quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
I think one of the main contributing factors, and perhaps CaptainMike can attest to this, is that Navy vessels are simply horrible when it comes to communicating with Merchant Vessels. Bridge personnel on a Merchant ship are constantly picking up the mic and talking to each other, especially in congested waters. My experience is that those on the bridge of a Navy ship simply can't be bothered.

I sometimes wonder if the Navy ship would even know how to respond to a mate on a tanker getting on the radio and saying, "I'm going to give you two short blasts, Captain."

When I first heard about this it reminded me of this video...
I don't know if it's legit but it certainly seems plausible given the recent events...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VHXRYXzEVU

quote:

Originally posted by bald1:
Navy to Pause Operations, Review Collisions

The U.S. Navy announced an “operational pause” and has begun a broad investigation after the destroyer USS John S. McCain collided with a merchant vessel, leaving 10 sailors still missing, the second such incident in as many months.

The response by the U.S. military signals the Navy believes it needs to examine whether there may be institutional problems behind the deadly collisions.

Navy Adm. John Richardson, the chief of naval operations, made the announcement about the operational pause during a nearly four-minute video message posted on Facebook Monday morning. Adm. Richardson said he also ordered a broader investigation.

“I directed an operational pause be taken in all of our fleets around the world,” Adm. Richardson said. “I want our fleet commanders to get together with their leaders and their commands to ensure that we are taking all appropriate immediate actions to ensure safe and effective operations around the world.”

https://www.wsj.com/articles/n...l-missing-1503329812

This would be the perfect opportunity for China to expand its influence in the South China Sea.

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:

quote:

Originally posted by Pipe Smoker:

quote:

Originally posted by kimber1911:
Wow!
How can the US Navy fight a war if it can not even see merchant ships?

I wonder about that too.

Most modern warfare at sea is beyond eyeball distance. They don't use boarding parties, grappling hooks, no yardarms to swing over from.

I took kimber1911's term "see" to mean "be aware of" by any means.

The problem is that most recent attacks against US ships haven't been made in the spirit of modern warfare. Knowing that, one would expect the crew to be as wary as practical when it comes to other ships getting close. In these very congested waters, they obviously can't be shooting at everybody that comes within 300' of them, but you'd expect them to at least LOOK at them. Or look FOR them.

I don't pretend to know much about blue water boat driving. I once steered a yard patrol boat at Annapolis, walked around the USS North Carolina about a dozen times, I've sailed in a few circles between turtling Sunfish, and have done a fair amount of floating in coastal waters trying to catch fish with a beer in my hand, but I know that I don't want play chicken in my canoe with a 100' yacht, so I look around every now and then.

As everyone else is saying...I don't get how, even with gross negligence, a ship that big can go unnoticed with the tools they have available.

quote:

Originally posted by old rugged cross:

I hope no loss of life occurred.

Please read the previous few dozen posts here about the ten missing crewmen, and then tale a close look at the freakin' big hole in the ship. The chances of any of the ten missing crewmen being alive after getting smacked by a 30,000 ton merchant vessel are miniscule to say the least, I would have thought.

Let's hope that they are recovered sooner rather than later.

tac

quote:

Originally posted by tacfoley:

quote:

Originally posted by old rugged cross:

I hope no loss of life occurred.

Please read the previous few dozen posts here about the ten missing crewmen, and then tale a close look at the freakin' big hole in the ship. The chances of any of the ten missing crewmen being alive after getting smacked by a 30,000 ton merchant vessel are miniscule to say the least, I would have thought.

Let's hope that they are recovered sooner rather than later.

tac

Yes and "missing" for more than a few hours at sea at least in daylight and good weather, is not good.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by Poacher:
I spent two weeks in the Navy, so can speak with some authority on this. Okay, so that's a joke, but I did spend two weeks on the USS Blueridge for an exercise as an "embarkee" USAF guy.
All those guys did was drill, drill, drill 24/7. Fire drills. Intruder drills. Flooding drills. All the damn time.
Has discipline changed that much? And I do understand what the BR is, even though the boss was not on it.

When it comes to fire and emergencies, Navy personnel are second to none in damage control. I don't think that has changed much.

The issue is experienced seamanship on the bridge. Naval officers simply don't have it compared to a professional US merchant mariner.

Maybe the Navy needs to send their OOD's to the Merchant Marine Academy for training.

An interesting read about the schooling that SWOs go through as JO's and all the recent changes that have happened.

