Archive Logo.jpg

November 14, 2006

H&I Fires, 14 Nov 2006

Open post for those with something to share, updated through the day. New, complete posts come in below this one. Note: If trackbacking, please acknowledge this post in your post. That's only polite.

You're advertising here, we should get an ad at your place...


In all the hubbub of yesterday, I forgot to note this:

Hosting provided by FotoTime

THE SULLIVANS (DDG-68) is named to honor five brothers from Waterloo, Iowa who served together on the USS JUNEAU during World War II. The Sullivan brothers: George, 28; Francis, 27; Joseph, 24; Madison, 23; and Albert, 20; lost their lives during the Battle of Guadalcanal on November 13, 1942. They were adamant about serving together in spite of the Navy wartime policy to separate family members. Surviving the brothers were their parents, Thomas and Alleta, their sister Genevieve, and the youngest brothers wife, Katherine, and their son, James. The family today includes two grandchildren of Albert Sullivan: Kelly Ann Sullivan Loughren and John Sullivan.

The the first link is to the webpage of the current USS The Sullivans - this link is to the Navy history site on the brothers. I gotta get to work! -the Armorer


I am not exactly comfortable posting this story under the Sullivan's story.....but....

"Chinese Sub Came Close To U.S. Ships"

In the blogs and websites I read this has set off a firestorm of demands for more ASW training. I'm not saying it didn't happen. I would never impugn the honor of the Navy.........but could this have been leaked as an opportunity to enhance the Navy's budget. My understanding is that it had been difficult to justify more ASW training money since the end of the Cold War. Ordinarily I would find such subterfuge distasteful. However, a wise man once said to me "I hate corruption, unless I'm part of it.".....Swabbie Doxie


Horror of horrors! Bullet Found in Doorway. - FbL


Back in uniform - the "Sgt" in Sgt B is no longer just an honorific. - FbL

*A term of art from the artillery. Harassment and Interdiction Fires.

Back in the day, when you could just kill people and break things without a note from a lawyer, they were pre-planned, but to the enemy, random, fires at known gathering points, road junctions, Main Supply Routes, assembly areas, etc - to keep the bad guy nervous that the world around him might start exploding at any minute.

Not really relevant to today's operating environment, right? But, it *is*

The UAVs we fly over Afghanistan and Pakistan looking for targets of opportunity are a form of H&I fires, if you really want to parse it finely. We just have better sensors and fire control now.

I call the post that because it's random things posted by me and people I've given posting privileges to. It's also an open trackback, so if (Don Surber uses it this way a lot) someone has a post they're proud of, but it really isn't either Castle kind of stuff, or topical to a particular post, I've basically given blanket permission to use that post for that purpose. Another term of art that might be appropriate is "Free Fire Zone".

Comments on H&I Fires, 14 Nov 2006
jim b briefed on November 14, 2006 08:50 AM

And remember it's that time of year ... go nominate a blog... or vote for one that is already nominated.

TIM C briefed on November 14, 2006 09:18 AM

If you would like to see the U.S.S Sullivans, you can head up to my home area of Buffalo,NY or visit on the web

John of Argghhh! briefed on November 14, 2006 09:33 AM

Being completely unable to compete with Blackfive, Greyhawk, and Smash, and even Noonan, and, finding in the last two years that shameless shilling was both exhausting and fruitless, I declare this year that I just don't care. Go spend your votes on the other guys.

Maggie briefed on November 14, 2006 09:37 AM

John - Is that reverse psychology?

Maggie briefed on November 14, 2006 09:42 AM

Ok, I nominated you.........was this the right category?

Nominations - Best LGBT Blog

John of Argghhh! briefed on November 14, 2006 09:56 AM

Maggie - Comment 1. Not really.

Comment 2. That's a badge I'd put up proudly. And promptly change the color scheme at the Castle to Rainbow.

Maggie briefed on November 14, 2006 10:32 AM

It's no fun if I can't get a rise out of somebody!

