quote:

Originally posted by braillediver:
Nah- He let his men down because he didn't do what he expects them to do= Use the chain of command.

It's a tough job. Few can shoulder the responsibility. People do die serving our country.

It's good we found out he wasn't suited for that responsibility now instead of when the shit hits the fan.

Just curious. I wonder how the Capt would have felt had his XO done the same thing to him?

quote:

Originally posted by ChicagoSigMan:
Not a military guy and not knowledgeable about the chain of command issues involved, but there doesn't appear to be any doubt that this captain had the respect of the sailors under his command.

People below you keep you alive, people above you decide your fate.

quote:

Originally posted by AirmanJeff:

quote:

Originally posted by RHINOWSO:
And besides, he's an O-6 >24-26 years of service, gonna pull down nearly 6-figures in retirement pay and get a 6-figure consulting job before he's off terminal leave.

Looks like he's going out with the respect of his crew and knowing Big Navy, they were likely incompetent as fuck in dealing with the issue - as they often are with pretty much everything.

Yup, he was probably ready to go, and at least he can leave with his head held high. I seriously doubt this guy would have did what he did, again not leak this but distribute his letter on an unsecured channel, without the situation being rather dire.

How anyone could trust "Big Navy" to properly deal with this is beyond me.

To put this in perspective. Hillary Clinton did just that, 100's and 100's of times as Secretary of State, and absolutely nothing happened to her.

Considering the varied opinions of those who have already replied, I'd like to see an IG inquiry into the specific timeline and what was conveyed at each point in time.

If the Captain erred, so be it. If Command erred, they need to be subject to the same penalties.

quote:

Originally posted by DrDan:
Reading the SECNAV's letter, one thing really piqued my interest:

"The next day, I spoke with the CO of the THEODORE ROOSEVELT myself, and this morning, I have spoken to the TR’s Carrier Strike Group Commander, RDML Stuart Baker. RDML Baker did not know about the letter before it was sent to him via email by the CO. It is important to understand that the Strike Group Commander, the CO’s immediate boss, is embarked on the Theodore Roosevelt, right down the passageway from him. The letter was sent over non- secure, unclassified email even though that ship possesses some of the most sophisticated communications and encryption equipment in the Fleet."

"...directed the Vice Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Robert Burke, to conduct an investigation into the circumstances ..."

I would love to know why Cpt. Crozier did not bother to send the letter ahead of time to his immediate boss, who was literally down the hall from him. If I were ADM Burke, my first question would be to ask Cpt. Crozier why was there not better communication with RDML Baker.

The timeline REALLY does not make any sense in the link. IF his immediate boss (Strike Group Commander) on the ship had spoken to the superiors who wrote the letter in the link, they would ALREADY KNOW, what is going on with the ship regarding the virus AND taking actions. They said in the letter that the NAVY was already taking actions for 2 days prior, BUT had to make a phone call to the Strike Group Commander on the ship to understand what is going on and WHY the Captain wrote the letter??? They should have already known what was going on, on the ship regarding the virus for 2 days. I'm no Navy guy, but reading the letter in the link, the Navy is doing CYA.

quote:

Originally posted by SigSAC:
Considering the varied opinions of those who have already replied, I'd like to see an IG inquiry into the specific timeline and what was conveyed at each point in time.

If the Captain erred, so be it. If Command erred, they need to be subject to the same penalties.

Good point. Hopefully the IG would be competent.

quote:

Originally posted by jimmy123x:
The timeline REALLY does not make any sense in the link. IF his immediate boss (Strike Group Commander) on the ship had spoken to the superiors who wrote the letter in the link, they would ALREADY KNOW, what is going on with the ship regarding the virus AND taking actions. They said in the letter that the NAVY was already taking actions for 2 days prior, BUT had to make a phone call to the Strike Group Commander on the ship to understand what is going on and WHY the Captain wrote the letter??? They should have already known what was going on, on the ship regarding the virus for 2 days. I'm no Navy guy, but reading the letter in the link, the Navy is doing CYA.

You bring up a good point and this is why I personally believe that he tried going the proper route and got stonewalled by CSG Commander.

A CO of a carrier isn’t a stupid person. He’s farthest from that, in fact. In order to become a CO of a carrier you first have had to be an Air Boss (commander of an air wing on a carrier). Also, since all of our carriers are nuclear powered they have to go through and get fully qualified through the Navy Nuclear Power pipeline. That is no easy task for anyone, and especially for the officers. And even more so for an officer who will become a CO on a nuclear powered vessel. This part also applies for any CO of submarines as well.

Point I’m trying to make is that he’s a very smart man and he knew exactly what would happen by doing what he did. He had his reasons and we will likely never know what happened prior to sending the email. I’m of the opinion that he “took one for the team” because things were falling on deaf ears up until that point (CSG commander is who I’m thinking).

I wish it hadn’t come out like it did because the world now knows we are 1 carrier down right now, and I hope nobody tries to take advantage of that. It’s a real slippery slope and I wish it had never came to this.

quote:

Originally posted by jimmy123x:
They should have already known what was going on, on the ship regarding the virus for 2 days. I'm no Navy guy, but reading the letter in the link, the Navy is doing CYA.

I retired in 03 but if I remember correctly while a ship is deployed the medical statistics of the crew, along with many other things, are reported up the chain with many CC's in a daily report. I can't remember the name of the report though, doesn't matter. Regardless anyone with half a wit would know that it would spread on a Navy ship like on a cruise ship. Had it happen on one of the ships I was on.

quote:

Originally posted by Largefarva:
You bring up a good point and this is why I personally believe that he tried going the proper route and got stonewalled by CSG Commander.

A CO of a carrier isn’t a stupid person. He’s farthest from that, in fact. In order to become a CO of a carrier you first have had to be an Air Boss (commander of an air wing on a carrier). <Incorrect, however they have been Squadron Commanders - CVN COs and CVW Air Wing Commanders are 2 separate career tracks - the split happens shortly after they have a successful squadron command tour.> Also, since all of our carriers are nuclear powered they have to go through and get fully qualified through the Navy Nuclear Power pipeline. That is no easy task for anyone, and especially for the officers. And even more so for an officer who will become a CO on a nuclear powered vessel. This part also applies for any CO of submarines as well.

Point I’m trying to make is that he’s a very smart man and he knew exactly what would happen by doing what he did. He had his reasons and we will likely never know what happened prior to sending the email. I’m of the opinion that he “took one for the team” because things were falling on deaf ears up until that point (CSG commander is who I’m thinking).

Aside from the minor correction in red, I agree 100%.

quote:

Originally posted by Scoutmaster:

quote:

Originally posted by braillediver:
Nah- He let his men down because he didn't do what he expects them to do= Use the chain of command.

It's a tough job. Few can shoulder the responsibility. People do die serving our country.

It's good we found out he wasn't suited for that responsibility now instead of when the shit hits the fan.

Just curious. I wonder how the Capt would have felt had his XO done the same thing to him?

I would be nervous as hell knowing that the impending investigation will be focused on him and the command environment he created and fostered. The spotlight is now on the CSG CDR and what happened there. Meanwhile, the rest of the battle group is lazily circling Guam, if they have no cases, they'll be formed into a Surface Action Group and told to go prowl.

quote:

Originally posted by corsair:

The spotlight is now on the CSG CDR and what happened there. Meanwhile, the rest of the battle group is lazily circling Guam, if they have no cases, they'll be formed into a Surface Action Group and told to go prowl.

Concur

https://www.navy.mil/navydata/...avybio.asp?bioID=990

quote:

Originally posted by Kraquin:

I retired in 03 but if I remember correctly while a ship is deployed the medical statistics of the crew, along with many other things, are reported up the chain with many CC's in a daily report. I can't remember the name of the report though, doesn't matter. Regardless anyone with half a wit would know that it would spread on a Navy ship like on a cruise ship. Had it happen on one of the ships I was on.

IIRC it is a LOGREQ, where a list of items are run down starting with the letter “A” etc each has a set meaning....
Ammo, food,berthing, health, etc....everything is addressed....port calls...anything you can think of..

Another way to handle it is thru the CASREP system of messages...where the ships crews health is also addressed and what and which type of gear is broken, when it may be repaired, what they might need and it goes on....

I do think RADM Baker has some ‘splaining to do. Unfortunately most of my command is presently teleworking so I’m not getting any of the scuttlebutt on this. Everyone I know in the USN is following this closely.

Mike, you are thinking of a SITREP (situation report) a LOGREQ is a logistics request, and CASREP is a casualty report. I’ve had to release all three this week so I’m on pretty solid ground.

Several Senators have asked for an IG investigation into the matter.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...8JvM?ocid=spartanntp

quote:

Originally posted by RHINOWSO:
Aside from the minor correction in red, I agree 100%.

