[HN Gopher] Navy failures destroyed the Bonhomme Richard
___________________________________________________________________
Navy failures destroyed the Bonhomme Richard
Author : smitty1e
Score : 64 points
Date : 2021-10-30 12:54 UTC (10 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (gcaptain.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (gcaptain.com)
| fasteddie31003 wrote:
| Another example of the institutional rot that is happening across
| our county in aging institutions that have little accountability.
| Will any leadership be held accountable? No. The US Military is a
| jobs program first and a fighting force a distant second.
| rwmurrayVT wrote:
| There have been major changes in the shipyard since the fire.
| Navy leadership, RMCs, and ship's force have been more involved
| at every level. The question to follow now is when will they
| return to complacency.
| PicassoCTs wrote:
| The density of these incidents seems to be increasing, ships
| run by untrained crew crashing into other vehicles, steered
| by software that does not work.
|
| Now the leadership that created the circumstances and
| conditions for this mismanagement to flourish, rushes to fix
| a problem they allowed to create?
| twofornone wrote:
| The leadership is more concerned with diversity and inclusion
| than combat readiness. This institutional rot, across industry,
| academia, and military, is a symptom of antimeritocratic hiring
| bias. For example, apparently women are so valuable to our
| military that the brass has decided to quietly lower standards
| in return for positive political coverage. This has been going
| on to an increasing degree for at least a decade, and is only
| accelerating under the current administration and, frankly,
| it's insanity.
|
| Also extremely toxic to morale.
| userbinator wrote:
| Indeed this phenomenon is not exclusive to the military and
| has permeated into a lot of other industries. I see evidence
| of it in the software industry too. Quality is declining
| noticeably, but the elephant in the room few would speak up
| about, so they start pointing fingers elsewhere instead. Yet
| what else could you expect if you started hiring people based
| on who they are instead of what they can do?
| s5300 wrote:
| > The leadership is more concerned with diversity and
| inclusion than combat readiness.
|
| How exactly did you reach this conclusion?
| twofornone wrote:
| Well, for one, there was a letter signed by 1xx retired
| leaders but I'm having trouble finding it on google under
| the pile of pro D&I propaganda that exclusively makes up
| search results.
|
| For two, consistent anecdata from personal acquaintances
| and forum posts. The demographics are also completely
| changing. The military was until recently carried primarily
| by white men from small town America. Now white maleness is
| effectively a career handicap when genitals, skin color,
| and sexual orientation are considered for promotion.
|
| I think the recent army advertisements are a valid proxy
| for the negative value that current leadership places on
| white-maleness. A military which is still majority white
| and male is releasing recruitment videos which exclusively
| feature minorities, females, and a healthy sprinkling of
| homosexuality. Here's a nice illustration, comparing recent
| US ads to those from Russia and China[0]. Only two of those
| forces are actually interested in recruiting competent
| soldiers, if these ads are any indication. China is
| laughing.
|
| 0. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Kfe6d6MzeLM
|
| Edit: the sister post by jimmygrapes found one of the
| reports/letters I was looking for. I urge you all to read
| it to see, among other things, what happens to morale when
| demographic considerations are added to promotion
| evaluations. What is reported is consistent with what I've
| been hearing from former servicemember acquaintances.
| ceejayoz wrote:
| Are you a lost time traveler?
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_9981
| twofornone wrote:
| What do you think a diversity quota is, if not
| discrimination? Maybe you're suggesting that it's time
| for the supreme court to step in, given that these hiring
| and promotion practices are, as your link clearly states,
| illegal?
|
| This is pretty cut and dry. You may be supportive of D&I
| but by definition it is an exclusionary, discriminatory,
| a-meritocratic, and illegal policy. The fact that these
| quotas tend to be implicit does not change the legality
| (or morality) of the widespread practices.
| wolverine876 wrote:
| It's a remedy for existing discrimination. For example,
| if for a job we have 100 candidates in group A and 100 in
| group B, and we only hire from group A, then requiring
| some hiring from group B likely increases the hiring
| based on merit and decreases discrimination.
|
| The odd thing is a lack of concern for the decades and
| centuries of discrimination that continue today, and only
| focusing on criticizing remedies for it. When do we see
| posts on HN addressing the former?
| twofornone wrote:
| >For example, if for a job we have 100 candidates in
| group A and 100 in group B, and we only hire from group
| A, then requiring some hiring from group B likely
| increases the hiring based on merit and decreases
| discrimination.
|
| This is borderline disingenuous. In the vast majority of
| institutions accused of discrimination because of
| disproportionate representation, the underrepresented
| groups are already underrepresented among applicants.
| Especially in the military - what proportion of military
| applicants have historically (or contemporaneously) been
| female?
|
| More importantly, your repeated justification for
| discrimination against white males is predicated upon the
| dangerous and ubiquitous conflation of equality of
| opportunity with equality of outcome. There is absolutely
| no reason to expect one to imply the other in a diverse,
| even perfectly meritocratic civilization. Culture heavily
| influences career/employment goals.
|
| That's one of the major issues with the entire diversity
| movement. The bulk of evidentiary support for reverse
| racism comes from statistical underrepresentation, which
| is effectively impossible to conclusively blame on
| discrimination.
|
| Equal representation is not a viable goal at least
| because, ignoring other reasons, not all demographics are
| equally interested in all jobs.
| Chris2048 wrote:
| Can't we hire disproportionally for one group _and_ be
| meritorious? Why assume all groups are equally good at a
| thing?
| wolverine876 wrote:
| Theoretically, yes, But the overwhelming evidence is that
| isn't what has happened or is happening.
|
| An important question is, why are people looking for
| every theoretical possibility instead of where the
| evidence clearly points: plain prejudice.
| Raidion wrote:
| Do you think having different opinions, experiences, and
| backgrounds is something that should be left out of
| decision making?
|
| Can you see any value in making sure the army is diverse
| to make sure it still can recruit, integrate, and retain
| people from all over the US and not just people from one
| specific background?
|
| This is honestly a very grey area and could be taken too
| far, but there seems to be clear benefits to having armed
| forces that everyone feels represents them. And that's
| worth at least some impact on effectiveness, right?
| angelzen wrote:
| There are only 2 stable fixpoints: meritocracy and
| sectarianism, with meritocracy being merely metastable.
| Trouble is, sectarian armed force don't win wars. At
| worst they engage in civil war. Your logic is
| unassailable, sadly few people bother to acquiesce the
| consequences.
| vimy wrote:
| A rich black man and a rich white man have more in
| common, in thoughts and experiences, than a rich white
| man and a poor white man.
|
| Class is so much more important than race yet the Western
| world, especially the US, is obsessed by race.
| ceejayoz wrote:
| They're heavily linked in the US.
|
| https://money.yahoo.com/black-americans-net-worth-is-one-
| sev...
|
| > The average net worth of Black families is $142,330 --
| or just one-seventh of the $980,550 in wealth accumulated
| by white Americans, according to a new study from
| LendingTree that draws on data from the Bureau of Labor
| Statistics, the 2020 Economic Policy Institute report,
| and various Federal Reserve reports.
|
| > The median net worth of both shows similar disparities.
| The median wealth for Black families is $24,100, or about
| one-eighth of that for white families at $189,100,
| according to the study.
| wolverine876 wrote:
| What basis do you have for saying that?
|
| The African-Americans I've talked to and whom I've read
| often say the opposite, and I haven't heard any agree.
| What I hear is, 'it doesn't matter who you are or what
| you've done, you are always just Black in the eyes of the
| police (and society)', and that there is often no way for
| an observer to distinguish rich from poor (as if that
| should matter anyway).
|
| For example, African-Americans driving expensive cars are
| pulled over and suspected of being drug dealers. I've
| read many stories of African-Americans being pulled over
| for nothing - an experience I've never had.
| vimy wrote:
| No doubt that still happens but I don't know how common
| that is? There is a lot of race-baiting going on in the
| press which may give a skewed perspective of reality. For
| example, research shows that white police officers aren't
| more likely to shoot a black suspect than police officers
| from another race. [1] But that's not what the media
| tells us. The constant focus on race also makes people
| paranoid. "Was that guy just a dick or was he racist?"
|
| But that is not the point. A black man that went to
| Harvard and is now working for Goldman Sachs has more in
| common with a white Goldman Sachs employee than with a
| black factory worker. They read the same kind of books
| and newspapers, drive the same kind of car, live in the
| same kind of neighborhood, ...
|
| [1]https://www.pnas.org/content/116/32/15877
| ceejayoz wrote:
| > A black man that went to Harvard and is now working for
| Goldman Sachs has more in common with a white Goldman
| Sachs employee than with a black factory worker.
|
| Probably not when they're pulled over, but ignoring the
| difficulty _getting_ to that point is a bit silly.
|
| https://fortune.com/2021/04/20/goldman-sachs-reveals-
| black-w...
|
| "Inside Goldman Sachs Group Inc., 1,548 U.S. executives,
| senior officials and managers run the bank. Of that
| group, 24 are Black men and 25 are Black women."
|
| 3%, versus about 15% of the US population.
| wolverine876 wrote:
| > No doubt that still happens but I don't know how common
| that is?
|
| It's very well covered, researched, and discussed;
| ignorance doesn't relieve the problem or dismiss it.
|
| > There is a lot of race-baiting going on in the press
| which may give a skewed perspective of reality.
|
| That's your claim, a trendy one in some circles to blame
| 'the media', but it's not really substantiated, even by
| one study. African-Americans - the people with direct
| experience of it - have been telling the world about it
| for generations. Racism is getting worse as many people
| openly embrace it, including rapidly increasing hate
| crimes, overt statements by national leaders and other
| 'influencers', and far more. And every time, throughout
| history, the problem of racism is met with the same
| response - an effort to shut down the complaints.
| vimy wrote:
| I have read a lot of research about racism and I can only
| conclude that the media is not painting an accurate
| picture about it.
|
| If you want to challenge your views you could read some
| of Thomas Sowell's work or from other black conservative
| thinkers.
| greedo wrote:
| Ironic that you claim this when a Harvard professor was
| treated much more like a common criminal than a member of
| an elite institution. Perhaps it's not the color of skin
| in your example that matters, but the financial and
| social class.
|
| https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/jul/22/henry-
| louis-ga...
| oh_sigh wrote:
| I love when elites talk like "Yeah, I'll speak with your
| mama outside".
|
| It's entirely plausible that a white person who was
| accused of breaking into their own home would not be
| arrested for disorderly conduct afterwards, because they
| wouldn't view the event as being part of a larger
| narrative against their race. All of that could happen
| without anyone actually doing anything wrong.
| burnished wrote:
| >>research shows that white police officers aren't more
| likely to shoot a black suspect than police officers from
| another race. [1] But that's not what the media tells us.
|
| I've never heard anything about this. The point isn't the
| color of the person holding the gun, and its weird that
| you think it is.
| asbest0s wrote:
| As a former enlisted member myself, I agree with you
| 100%. Unfortunately, any attempt to bring attention to
| this in masturbatory echo chambers such as this will not
| be met well.
| jay_kyburz wrote:
| I like how in the Chinese ad they don't even hide the
| fact that you might have to run along side the tanks
| while shells rain down on you. You would have to be mad
| to watch that video and think, yes that's the life for
| me!
| User23 wrote:
| I'm willing to bet at least ten times as many young men
| as young women think that's a good idea.
| s5300 wrote:
| Good friend of mine is a white male O-4 BN in the Navy,
| previously a marine, from a family of predominantly white
| men in the Navy/military in general, with female family
| members also in the military.
|
| He first started talking to me about this "perceived
| issue" you speak of back in the beginning of 2019.
|
| Has repeatedly stated is the most hilariously stupid
| white nationalist and incel-esque shit he's ever had to
| hear about or deal with
|
| Along with the fact that everybody he's observed as a
| marine and a Navy BN spouting off about it is typically
| an obnoxious douche who everybody hates and is generally
| incompetent at some of the easiest jobs our government
| provides citizens.
|
| So, after reading what you've posted, the theme of it
| seems to line up with his, his families, and all of his
| higher ranking friends observations - just another person
| butthurt about females and people who aren't white,
| likely because you feel you've somehow been wronged by
| them in life or have other issues you need therapy for.
|
| But go on about this being the issue, and not _many_ of
| the clearly observered, defined, and reported on issues
| that the Navy /US Military in general is facing. Hint:
| one of them is white nationalists, and the poor quality
| of service/general incompetence and questions about
| loyalty that typically come with them.
|
| Losers is something I can recall him repeatedly referring
| to them as, but I'm not sure how appropriate that is for
| HN.
|
| And, since we're in the thread about the Bonhomme - I'll
| mention he has some very nice footage of the fire from
| Coronado bridge.
| twofornone wrote:
| It's pretty gross that in light of clear evidence of
| widespread discrimination you dismiss legitimate
| complaints with generic and shallow accusations of
| inceldom, white nationalism, and incompetence. Reverse
| racism is still racism.
|
| Step back for a moment and consider what psychological
| effect such explicitly discriminatory policy may have on
| any demographic on the receiving end. Explicitly
| assigning disadvantages according to immutable
| characteristics fuels so called "white nationalism", as
| do blithe dismissals such as yours. You can't have it
| both ways - either you attempt to hire by merit or you
| acknowledge that you are motivating self-preserving
| movements in demographics which perceive discrimination.
|
| There's also a certain selection bias among those willing
| to complain. Generally those with good career prospects
| are far more likely to keep their heads down rather than
| risk repercussions for speaking against top down D&I
| pressure - so the fact that the loudest may not be
| stellar examples of good soldiering does not imply that
| this perceived discrimination is not more widespread
| among otherwise competent personell.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| > until recently carried primarily by white men from
| small town America
|
| How do you define recent? This was not the case when I
| was in the military almost 30 years ago.
| s5300 wrote:
| It's never been the case, but those sorts of made up
| talking points are the only things these types
| complaining seem to have to attempt to justify their
| frustrations at society, or something.
|
| There seems to be a lot of cognitive dissonance or just
| ignorance about the fact the U.S. has singular counties,
| essentially close to singular _cities_ , that have the
| same population of 13 _states_ combined.
|
| And, statistically, those in the lower population 13
| states are more and more unable to meet the simple
| physical requirements of the U.S. military. To my
| knowledge, the past 5 or so years, the military has had
| serious recruitment issues because of things as simple as
| obesity metrics.
| twofornone wrote:
| Never been the case? The US was about 90% white until the
| 90s. As of 2017 it was still the case[0]. I think the
| cognitive dissonance is more on the side of so called
| "anti-racists" who are cheering on the implementation of
| explicit institutional racism ostensibly to correct for
| _perceived_ institutional racism. You can 't literally
| fight fire with fire.
|
| 0. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pewresearch.org/fact-
| tank/2...
| s5300 wrote:
| I believe he was speaking of the "small town" part.
|
| Of course, that in a nation with a majority white
| populace, its military will also be _majority white_
|
| Anyways, you're just here to argue in bad faith.
| burnished wrote:
| I don't think that follows. You're tacitly assuming that
| the demographics of the military will reflect the
| demographics of the society as a whole, whereas I think
| its more reasonable to assume that the demographics of
| the military will reflect the demographics of the poor
| for whom it represents a viable alternative.
| greedo wrote:
| Try the 1960, according to the US Census. After 1960,
| it's been a steady change to today where people who
| identify as White comprise a bit over 61%, a figure that
| seems to make strong, heterosexual white men clutch their
| pearls.
| twofornone wrote:
| You're suggesting that concerns over codified
| institutional discrimination (through affirmative action
| and reverse racism quotas) are "pearl clutching". And
| singling out straight white men.
|
| Are white men not allowed to expect meritocratic, equal
| treatment in a society where they are a minority-
| majority?
| dragonwriter wrote:
| > You can't literally fight fire with fire.
|
| That's _literally_ an important technique for fighting
| fire, so you are _literally_ wrong.
| dragonwriter wrote:
| > The military was until recently carried primarily by
| white men from small town America
|
| The military has disproportionately been non-White for a
| long time (largely, because even while actively racist
| for most of its history, it was _less_ racist than the
| rest of American society), despite the White segment of
| it being disproportionately small town.
|
| Its been disproportionately male, because it has been
| actively sexist and, unlike its racism, _more_ actively
| sexist than the rest of society.
|
| > Now white maleness is effectively a career handicap
| when genitals, skin color, and sexual orientation are
| considered for promotion.
|
| Genitals, skin color, sexual orientation, and conformity
| with social norms of alignment of sex assigned at birth
| with gender presentation have _always_ been a factor in
| military assignment, promotion, and discipline in the US.
|
| For most of the history of the US military being White
| was a commanding advantage in that, being male was a
| commanding advantage in some areas, and a bright-line
| legal requirement everywhere else, and until very
| recently not being a cisgender heterosexual was grounds
| for being excluded from the service and drummed out (and
| criminally prosecuted) if already in.
|
| The idea that these factors only started to matter when
| they stopped being a trump card for White cishet men
| is...amusing.
| jimmygrapes wrote:
| Whatever your feelings regarding the source of such claims,
| here is where a lot of the pundits got it:
| https://www.cotton.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/navy_report.pdf
| wolverine876 wrote:
| Cotton is an aggressive culture warrior. Do we have
| something non-partisan?
| [deleted]
| chernevik wrote:
| Sure seems like the US Navy has lost track of some basic skills.
| KineticLensman wrote:
| Unfortunately not an isolated incident [0, 1]
|
| [0]
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Fitzgerald_and_MV_ACX_Crys...
|
| [1]
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_John_S._McCain_(DDG-56)#20...
| jet_32951 wrote:
| Whatever is going on with the Navy, it doesn't seem to be well
| understood by flag officers. There have been far too many reports
| of crew exhaustion and confusion, too many reports of faulty or
| ill-designed user interfaces, and too little exhibition of
| loyalty downward from flag ranks toward the people who act to
| keep the ship afloat and moving.
|
| Is crew retention decreasing? It is hard to imagine people
| putting up with conditions in the Navy while there are so many
| stories like this going around.
| greedo wrote:
| Considering how many FOs the Navy has, it's a disgrace. They
| could can 1/2 of them without even making a significant dent in
| the problem.
|
| The leadership problems in the USN have been endemic since
| Tailhook.
| AcerbicZero wrote:
| To the Navy's credit it does appear they're chopping some heads
| over it (even calling out the ships previous captain and some
| civilians) and perhaps this wake up call will help reorient the
| navy back towards where it needs to be. It's certainly better
| than pinning this entire event on whatever E-3 started the fire.
|
| Can't say I'm super surprised it's reached this point though,
| we've been running our military like schizophrenic kids on
| adderall for the last 20+ years.
| tbihl wrote:
| >perhaps this wake up call will help reorient the navy back
| towards where it needs to be.
|
| Maybe. The reports are very clear that most of the problems are
| lessons learned but not implemented from the Miami in 2012.
|
| > It's certainly better than pinning this entire event on
| whatever E-3 started the fire.
|
| Does this ever happen? I've never seen it.
|
| > we've been running our military like schizophrenic kids on
| adderall for the last 20+ years.
|
| Can you explain?
| syngrog66 wrote:
| Afghanistan, Iraq, countless foreign bases and deployments
| all around the world, civil crisis response (think weather
| disasters and the recent Trump unrest shenanigans) and oh
| also actual "homeland defense" responsibilities somewhere in
| the mix too. a nation not _officially_ at war and yet...
| thousands of combat deaths, etc
| ak217 wrote:
| > Does this ever happen?
|
| It sure used to. Iowa turret explosion?
| ceejayoz wrote:
| > Does this ever happen? I've never seen it.
|
| It does. In this specific case, even.
| https://www.npr.org/2021/07/29/1022514854/sailor-charged-
| ars...
|
| "The U.S. Navy charged a sailor Thursday with starting a fire
| last year that destroyed the USS Bonhomme Richard docked off
| San Diego, marking the maritime branch's worst warship blaze
| outside of combat in recent memory."
| frankharv wrote:
| The whole arson story is not really believable to me.
|
| I was once interrogated by NIS for 3 days and in the end I
| almost signed a false statement to get it over with.
|
| NCIS is not a believable policing agency. They use very
| questionable methods for getting confessions.
|
| In my case they provided a false statement from my roommate
| and then when I asked for representation they escorted me
| to a Flag Officer who told me I should tell them everything
| I know.
|
| Turns out the flag officer was a prosecuting not defense
| lawyer. One agent was kind enough to mention that. With
| that information I ran out of NIS headquarters never to
| hear from them again.
|
| They are not to be trusted.
|
| Now I work in a shipyard and my simple question is: How did
| MARMAC allow a ship to not have fire stands in a shipyard.
|
| Utter failure on thier part. They are the US Navy contract
| representatives.
| dragonwriter wrote:
| > NCIS is not a believable policing agency. They use very
| questionable methods for getting confessions.
|
| That makes them a very believable policing agency, since
| that's basically an universal trait of such agencies.
| bitcurious wrote:
| > The sailor was charged with aggravated arson and the
| willful hazarding of a vessel, Robertson said.
|
| Charged with arson, so without more details it's hard to
| say if they're just a patsy.
| renewiltord wrote:
| Their competence on not burning up does not set a high
| prior on competence in evaluating the burn up.
|
| Probably incompetent throughout.
| jwithington wrote:
| So infuriating. I'm a former damage control assistant on a US
| submarine.
|
| The fire response read like a clownshow, and this article doesn't
| even highlight the worst of it. There was a Sailor who saw the
| smoke and walked by it, thinking nothing of it!
|
| Another officer thought the smoke might have been coming from the
| diesel generator. Why tf would the diesel generator be running???
|
| It's hard for me to think of the software equivalent of these
| fundamental errors. Maybe something like finding a spike in
| network traffic and assuming it's load testing on prod, when
| you're actually getting pwned?
| secondcoming wrote:
| It's just a guess, but the sailor who saw the smoke may have
| instead seen the CO2 from the extinguishers being emptied
| jwithington wrote:
| The one I'm referring to was the first person on the ship who
| saw the smoke. They then went back to sleep or something like
| that.
| wolverine876 wrote:
| That could be the sailor, but I would bet on the
| organization and leadership: In many organizations, bearing
| the bad news just creates enormous work and trouble for
| yourself, for your teammates, and rarely accomplishes
| anything.
|
| Rationally, it's absurd to ignore a fire. But I've seen
| organizations and situations where I would expect it.
| i_am_proteus wrote:
| Also a former submarine DCA: a sailor failing to call
| away smoke speaks to an egregious cultural problem in how
| the crew treats damage control (unless this was an
| absolutely brand-spanking-new nonqual).
| hugh-avherald wrote:
| I'd say training more than culture. The response to smoke
| onboard a ship should be automatic, not requiring any
| contemplation (even if it's just 'trigger alarm').
| qwertyuiop_ wrote:
| So as time progressed from WWII we lost best practices,
| maritime safety knowledge and Military discipline. We can't win
| another war if a worthy enemy challenged us. We can't build
| another Saturn V or Apollo module. In other words we
| retrogressed and became WOKE
| bobbylarrybobby wrote:
| What does wokeness have to do with military preparedness?
| burnished wrote:
| Yeah, these damn kids these days and their insistence that
| everyone be treated with dignity and respect! Downfall of
| humanity.
| mwattsun wrote:
| I had a buddy report and then help prevent a major electrical
| fire in the electrical mains coming from the submarine tender.
| They drug tested him after his heroic performance, found traces
| of THC and kicked him out of the Navy. Maybe the sailor saw the
| smoke and decided he didn't want to get drug tested.
| myrandomcomment wrote:
| At the end of the day the responsibility rest on the Captain. It
| is their job to see that those under them are well trained,
| retrained, and reenforced in that training as a daily operational
| objective. Every good CO I have ever met when taking over a new
| station will review in detail the training and readiness status
| of their command as job 1, and not just review on paper but
| execute all the drills and observe the results. This is
| fundamental and is taught in detail in command school. Their
| should be a full set of court-martial for this failure at the
| command level.
| bell-cot wrote:
| Direct links to sources (far longer, official U.S. Navy) cited by
| the article:
|
| https://www.secnav.navy.mil/foia/readingroom/HotTopics/BHR%2...
|
| https://www.secnav.navy.mil/foia/readingroom/HotTopics/BHR%2...
| bell-cot wrote:
| A less-long read, with some good diagrams:
|
| https://news.usni.org/2021/10/19/long-chain-of-failures-left...
|
| And a juicy (and damning) tidbit from the parent's second link
| - the San Diego (local civilian) Fire Dept, arriving at the
| ship's pier 30 minutes after FedFire, and at least 45 minutes
| after the ship's crew knew of the fire, and knowing nothing of
| the ship's layout or systems, and having to (in effect) ask
| passing sailors for directions - was the _first_ organization
| to actually get a hose to the fire, and start doing something
| useful - before the fire grew out of control.
|
| jwithington's comment about the whole fire response (presumably
| outside of the municipal crews) being a "clownshow" is
| _profoundly_ understated.
| wolverine876 wrote:
| As with the collisions in the western Pacific several years ago,
| I don't see anyone addressing the overwhelming workload and lack
| of resources provided to the US Navy. I read much about those
| collisions, not such much about this fire, so the following is
| based mostly on the former.
|
| In absolute terms, they are very well funded of course. But what
| I read over and over is that there isn't time for training,
| because the demand we put on them - the world is a very large
| place - is much higher. They are told to cut training and deploy.
| After the collisions, they decided that officers (at least some
| positions) were too overworked and discussed (maybe implemented)
| _limiting_ their workweeks to 100 hours.
|
| Think of any organization; when the choice is product or
| training, many managers will cut the latter, even at the obvious
| long-term cost. The pressure and immediate demand are too great.
| If someone is working over 100 hours per week, if they can get a
| break by cutting training, that actually seems like a valid
| choice - they need to function.
| ethbr0 wrote:
| Fundamentally, the US military is optimized for quality over
| quantity.
|
| Look at the US Navy: ~400,000 active duty personnel operating
| ~400 ships (~250 combat, ~150 aux).
|
| Compare to the Chinese PLAN: ~250,000 active duty personnel
| operating ~750 ships (~500 combat, ~250 aux).
|
| A huge portion of that difference is due to aircraft carriers
| (11 USN, 2 PLAN), average tonnage per ship, and specifically
| the USN's lack of frigates.
|
| This arrangement optimizes for the USN's mission of
| international power projection, where logistics requirements
| are like an iceberg, with the deployed forces being the above
| water volume.
|
| However, it does leave a problem of training and experience. If
| no numerous smaller vessels exist for SWOs and crew to come up
| through, how do we expect them to have a deep reservoir of
| experience by the time they're commanding and crewing a
| destroyer+?
|
| The retirement of the Perry class, subsequent botching of the
| LCS program (and finally recent selection of a Constellation
| class design, to be built) left the current USN with ~50 less
| commands for officers and crew to cut their teeth on.
| [deleted]
| coldcode wrote:
| In WW2 sailors fought horrific battles with fire and damage while
| under fire and trying to keep from dying. Yet today it appears no
| one gives a shit about training. We dump massive money into
| building new ships (with tech that often is pathetically bad, see
| the new aircraft carrier). Maybe our military has been reduced to
| a money sink for big defense contractors, but that doesn't
| absolve them from basic training and disciplined planning for
| disaster which really costs very little to do right.
| Animats wrote:
| The article assumes you already know the basic story. Here's a
| more comprehensive article.[1]
|
| This ship was not at sea. It was docked, and partially
| disassembled for maintenance. Only 118 of the normal crew of 1000
| were on board. On the other hand, they had assistance from the
| shipyard, other ships nearby, and civilian fire departments.
| Despite that, the ship burned for days and had to be scrapped.
|
| [1] https://news.usni.org/2021/10/19/long-chain-of-failures-
| left...
| userbinator wrote:
| What's with the "(b)(6)" censoring in some photos? Presumably
| deceased?
| kingcharles wrote:
| I've done a lot of FOIA litigation. (b)(6) must refer to a
| paragraph of the federal FOIA statute - an exemption that
| prohibits the release of that portion of the image.
|
| Here: Exemption 6 protects information about individuals in
| "personnel and medical files and similar files" when the
| disclosure of such information "would constitute a clearly
| unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. https://www.justice
| .gov/archive/oip/foia_guide09/exemption6....
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-10-30 23:01 UTC)