Navy Relieves Captain After Carrier Crash

[Slammer2]

The Soviet trawlers that shadowed our carriers off of Yankee Station, would harrass our carriers by setting collision course during critical evolutions, like flight ops and un-reps. So, it not the first time someone tried to play chicken with a CV or a CVN.

How is a CO supposed to deal with something like that?? Do you just have to keep trying to move and avoid them....or if they close a certain distance is there some kind of action you take?? That would seriously piss me off if some little dinky boat was playing games like that. Unreal...

 

[Clux4]

I believe there are S.O.P's for situations like this. Really it is the skippers call.

 

[Jolly Roger]

How is a CO supposed to deal with something like that?? Do you just have to keep trying to move and avoid them....or if they close a certain distance is there some kind of action you take?? That would seriously piss me off if some little dinky boat was playing games like that. Unreal...

Usually the picket destroyers would try to force the trawler off coarse. Both the US and Sovs knew that the trawlers would not actually bump with a CV. Itr just pyshcological. Besides, they were just there to gather intel.

 

[VetteMuscle427]

Hummmm.... how about increase to flank so you make sure you sink the trawler... then say: "trawler? what trawler? why would a trawler be in the middle of a battlegroup?"

 

[bunk22]

As far as COs being relieved, how about the CO of the Oriskany being relieved of command after the flare fire off Yankee Station, and the COs of the Forrestal and Enterprise not?

There is a great book called "Over The Beach" by Zalman Grant I believe. Excellent read and highly recommended. Anyway, the author was a reporter who was with VF-162 onboard the Oriskany during a cruise or two in Vietnam. The same question was brought up as to why the CO of the Oriskany was relieved while the others were not. The conlusion on his part and the Oriskany's CO's part was Adacedmy vs non-Acadamey. Actaully, the other CO's went on to make Admiral as I understand it and both were Acadmey grads. According to the author, being a ring knocker (as he put it) was a big deal back then and made a difference with regards to major command and admiral select. Again, this is according to this particular author and his single point of view.

 

[Flash]

There is a great book called "Over The Beach" by Zalman Grant I believe. Excellent read and highly recommended. Anyway, the author was a reporter who was with VF-162 onboard the Oriskany during a cruise or two in Vietnam. The same question was brought up as to why the CO of the Oriskany was relieved while the others were not. The conlusion on his part and the Oriskany's CO's part was Adacedmy vs non-Acadamey. Actaully, the other CO's went on to make Admiral as I understand it and both were Acadmey grads. According to the author, being a ring knocker (as he put it) was a big deal back then and made a difference with regards to major command and admiral select. Again, this is according to this particular author and his single point of view.

Of course, you could also argue that the Oriskany was the fault of poor crew training while at least one of the others was not. The Oriskany accident happened when a sailor set off a flare accidently and threw it into a storage space full of flares and ran. One of the other two happened when static discharge set off a Zuni rocket starting the chain reaction of explosions. As for the ring knocker bit, maybe some of the resentment that the author saw on cruise from the non USNA types rubbed off on him.

 

[bunk22]

Of course, you could also argue that the Oriskany was the fault of poor crew training while at least one of the others was not. The Oriskany accident happened when a sailor set off a flare accidently and threw it into a storage space full of flares and ran. One of the other two happened when static discharge set off a Zuni rocket starting the chain reaction of explosions. As for the ring knocker bit, maybe some of the resentment that the author saw on cruise from the non USNA types rubbed off on him.

As I recall, a defective flare ignited and then the crew through into a storage space. The flare was dropped and somehow armed (dropping it should not have armed it) then placed into a locker with zuni rockets. Thus the accident or at least the initial cause was due to a defective product and not because of poor crew training (at least that was the defence arguement). So the CO was relieved for a defect but the CO of the Forrestal was kept in command. That's why the skipper of the Oriskany was bitter.

 

[Jolly Roger]

Bunk,

I have that book, it is great! If I recall from the book, Grant says that an independent investigation found that particular flare had a history for accidently igniting. That the ordies who pulling them out the locker were tossing them like "cord wood" probably did not help, even though the flares were spec'ed to be able to be roughly handled. Hell, the flare locker could not even have been flooded in the case of fire. Irrabino, in his defense, proved that the igniters were touchy and the day after he proved that to the Admiral in charge of the investigation the order went out for all flares aboard all US carriers to be dumped overboard. Yet the blame remained on Irrabino and his crew. So, Irrabino was railroaded. The COs of the Forrestal and Enterprise were promoted to Admiral, Irrabino was relieved of command.

Bunk, have you read "Alfa Strike: The Naval Air War over Vietnam", it's a collection of a anecdotes from naval aviators. It is really good and gives a good perspective from the aircrews.

