So when a design flaw causes an accident, is it still the commander that gets the blame?
Suppose food is contaminated before being loaded on to a ship. Hundreds of sailors are poisoned and an accident results.
Still the commanders fault?
Suppose a commander orders that his sub be turned but because of a design flaw the sub goes straight and crashes. Should the commander be blamed?
These charts are part of the ship provided to the commander. He should be able to depend on them.
Outdated maps amount to a design flaw.
The responsibility for seeing that technology is applied to the creation of current maps lies with those higher in the chain.
Instead they pass the buck back down.
Your points are meaningful, but they do not carry the day.
The commander signed approval for acceptance of the contaminated food on board. He also accepted command of the ship with the design flaw. The same will be true for each of your examples. The commander accepted them. It was his choice.
The choice is to hold those who have assumed responsibility, responsible. If you start to depart from that precedent, then people who really did screw up will start to maneuver more aggressively to avoid being held responsible for their screwups.
It's a bit like the justice system. A choice was made to let 10 guilty men go free to lessen the odds of incarcerating an innocent man. A similar choice is in place with regard to commander responsibility. Ten times you punish a commander who did nothing wrong to avoid having a guilty one escape punishment.