- Joined
- Mar 14, 2009
- Messages
- 5,176
- Reaction score
- 1,899
The USS John McCain (named for Senator McCain's father and grandfather - both admirals) has collided with another ship. Search and rescue operations underway.
WASHINGTON — One day after ordering a rare suspension of ship operations worldwide, the Navy plans to relieve the commander of the fleet that has sustained four collisions in Asia and the deaths of more than a dozen sailors this year, an American official said Tuesday.
Vice Adm. Joseph P. Aucoin, the head of the Seventh Fleet based in Japan, the Navy’s largest overseas fleet, is expected to be removed Wednesday in connection with the four collisions since January, including two fatal ones in the past two months, the official said.
Admiral Aucoin had been expected to retire in the coming weeks, but his superiors pushed up his departure date after losing confidence in his leadership. The action was first reported by The Wall Street Journal.
Navy officials declined to comment on Tuesday night. But Adm. Scott H. Swift, the commander of the United States Pacific Fleet, was flying from Singapore to the Seventh Fleet headquarters in Yokosuka, Japan, where he is expected to relieve Admiral Aucoin on Wednesday. Admiral Aucoin, a highly decorated fighter pilot, has commanded the fleet since September 2015.
The admiral’s removal comes as the Navy is preparing to conduct an extremely rare suspension of ship operations worldwide for a day or two in the next week to review safety and operational procedures. More broadly, Navy officials are also investigating the role that training, manning and crew communications may have played in the collisions.
[For more, read the full article from the link above]
\
...Navy has ALREADY discounted hacking...
Relieving the people at the top... changes nothing. Facts are that 4 ships in the past 6 months have been damaged..
To say its the fault of the fleet commander is hilarious.
I didnt know the fleet commander was also the captain of all 4 ships..
Relieving the commanding officers of the ships was utterly appropriate. The person with the OIC badge is responsible for anything that happens to their ship. As Trip noted, they will and should be fired for simply not ensuring their folks were 100% on the ball. Folks can come up with all kinds of conspiracy theories about hacking and whether or not they pan out, someone was derelict in their duties. You can't "hack" a live watch stander. To me, I think they cut back on watches and relied way too much on technology to do a job far better done by someone standing watch. I'll presume that there was no technological problem. Given that, it means the commanding officer did not ensure his folks were well enough trained to properly interpret the sensor data or appropriately react to data that indicated a hazard to their vessel.
As to the Admiral, yes he should be relieved of his command. Call it theater if you like, however he is accountable for the failure of the captains he commanded to do their jobs correctly. No investigation was needed. With multiple casualties like this on his watch, he is apparently not up to the job he was given. People's lives depend on officers like him doing their jobs with the utmost skill and professionalism. That admiral and those commanders did not live up to the trust placed in them.
My theory is in our kinder and gentler more inclusive world, we are failing to train front line troops (and yes a sailor on a warship is as much a soldier as a guy holding an assault rifle) for fear we may hurt their sensibilities. I think we are begging to find out that the converse of the old saying "The More You Sweat in Training, The Less You Bleed in Combat" is true. The military is no place for sensibilities. I don't care what race, gender (however you define it), or whatever other definition of person you have. If you are not up to the discipline and rigor of being in a ready to act military without "special" treatment, you don't belong there.
Of course that is my $0.02 and, as usual YMMV
(And yes I served on a surface combatant)
Teddy, as too your thought about the McCain being in a very congested shipping lane, there should have been port and starboard bridge lookouts (at the very minimum). If those were in place, then there really is a leadership problem. A stand down, however embarrassing, is needed. We need to understand where we are failing and fix it on the freaking double.
I reject any theory of deliberate action on the part of these crews. Most every service person I have had the honor of standing alongside was way above this sort of behavior and it is beyond any reasonable scope that they would hazard their comrades to prove a political point. This was simply a case of poor training and incompetent leadership.
I see no reason to feel bad for those people being relieved of command. For the senior people that is the price you pay when people beneath you screw up. These are things you are supposed to prevent; that is your job. Besides, it is not like they will be "fired" like in the civilian world. They are still in uniform and still getting paid and if they have their 20 years in they will be able to retire and get their pension. If they screw up badly enough they may get knocked down a rank or two for retirement pay, but senior military people will still get a pension that pays more than many people earn from a full time job.
It's been widely reported that there was a steering failure on the USS John McCain. A couple reports questioned why the crew hadn't used the backup steering mechanism.