God Bless
Posted on 01/19/2007 5:47:40 PM PST by SmithL
The Navy announced Friday it relieved the commander of a nuclear submarine that was involved in an incident that killed two sailors.
On Dec. 29, rough seas swept four American sailors from the deck of the submarine off the coast of southwestern England. The USS-Minneapolis-St. Paul was leaving Plymouth harbor when the sailors were knocked into the water by surging waves. The four men were taken to a hospital in Plymouth, where two were pronounced dead.
According to officials, an initial review determined the incident was avoidable and due in part to a poor decision by the commander. A formal investigation is still under way. He was identified by a Navy statement as Cmdr. Edwin Ruff.
According to the Navy, Ruff was reassigned to a shore-based post in Norfolk, Va. The decision was made by Vice Adm. Chuck Munns, commander of the Navy's Submarine Force in Norfolk.
"Munns took this action due to a loss of confidence in Ruff's ability to command,"
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Steely-eyed Killers of the Deep Ping
I say interesting, because the first reports, at least, said that after the accident, the sub headed out to sea for their regular patrol. Were they ordered to return to port?
God Bless
True: expected.
Of course, that would also mean Nimitz was cashiered out of the Navy as well.
I knew Vice Adm Munns when he was a LT, instructing our NROTC class - he was always a sharp man.
Career down the tubes (so to speak). Hope his resume is up-to-date.
"Munns took this action due to a loss of confidence in Ruff's ability to command," … death null for any Navy Commander.
He will likely face court martial proceedings, jail time and dishonorable discharge from the Navy.
I guess this might be called "taking one for the team."
I don't know the Facts of this Case nor do I seek to Judge anyone involved in this Case, but...
Almost any incident will end your Career when you Command in the USN, which is why those that Fly Desks seem to be in the Majority at the Pentagon.
JMHO
TT
NOPE!
Top officers reprimanded in incident in which two sailors died
>>>>>"He will likely face court martial proceedings, jail time and dishonorable discharge from the Navy"<<<<<
WHAT?????
Wipe before pulling crap like that from your nether regions, it really stinks, it is wrong and people will look at you funny from now on
TT
No doubt that Captain Ruff, too, was a sharp man -- the Navy is not in the habit of giving command at sea to men who do not inspire confidence.
It's hard to tell whether this is one of those things where Ruff really screwed up, or one of those things where the good of the Naval Service demands a sacrifice, and so a head rolls, and in timeless tradition that head is the captain's.
In "The Right Stuff," which is about pilots and astronauts but could easily be about naval officers, special ops operators or several other military elites, Tom Wolfe notes that the "Right Stuff" is something that "can blow at any seam." It's generally a bad thing for most commanders when their unit makes the newspaper (given that most reporters hate the military and will only report the negative).
We'll never know what really happened on the deck of that boat, I reckon. Ruff knows, and whether his responsibility was direct, indirect, or of the "Naval tradition requires you to step down" variety, the nature of command is such that the burden of these men's deaths will remain with him all of his remaining days.
It's a grim business.
d.o.l.
Criminal Number 18F
That is a shame.
I don't know the Navy, but I know construction and I send the desk jocks to the field every chance I get. Especially the Designers.
Field experience is everything in my business.
Well said 18, well said, salute.
TT
You haven't a clue what you're talking about.
Having spent over ten years in the USN, I beg to differ. (68-78). I don’t think the responsibility of command has changed much in the intervening years since my tour.
He will likely face retirement and a second career in government or the private sector.
It is standard in today's Navy to relieve a Commanding Officer for an "avoidable accident".
Ens. Nimitz was the OOD of a ship that grounded, and that much less significant accident (which today, would probably be a "career killer" unless there were exceptional mitigating circumstances) wasn't a career killer for him (obviously!)
In rough weather, persons topside should be wearing life jackets and fall protection harnesses. The harnesses have lines that clip into tracks on the sub; a wave might knock someone topside down, but the sailor is still attached to the sub - no need for a "man-overboard" drill.
When I was on a sub, the XO was usually topside as a 3nd level supervisor for the topside party. He would ensure that the line-handlers, etc. (and the 1st level supervisors) followed all the safety rules! If the XO wasn't topside - why not. If he was topside - how did this (avoidable) accident occur. The CO is ultimately responsible to ensure he sets the standards for doing everything on the sub in a safe manner.
The CO (COs of submarines are usually Commanders - O-5) was selected for promotion to Captain (O-6) - but that selection is very likely to be pulled.
As to those thinking of Dishonorable Discharge or Criminal Prosecution .... baloney! Scott Waddle, the CO of the USS Greeneville - the one who allowed a "emergency blow" from deeper depths, and hit and sunk a Japanese fishing ship (training vessel) - where nine students died - was relieved of command. He retired and is drawing his retirement pay.
As to the rationale for "punishing" the CO for things that happen on his ship - an excellent editorial published by the Wall Street Journal in 1952 explains things very well. From another article that references the editorial:
It is sometimes difficult for those who have not spent time at sea to understand the "law of the sea." Indeed, the number and complexity of tasks that a reasonably prudent ship captain is expected to handle might seem overly harsh in comparison to other professions. In an editorial commenting on the 1952 nighttime collision between the aircraft carrier Wasp and the destroyer Hobson, the Wall Street Journal explained the ship captain's duties of care as rooted in history and tradition:
On the sea there is a tradition older even than the traditions of the country itself and wiser in its age than this new custom. It is the tradition that with responsibility goes authority and with them both goes accountability. . . . [M]en will not long trust leaders who feel themselves beyond accountability for what they do. And when men lose confidence and trust in those who lead, order disintegrates into chaos and purposeful ships into uncontrollable derelicts.
The collision between the aircraft carrier Wasp and the destroyer Hobson destroyed a ninety-foot section of Wasp's bow and split Hobson's hull wide open. In just minutes, the Hobson dropped into the sea, taking with her 176 of the 237 souls onboard, including her captain. A court of inquiry was convened to investigate the facts and determine who should be held accountable. Many of the public felt it unnecessary to go after the deceased Captain of the Hobson, but the WSJ article tried to explain the need for "ACCOUNTABILITY".
Mike
Now just where is the poster that said I was crazy for saying this commander needed to be canned.
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.