Submitted via IRC for guy_
A former commander of the USS John S. McCain pleaded guilty Friday to dereliction of duty when the destroyer collided with a commercial tanker, killing 10 people and injuring five in the Straits of Singapore last August.
Cmdr. Alfredo Sanchez, who has served in the Navy for more than 20 years, testified during a special court-martial at the Washington Navy Yard, Stars and Stripes reported.
“I am ultimately responsible and stand accountable,” Sanchez said. “I will forever question my decisions that contributed to this tragic event.”
Per disciplinary proceedings, Sanchez agreed to retire from service, forfeit $6,000 in wages, and was issued a letter of reprimand.
Sanchez claimed responsibility for the deadly collision. He said had failed to put a well-rested, well-trained crew in place to steer the destroyer into the Straits.
The former commander, who was immediately reassigned after the collision, initially faced negligent homicide charges, CBS News reported.
According to Sanchez, an 18-year-old undertrained helmsman had been navigating the destroyer, known as "Big Bad John," leading up to the collision.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 27 2018, @11:59PM (1 child)
Sink every ship. Hang every captain. Death to America.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Ethanol-fueled on Monday May 28 2018, @12:40AM
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 28 2018, @12:30AM (5 children)
What justice demands:
John S McCain Pleads Guilty, Retires After Deadly Collusion
John S. McCain pleaded guilty Friday to dereliction of duty when the democrats colluded with him, killing Seth Rich and importing Russians in the Swamp of DC the July before last.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 28 2018, @12:37AM (4 children)
John S McCain died in 1981, you ignorant American turd.
(Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 28 2018, @12:44AM (3 children)
LOL... he's not dead yet, you insensitive clod.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 28 2018, @01:00AM
Fuck you, troll.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday May 28 2018, @12:53PM
What, they buried him [wikipedia.org] alive?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 29 2018, @08:15PM
John S McCain died in 1981.
And John S McCain died in 1945.
And John S. McCain is still alive.
Clear enough?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 28 2018, @12:47AM (1 child)
Seems like a good deal.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 28 2018, @01:03AM
He'll be working security at a high school real soon, telling kids to join the navy, and enjoying a cushy job with no pressure.
(Score: 2) by Snotnose on Monday May 28 2018, @01:04AM (25 children)
1 ship, yeah I get that. But we had a rash of ship collisions, none of them made any sense. Tells me there is a systemic issue the Navy is trying to bury.
When the dust settled America realized it was saved by a porn star.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 28 2018, @01:08AM (4 children)
The Navy was secretly testing Linux for its navigation computers.
(Score: 2) by Snotnose on Monday May 28 2018, @01:59AM (2 children)
If that was true they'd have been too busy reconfiguring/compiling/booting their kernel to run into another ship.
When the dust settled America realized it was saved by a porn star.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 28 2018, @03:54AM (1 child)
He said "running Linux," which does not imply running Gentoo.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 28 2018, @04:06AM
Indeed. Where was the systemd joke? They were running Ubuntu.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 28 2018, @08:28AM
Secretly?
It was moving, right? Not being towed, like the ones that ran Windows.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday May 28 2018, @01:17AM (1 child)
MSM was paying attention for once.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 28 2018, @01:27AM
Well, yeah! They all thought they were reporting about Senator John S McCain III. Just like this idiot [soylentnews.org].
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Monday May 28 2018, @02:19AM (11 children)
Yes, I agree. I can't say what the problem is, but there is a problem. Years ago when I was in, the old salts ribbed and kidded us all the time, telling us about the days of wooden ships, and iron men. And, in turn, I passed some of that along. But, I wonder if there isn't some truth to that. In the old timer's day, there were no computers - everything was done manually. Nothing aboard ship was automated. In my day, computers were on the horizon, and we had some niceties. Today? The Navy is building ships with very small crews, citing automation. Everything is computerized.
And, yes, the Navy knows that there is a problem. http://gpsworld.com/naval-academy-brings-back-celestial-navigation-courses/ [gpsworld.com] https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2015/10/22/us-navy-renews-training-in-celestial-navigation-over-gps-hack-fears/ [sophos.com]
A supply puke, like myself, was never trained in navigation, of course. No one would want to trust me to navigate through a narrow strait. But, even so, I could get an idea where on earth we were if I had to. Today's generation? The worst of the worst can't even navigate with detailed maps printed out for them - they have to have their GPS or they are lost.
This kind of ignorance, if left unchecked, carries over into all other aspects of shipboard life. A Captain who doesn't ensure that his navigators can find their asses with both hands, probably isn't checking up on the million other details of life at sea.
