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

71–80 of 143 posts

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

#71

Post by curveship »

TecoAndJix wrote: post #67

I was stationed on a Destroyer from 2015-2017 and subsequently deployed with them as an IT in the radio shack. CIC looks like something out of a movie (and really the only part of the ship that does) - it's very dark, has lots of glowing monitors covered in charts, surveillance feeds, and a whole lot of people. In the radio shack, we worked 12 on, 12 off, 7 days a week. I cannot remember CIC's watch rotation exactly…

Thanks for your perspective, very interesting.

I'm really surprised that all it takes to be declared qualified is the signature of someone else who's qualified. That leaves lots of room for slippage and social pressure, like the dip you mention. It also leaves no one specifically responsible for the crew's level of qualification. A cynic might say that was the point of the system: we know this is going to fail, so make sure no one is directly in the line of fire when the shit cannon goes off.

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

#72

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

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

#73

Post by jessaustin »

chopin wrote: post #20
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…

I was more shocked of the pee-filled bottles on the bridge. This hints to deep cultural problems being present and an utterly incompetent upper management.

The officer of the deck is named "Sarah". How does a woman urinate in bottles in a public work setting? If she was the boss, why did she tolerate others doing what she can't? If she wasn't the boss, it seems she has a pretty good case for having been subjected to a toxic work environment.

Of course this must be balanced against the fact that her poor performance killed sailors.

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

#74

Post by Sebguer »

jacobush wrote: post #40
cf141q5325 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They were part of a group that is classified as a terrorist organization.

Ok, I can buy that - it's not perfect, but the world is messy. :-/

It's also worth noting that it was a suicide bomber attack, which is rarely a facet of conventional warfare.

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

#75

Post by yyrrll »

TecoAndJix wrote: post #67

I was stationed on a Destroyer from 2015-2017 and subsequently deployed with them as an IT in the radio shack. CIC looks like something out of a movie (and really the only part of the ship that does) - it's very dark, has lots of glowing monitors covered in charts, surveillance feeds, and a whole lot of people. In the radio shack, we worked 12 on, 12 off, 7 days a week. I cannot remember CIC's watch rotation exactly…

Technology problems are also people problems, so I am curious about your opinion of the report's comments on the lack of a quartermaster chief petty officer and a "dysfunctional chief's mess."

And, how could the fleet command be ignorant of the culture problems on this ship?

Seems like those NCO issues should have flagged long-term problems to both the ship's command and to the fleet. I don't understand why they would ignore something like that.

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

#76

Post by TheCondor »

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…

Are there any active members of the US Navy that remember our last real boat fight?

I think some really big fights and even a bit of an ass kicking has some rejuvenating powers for big military apparatus. The military likes to really teach from mistakes, they make lots of noise about what does and doesn’t work after a big fight, they change. I’m not saying the navy hasn’t seen action but they definitely have t seen WWII style battleship to battleship action in 70 years, we don’t even have battleships anymore...

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

#77

Post by odn86 »

sevensor wrote: post #69
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…

> What is this? High school?? According to most of the ex-Navy people I've met, it's high school part 2. None of them had been officers, and I'm a tiny bit surprised it extends to the officer class, but only a tiny bit.

Surface Warfare Officers eat their own. It's a constant game to make sure you don't get passed over for promotion.

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

#78

Post by hansthehorse »

dctoedt wrote: post #47
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 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 i…

Floated alongside the Enterprise in the 70's on a nuclear cruiser. In engineering we didn't change watch getting underway on entering port until past the sea marker or tied up.

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

#79

Post by alistairSH »

adventured wrote: post #54
chopin wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I said, that's poor management. You will loose to an enemy who does it properly. The US was once envied for their officers training and education. Edited to add: Also, what will people do? They will drink less than they should to avoid the humiliation. On top of a tired crew you will get also a dehydrated one. This is a surefire recipe for bad things to happen.

> You will loose to an enemy who does it properly. I agree with the need to always keep training in top shape. There is no naval enemy on earth that is even remotely competitive with the US in any regard. Iran? North Korea? ISIS? What enemy? Russia has no global naval projection, it can barely sustainably push beyond the Black Sea with its surface ships. Their sub fleet is a medium threat. The US is also not at war w…

If our naval superiority is that vast, perhaps we should retire a few warships, pick commanders for the remaining vessels from the competent members of the officer corp, and force-retire those that no longer have ships to command.

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

#80

Post by cf141q5325 »

naval-gazer wrote: post #50

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…

To the culture of deliberate sleep deprivation, the medical profession had(?) something similar which resulted in the Libby Zion Law .
Post reply on HN