FbL briefed on November 14, 2006 10:35 AM

Maggie, you just wiped out two peoples' post from an hour ago... LOL!

BloodSpite briefed on November 14, 2006 10:52 AM

Ahh well. My joke wasn't that funny anyway.

As for me I'm at point Bingo anyway. Where I need to make a decesion do I get my carcass out of my house and stagger to work or do I crawl under my bed comforter and let this sinus infection end my life.

Just blah. I hate season change sickness

fdcol63 briefed on November 14, 2006 11:01 AM

I'm not so sure this is an "ASW" training issue.

It's probably more of a "technology" and "capability" issue, wherein the Chinese have been successful with their espionage and political efforts in gaining access to classified and secret US ASW-related information.

They've caught up to us in this area, and we need to again implement counter-measures to get another step ahead.

Troubling, though, indeed.

WereKitten briefed on November 14, 2006 11:52 AM

I HIGHLY doubt the Navy ship didn't have an eye on that sub the whole time. They knew it was there... but we're not at war with China so they had no reason to do anything about it. Now if we were at war with China, there would be a mangled hunk of tin at the bottom of the ocean right now along with a BUNCH of very angry and sad Chinese back home.

fdcol63 briefed on November 14, 2006 12:41 PM

Geez! The "Live Bullet in London!" story reads like a Scrappleface parody, doesn't it? LOL

ry briefed on November 14, 2006 12:48 PM

Groan. Thanks a lot for stealing my thunder Maggs.;) I am the local PLAN watcher around here! (I'm still going to write that bit, John. The Wife had a hissy last night so I couldn't get around to it. She gets mad when I get serious about China watching---something about an ornery gollum sticking his head in some books and biting her head off when she disturds him she doesn't like or tolerate.).

For a view counter to mine you should check La Malkin's post from yesterday and (THE)Bubblehead(as he's not to be confused with just any old bubblehead). For the Gertz column that broke this yesterday(maggs, you're such a FNC junky) you should check out the WashTimes.

John of Argghhh! briefed on November 14, 2006 01:36 PM

Um, FbL - it never was simply an "honorific"...


John of Argghhh! briefed on November 14, 2006 01:38 PM

As for the bullet found in a doorway... I guess I have something to blog tomorrow!

FbL briefed on November 14, 2006 04:12 PM

Um, FbL - it never was simply an "honorific"...

Okay, fine! :P

I was trying to find a quick way to say that calling him Sgt. is no longer a reflection of his being a former Marine, but rather a statement of current activity.

See? The first way is much more concise.


Marine6 briefed on November 14, 2006 04:31 PM

If the news reports are accurate (and I admit that they seldom are) it is VERY troubling that a potentially hostile submarine could get within 10,000 yards of a carrier without being detected at all. First, this b.s. that the Navy is putting out that "we weren't conducting ASW (ant-submarine warfare) exercises at the time" is NO excuse for a total failure of detection. The whole purpose of all those ships in a CVBG (carrier battle group) is to PROTECT the carrier. They are to provide a total screen for the carrier against all threats in the air, on the surface, and below the surface. And while I don't pretend to be an expert, I've NEVER been aboard anything haze grey and underway that wasn't manning a full watch. And I might point out that a critical part of each CVBG is a US Navy submarine that is specifically tasked with anti-submarine duties.

If, in fact, this Chinese submarine "stalked" the carrier and then surfaced at 10,000 yards, then either there are one, or more, US Naval officers who richly deserve to be relieved, or we have fallen dangerously behind a potential enemy in an area where we cannot afford to be deficient. We should remember that for more than 50 years our carriers have been not just an essential element of our foreign policy in dealing with China, but THE essential element. Remember how we dealt with China when they rattled the sabre over Quemoy and Matsu. If our carriers can't operate freely in WESTPAC without unreasonable risk of submarine attack we have a major problem.

