Posted on 09/07/2005 4:18:06 PM PDT by Michael Goldsberry
PENSACOLA, Fla. — Two Navy helicopter pilots were praised but then reminded of the importance of supply missions after delivering their cargo and then rescuing 110 hurricane victims in New Orleans instead of immediately returning to base, the military said today.
One of the pilots was temporarily assigned to a kennel, but that was not punishment, said Patrick Nichols, a civilian public affairs officer at Pensacola Naval Air Station.
"They were not reprimanded," Nichols said. "They were counseled."
Lt. Matt Udkow and Lt. David Shand returned to the base from their mission Aug. 30, a day after Hurricane Katrina made landfall, Nichols said.
Udkow and Shand were met by Cmdr. Michael Holdener, who lauded them for the rescues but reminded them their orders were to fly water and other supplies to three destinations in Mississippi — the Stennis Space Center, Pascagoula and Gulfport — and then return to Pensacola, said Lt. Jim Hoeft, another Navy spokesman.
"The Hollywood role of this thing is search and rescue," Nichols said. "Logistics was just as important. They realize that."
The two air crews picked up a Coast Guard radio call that helicopters were needed for rescues in New Orleans, Hoeft said. They were out of radio range to Pensacola, so they decided to fly their helicopters to New Orleans and join the rescue effort without permission.
It took only minutes for the H-3 helicopters to fly to New Orleans, where Udkow's crew plucked people off rooftops. Shand hovered over the roof of an apartment building where more than a dozen people had been stranded. When he returned to get more, two crew members entered the building and found two blind residents and led them to the helicopter.
Udkow later received permission to continue with the rescue missions when he landed to refuel in New Orleans.
Both helicopters returned to Pensacola, about 200 miles east of New Orleans, by dark, as required by flight rules. Nichols said they did not miss any additional supply runs because of the rescues.
The pilots and Holdener weren't available for interviews today, Nichols said. He said Udkow was flying and Shand was resting between missions.
"We all want to be the guys who rescue people," Holdener told The New York Times. "But they were told we have other missions we have to do night now, and that is not the priority."
The air over New Orleans was so thick with helicopters a few days later that crews were having a hard time finding people who needed rescuing, but that was not the case when Udkow and Shand flew their rescue missions.
"I would be looking at a family of two on one roof and maybe a family of six on another roof, and I would have to make a decision who to rescue," Udkow told the Times. "It wasn't easy."
Nichols said Udkow was in no way being punished by being put in charge of a temporary kennel in Pensacola for pets of military personnel who had been evacuated from hurricane-stricken areas.
"It's a collateral duty," Nichols said. "These guys don't just fly. They do other stuff."
Because THEY talked to the press; I'm sick of whining, period.
"...said Patrick Nichols, a civilian public affairs officer at Pensacola Naval Air Station."
Huh?
They went to the press first; that's why the Navy is responding.
Unless that officer jeopardized your mission by his disobedience.
You'll have to do better than tinfoil. I still love 'ya.
Odds are that the vast majority of those rescued were net tax recipients not net tax payers.
When servicemembers fail to follow an order it is failure to obey an order.
Dereliction of duty is something else. It is possible to be derelict in duty while following orders and it is possible to carry out one's duties and disobey and order.
A duty may be imposed by treaty, statute, regulation, lawful order, standard operating procedure, or custom of the service.
It may be and most certainly is a custom of the naval service to render aid and assistance where required. Rendering such service would be in conformance with the duties of a helicopter pilot. Failure to obey an order to return to base because one is rendering assistnace is a complicated issue, raising the issue of whether the duty to render assistance takes precedent over the order to return to base. Officers including pilots get paid to make such judments. Blind obediance to an order is no defence against dereliction of duty (failure to render assistance).
Individual initiative is why we won WWII and the Germans lost WWII. Citizen soldiers is why our military safeguards democracy rather than overthrow it.
Good order and discipline are part of an effective military, but so are a lot of other things. We are Americans, not goose-stepping fascists.
In short, responsible, mission focused independent thinking is what I want. It is, in fact, modern military doctrine/
"counseled" so that's what the new sensitive military calls it.
Complex operations...I must confess I was not a military type person, a short timer, not a lifer. In my short term I had great appreciation for the lifers but still disdain for most that could subject themselves to the system.
Exactly.
Let's allow the commander to set the width of the line. That's their job, and that's a product of their experience.
I'm glad the pilots aren't in any deep kimshee, but they needed permission to deviate this broadly before they did it. O-3s are NOT prepared to make mission selection decisions on their own.
"Sorry. Whatever this is, it is not dereliction of duty."
It's more like they were just saving gas.
My first few years in I hated to be sat down and given the "Big Picture" talk. I had a better eye for what was really going on then those crusty old farts.
Then one day when I was a little older and a bit higher in rank something we were doing became almost FUBAR because of a young hotshot who knew it all. We recovered because of the experience of all the players but it did cause a few exciting moments.
I sat him down and started to give him a good talking to and I realized it was the "Big Piture" crusty old fart talk. Kinda like when kids grown up and learn "Oh No, I've turned into my parents".
The key to miss steps is how it is handled. In the case of the pilots I think it was handled well. The CO chewed a little butt, got all the unit to refocus on the unit mission and everybody drives on.
To focus on the pilots and make them into heros would send the wrong message to "individuals" in the military.
"To focus on the pilots and make them into heros would send the wrong message to "individuals" in the military."
Thanks for being honest and straight forward...
To my thinking and from experience, there should have never been any public knowledge of any reprimand made public by anyone.
I learned early on to differentiate between the paper shufflers and the doers, the ones that got it done, that you could count on when things turned hairy.
I flew with one that made a three engine bomb run in Korea, against all regulations. With agreement from the crew, he made the run, declared an emergency and landed in South Korea. When he got back to Okie the CO was so "upset" he took him out on a good drunk. Told him to never do it again, nothing was ever put on paper and the CO hung the nickname of "suicide" on him. Suicide was a doer.
I'll bet you'll get a good argument from a Marine 2nd Lieutenant on this dumb statement.
O-1s exist solely for the entertainment of the enlisted ranks. LOL
They'd best be able to outrank an Army Captain, then. 2LTs have leeway, but must stay within their mission parameters. So must their Captains, although CPTs have more wiggle room. LTCs and COLs have even more wiggle room (Sorry - I don't know the Navy rank structure all that well, so I speak in ground-pounder lingo).
The bottom line is this: Significant deviation from one's mission must be authorized by someone who has the big picture in mind. The article says that the one pilot got permission to continue flying rescue missions somewhere in the middle of all this. That permission should have been sought immediately, otherwise the pilot was unilaterally deciding what he was supposed to do was unimportant in light of unknown consequences.
That's the way the military works. The only real exception is for illegal orders.
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.