Weird, because that’s how it was explained to me during my ESWS quals back around 97-98 or so on the Enterprise. Guess I have misunderstood the process the whole time. lol

And that CO left his successor in a tough position... taking over a ship where the implied threat of mass unrest forced the Navy into taking action to make things easier on the crew. He or she is going to have a hard time making the crew do something extra hard if they know they can appeal to the media.

When does the crew go back on the TR? In November, if COVID-19 dies down? And if the crew needed to be taken off the TR, then every other one of our 296 ships would seem to need to come into port and take its sailors to the local hotels... essentially taking the USN off-line. Problematic?

I wonder what intelligence assessment the Chinese leadership, thinking about Taiwan as they always do, is getting about the morale and fighting spirit of our Navy? After this, Hainan Island, the McCain, the Fitzgerald, the Fat Leonard scandal (which implicated so may senior officers that it was impossible to clean it up), etc.

Ironically, by taking the action he did, Acting SECNAV Modly could probably not get confirmed by Congress as the actual SECNAV in the future. So there is some morale courage there, too: his actions, which he felt were necessary, almost certainly signaled the end of his career in government.

What with all those sailors now on that side of the island, I just hope Guam doesn't tip over

Got an email from my sister today stating she thinks Capt. Crozier is a hero and asked me (20yr retired Navy) what would happen next. I tried explaining to her why he was relieved, how he failed and pointed out that his former crew didn't get to vote on it. As well as the fact that the Roosevelt isn't a lone ranger in a carrier battle group deployment and if C-19 is an issue onboard the Roosevelt, it likely is an issue onboard other ships but Capt. Crozier is the only CO who did what he did. All that doesn't matter. She still thinks he's a hero and glad his former crew cheered him off. My point is that as the thread title alluded to, perhaps (right or wrong) "Navy Peeps" have a broader view of what happened and why the consequences are what they are, than (some) others may have.

EDIT: After further emails this evening, my sister, a 40+yr career nurse with no military experience, stated she felt he was a hero for trying to get his crew out of close quarters as quickly as possible. She said she'd considered my opinion and had read the link I provided to the SECNAV statement and had a better understanding of why what Capt. Brett Crozier did cannot be justified within military standards.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Hobbs,

quote:

Originally posted by Largefarva:
Weird, because that’s how it was explained to me during my ESWS quals back around 97-98 or so on the Enterprise. Guess I have misunderstood the process the whole time. lol

It's really a minor point and in the past, it likely was that way when the Air Wing Commander position was an O-5 billet, not an O-6 billed like it is today.

quote:

Originally posted by RoverSig:
And that CO left his successor in a tough position...

The previous TR CO is coming back and will have no issues taking over, since he's run that ship before for 2+ years.

He might need to fire some people, but after the crew is deemed healthy and the ship clean, I'm sure the "Rough Rider" will be back in action (I cruised once on the TR; great fucking ship back in '01-02).

quote:

Originally posted by CaptainMike:
I do think RADM Baker has some ‘splaining to do. Unfortunately most of my command is presently teleworking so I’m not getting any of the scuttlebutt on this. Everyone I know in the USN is following this closely.

Mike, you are thinking of a SITREP (situation report) a LOGREQ is a logistics request, and CASREP is a casualty report. I’ve had to release all three this week so I’m on pretty solid ground.

Thanks Mike, you are right, SITREP...

I had the name confused

quote:

Originally posted by PowerSurge:

quote:

Originally posted by CaptainMike:
I think it says much more about his popularity than it does about his character. Did you read SECNAV’s statement?
I don’t know him beyond having spoken on BTB a few times. He certainly seemed nice enough, and TR’s bridge team had their shit together.
He knew better. I’m curious to see what comes out down the road.
I currently have a former O-6 who was relieved of a CG command working for me. There isn’t any tolerance for errors at that level, of judgement or any other kind.

I was just talking to a retired Navy friend of mine. He stated the captain would’ve absolutely knew better than to send an email copying 30 people. When someone obviously leaked it, that sends the message to adversaries that the ship was possibly not combat ready. He was happy he was relieved.

The Navy has always moved in mysterious ways to me, but one of my commanders once sent a - very - frank email to me regarding his boss, who was the direct report to the GO Wing Commander at one of our bases when I worked on the HQ USAF Air Staff. He accidentally included the Wing King and his Exec in the CC block, and called me about 60 seconds after he sent it, when he couldn't recall it. I spent the better part of an afternoon unruffling some very ruffled feathers, explaining to my boss in the Pentagon, and salvaging someone's career. I expect the CO's communication wasn't accidental, but even back then it was a one mistake military at that level of command.