CIRCLES IN SURFACE WARFARE TRAINING

Looks a little congested in that part of the ocean.


Straight of Malacca

quote:

Originally posted by ulsterman:
Maybe the Navy needs to send their OOD's to the Merchant Marine Academy for training.

Our real training happens out at sea. During our four years at the Academy, one full year of that time is spent at sea on a Merchant ship.

quote:

Originally posted by bubbatime:
Looks a little congested in that part of the ocean.

Straight of Malacca

Hence why communication is so important and why we have rules of the road.

quote:

Originally posted by corsair:
An interesting read about the schooling that SWOs go through as JO's and all the recent changes that have happened.

CIRCLES IN SURFACE WARFARE TRAINING

Holy crap. I had no idea that USN had terminated Surface Warfare Officer training in Newport, RI in favor of "computer based training".

That tells me "we" have a entire generation of incompetent Department Heads that missed a bunch of basics, now trying to mentor junior offices.

Blind leading the blind. This will take more than a one-day safety stand down to correct.

quote:

Originally posted by Pipe Smoker:

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:

quote:

Originally posted by Pipe Smoker:

quote:

Originally posted by kimber1911:
Wow!
How can the US Navy fight a war if it can not even see merchant ships?

I wonder about that too.

Most modern warfare at sea is beyond eyeball distance. They don't use boarding parties, grappling hooks, no yardarms to swing over from.

I took kimber1911's term "see" to mean "be aware of" by any means.

Modern warfare at sea changed with the USS Cole, maybe the US Navy did not recognize this change.

Believe last successful attack beyond eyeball distance was the USS Stark, and that was supposedly friendly fire.

Yes the Navy needs to be aware of all potential threats, within and beyond eyeball distance.

If you were an adversary wishing to do harm, would you not now be thinking, I found the soft underbelly of the US Navy? Simply scrap the idea of little attack boats and load up an old large vessel with explosives then simply do a drive-by bombing. We are in trouble, the Navy needs to reconsider these port calls which put them in close proximity to other vessels.

quote:

Originally posted by kimber1911:

quote:

Originally posted by Pipe Smoker:

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:

quote:

Originally posted by Pipe Smoker:

quote:

Originally posted by kimber1911:
Wow!
How can the US Navy fight a war if it can not even see merchant ships?

I wonder about that too.

Most modern warfare at sea is beyond eyeball distance. They don't use boarding parties, grappling hooks, no yardarms to swing over from.

I took kimber1911's term "see" to mean "be aware of" by any means.

Modern warfare at sea changed with the USS Cole, maybe the US Navy did not recognize this change.

Believe last successful attack beyond eyeball distance was the USS Stark, and that was supposedly friendly fire.

Yes the Navy needs to be aware of all potential threats, within and beyond eyeball distance.

If you were an adversary wishing to do harm, would you not now be thinking, I found the soft underbelly of the US Navy? Simply scrap the idea of little attack boats and load up an old large vessel with explosives then simply do a drive-by bombing. We are in trouble, the Navy needs to reconsider these port calls which put them in close proximity to other vessels.

A ship is always at it's most vulnerable when it's tied up and not at sea. While the attack on the Cole was tragic, I wouldn't call it a game changer, it simply slapped the Navy into reality and start taking port security seriously while paying attention to whom it farms out port services. 7th Fleet unfortunately didn't get the message given the whole Fat Leonard debacle. Now, 7th Fleet has had three surface ships in the last year have major accidents.

The USS Mason was attacked last year from shore batteries in Yemen.

quote:

Originally posted by feersum dreadnaught:

quote:

Originally posted by corsair:
An interesting read about the schooling that SWOs go through as JO's and all the recent changes that have happened.

CIRCLES IN SURFACE WARFARE TRAINING

Holy crap. I had no idea that USN had terminated Surface Warfare Officer training in Newport, RI in favor of "computer based training".

That tells me "we" have a entire generation of incompetent Department Heads that missed a bunch of basics, now trying to mentor junior offices.

Blind leading the blind. This will take more than a one-day safety stand down to correct.

There was no SWO when I was commissioned. I don't think there were any schools between graduation and reporting aboard for most. Maybe a COMM officer school. My brother went to DASH School, which was closed while he was there. There was Supply School for the pork chops.

One of my classmates at OCS got orders of an ocean going tug out of San Francisco. He made the call to the XO, "Good morning sir. Officer Candidate Stumblebum here. I'll be getting my commission next week and have orders to your ship. I am calling to find out what the operations might be and what my duties are going to be."

