Another report noted that the CO did not manuver to avoid the collision because the ship was in the middle of recovering aircraft at night. Tough call.
Posted on 09/17/2004 7:24:02 AM PDT by pabianice
No one on the aircraft carrier John F. Kennedy will be court-martialed or receive non-judicial punishment as the result of a July 22 collision with a dhow in the Persian Gulf, Navy officials announced Wednesday.
A statement released by Commander, Naval Air Force Pacific public affairs noted that Kennedy’s commanding officer, Capt. Stephen G. Squires, and the ship’s navigator were detached for cause, which is “considered an adverse administrative action.”
Squires was relieved of command Aug. 27 by Vice Adm. David C. Nichols, commander of 5th Fleet in Bahrain, on Aug. 27. The name of the ship’s navigator was not released.
Navy officials have released scant details about the collision, which took place as Kennedy conducted night flight operations.
Kennedy watch standers first spotted the dhow at a distance of 13 miles, a full 28 minutes before the collision. At some point, two people were spotted aboard the dhow before the collision. No survivors or bodies were recovered.
Another report noted that the CO did not manuver to avoid the collision because the ship was in the middle of recovering aircraft at night. Tough call.
He's what? The third JFK skipper relieved in the last few years?
The "Rules of the Road" that govern the conduct of vessels at sea, gives the highest status (and privilege) to aircraft carriers involved in flight operations. All other vessels MUST give way. Captain Squires was releived because of the politics of two dead Arabs in the dhow.
All of what you say may be true - however there is the hypothetical of suppose that that dhow was filled with explosives a la USS Cole. Politics and PC aside, my feeling is that the bigger issue here is that something penetrated the carrier's shield, and that that shouldn't ever happen, and the consequences could be unimaginable if the circumstances were different. It's sort of analagous (in a way) to a soldier not being able to account for his weapon. Even if something bad didn't happen as a result of it, the main idea is that somethign bad *could* happen as a result.
Rules of the road????? I call it negligence and stupidity. Arrogance first class. Evidently the Navy agrees.
Gotta believe they have a "bingo" (land based alternative) air field, either in Kuwait or Qatar. You hate to invoke an emergency, but running down some poor sob's on a dhow is really a horrible thing to do.
I would like to know what the fuel states were of the aircraft waiting to come back aboard. Was there a tanker aloft? What were the weather conditions? Were attempts made by the Big John to warn the dhow?
I served with the MARDET on the Kittyhawk 86-88. I recall one instance in the Indian Ocean where we were being trailed by a Russian Krivak (A small destroyer.) During flight ops the Krivak would suddenly pull alongside us, then dash ahead and cut across the bow, and we're turn and wave the aircraft on final off. After the third time, the Captain D.W. "Hang'em High" Hoffman cam on the 1MC. "We're not moving again." Then we heard the collision alarm. Ivan must've thought better of it that time, since the Hawk's 80 tons were moving at 30 knots and we wouldn't have felt a bump if we had hit him. We recovered the last aircraft and went on our way.
I don't think Captain Hoffman ever made admiral, which is too bad.
You've never been in a jet attempting to land onboard an aircraft carrier at night as it zigs and zags to avoid craft that do not obey the Rules of the Road. If the aircraft cannot land due to the zigging and zagging, they run out of fuel and crash. (Sometimes, friendly nations provide airfields to where aircraft that cannot land on the carrier can land. I have no idea if such fields were available that night).
Bottom Line: all mariners MUST comply with the Rules of the Road. They were desigend to avoid chaos and to save lives. If the CO of JFK had zigged and zagged he might have put the lives of the pilots (and their multi-million dollar jets) at risk. I vote with him.
Good Point.
You are correct, of course, as was discussed here at length on the original threads, and the question is STILL not addressed..what abotu the Admiral in charge of the battle group, and the screen commander..
Aren't there supposed to be a whole slew of naval assets whose job it is to protect the carrier? What could account for a ship of any size getting through this shield? How can something like this happen? I personally could care less that the carrier didn't avoid the dhow. I care deeply however that the dhow was able to approach carrier.
OK, thanks, didn't see the original threads. Guess I'm always late to the party :)
A carrier will typically have a helicopter aloft whose prime mission is to rescue downed aviators or men overboard. That helo is often dispatched to overfly and attempt to let vessels in the way of the carrier know that they must move. Often they do not. Among the WORST offenders are huge ocean-going vessels. Most of these are on some sort of auto-pilot with one guy in the pilot house. Every time that huge vessel shifts its rudder to move out of the way of the carrier it incrementally slows down its march to its assigned destination, and therefore, costs the owner money. So, they typically plod forward, knowing that in a game of chicken, the carrier will alter its course (imperiling the airborne jets and their pilots). Fishing Vessels (like the dhow), too, are reluctant to move (off of their lucrative fishing spot).
Battle Groups only have 2-3 vessels close aboard (if that many). And, lowering a boat into the water to drive over to the dhow (especially at night), would have been totally impractical and unsafe.
Points made by other readers are valid: if there was a tanker airborne, and if there was a divert field available, all are factors in whether the CO alters course or not.
The main point you made however is the MOST IMPORTANT: the dhow could have been loaded with explosives.
A carrier will typically have a helicopter aloft whose prime mission is to rescue downed aviators or men overboard. That helo is often dispatched to overfly and attempt to let vessels in the way of the carrier know that they must move. Often they do not. Among the WORST offenders are huge ocean-going vessels. Most of these are on some sort of auto-pilot with one guy in the pilot house. Every time that huge vessel shifts its rudder to move out of the way of the carrier it incrementally slows down its march to its assigned destination, and therefore, costs the owner money. So, they typically plod forward, knowing that in a game of chicken, the carrier will alter its course (imperiling the airborne jets and their pilots). Fishing Vessels (like the dhow), too, are reluctant to move (off of their lucrative fishing spot).
Battle Groups only have 2-3 vessels close aboard (if that many). And, lowering a boat into the water to drive over to the dhow (especially at night), would have been totally impractical and unsafe.
Points made by other readers are valid: if there was a tanker airborne, and if there was a divert field available, all are factors in whether the CO alters course or not.
The main point you made however is the MOST IMPORTANT: the dhow could have been loaded with explosives.
No, he was relieved because he didn't take adequate steps to protect his ship from a possible terrorist attack.
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.