Just damn... That boy did not hit the mountain, he plowed it. He is lucky not to have a boot print branded on his posterior as he left the mast. Poorly charted waters does not mean flank speed!
Posted on 02/11/2005 9:13:07 PM PST by SmithL
The skipper of the nuclear-powered submarine that crashed into the side of an undersea mountain is quietly being sent before an “admiral’s mast” in Japan this weekend to face charges of endangering his ship, according to several active-duty and retired Navy sources familiar with the case.
Cmdr. Kevin Mooney was slated to appear before 7th Fleet commander Vice Adm. Jonathan W. Greenert in Yokosuka on Saturday morning, the sources said.
The Navy’s highest form of nonjudicial punishment, admiral’s mast falls short of the criminal proceedings of a court martial, but can result in anything from full exoneration to fines, reprimands, and loss of qualifications.
Publicly, Navy officials decline to comment on Mooney’s case.
“It would be inappropriate to discuss any nonjudicial punishment proceedings at this time,” said Greenert’s spokesman, Cmdr. Ike Skelton.
On Jan. 18, the San Francisco, a Los Angeles-class, fast-attack submarine, is believed to have rammed into an undersea mountain 350 nautical miles south of its homeport at Guam. One sailor was killed and another 23 injured in the incident.
The sub suffered massive damage to its sonar dome and bow structure, but was able to limp back to Guam where it is now in dry dock. Navy officials are still unsure if the sub can be salvaged.
Mooney’s mast, however, comes before the detailed investigation into the accident is complete. And unlike most nonjudicial punishment throughout the rest of the military, sailors from sea-going commands cannot refuse mast and demand a court- martial.
At issue, say officials, is whether charts supplied to Mooney provided any clue of dangerous waters. Officials at the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency in Bethesda, told reporters after the accident that the main maps used by the U.S. Navy did not reveal any obstacle anywhere near the sight of the crash.
Officials familiar with case, however, say another, much older chart was believed to be aboard the San Francisco indicating discolored water several miles away.
Early findings of the Navy’s investigation appear to indicate some level of “questionable” practices by Mooney, according to a Feb. 7 letter obtained by Stars and Stripes to Greenert from the commander of Pacific submarine forces Rear Adm. P.F. Sullivan.
Preliminary findings of the grounding, reads the letter, “highlights the questionable Voyage Planning processes and navigation practices Cdr. Kevin Mooney implemented and maintained while in command. He was responsible for the safe surfaced and submerged navigation of the ship, and should be held accountable.”
Still, the vast majority of the three-page letter outlines Mooney’s many accomplishments while in command of the San Francisco.
Sullivan said he had personally selected Mooney “to correct significant command climate and performance issues” aboard the ship.
Since taking command in late 2003, Sullivan said Mooney was directly responsible for transforming a down-in-the-dumps crew into one of the best in the fleet.
The ship, he wrote, got the highest marks of any Pacific submarine in a grueling Tactical Readiness Evaluation, among other top line certifications of its nuclear propulsion system and engineering departments.
Mooney’s “operational planning skill and command presence ensured the ship’s success in dynamic operations of vital importance to national security,” adds Sullivan.
“In the face of huge quality-of-life challenges faced by his ship, including a five-month deployment to San Diego for material repairs and transforming Guam into a viable submarine homeport, retention and reenlistment rates significantly exceed fleet norms” under Mooney, writes Sullivan.
“Despite the intense scrutiny under which he has been placed as a result of this tragedy, Cmdr. Mooney has conducted himself with honor and dignity. I ask that you consider his positive contributions to the U.S. Navy during your deliberations at Admiral’s Mast.”
So also did the man that died under his command. The guy may have been nothing but a cook, but cooking was his job, the Captains job is to not let the boat be run into the rocks. Every sailor on the ship is trusting the Captain, the Captain failed, the Captain paid, that is the way it works. Fault is not the issue, boat hit rock, that is the issue in the Navy. If the President himself ordered the Captain to run the ship into the rocks the Captain should and can say NO. That is the Captains job.
Responsibility comes before fault and cause in the Military. There is no excuses when dealing with nuclear weapons and the such, and the military is constructed with that in mind. To a civilian mind, that is unfair, but then, if you want life to be fair, don't join the military, it is not made fair, it is made military.
Hope that cleared the issue up.
I hadn't heard that, is there some place to check out this story?
The problem was he did not know it was not there. One does not fly a thermonuclear submarine in the blind.
I understand the issue completely. God rest the soul of the sailor who died and may those injured heal okay. I still have compassion for a man who has served his nation for years. This is so tragic. Perhaps there might be some policy changes about running silent in certain areas.
Just damn... That boy did not hit the mountain, he plowed it. He is lucky not to have a boot print branded on his posterior as he left the mast. Poorly charted waters does not mean flank speed!
Lighten up, Francis.
It is, but the Navy doesn't want you if you've been unlucky.
Well with the Re-up rate being higher than any other ship in the Navy, you can tell this was one heck of a captain. A great loss to the Navy. Meant no disrespect to you, it is just the way it is.
You watch TV. Maybe I should watch West Wing and think that is really how my government works.
Now that was funny...lol
Uh...that is not a true statement...
It's virtually a rule that if the captain runs his ship aground, he's finished. They don't generally accept excuses or mitigating factors. They expect perfection.
That is something the Marine Commandant does not subscribe to. He admits that we are human and humans are prone to err. He justs wants errors kept to a minimum. If you expect perfection no one will make the grade.
Well, they are going to charge him now. So television is not so far from reality. I just heard on FOX this morning that he has been relieved of command and that they are going to charge him in relation to the mishap.
Your sarcasm was duly noted. I hate West Wing. They are a bunch of left wing liberals.
The Navy apparently doesn't agree with you:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1341774/posts
Well, tell me what he should have done then.
I admire all branches of the military. I am not putting them down. I just don't understand this situation. So, am I to understand that the Navy way is be perfect or else?
Exactly. He said it in jest. I responded in kind. I am not that much of a dingbat.
Well, then, how could he have known it was there?
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.