U.S. Navy ship goes aground due to bad charts

[jeremiason]

Originally Posted by delmarrey

At first is was just slightly onto the reef. It wasn't till the waves started washing it up that the major damage occurred.
If it were pulled off right away, all they would have to tend with would have been some damage control. Hast makes waste.
If they even would have kept it in reverse for as long as they could, it might have come off by itself. But once abandon, that's it for any boat!
If this were 200 years ago, do you think they would have walked away?
I know this is just my opinion, but I wouldn't have given up so easily. They may have been holed so bad right off to warrant abandonment, but w/o knowing that it doesn't seem like a wise decision to walk away. But neither was running it up on the reef!

I don't know were you get your ship handling skills, but it my guess the US Navy has a little more experience than you in the decision to scrap instead of salvage.

Look at the picture of ths ship.... Its bow is completely out of the water and it appears almost one half of the vessel is resting on the reef.

This isn't a sail boat or a steel ship, it is a Mine Sweeper made of wood with fiberglass overlay. Its displacement is listed at 1389 tons (Over 2.7 million US pounds).

Not to mention whatever specific flooding occurred and thus added more weight to the vessel. The Navy reports there is also delamination on the port side, not seen in this picture, further comp[licating things.

Backing the vessel, even if the props were clear, probably would have caused more damage to the ship and the reef than allowing it to sit. It could have also tore open fuel tanks and caused an environmental nightmare...

Finally, the current Fleet of US Navy Mine Sweepers is due to be replaced shortly with the Littoral Comby Ship, which also probably figured into the scraping of the vessel, since the USS Guardian would have been scrapped or mothballed in the next several years.

[delmarrey]

Originally Posted by jeremiason

I don't know were you get your ship handling skills, but it my guess the US Navy has a little more experience than you in the decision to scrap instead of salvage.

Look at the picture of ths ship.... Its bow is completely out of the water and it appears almost one half of the vessel is resting on the reef.

This isn't a sail boat or a steel ship, it is a Mine Sweeper made of wood with fiberglass overlay. Its displacement is listed at 1389 tons (Over 2.7 million US pounds).

Not to mention whatever specific flooding occurred and thus added more weight to the vessel. The Navy reports there is also delamination on the port side, not seen in this picture, further comp[licating things.

Backing the vessel, even if the props were clear, probably would have caused more damage to the ship and the reef than allowing it to sit. It could have also tore open fuel tanks and caused an environmental nightmare...

Finally, the current Fleet of US Navy Mine Sweepers is due to be replaced shortly with the Littoral Comby Ship, which also probably figured into the scraping of the vessel, since the USS Guardian would have been scrapped or mothballed in the next several years.

Sorry! I didn't mean to upset you so. It's just my opinion. And I did my share of getting boats off of groundings in Vietnam. But they were Army boats.

[David_Old_Jersey]

Sounds like she will soon be on Yachtworld.com then.......

.........and shortly thereafter on CF for round 2 of......"it's a write off!" vs "a couple of weekends work and a quick polish".

[Randy]

Navy ships are compartmentalized so initial flooding would have been manageablebut beingawooden hull; dragging it off the reef would have torn the bottom out. I work with the Navy salvage experts and initially the thought was to lift the ship off. The subsequent thrashing by the heavy seas plus the political fallout made the decision to cut it up the way to go in my opinion.

[jeremiason]

Originally Posted by delmarrey

Sorry! I didn't mean to upset you so. It's just my opinion. And I did my share of getting boats off of groundings in Vietnam. But they were Army boats.

Not upset and not trying to offend you ... And thank you for your service to our nation


As you know, the US Army has more boats than the US Navy, or did when I was in the late 70's, but by tonnage, the Navy wins hands down.

Just hate this arm chair quarterbacking and assumption of facts not in evidence.

Also comments made by people who have no clue how to handle a large vessel making assumptions based on their skills as Yatchsmen, not as veteran Merchant Marines or Naval Personnel

[svmariane]

What a mess of a situation.

I wasn't a'board when the ship struck the reef -
nor nearby monitoring various radio freqs -
nor have access to full damage reports -
nor have a proven expertise in ocean salvage -
nor have a part of the decision-making process as to "now what?


So, here's what I think happened, and why, and who's at fault, and what should have been done right away, and what should be done now:

¿qué?