Of course, it is possible that the story is wrong and that the sub was detected and deliberately not treated as a threat. But a cynical individual might then think that somebody in the Navy deliberately leaked a false story for the purpose of defending additional funding for ASW. Aside from the obvious ethical issues such a strategy would rise, it would be very risky politically. At a time when the generally antimilitary Democrats have taken over the House and the Senate setting up a strawman that could be easily knocked down would be just plain stupid. Don't be surprised to see a Democrat controlled Armed Services Committee to investigate this incident.

One also might question what is going on when both the Pacific Commander, and the Pacific Fleet Commander are doing everything in their power to improve our relations with China. Regardless of what the admirals might think, I believe that China is not our friend. They may not be our enemy, but they see their role in Asia, and in the Third World, as far different from the role we would support. They feel that they are going to do what they see as best for China regardless of the consequences. And, I suspect, they don't see the United States as a particularly credible threat.

After all, time after time, starting with Korea, we have gotten into wars where we eventually withdrew without victory once the going got tough. They clearly believe that in a military confrontation they would take a lot of casualties, but they also believe that if they can inflict a sufficient number on us that we will loose the will to continue the war.

At a time like this we need to remember Ronald Raegan's words, "Trust, but verify!"

Marine6 - Sends

Maggie briefed on November 14, 2006 06:22 PM

FbL briefed on November 14, 2006 10:35 AM
Maggie, you just wiped out two peoples' post from an hour ago... LOL!

How'd you know it was me? I was posting under my nom-de-guerre, given to me by the Armorer. Come to think of it, all my AKAs come from the Armorer.

Seriously, I am sorry about that. I will be more careful in the future.

Ry - Sorry you were distracted and slow off the block, lol. Actually, I was surprised there was nothing out here about it yesterday. BTW, I am more than just an FNC junkie, thank you....

WereKitten - The United States Navy has no greater fan than the Princess....individually and as a service. That is most likely true that the Reds got the drop on us.

fdcol63 - Same point, technology cost money too.

Sgt. B - Don't new orders, commissions, etc require a "wetting down"? May I be of assistance?

John - Was that careful enough for NetNanny?

Mike Daley briefed on November 14, 2006 07:34 PM

Marine 6,
Pollyanna that I am, I think I'll go with the, I'm sure, lovely werekitten on this one!
Not to denigrate the technological sophistication of the Chinese, (as John would so eloquently say, bwa-ha-ha-ha)but,I'm pretty sure they're still in previous generation Soviet territory.
I just read somewhere, I'm old and can't remember where, the Chinese were about to prototype an improved Soviet Flogger aircraft, but their improved over the Soviets previous Century engines were still in design validation.
Why tell a potential enemy you could have easily killed him two hours before he appeared?

ry briefed on November 14, 2006 08:30 PM

And the parochialism continues.
Let me lay something on out here. In WW2 our subs and torpedoes were second rate compared to our opponents. For much of it so was all of our major weapon systems. Innovative tactics and good crews can overcome a lot of that. Ask the Royal Navy which didn't face anything half as good as they had in the Falklands(and had some knackered ol' crap fire some torpedoes at them despite having NATO's supposedly crack ASW force at the time.). I'm with The Bubblehead in that we shouldn't be talking about this is the most breathless of tones like Gertz has done, but saying it ain't a problem at all and we should all STFU about it is just sticking the kick me sign on your own back.

We may be the great white shark as navies go, but that doesn't mean the other side isn't a predator too. It would do well for us if some people remembered that from time to time.

WereKitten briefed on November 14, 2006 09:21 PM

*courtsey* NO. scratch that... I'm much too sassy for a courtsey.

*blows kiss*
Thanks Mike... I'm more than just a beer babe, ya know. I really do believe our Navy boys had an ear to the sea and knew every move that Chinese sub was making. No way they let them slip through undetected.

Chuck Simmins briefed on November 14, 2006 09:40 PM

As I recall, the usual response to being hammered for an hour or so by our sonar was for the Soviet sub to surface. Don't know what happened here, but... just maybe the noise got to them.