Replies

In response to a question asked on an other board this was Jim Christley's anwers:

This is a bit wordy and just an opinion. Agreement is not required.

While the boats today are a quantum leap above the old fleet boat in terms of technology, they are just as likely to fall in the clutches of old problems.

The question boils down to "Why did it happen"

The answer falls into one of several areas.

1. The thing they ran into isn't supposed to be where its at, at the depth its at. One has to assume the chart information is correct. If its not, all bets are off. Our charts, while good are not perfect. Of course this begs the question, if the chart is no good, why was the boat going that fast that deep. The answer to that is relatively simple. Some years ago the section of I-95 that goes across the Mianis River in Connecticut fell in at night. Several people traveling at 'the speed limit' ran off the bridge into the river and died. We assume the path chosen is clear and safe. If its not and we don't know it, all bets are off. Submarines don't use active sonar systems in some evolutions. A high speed transit where the boat is to be undetected is one of those. The SanFran might have been doing that, we don't know.

2. Someone might have screwed up. Plotted the wrong course, inputted the wrong way points. Misread an instrument or tried to take a shortcut. In this instance, the problem must be found and corrected and the guilty must be shown what responsibility means. No matter who it is. And make no mistake, this problem might not be on the boat. If the boat was told to go from A to B directly and given a speed and depth (so someone else could try to detect it) the problem might lie off the boat.

3. The instruments and or computer programs may be in error or generating an error. In this case, we must make them better because they are not safe enough to allow certain types of operations.

We sailors have been running into things since we have been floating on logs. SanFran is just the latest in a long line of groundings which transcend the technology and presence or lack of quartermasters. Trust me, the problem isn't that simple. Guardfish hit Oahu in 1966-67 with good navigation and quartermasters. Tiru hit a reef in 1966. Sam Houston hit several things in a 6 month period. Back in the old days, (1910-1940) boats used to run into everything they could on an average of once a month in some years to once every six months. We have hit each other, Cape Cod (many times) the coast of California and the East coast of the US. During WWII we lost several boats simply due to running aground.
While true the boats today have many better things, they aren't tracking around on the surface at a 10 Knot SOA. They are pushing the envelope as they should and there is a risk.

This is not in defense of the change in the rating structure, but I have been out too long to be of any use in that argument. Like the change of uniforms, its not real important how you dress the sailor, only how well you train him/her. And as for rates, I don't care what you call me, long as its not late for first call to midrats, but thats just me.

Be assured that if there is a problem it will be found and corrected and that process will be painful. And-- this is most important as any COB or LPO will tell you. Just because you fixed it on ustafish, doesn't mean the fix is permanent or fleet wide.

We seem to be screwing up more often. I don't think we are, I really think its more public now. I do know this. In keeping the list of our lost shipmates and updating it when necessary, we are killing our shipmates a lot less often than we did in the past. (peacetime, I mean)

Just a longwinded look at whats happening.
Thanks for the listen
Jim