[s/v Beth]

Originally Posted by jeremiason

Just hate this arm chair quarterbacking and assumption of facts not in evidence.

Also comments made by people who have no clue how to handle a large vessel making assumptions based on their skills as Yatchsmen, not as veteran Merchant Marines or Naval Personnel

I appreciate your point of view Tom, but your last statement puzzles me. If you do not want yachtsmen, or even armchair sailors to comment on this sad situation, why are you following it on cruisers forum? Is this a secret meeting of Merchants or Navy that I am unaware of? Or are not most of us just waiting for the snow to melt so we can get outside and its driving us crazy???

Now I have gone aground hard and gone aground easy, I have sailed in 30 feet of water and watched in horror as I saw a merchant ship pass me broadsides heading straight toward a beach only to turn too late. Am I qualified to comment on this?
No.
But I do enjoy reading about it.
And others are going to comment about it. Its just the nature of the media.
So I am going to have to sift through the posts of the unknowing to get an occasional jewel by those that do. Its the nature of the beast.

[The Garbone]

I stand by my initial knee jerk comment,


Skippers. Career. Over.

;P

[delmarrey]

Here come the money makers............

The Navy has contracted two massive crane ships and a barge from the Dutch contractor Smit International to clean up and remove the Navy vessel.

Read more: U.S. Navy will hack $61million minesweeper ship to pieces to remove it from sensitive reef near Philippines | Mail Online

It's unclear how, exactly, the ship will be dismantled - it's something that the Navy has not done in recent memory - or perhaps ever, experts say.

[mcarling]

Originally Posted by The Garbone

Skippers. Career. Over.

With 100% certainty, the skipper will never be promoted to O-5 and he will never receive another command (either at sea or shore-based). I doubt he'll be able to make it to 20 years and retirement with staff assignments before being forced out after being passed over the second time.

[Richard_W]

Does not look good for Lieutenant Commander Rice ... err ... Pudding ...

Lieutenant Commander Mark Rice was in charge of the of the ship when she hit the reef as she was sailing between Puerto Princesa and Indonesia on a routine patrol.

None of the 79 sailors about the ship were injured and all but ten of the crew was returned to the forward-deployment base in Sasebo, Japan.

Those ten sailors, including Lt Commander Rice, remained behind aboard the USS Mustin - a guided missile destroyer that is overseeing the cleanup operation.

Lt Falvo said the Navy would determine whether Lt Commander Rice will face disciplinary action after it concludes its investigation of the crash.

[captain58sailin]

Ah what is a little grounding between friends? There can be a lot of speculation, however if you weren't there, you can't know or judge. Speculate, all the time. Back in the day when Exxon Valdez went aground, Capt. Joe was hung out big time, and he wasn't even on the bridge. Not to say that he shouldn't have been, but Gregory Cousins was the man in command at the time of the grounding. He was the OOW and he is expected to stand his watch. In the standing orders there is a line it goes something like this "when in doubt, call the Master out!" the follow up goes if you even think you might want to call him out, do so.

[Kettlewell]

"when in doubt, call the Master out!" the follow up goes if you even think you might want to call him out, do so.

We operate under the same orders on my boats, though nobody has a title. But, if one of us is beginning to wonder about some situation, we call up the other. It has helped us out many times.

[jeremiason]

Originally Posted by captain58sailin

Ah what is a little grounding between friends? There can be a lot of speculation, however if you weren't there, you can't know or judge. Speculate, all the time. Back in the day when Exxon Valdez went aground, Capt. Joe was hung out big time, and he wasn't even on the bridge. Not to say that he shouldn't have been, but Gregory Cousins was the man in command at the time of the grounding. He was the OOW and he is expected to stand his watch. In the standing orders there is a line it goes something like this "when in doubt, call the Master out!" the follow up goes if you even think you might want to call him out, do so.

The Exxon Valdez had a number of errors, all pointed out in the USCG Investigation... That is worth discussing with facts.

The most striking was the Able Seaman who accidentally switched the Exxon Valdez's Auto Pilot on just before the accident. The Officer of the Watch made a deadly mistake of giving steering commands to the AB, but didn't realize until it was too late, that the ship was on Auto Pilot instead of manual steering and wasn't answering the helm

[goboatingnow]

Well SMIT are the experts. They'll have it sorted out in no time.


Dave