My own early days at sea involved Damage Control work. Tedious, monotonous inspections of the gaskets in watertight and airtight doors tripped me up. The executive officer and the Captain were taking a tour of the ship, when they found a gasket that I had signed off on. It wasn't "bad", but it was bad enough to catch their attention. They went through the records, to see who was inspecting those gaskets, and found my name. I had to explain that I was new aboard ship, overworked trying to get all my qualifications, do my daily job, do my watch standing, as well as trying to get all the DC work done. I had to explain that I did actually inspect the gaskets in question, and that I decided some actually had to be replaced, while others were "good enough". Then I had to listen to a lecture that "good enough" just is not "good enough" - all of my gaskets MUST be in top condition.
Lucky for me, my XO and CO actually put on old work clothes, and personally inspected little details like door gaskets. There was nothing that escaped their notice, because they would actually crawl through the shaft alley, searching for rust, broken bolts, etc. And, they were reasonable men - a guy could screw up a time or two, and only get an ass chewing and a few hours of extra duty.
Today? Do officers still get down into the nitty gritty details of shipboard life?
Obviously not. This particular captain apparently didn't know how competent his officer on deck was, or any part of his ship handling crew. The captain had no idea that a less-than-competent helmsman had the helm in restricted waters.
You said "systemic", and I'm afraid that word is perfectly apt.
(Score: 0, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 28 2018, @02:31AM
Ah yes, the grand old days of sail. No computers to distract you from the bad food, brutal discipline, and lack of women. Absolutely perfect for an old gay faggot like Runaway.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Monday May 28 2018, @02:32AM
I read about how they just recently started teaching navigation by the heavens again and thought "why the hell would they stop?"
I'd want my crew to be able to navigate through a BSOD if needed.
Good on them for going back to basics (bad on them for needing some embarrassing episodes to push them there)
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 28 2018, @03:26AM (5 children)
A reasonable choice is to ask when navigation is useful, and then ensure it can be performed under those situations. Navigation is needed for movement and for radioing for help.
Given that you can move or operate a radio, you should have power. You can't assume that every computer and antenna is in working condition. You can't assume that satellites still exist. All radio signals could be spoofed.
You can thus use a computer, a clock, the sky, gravity, the Earth's magnetic field, underwater features, and all the data tables you'd like. You'll need some redundancy; whole compartments may be flooded or burning.
For the sky, you'll want some imagers that are fixed to the ship. At least one should have a polarizer so that you can track the sun when the sky is overcast. At least one should have a color filter so that you can track bright stars during the day.
For the magnetic field, you'll want something that can be deployed away from the ship. Dangling a probe into the water is one option. Flying a kite is another option. You need to get that probe away from the ship's metal.
For underwater features, you'll want active sonar. Dropping a probe will sometimes work, to a limited extent.
Ships with nice big phased-array radar sets (ought to be on everything large) should also be able to track natural radio sources in the sky. Some of these can be tracked through cloud cover.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday May 28 2018, @06:30AM (4 children)
That is exactly what we seem to have forgotten in the military today. Ships don't have just one weapons system - they have several, because A: sometimes one weapons system is unsuitable for the purpose and B: upon contact with the enemy, you can expect to lose a weapon and/or a system. Ships don't have just one gun within the gunnery system - most have two or more main guns, with some kind of backup gun. Ships don't have just one fire main pump, because a pump can be damaged or destroyed, just when you need it most. There isn't just one boiler, or even just one boiler room - there are two boiler rooms, with two boilers in each room.
Ditto with communications gear - repetitive redundancy is a requirement.
Even people! The Fletcher class destroyers were famous and/or notorious for requiring a couple hundred people to operate the ship during peacetime, but often carried close to 500 men during wartime. Tacticians and strategists alike knew that you lose men when you meet the enemy, so the Fletcher's carried almost twice as many men as necessary.
Navigation is no different. A system goes down, use another system. In this case, as long as trained men remain alive, they can look at the sky, and at least guesstimate where they are. A few simple tools enables those trained men to determine their position pretty precisely, even when there is no electricity flowing anywhere on the ship.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 28 2018, @07:06AM
From a guy who has been out for decades? Your lack of Security Clearance is betraying you, Russian spy!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 28 2018, @06:09PM (2 children)
If there is no electricity, then that means no radio and no movement. Navigation is pointless.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday May 28 2018, @11:29PM (1 child)
You are mistaken. The Captain's gig, the whaleboat, and the life rafts can all move. The navigator still needs to be able to tell them which way to move.
I've forgotten the proper form of the abandon ship message. Something like, "the nearest land bears 260 degrees magnetic north, at 58 nautical miles, the nearest FRIENDLY land bears 230 degrees magnetic north at 275 nautical miles". I don't have it exactly right, but it's close enough to get the idea. The announcement goes on to note the sea conditions, wind speed and direction, and the water current.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 29 2018, @03:38AM
Anything that moves in a non-trivial manner can provide electricity for navigational equipment.
