Comments for Apropos of assigning responsibility.

Comments for Apropos of assigning responsibility. We're the Military and Airpower Guys of Jonah Goldberg of National Review Online + a stray we found wandering around looking lost. All original material JHD, BHD, JR, WT, and KA 2003-2010 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/09/apropos_of_assi.html Sat, 24 Mar 2012 15:26:56 Z Movable Type 4.12 en Copyright 2012 http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification Apropos of assigning responsibility. http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/09/apropos_of_assi.html http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/09/apropos_of_assi.html Mon, 29 Sep 2008 09:36:11 -0600 Comment from AW1 Tim on 2008-09-29
   I agree completely with Mark. The Skipper is always responsible for what happens to his vessel, even if the incident was completely beyond his control. That's the way it is, and I respect that. Heck, it is a good thing inthat it reinforces the desire to check and recheck every little thing to see what you might have missed.

   As in all things, complacency kills. There were, indeed, things that the crew might have done that may or may not have prevented or lessened the casualties, both personell and ship. However, as I posted earlier, the omission of the relevant data from the charts is inexcusable. It is one thing to be careless with your navigation, or cavalier with the operation of your vessel. It is quite another to believe you have unobstructed blue water ahead of you, when in fact there is a seamount that someone should have mentioned. Mentioned rather firmly.

   On the positive side, there were numerous acts of heroism and demonstrable professionalism that kept the ship afloat and limited casualties in both severity and number. No matter the resulting findings, it's better to have this than to be talking about another Thresher or Scorpion.

   Respects,
]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/09/apropos_of_assi.html#comment-78679 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/09/apropos_of_assi.html#comment-78679 Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:00:34 -0600 Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2008-09-29

John:

I really don't know any more than I did back when I posted this
http://www.eaglespeak.us/2005/05/blame-shared-for-uss-san-francisco.html

But I think the comments to that post tell the tale. Ship CO's and navigators are always accountable for safe navigation of their ship.

When I was a ship's navigator, in really tricky situations I would take over as officer of the deck and conning officer so that only the CO and I would visit the long green table if things went south.

Very few Navy skippers who have grounded a ship have had a career thereafter (except perhaps Nimitz). When a death is involved the odds of a continuing career are so low as to be zero.

Historically, the buck seems to have stopped at the CO level except under extraordinary conditions.

If the reviewing authorities said the ship's crew did not do all that it could have, then it's on the Captain and crew.

Brave guys, too, and they did great work to save their ship.

Skippers of ships know this when they take command - which is why many quietly retire after such an event.

I wish some other elements of our society took as much responsibility...

Best regards,

E1

]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/09/apropos_of_assi.html#comment-78678 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/09/apropos_of_assi.html#comment-78678 Mon, 29 Sep 2008 13:17:37 -0600 Comment from AW1 Tim on 2008-09-29
     From my perspective, money for upgrading the charts would have been available had not billions been squandered on the failed and cancelled A-12 aircraft, and further billions wasted on acquisition and building programs for ships.

     If nothing else, the info on the sea mount could have been transmitted to the relevant commands and pen and ink changes made to charts to indicate the location and data.

     VP-11 lost an aircraft (P-3B) and entire crew under similar circumstances in 1977. A substandard chart that failed to indicate proper elevations. I knew some of the crew.

     One small point of grammar: Proper usage of ship's names is just the name, as in USS Howard, USS San Francisco, or, simply, San Francisco. There is no "the" prior to the name, unless in reference to some portion as in "the crew of USS San Francisco", etc.

     Sorry to pick nits. However, had I been investigating this accident (San Francisco) I would have been loath to cast blame on anyone in the crew, based soley upon the lack of intelligence regarding the seamount. How can blame be affixed to those onboard if they were following standard procedures and operating within parameters and with all known information?

     If someone's head needs to roll, it is whomever chose to NOT upgrade the charts, or to NOT pass along the approproate data to those who would be using it.

     Just my 2-cent's worth.
]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/09/apropos_of_assi.html#comment-78676 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/09/apropos_of_assi.html#comment-78676 Mon, 29 Sep 2008 12:55:37 -0600