Mister.
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.”
Maybe "luck" is the issue. Napoleon once asked of an opposing commander, "Is he lucky?" This Skipper has proven that he isn't. I hear sailors are a superstitious bunch and I can't say that I blame them. Who would want to serve on a war ship with a skipper this unlucky? I wouldn't. It may not be fair, but life isn't.
This is not McHale's Navy, Mister. Cmdr. Mooney went through a lot to become what he is. He had to be nearly perfect. God Bless the Sailor that died and Cmdr. Mooney. This is no place for disrespect. If we didn't have people like this defending America you would not be able to have the Freedom you have to act with the disrespect you just did. If you're upset with this send your Incoming, Mister.
Mister.
That's a good concept, but it wouldn't have done them any good in this case.
Why would anything else have to be going on? I don't know how the Navy does things but this may just be the way to conclude the incident for all involved.
If by this you mean you're not paying attention to JOE43270 because he is new, I suggest you look at his joined date again. Seems you are about a year off.
There's going to be some kind of official notice taken when a ship or boat (subs are boats) is this badly damaged.
The findings of this mast could go either way. He could be exonerated, even praised for saving his boat. Or they could torpedo his career. Time will tell.
I am wondering - why did you address your comment to me? I am not conflicted about how this is proceeding, it is a military affair and I understand the regs. Perhaps you were commenting to another's post?
In the USCG Academy simulators, we used to train every XO and OPS for every US Sub in the nation in a set of 4 four advanced, complicated surface driving exercises, for years and years. (Groton sub base a stone's throw across the Thames. They bought their own simulators last year, so I'm outta the picture now)I remember him a few years back in class. Focused, serious, highly knowledgable in the Rules of the Road (primary focus of the training). There's something else going on about this incident. The mast is an investigation, and is welcomed by anyone wrongly accused or heaped on by rumors.
That picture isn't going to save you Mister. Just remember when you go to sleep tonight and sleep calmly and soundly who made it possible for you to do that. Two that are on the top of the list are Cmdr. Mooney and the Sailor that died. God Bless them both and all the rest of us who have defended America Past, Present, and the Future to come. Keep on enjoying your Right of Free Speech and enjoy it. Remember who paid the price for you to have it Mister.
Why don't you explain rather than fire off smart-aleck comebacks? If the only way submarines avoid running into things is maps, then there ought to be a lot more groundings and rammings than there are.
Thank you and God Bless.
The story about the "rear" admiral was yesterday...
Well, I like the concept that someone has to assume responsibility. If it was just one of those things he stilll may not be able to drive subs again, but they don't have to give him a dishonorable discharge.
Well, the fact that NO ONE lost their job over 9-11 still irritates me. Sometimes things happen and heads just have to roll. It's not fair, but life's not fair. Certainly wasn't fair to the sailor who died, or the thousands on 9-11.
So the Admirals mast is basically where the Admiral says "I'm sorry, son. Thank you for your excellent service, but now I'm going to have to screw you." Is that about right?
I don't know how one could be a real confident sub-driver again after something like this happened.
You're right. They have windows. Certainly you've seen "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea".
I think I might have heard on the radio that Mooney disregarded the second chart.
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.