If you're just paddling, the only navigation you need is to point at a visible rescue ship or island. The energy you'd spend on serious paddling will cause you to use up your supplies of food and water. Humans who paddle across the ocean are right up there with arctic explorers, ultramarathon runners, and Everest climbers.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 28 2018, @07:03AM (1 child)
Ah, explains your basic Republican disorientation, and tacit support for Trump, the draft dodger who went to a "Military Academy" because his father caught him with a switchblade. So, Runaway1956, how about you just shut the fuck up about things you do not understand, and some of us may entertain the fantasy that you actually served someone, once? Deal?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 28 2018, @04:51PM
The switchblade story is a lie. He was caught smacking his monkey while watching two dogs fucking.
(Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 28 2018, @07:43AM
As someone who has lived and breathed tech for almost 40 years of life, I can tell you that I have also come to the conclusion there are some places it simply shouldn't be placed at this time, and given the compromises being made in its engineering and implementation, perhaps ever (short of a major shift in who is running the companies producing it.)
Cars without at minimum failover/overriddable manually controlled steering, brakes, throttle, etc? No way. Planes and ships with completely electronic drive/fly by wire systems with no manual failsafes? *HELL NO* The former are more risky on a day to day basis to a small group of people, but the latter have the potential to kill hundreds to thousands in a single even, even if odds of that event are far smaller on average compared to the car. I hold similiar reservations about softswitches on computer hardware, especially devices with microphones, cameras, and other personally identifiable metadata, although that is more about asymmetric information warfare than immediate safety concerns like badly implemented electronic interfaces and failsafes on multi-ton to hundreds of ton vehicles exhibit. Mankind is providing its collective immaturity in the safe usage of semi and autonomous electronics technology in places where human or physical failsafes are not already engineered into place. And as most of these examples prove, the human element failsafe is unreliable not because of the individuals who fail, but because of the management, lack of training for all possible conditions, and underengineering that result from the true perpetraitors not being held to task for their systemic shortcomings. Start at the top before you blame the bottom. This commander deserves his career ending blow, but so do all the other personnel both within and without the service who helped produce the failure conditions which caused this collision. And there are a lot more of them than one commander.
(Score: 2) by MostCynical on Monday May 28 2018, @03:15AM (4 children)
Entire Navy is scrwing up training, watch hand overs, ship managment.
As has been previously discussed on SN and elsewhere, they don't even know *which* controls are active on a given station, so the ships are actually hitting alot fewer objects that you'd expect.
This isn't acover up, though. The captain was in charge.
As to who handed him badly trained obliviots to actually run his ship, well, that is a separate issue.
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 4, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Monday May 28 2018, @06:47AM (3 children)
That gets a little deep. Ultimately, the captain does that to himself. There are a lot of contributing factors, of course, but it all comes back to that commanding officer.
First, I have to say a word in the captain's defense. Before going to his cabin, the captain did tell the OOD (officer on deck or officer of the deck) to set the special sea and anchor detail during passage through the restricted water way. The OOD FAILED to do so. That is, he disobeyed a direct order. The sea and anchor detail consists of the ship's best trained, and most experienced hands, at all navigation stations. The Old Man stated his wishes, and those wishes were not carried out.
Moving beyond that one point in the Captain's defense - all hands should be moderately competent in whatever station they are assigned to. As a lowly supply puke, I was able to stand a watch at the helm. Granted, I was only permitted to do so in open seas, with a real helmsman standing by to take over at any time. But, all hands should be competent to stand any and all watches. Any deck hand should be more competent than I ever was, which is apparently more competent than the men under discussion.
How does a crew get competent? The XO and the CO should be reviewing the skill sets, and the competencies of all hands, routinely. Department heads and division chiefs play a big part in all of that, but those two top officers should be aware of the training level of their crew.
For a commanding officer to permit less than competent personnel to assume a watch - any watch - is a display of complacency, and incompetence on the commander's part.
Boot camp and advanced training schools may or may not be producing men and women who are up to snuff - but it is the captain's responsibility to determine who among his crew is competent, and who is not. Then, it is his responsibility to remedy any problem with those levels of training.
I've not read that the OOD was punished, disciplined, resigned, or booted out of the Navy. But, I can tell you with certainty that the OOD bears as much responsibility as the Old Man. He disobeyed at least one direct order, and a standing order. That standing order would have been, "Wake the captain!"
(Score: 2) by bradley13 on Monday May 28 2018, @08:05AM (2 children)
"Boot camp and advanced training schools may or may not be producing men and women who are up to snuff - but it is the captain's responsibility to determine who among his crew is competent, and who is not. Then, it is his responsibility to remedy any problem with those levels of training."
