Help support TMP


"CO Pleads Not Guilty to Negligence Charges" Topic


6 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Please remember that some of our members are children, and act appropriately.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Ultramodern Warfare (2014-present) Message Board


Areas of Interest

Modern

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Link


Top-Rated Ruleset

A Fistful of Kung Fu


Rating: gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star 


Featured Showcase Article

Bannon's Boys for Team Yankee

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian is finally getting into Team Yankee.


Featured Workbench Article

The Zombie Resistance Family Project

Meet the Zombie Resistance Family!


801 hits since 14 Jul 2018
©1994-2024 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?


TMP logo

Membership

Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian14 Jul 2018 8:32 p.m. PST

The former commander of USS Fitzgerald (DDG-62) has pleaded not guilty to charges he committed criminal acts leading up to the collision of the guided-missile destroyer, in a Tuesday arraignment…

link

Andrew Walters16 Jul 2018 1:16 p.m. PST

That's good news from the point of view of those of us who want to know what happened. It's also probably good from the point of view of making sure this desire of stupid doesn't recur. The more it's explored and hashed over the more likely all the places we depend on technology and quit using common sense will get some protection.

Lion in the Stars16 Jul 2018 6:47 p.m. PST

I don't see that leading to an acquittal.

Not when they've already convicted several lower ranking folks.

The Captain (excuse me, "Commanding Officer") is the right hand of God on board ship. EVERYTHING is, by legal definition, the CO's responsibility.

The only mitigating factor is the actions of higher officers in not getting sufficient crew out to the ships.

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian18 Jul 2018 6:11 p.m. PST

From what I've read, the CO should always be on the bridge when transiting busy sea channels.

Ghostrunner18 Jul 2018 9:01 p.m. PST

From what I've read, the CO should always be on the bridge when transiting busy sea channels.

In his defense, very little of the South China Sea is not a 'busy sea channel' by any American definition. And I hold the opinion that a tired watch officer (or CO) can be more dangerous than leaving the post unfilled. I do speak from experience.

That said, I agree that I would not bet on him ever seeing the bridge of a ship again.

Lion in the Stars19 Jul 2018 11:49 a.m. PST

The Fitz was around Japan when she collided with the ACX Crystal, but at 0130, the Captain should be asleep (the CO is usually awake from ~0500 to 2300).

Either the XO or the Nav should have been officer of the deck for that, though. A LTjg just flat doesn't have enough sea time for running in busy waters.

Overall, I agree with Ghostrunner, a tired watch officer is far more dangerous than anything else.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.