 

[bunk22]

Bunk,

I have that book, it is great! If I recall from the book, Grant says that an independent investigation found that particular flare had a history for accidently igniting. That the ordies who pulling them out the locker were tossing them like "cord wood" probably did not help, even though the flares were spec'ed to be able to be roughly handled. Hell, the flare locker could not even have been flooded in the case of fire. Irrabino, in his defense, proved that the igniters were touchy and the day after he proved that to the Admiral in charge of the investigation the order went out for all flares aboard all US carriers to be dumped overboard. Yet the blame remained on Irrabino and his crew. So, Irrabino was railroaded. The COs of the Forrestal and Enterprise were promoted to Admiral, Irrabino was relieved of command.

Bunk, have you read "Alfa Strike: The Naval Air War over Vietnam", it's a collection of a anecdotes from naval aviators. It is really good and gives a good perspective from the aircrews.

Great that you have it. I couldn't find my copy so I was going off my not so great memory. I remember there was a bit of controversy, especially with the other CO's making Admiral.

I haven't read Alpha Strike. Anything naval aviation I like to read though.

 

[Flash]

So the CO was relieved for a defect but the CO of the Forrestal was kept in command. That's why the skipper of the Oriskany was bitter.

To play devils advocate again, I think the above says a lot. The CO was bitter at being relieved and tried to place some blame elsewhere. Another thing against him, this is a bit of specaulation, was the crews response to the accidents. I am sure you have seen the film of the response to the Forrestal accident and it was pretty immediate, the same with the Enterprise accident. I am not sure about the Oriskany fire but maybe the response was not as immediate. It was in the hangar deck while the others were on the flight deck. What all three accidents did show was that the Navy needed to improve its damage control training and equipment. Fortunately, the Navy has done a good job of doin that, if every Marine is a rifleman then every sailor is a fireman.

 

[bunk22]

To play devil's advocate even more, do zuni rockets just fire? Was there a defect, did the pilot have his armament switches in the appropriate place, etc. Those flares were shown to be defective in other incidents. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

 

[Flash]

To play devil's advocate even more, do zuni rockets just fire? Was there a defect, did the pilot have his armament switches in the appropriate place, etc. Those flares were shown to be defective in other incidents. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

In one instance static discharge was responsible and in the other a sailor parked a tow vehicle right next to the plane and the exhaust vent was right next to the rocket pod. We could play devils advocate all day, the point I was trying to make was that I seriously doubt the ring knocker mafia was the only reason the Oriskany CO was relieved and the others were not. There has to be more to the story.

Good comebacks though, I am glad it has not degenerated into "mine is bigger than yours" arguement like other threads. I can't even argue my plane is better looking than yours :icon_wink .

 

[bunk22]

In one instance static discharge was responsible and in the other a sailor parked a tow vehicle right next to the plane and the exhaust vent was right next to the rocket pod. We could play devils advocate all day, the point I was trying to make was that I seriously doubt the ring knocker mafia was the only reason the Oriskany CO was relieved and the others were not. There has to be more to the story.

Good comebacks though, I am glad it has not degenerated into "mine is bigger than yours" arguement like other threads. I can't even argue my plane is better looking than yours :icon_wink .

I could never argue my plane is better looking than anything. Actually, the real reason why COD's don't stay on the boat anymoe is for flight deck beautification.

As for the CO's, the academy thing wasn't the only reason but was felt it was part of the reason why a CO of a ship could have a major disaster and still make admiral. I don't think being an academy guy/gal would come into play today.

 

[rare21]

Commander Waddle talked to us at my old ROTC unit before the Fishing Boat mishap. All the staff hated him and his attitude, he showed us some film of SEALS coming out of the sub, etc and the unit Submarine officer was saying that he shouldnt have been showing that stuff, that much of that was classified. After the accident a lot of the staff members werent surprised especially our sub guy.

 

[Steve Wilkins]

While I have heard that dhows are incredibly hard to spot on radar, it doesn't excuse the CV and the escorts from conducting a constant visual scan to prevent small boats from closing with the CV.

Yes dhows are incredibly hard to pick up on radar. Often, their radar return can be confused with random sea clutter. And yes they are hard to spot visually from the bridge of a normal size warship. Spotting these things from the bridge of an aircraft carrier is even more difficult. And remember, it's not just the eyes on the bridge that need to pay attention. On the carrier, you've got guys standing watch all the way around the ship that should be looking out. Gunners Mates are on station for force protection measures. And then there's the actual lookouts who are there specifically to see these things visually. Having many frustrated experiences with these "lookouts," I would wager that one of these guys dropped the ball. Unfortunately, the CO is ultimately responsible for all this even though he may not have any control. That's command at sea for you.