First off, I appreciate your comments as an ex-Navy type - thanks for putting your experience up.
I do wonder if there isn't a more systemic problem. I'm not Navy, I'm ex-Air Force. Still, we heard tales about the Navy transforming into the biggest child-care organization in the country. Lots of single moms signing up, who would then "accidentally" get pregnant again, just before they were supposed to be off on a long tour. Mind you, the Air Force was much the same: there was a lot of emphasis on tailoring assignments to people's personal situation (and single parents got a *lot* of slack), and too little on doing what you (supposedly) signed up to do.
That's just one example of the more general problem: attracting and keeping enough good people in the military. What kind of people sign up to be a soldier or sailor today? To what extent are the Navy's problems the result of lowered standards?
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Monday May 28 2018, @09:04AM (1 child)
Agreed. As much as it hurts to go along with the child-care bit, that is what I've heard.
During my day, there were rotation schedules for the various ratings. My own rating said that I was supposed to do 2 years of sea duty, for one year of shore duty. I actually did 1 year of isolated duty, and five years of sea duty, for one year of shore duty. That didn't bother me, but it bothered a lot of shipmates. The reason was women in the military. The women flocked in, and because they weren't permitted to serve in combat roles, they automatically got shore duty, and preferred overseas duty billets - leaving the men to fill at-sea and potential combat roles. It was much worse for some of the other ratings, such as gunner's mates. Some chick joined up, got gunnery training (missiles, guns, control, whatever) then sat on her pretty little tush somewhere that guns would never be used. What an absolute waste! Real gunner's mates, many of them Viet vets, simply had no shore duty available. Resent women in the military? That's putting it mildly!
Every bit of that kind of nonsense can be laid on the shoulders of congress. They want to run their social experiments, fine - but they shouldn't be doing it in the military. When all is said and done, on the day that we are called on to perform the job we are paid for, people are going to die. Congress, liberals, and people in general have lost sight of our primary purpose. Kill, or be killed.
I'm not gullible enough to believe that mankind is changing, or that future warfare will be more humane, or that we are so very powerful that no one will challenge us.
Look at Iraq and Afghanistan, and Vietnam before that. A bunch of virtually untrained, poorly equipped people with shoddy equipment and substandard arms fought us in all three places. Vietnam was a loss for us, Afghanistan is still up for grabs, and Iraq remains contested grounds among several different players. ISIS/DAESH actually took part of Iraq away from us, and our puppets!
Collectively, we have lost sight of our goals. We hardly even understand what military superiority means, anymore.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 28 2018, @01:52PM
Nope, it was the DoD's 1994 Direct Ground Combat Definition and Assignment Rule (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combat_Exclusion_Policy) that kept those women out of combat roles.
(Score: 2) by Whoever on Monday May 28 2018, @03:34AM
The systematic issue is simple and public.
Ships are under-manned and the crews are under-trained and over-worked.
(Score: 4, Informative) by SomeGuy on Monday May 28 2018, @02:11AM (1 child)
Since the trolls seem to be losing their shit over this...
From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_John_S._McCain_(DDG-56) [wikipedia.org]
"This warship is named after John S. McCain, Sr., and John S. McCain, Jr., both admirals in the United States Navy. John S. McCain, Sr. commanded the aircraft carrier USS Ranger, and later the Fast Carrier Task Force during the latter stages of World War II. John S. McCain, Jr. commanded the submarines USS Gunnel and USS Dentuda during World War II. He subsequently held a number of posts, rising to Commander-in-Chief of the United States Pacific Command, before retiring in 1972. These men were, respectively, the grandfather and father of Senator John S. McCain III.[3]"
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 28 2018, @02:19AM
Facts! Get your fucking facts out of here!
God bless Obama President for Life.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 28 2018, @02:18PM
Not much of a coverup of what happened on the ships.
The Navy published a pretty good report on this.
Quite a few gory details.
Definitely a three stooges performance.
http://s3.amazonaws.com/CHINFO/USS+Fitzgerald+and+USS+John+S+McCain+Collision+Reports.pdf [amazonaws.com]
For this accident, see page 47 section 2.2.
This one was poor training made worse by the UI used to switch steering control.
If there was a coverup it might be that tasking given the ships from higher command left little chance for anything else to happen.
The Fitzgerald was much worse.
I think they planned a course without being aware of the shipping lane.
Unfortunate mix of arrogance and neglect.
I hope the good news is that after the second incident, they stopped and looked at what they were doing.
The emphasis for mission over seamanship is understandable except that mission depends on seamanship.
Too many cases of getting away with it made them forget this.