The XO is reported to have replied, more or less, "congratulations, Mr. Stumblebum. Get your ass out here on the double. We're leaving for WestPac as soon as you get aboard. You'll be the navigator."

The XO might not have realized that Stumblebum had passed the NAV curriculum after a herculean effort, many hours of stupid study and by 1 question. If he had missed one more question, he would fail, be disenrolled and sent to the fleet as an enlisted man.

Admiral, when was the last time you drove a ship or, sub? You remember how to use a sextant or, take a bearing?

quote:

Originally posted by feersum dreadnaught:

quote:

Originally posted by corsair:
An interesting read about the schooling that SWOs go through as JO's and all the recent changes that have happened.

CIRCLES IN SURFACE WARFARE TRAINING

Holy crap. I had no idea that USN had terminated Surface Warfare Officer training in Newport, RI in favor of "computer based training".

That tells me "we" have a entire generation of incompetent Department Heads that missed a bunch of basics, now trying to mentor junior offices.

Blind leading the blind. This will take more than a one-day safety stand down to correct.

As soon as they made SWO a de facto requirement for advancement in the LINE surface community, just as they pretty much later did for enlisted (ESWS, see avatar to the left), that started the slide down a very slippery slope. Instead of people pursuing excellence out of pride and conviction to improve it became every senior/mid-grade officers "requirement" to put up "numbers" of people they had pushed through the system.

When I qualified for ESWS as a very junior E5 (1987) it was extremely uncommon for anyone not nearing a chiefs board (E7) to even have the damn pin. Now it's basically a benchmark grading exercise for junior officers and division senior enlisted to push junior NCO's (E4) to start qualifications... I never "saw" the standards change, but I've certainly heard stories.

quote:

Originally posted by corsair:
Admiral, when was the last time you drove a ship or, sub? You remember how to use a sextant or, take a bearing?

Well he's a sub guy, sooo, probably not as much opportunity to use a sextant.

quote:

Originally posted by stoic-one:
As soon as they made SWO a de facto requirement for advancement in the LINE surface community, just as they pretty much later did for enlisted (ESWS, see avatar to the left), that started the slide down a very slippery slope. Instead of people pursuing excellence out of pride and conviction to improve it became every senior/mid-grade officers "requirement" to put up "numbers" of people they had pushed through the system.

When I qualified for ESWS as a very junior E5 (1987) it was extremely uncommon for anyone not nearing a chiefs board (E7) to even have the damn pin. Now it's basically a benchmark grading exercise for junior officers and division senior enlisted to push junior NCO's (E4) to start qualifications... I never "saw" the standards change, but I've certainly heard stories.

It took me over a year to earn my warfare designation back when it wasn't mandatory. My son said people in his division were able to get ESWS in a month now that it is mandatory and you just use the "cheat sheet" (i.e. study guide) to get your PQS signed off and pass the written test and board.

It is a whole new world from the 26 years I spent in the Navy.

My A School was two years long...now the same rate goes through A School in just a couple months. The good thing is...they are well trained on diversity, gender sensitivity, trafficking in persons, physical fitness, liberty risks, etc. Not so much on the "Sailor Stuff" though.

An appropriate comment on the always insightful Cdr Salamander blog
http://cdrsalamander.blogspot....n.html#disqus_thread

quote:

It never made much sense that pilots and submariners needed a year or more of intense training to be "fleet ready" but SWOs only needed a package of CDs and a few hours of their own time and ~4 weeks of underway time as midshipmen.

It is past time to bring back training ship cruises. The best training ship driving training I had, by far including the submarine pipeline, was my 3 weeks on an academy YP driving to New York, Newport, and Boston and then back to Annapolis. Of course those long distance cruises were one of the first things sacrificed on the alter of budget cuts. God forbid midshipmen gain great experience as mariners on multi-day cruises, practice maneuvers such a unreps by pulling two YPs within yards of one another, and actually get to experience enjoyable liberty ports too.

Far from being cut those cruises should have been expanded and lengthened as things like SWOS were also culled on the alter of the budget cuts.

quote:

Originally posted by kimber1911:

Believe last successful attack beyond eyeball distance was the USS Stark, and that was supposedly friendly fire.

"friendly fire"? How are two Iraqi Exocet missles friendly fire during the Iran-Iraq war?