In a way I feel sorry for him since he was put in that position by the Navy command, who of course will never take responsibility.
A heavier punishment than his Commanding Officer, to be sure:
Getting busted from E-7 to E-6 and retiring at 20 years works out to a $366 fine per month for the rest of his life.
He will probably get some disability $$ which is tax free… I work with a few retired fat bastards that get 70% for bad knees and sleep apnea… I hate guys that scam the system
It seems strange to pin the blame of an accident that to my eyes seems to be the result of a very basic lack of seamanship, not a new IBNS, on the guy supposed to teach people how to use the system. Altering to port to cross the bow of a tanker in confined waters should in my mind never be done if a simple failure to execute the correct ROT will lead to a collision.
Sort of like blaming the tomtom dealer for running a red light with your eyes closed.
They didn’t alter to port in the sense of it being a voluntary action. See http://s3.amazonaws.com/CHINFO/USS+Fitzgerald+and+USS+John+S+McCain+Collision+Reports.pdf page 46.
thanks for the reports. Been pretty curious as to the details about these two incidents for a while now.
Having read them I am utterly and completely shocked and appalled… how the hell can someone man a piece of equipment without understanding it to the point of being able to diagnose what seem like rudimentary issues with a clear conscience?
I’m baffled… so many people on the bridge… no one picks up on it… so confused.
IIRC these guys were on loan from another ship that did steering differently. Not that that excuses it. The software people who think that a bunch of little boxes on a touch screen is ergonomic have their part in it as well. There’s a lot to be said for big brass handles that Do One Thing.