Posted on 05/07/2005 8:47:40 PM PDT by SmithL
HONOLULU - The crew of an attack submarine that struck an undersea mountain in the Pacific Ocean earlier this year did not adequately review navigation charts that warned of an obstacle in the vessel's path, according to a Navy report released Saturday.
The USS San Francisco was en route to Australia when the accident occurred Jan. 8 about 360 miles southeast of Guam, killing one sailor and injuring 97 others.
Had the submarine's crew "complied with requisite procedures and exercised prudent navigation practices," the grounding could have been avoided, the 124-page report said. "Even if not wholly avoided, however, the grounding would not have been as severe and loss of life may be been prevented."
The submarine hit the mountain while submerged 525 feet below the ocean's surface. The mountain did not appear on the chart being used for navigation.
Other charts, however, clearly displayed "a navigation hazard in the vicinity of the grounding," the report said. The San Francisco's navigation team "failed to review those charts adequately and transfer pertinent data to the chart being used for navigation, as relevant directives and the ship's own procedures required."
Petty Officer 2nd Class Joseph A. Ashley, 24, of Akron, Ohio, suffered severe head injuries in the collision and died the next day.
Ashley's father, Dan, received the report Friday and said he was not surprised with its findings. He expressed concern about the vessel's "sub notes," which are created by senior Navy commanders to chart the vessel's course and sent to crews before they embark on a mission.
Had Navy officials corrected those notes, "the accident would've never happened and my son would still be alive," said Ashley, who served in the Navy for eight years.
The skipper of the submarine, Cmdr. Kevin Mooney, was earlier relieved of his command and reprimanded. Six crew members were also disciplined. The punishment included reduction in rank and punitive letters of reprimand.
Mooney recently met with Ashley's father and together they visited the sailor's grave in West Virginia.
"He took full responsibility, and with tears in eyes, he asked me to forgive him," Ashley said in a telephone interview from Akron. "And I know Joey and him were very close."
The San Francisco sustained severe damage, but returned to its home port of Guam under its own power. It has been undergoing repairs.
Single Ping
The skipper should at least take some flak on this one. Sounds rather a lazy attitude was onboard. They have no excuse for not knowing where they are steering. No debate solicited my eyes are getting bleary, going to bed. nighty nite all.
"He took full responsibility, and with tears in eyes, he asked me to forgive him," Ashley said in a telephone interview from Akron. "And I know Joey and him were very close."
This is so tough, I think the Navy has some questions to answer. These six sailors are not totally at fault.
Yeah, well, I think the skipper did take some flak.
I think the loss of the crewmember is worse to him than any sentence handed out.
Therefore, it was inexcusable to proceed at the speed and conditions that they did.
Sigh. A good sailor dead and another commander scratched.
The sea is not known for her forgiveness, which is why the Navy isn't, either.
Submarine ping
I am still confused by this point. Why, again did they have an incorrect chart? And whose fault was that? Why did they apparently have differing charts of the same place?
'Mooney recently met with Ashley's father and together they visited the sailor's grave in West Virginia.
"He took full responsibility, and with tears in eyes, he asked me to forgive him," Ashley said in a telephone interview from Akron. "And I know Joey and him were very close." '
That was a really honorable thing to do.
Mooney is one of the good guys. One of many good guys that were on the boat when it hit. I'd be proud to serve in his command.
Look out Gilligan...that's a mountain ahead!....
By both men.
Last I heard, in the US Navy, if your ship hits dirt your command is ended, as well as any chance for promotion. Dead man walking...
Ping!
Hell's bells, how many charts do you guys have to pick from? We all know the Navy is as unforgiving as the sea but where'd the damn chart come from?
I served in Germany in the late 70's.. Our operational maps were generally 20 years old...
I would venture a guess it is much the same in the Navy..
Much money is spent on "Golly-Gee-Whiz" but when it comes to the everyday operational aspects, corners are cut, there is no budget, etc...
Some explanation can be found in the fact that mapping the ocean's floor is a little more complicated than surface topography..
Underwater earthquakes, volcanism, etc.. can cause topographical changes in an area as small as several square miles in an environment that covers 75% of the earth's surface..
That's 3 times as much area to map, and even the best oceanographers often have no idea when or where changes in the seabed topography are being made..
Just my opinion, for what it's worth..
-The mountain did not appear on the chart being used for navigation. Other charts, however, clearly displayed "a navigation hazard in the vicinity of the grounding.
I don't understand this statement.-
My guess, as an old navigator, is they used wide area charts to lay out the course and did not use small area charts to check each part of the track. Had they done so, the sea mount would have been obvious. This is just laziness on the part of the Navigator's team, including the Navigator. A look at a wide area chart will show very few hazards and the water depths will look fine.
Think of it as planning a trip from Boston to San Francisco using back roads. You can easily lay out a route with a US map, but individual State maps would be better and county maps would be even better to accurately see the condition of the roads chosen and the small cities and towns on the way.
It was my understanding, from reading several reports, that the exact opposite was the case. The wide area chart showed some questionable waters, but the localized detail chart showed everything was good to go (i.e. plenty deep w/ no hazards).
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.