Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Document: Navy Comprehensive Review of Surface Forces
United States Naval Institute ^ | November 2, 2017 | Department of the Navy

Posted on 11/03/2017 10:27:11 AM PDT by Retain Mike

The following is the U.S. Fleet Forces led, Comprehensive Review of Recent Surface Force Incidents. The report was released by the Navy on Nov. 2, 2017.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.usni.org ...


TOPICS: Military/Veterans
KEYWORDS: collision; ussfitzgerald; ussjohnsmccain
For folks following the USS Fitzgerald, USS John S. McCain collisions here is one of the five articles the U.S. Naval Institute published today and yesterday.
1 posted on 11/03/2017 10:27:11 AM PDT by Retain Mike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Retain Mike
Here is the actual pdf of the comprehensive review
2 posted on 11/03/2017 10:42:40 AM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AndyJackson

3.7.1 Fundamentals

The training continuum for Surface Warfare Officers (and candidates),
Quartermasters, and Operational Specialists does not provide sufficient seamanship and navigation knowledge in advance of milestone assignments.(Sections 4.2.1, 4.2.2, 4.2.3)

The individual qualification proficiency of Surface Warfare Officers is not periodically assessed against objective qualification standards or in high traffic, emergency or extremis situations. (Section 4.2.2)

Unit seamanship and navigation training, assessments, and certifications do not adequately test or measure performance in high traffic, emergency, or extremis
conditions. (Section 5.2)


3 posted on 11/03/2017 10:46:20 AM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Retain Mike

“Both crews did not attempt to contact the merchant ship bearing down on them, sound a warning horn, sound a collision warning or sound general quarters before the impacts.”

Chain of command confusion? Sounds like no one on the bridge was viewed as “in charge” or that person “froze” when decisions had to be made.


4 posted on 11/03/2017 11:43:20 AM PDT by GAgal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AndyJackson

From the Article: “Today, proficiency in seamanship and navigation competes for time and attention
with the expanding tactical duties of our naval professionals at sea.”

Yes, and seamanship/navigation competes UNFAIRLY with every other foolish requirement levied by DOD, Department of the Navy and Command authority. You can bet that all those Sailors on the Bridge were current on their sexual harassment training.


5 posted on 11/03/2017 11:49:15 AM PDT by Gunner TLW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GAgal

Granted my time goes back to the Vietnam era, but when I said I had the deck and the conn I was in charge. That is so basic. My CO also had a standing order to make a significant course change before a ship got close to ensure you were always in safe water. Make that course change even if by the rules of the road you are supposed to maintain course and speed. Don’t transfer the fate of your ship to another, if you become unsure they are going to behave correctly.


6 posted on 11/03/2017 12:20:21 PM PDT by Retain Mike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson