Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Problems plagued U.S. Navy destroyer Fitzgerald before fatal collision

navytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 143 posts

Re: Problems plagued U.S. Navy destroyer Fitzgerald before fatal collision

#41

Post by gaius »

PhantomGremlin wrote: post #6
doodliego wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After reading the article, no, the Navy probably does not need more overpaid business consultants with powerpoints full of easy answers. It needs to do something about inexperienced, undertrained, overworked crews in its ships. The CO and XO shouldn't be sleeping while their ship is crossing a busy sealane full of behemoth freighters driving on autopilot in the dark.

The CO and XO shouldn't be sleeping while their ship is crossing a busy sealane Why aren't these people "the best of the best", to quote the trite line from Top Gun? According to Wikipedia, the US Navy has 282 deployable combat vessels. It employs a total of 325,673 active duty personnel plus 270,265 civilian employees. So out of those 600,000 people, they can't find a few thousand who are willing, able, and capable…

The US Naval Academy alone graduates 1000 people a year. Where do they all go? What do they all do?

In the Star Trek reboot Kirk goes straight from Academy sophomore to commanding a capital ship in a matter of days.

It is not like that. It takes many years. Only a small percentage of Academy graduates will ever get there. And many have no ambition to either, there are lots of other challenging and prestigious jobs in the Navy. You could be a fighter pilot or a SEAL platoon commander, neither of those career paths leads to commanding a destroyer.

Re: Problems plagued U.S. Navy destroyer Fitzgerald before fatal collision

#43

Post by austincheney »

sametmax wrote: post #34
GeekyBear wrote: post #17

According to retired officers, the issue stems from training cuts. >For nearly 30 years, all new surface warfare officers spent their first six months in uniform at the Surface Warfare Officer’s School in Newport, Rhode Island, learning the theory behind driving ships and leading sailors as division officers. But that changed in 2003. The Navy decided to eliminate the “SWOS Basic” school and simply send surface fleet…

And yet, the US had no problem spending 600 billions of dollar for the war in Irak. And after that, elect a second time the president that started it. I have a hard time feeling compassion.

I don't see the relation between any of the things you mentioned. I gave you downvote because I believe your comment seeks to inflame and distract from the conversation at present.

Re: Problems plagued U.S. Navy destroyer Fitzgerald before fatal collision

#44

Post by austincheney »

dba7dba wrote: post #19

> The probe exposes how personal distrust led the officer of the deck, Lt. j.g. Sarah Coppock, to avoid communicating with the destroyer’s electronic nerve center — the combat information center, or CIC — while the Fitzgerald tried to cross a shipping superhighway. I was shocked to read above. You don't personally trust someone or people in CIC so you just don't communicate with CIC when you are crossing the most con…

Distrust of management is extremely common. I cannot stress enough just how common it is both in the military and the corporate world or how potentially toxic this is. Most people outside of management are absolutely incapable of seeing it, even when its excessively rampant, because they don't recognize the symptoms. The common reasons for not recognizing such symptoms, even when immediately apparent and excessive, are due to: self-centered desires, incompetence, and perceptions of hostility.

Trust issues can occur from top down as well as bottom up. I have observed management not trusting their people far more commonly than opposed to people not trusting their management. When management does not trust their staff the staff will not be used or properly developed. It may be that the leadership believes it takes less effort to do the job themselves than watch their staff struggle and fail. This is a benign form of toxic leadership. Staff must be made to do their jobs and properly mentored to just before the point where the incompetence is likely to result in criminal/policy violations or immediate harms.

Re: Problems plagued U.S. Navy destroyer Fitzgerald before fatal collision

#45

Post by dmurray »

jacobush wrote: post #36
GeekyBear wrote: post #17

According to retired officers, the issue stems from training cuts. >For nearly 30 years, all new surface warfare officers spent their first six months in uniform at the Surface Warfare Officer’s School in Newport, Rhode Island, learning the theory behind driving ships and leading sailors as division officers. But that changed in 2003. The Navy decided to eliminate the “SWOS Basic” school and simply send surface fleet…

Ok, I don't like these bastards who attacked Cole, but how can they be terrorist? They attacked a military target. Is it because they masqueraded as civilians - didn't follow the laws of war?

The word "terrorist" has been reappropriated, possibly because "guerilla warfare", "asymmetric warfare" etc sound too glamorous. In the US it mostly means any military action by non-state actors against the US and its allies.

Re: Problems plagued U.S. Navy destroyer Fitzgerald before fatal collision

#46

Post by watwut »

dba7dba wrote: post #19

> The probe exposes how personal distrust led the officer of the deck, Lt. j.g. Sarah Coppock, to avoid communicating with the destroyer’s electronic nerve center — the combat information center, or CIC — while the Fitzgerald tried to cross a shipping superhighway. I was shocked to read above. You don't personally trust someone or people in CIC so you just don't communicate with CIC when you are crossing the most con…

That sort of thing happen in companies a lot. It is certainly not something limited to high school - where it actually happen less as analogical situation never arises.

We are in the context of CIC being full of bottles of pee and crew members who didn’t know how to use radar controls.

The personal mistrust may mean various things, but likely means something like "they rarely provided something useful and last x times I passed information it caused unnecessary complications, slowdowns and problems". The perception may be true of false of course, may be caused by technical incompetence or by people causing dramas for no reason or whatever. It is just something common in large badly managed groups where you cant rely on other people.

Re: Problems plagued U.S. Navy destroyer Fitzgerald before fatal collision

#47

Post by dctoedt »

doodliego wrote: post #4
nowarninglabel wrote: post #2

They should get Captain Marquet of "Turn the Ship Around!" to go get them ship shape. The book has some really good lessons on how shifting leadership style and culture can produce dramatically better results.

After reading the article, no, the Navy probably does not need more overpaid business consultants with powerpoints full of easy answers. It needs to do something about inexperienced, undertrained, overworked crews in its ships. The CO and XO shouldn't be sleeping while their ship is crossing a busy sealane full of behemoth freighters driving on autopilot in the dark.

> The CO and XO shouldn't be sleeping while their ship is crossing a busy sealane full of behemoth freighters driving on autopilot in the dark.

That was certainly how it worked 40 years ago aboard the USS Enterprise (the aircraft carrier, not the starship). Day or night, the CO would always come to the bridge whenever another ship got to within about two- to four miles and was predicted to come within one mile. And in traffic, e.g., transiting the Strait of Malacca, the skipper would be on the bridge pretty much continuously. (Not the XO; his full-time job was basically running the ship's internal operations.)

Re: Problems plagued U.S. Navy destroyer Fitzgerald before fatal collision

#48

Post by stoolpigeon »

0xffff2 wrote: post #16
kevinskii wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My experience in the navy was the opposite: Ships were typically crewed with about 1.5X the number of sailors that were actually needed. I always suspected this was partly because lots of sailors means a big navy base, and a big navy base means a booming local economy in that congressional district.

You're literally the only person I've ever seen make this claim. Why do we get so many stories of sleep deprived sailors if ships are over-crewed?

In my time on a ship we were always undermanned. All the development I've seen in new systems to replace those I worked on (arresting gear and catapults) focus heavily on reducing required manning. We never did busy work or work that was unnecessary when we were under way and flying aircraft. In port - yeah sometimes.

Most current sailors I talk to are overworked, training gets gundecked, following safety procedures and impede advancement - what's reworded is a "can do" approach that takes large risks.

I don't know anyone currently serving, in any command, who says they have too many people.

Re: Problems plagued U.S. Navy destroyer Fitzgerald before fatal collision

#49

Post by watwut »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #13
rectang wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even the best of the best need to sleep.

Which is why the post you replied to is suggesting "a few thousand" competent people in these slots for 282 ships. The question isn't why one person is asleep, it's why there's nobody filling the role.

There is exactly one CO and one XO for ship.

Re: Problems plagued U.S. Navy destroyer Fitzgerald before fatal collision

#50

Post by naval-gazer »

Root causes for this mess:

* Navy culture where chronic sleep deprivation is used as substitute for battlefield heroics. Navy aviators have enough sleep scheduled. Surface Navy has not seen battle for ages. Being tired is a way to show you are pushing it to the limit. Everybody being so tired that they microsleep in the bridge is the standard condition. People in the bridge start teleporting from one place to another because you keep falling asleep constantly. Driving a car that tired is not allowed, but it's OK in the Navy.

* Lack of basic seamanship skills and experience. Officers are rotated inside the ship and outside the ship to completely unrelated posts. They learn basics of everything but master nothing. Navy officers have less experience in basic ship driving than anyone in the merchant fleet. Other navies specialize officers for different areas. Training is cut because there is no time for it, but that's not the core reason. You would need less training with more specialization.

* 7th fleet leadership continues to be a corrupt mess. Most of the ongoing bad stuff related to Navy happens in the 7th. Fat Leonard scandal, collisions...

Post reply on HN