off. The harbor lights cause confusion too.

[LarryW]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

Not a Navy guy, but why don't they post watches to keep an eye out for traffic during limited visibility transits of congested areas?

Assuming the bridge watch cannot see 360 degrees.

RIP, Sailors.

TR

Yes, sir, and they're supposed to have lookouts posted on each of the bridge wings (port and starboard) and aft. So, three lookouts should have been posted and speaking directly to the Pilot House and to CIC (Combat Info Center). Information is supposed to be relayed to those spaces and immediately communicated to the respective officer in charge (the OOD on the Bridge and the Watch Officer in CIC). Preliminary reports from Fitzgerald state that the Command "lost situational awareness". I suspect the same catch all phrase will be applied to McCain. BTW, you "lose situational awareness" when you stop paying attention. I can't find an excuse for either of these senseless tragedies beyond failed leadership, and that is never an excuse.

On McCain the divers have thankfully found the bodies of all 10 missing sailors. Small consolation to the families.

https://news.usni.org/2017/08/27/nav...-john-s-mccain

[LarryW]

Originally Posted by cbtengr

Not trying to pick on the Navy but if it's so hectic out there then one would expect the level of vigilance to be that much higher. There is just no excuse for this. They are recovering bodies now I am sure those sailors did not go to bed thinking that their lives were in eminent danger from a collision.

Speaking purely from my own experience from '62 to '96, yes, when you hit the rack at sea, just as in any dangerous area of service, you go trusting those who are on watch to remain alert and protect your safety. Trust is the cornerstone of the brotherhood in which we all serve regardless of branch. Likewise, when you stand your watch you stand it fully aware that you are caring for your brotherhood, you are protecting them so they can sleep well, and more than that you are vowing to protect their family's most treasured possession. You don't bestow your trust when you sleep, or assume the responsibility when you stand your watch, casually or for granted. No, sir, there is no excuse. It's your job and it's your promise, your word. All rage against the conditions which caused these tragedies is appropriate.

[Pete]

Ouch

Part 1

https://www.usni.org/magazines/proce...re-root-causes

Part 2

https://www.usni.org/magazines/proce...rational-pause

[LarryW]

Originally Posted by Pete

Ouch

Part 1

https://www.usni.org/magazines/proce...re-root-causes

Part 2

https://www.usni.org/magazines/proce...rational-pause

Yes, sir: Ouch, indeed.

The author, Capt Eyer, is clear as to issues that have been breeding for years. It's a culture problem that appoints Fleet and Task Force Commands based on political leverage, Squadron and individual ship commands based on time in grade instead of demonstrated proficiency, and training and operational emphasis on reliance on technology and less on the individual. It reeks of so many other navies in history who failed in their mission. I hope but am not confident that this same or a similar paradigm does not also exist in other services. The Navy is unique in that a mistake made by a single ship results in dramatic and immediate undeniable results, and entire Fleet training and operational systems are revealed to be critically substandard.

Recommend all services at all levels take a hard look at their pipeline culture. While these inexcusable tragedies in the Navy are undeniable the culture which allowed them to grow can affect any service, for that matter any large organization.

Poor leadership is not restricted to the sea going services. JMHO.

[Streck-Fu]

As for these multiple new investigations, while perhaps necessary, there is no secret about what’s wrong. In 2010 Vice Admiral Phil Balisle was tasked to investigate the state of the surface force. The report clearly spelled out that training was poor, at every level; the material condition of ships was in decline; and the operational tempo for ships was crushing and prevented serious maintenance, even if funding existed (and it did not) to pay for repairs. If the “Balisle Report” had been acted on the Navy likely would not be where it is today.

I feel sorry for the junior enlisted that bear the brunt of this backlash. Most of the leadership will not treat this as a teaching moment that includes a mea culpa. IT will be increased watches, increased maintenance, and even less rest for an already over worked and deployed force. This is where the figurative shit rolls down hill into a literal pile of shit that will suffocate the E4 and below.

The Div O's and Dept Heads need to effectively train the JOs and the Chiefs need to approach the corrective training with an even hand.

[The Reaper]

Again, I am not a sailor, but I have often wondered what the efforts to reduce crew sizes to save money would have on damage control, watches, and the ability of the ship, if necessary, to fight and defend itself. Many of the vessels that were seriously damaged in combat during WW II were saved by the herculean efforts of many of the crew in damage control operations.

To me, it appears to be a failed experiment, unless we anticipate never actually employing our vessels in naval combat again.

TR

[LarryW]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

Again, I am not a sailor, but I have often wondered what the efforts to reduce crew sizes to save money would have on damage control, watches, and the ability of the ship, if necessary, to fight and defend itself. Many of the vessels that were seriously damaged in combat during WW II were saved by the herculean efforts of many of the crew in damage control operations.

To me, it appears to be a failed experiment, unless we anticipate never actually employing our vessels in naval combat again.

TR

"A failed experiment" is being gentle.

All spot on points, sir, and arguments opposing your conclusions would be on shaky ground. DoD chose to reduce manning in many systems to save money, and that acquisition strategy permeates all the services. It's fine and dandy when you're doing nothing more than show-and-tell whiz bang, shopping mall recruitment drives. A lot of shock and awe in all the technology impresses folks. Unfortunately, a war of attrition especially at sea doesn't respond to glitz. Winning such a war requires people.

"The new ship here is fitted according to the reported increase of knowledge among mankind. Namely, she is cumbered end to end, with bells and trumpets and clock and wires, it has been told to me, can call voices out of the air of the waters to con the ship while her crew sleep. But sleep thou lightly, O Nakoda. It has not yet been told to me that the Sea has ceased to be the Sea." (Rudyard Kipling)

[Old Dog New Trick]

Update over on the USS Fitzgerald.

http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/...0&postcount=42