Posted on 09/18/2017 8:40:03 AM PDT by EliRoom8
The commander of the Navy’s largest operational battle force and his subordinate in charge of the attached destroyer squadron have been removed from their positions as a result of ongoing investigations into a string of incidents this year that resulted in the death of 17 sailors and hundreds of millions of dollars in damages, USNI News has learned.
U.S. 7th Fleet Commander Vice Adm. Philip Sawyer removed Rear Adm. Charles Williams, commander of Combined Task Force 70, and Capt. Jeffery Bennett, commodore of Destroyer Squadron 15, from their positions on Monday (Tuesday local time) due to a loss of confidence in their ability to command, two Navy officials told USNI News and later confirmed by a statement from the service.
The officials told USNI News the removals of Williams and Bennett are part of ongoing accountability actions as part of the Navy investigations into four surface ship incidents – three collisions and a grounding – in the Western Pacific this year.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.usni.org ...
The Navy did away with ship driving school some years ago and it is mostly OJT now from some reports I've read.
Not necessarily. If there is strong enough evidence (even if it isn’t official or conclusive) it is considered good practice to take them out of the equation sooner rather than later, usually by relieving them from command and assigning them somewhere else pending an investigation.
I think that is a wise thing to do (not that there is a huge amount of wisdom going on here) because think about it: If initial indications point to a failure of command/leadership/capability, do you really want to leave a combat unit or ship under that same commander for months while the investigation takes place? I don’t think I would.
If there is no fault there, they will resume their career. Like another poster stated, I don’t like seeing officers getting relieved, but that is secondary. The primary issues (in this order) must be mission readiness, safety, and leadership.
And after the safety issues that have arisen with loss of life, I am concerned that people are being promoted to these command positions without adequate scrutiny of capabilities and suitability (political/PC promotions) and the people who serve under them are also not being evaluated for suitability either, nor being provided with the equipment in condition to be used, or the leadership and training needed to use them effectively.
“”Does the Navy have no inspector general system ?””
If not - that’s good! IMO IG’s are a total waste of our money. They appear AFTER the fact and never are on top of anything - much like the TV commercials - “we just monitor, we don’t actually do anything.”
I can’t for the life of me see any need for the expense of an IG in every agency - the cost of salaries, pensions and the like - NONSENSE!
Don’t forget one poor IG in CA actually tried to do something but he made the mistake of “picking” on one of obozo’s buddies so he got fired - Walpin...Poor guy.
Can’t say that’s the reason none of the rest of them do anything worthwhile as we never hear about them until the horse has already been stolen...
I heard one of the reasons for the collisions was a change in ship operation from having three people on duty who were in charge of visually watching for ships and other obstacles during a watch to only having one person doing the job on a destroyer. this would explain the removal of officers up the chain of command from the boat that had the collision.
Dirty shame our rotten politicians and judges arent held to the same strict levels of accountability that the military is.
The fact that the Navy is not citing a violation of a specific navagational rule as it did with the Indinanapolis suggests these incidents occured because of changes in naval navagation procedures. Frankly both ships sound like they were on autopilot controls
I was surprised the squadron commander wasn’t gone sooner. Maybe they need some continuity in command and couldn’t fire everybody at the same time.
Not sticking up for ANYONE and if guilty of misconduct, malaise or malfeasance find the nearest yardarm and dispatch them.
That said, they have to work with what is sent to them and sometimes if one ‘complains’ too much, they are relieved.
Back during the McNamara 100,000 campaign, a lot of ‘bad apples’ were PUT in the military and the DIs had to cope with them.
The services had to put a cap on how many people they could ‘flunk out’ of boot camp and some of the ‘wise guys’ would ‘act right’ until the ‘allowed’ number were vanished forever.
During that period some of the ‘Drug Gangs’ had people - otherwise ineligible - enlist to get to SE Asia to get into the drug field....
The CO had absolute command and he could have been ‘shacked up in Long Beach’ and something happen on his ship and HE was completely at fault.
The Pueblo incident ‘changed’ a lot of that when they tried to charge Capt Bucher with dereliction of duty because he didn’t properly dispose of the classified material in a timely manner.
His ‘defense’ was that he was NOT allowed into certain spaces and there was no way he could be ‘responsible’ if he wasn’t allowed free movement aboard his ship.
After that the CO is ‘God Almight’ took a hit and like anything else, the first watering down of ANY procedure, standard, rule etc just leads to general chaos.
In 2003, SWOSDOC (Surface Warfare Officers Course) was shuttered, largely for financial reasons,,,,,,,,
officers went directly from commissioning sources to their ships with only a packet of computer disks........
Now it was incumbent on the ship’s CO to replace a year’s worth of intensive dawn-to-dusk training, in addition to his or her other considerable responsibilities
Bringing back the SWOSDOC would be a good start
Why yes they do. And the IG does command inspections and makes sure that the Command is up to date in complying with all of the latest [social engineering] policy directives, the paper-work is all in line, and the training is all up to date. Seamanship, navigation and war-fighting don't have a lot to do with it.
Compared to how much for repair costs and death benefits, much less lost military capability.
“Until the Navy releases the detailed reports on how these collisions happened, all this other stuff is a distraction.”
The Navy will NEVER come clean about this. Report or no report.
Maybe Wikileaks will someday.
His ‘defense’ was that he was NOT allowed into certain spaces and there was no way he could be ‘responsible’ if he wasn’t allowed free movement aboard his ship.
He was correct. He could have had a TS and still not allowed in the SecGrp’s op areas.
He was correct. He could have had a TS and still not allowed in the SecGrp’s op areas.
= = = = = = = = =
Correct.
But under the ‘rules of the day’ he was responsible for the destruction/maintenance of the space etc.
Remember the WWII COs courts-martialed for losing ships etc. The Co of the Indianapolis (Capt McVay) was charged with dereliction etc and the US Government even brought the CO of the Japanese Submarine to testify against him.
The Japanese CO couldn’t believe it and thought they were just ‘bluffing’.
Despite the fact that the Indianapolis had requested an escort and was told nothing was happening in that area, just proceed.
Great book “All the Drowned Sailors” by Raymond B. Lech is very informative and acclaimed.
Having things like this being career-ending events for the entire chain of command creates important incentives.
If being politically correct results in promotion, and inadequate attention to "diversity" and "inclusiveness" are career enders, then that is what officers will pay attention to. Conversely, if politically correct incompetence results in mass terminations, then officers WILL jettison any and all factors which might bite them, regardless of how many Social Justice Warriors scream. And senior officers will act to protect their own careers by getting rid of anyone who they even suspect of operating off of "social justice" considerations rather than "do the mission" considerations.
But SENIOR heads must roll in order for this to happen. Which means that the Admiral of the 7th Fleet needs to go too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.