Replies

I believe we are on the same page - you just explained a lot more of the process than I. My presumption was that he might be cleared of any wrong doing (thus the "Innocent" remark) and that that will go a long way towards rebuilding his credibility in the eyes of his subordinates-to-be.

The C.O. on my west coast billet was the P.C.O. on FFG9 where he put the ship through the paces. Because of his "pushing the envelope" during this period, serious flaws were discovered in the ship's design that had to be incorporated prior to future commissionings (i.e. cracks in the aluminum bulkheads amidships along the ineffective expansion joints). Granted, this was part of the job, but he did push the edge and was never disciplined for it.

These sub-jockeys are the best in the world at what they do and this story is a bit light in details to make any judgements. As you said, the Navy will want to get to the bottom of "what broke" to cause this embarrassing incident from happening again. Prayers to the family of the lost brother seaman.