U.S. Navy Discussion

And don't be surprised by a wreck.

What are you talking about?

He was talking about if you wanted to tour the oceans of the world to join the navy and be prepared to work hard. I added in, based on their recent history, "and don't be surprised by a wreck."

Are you are referring to the collisions involving the USS Fitzgerald and the USS John S. McCain that happened in 2017? I haven't heard of any other "wrecks" since then, and I know the navy didn't take your advice to "ground" (your word) the entire fleet because of those "wrecks." How has the navy managed to operate without a wreck for about 3.5 years? Were you just taking a cheap shot at the navy?

I was half joking and half serious at the expense of the Navy, yes, and if you read all the reports after these incidents you will see they do have some issues. The Navy's report on their preparedness was scathing. Fitzgerald had already had a near miss. I don't know if the Navy has addressed the problems or not. I hope they have, but doubt they have fully and the reports just came out in 2019.

they have severe issues and there are 2 other incidences I believe . 1 destroyer ran aground in Tokyo harbor. There are a lot of articles on it, lack of training, lack of enough crew, faulty equipment, crew not trained how to use equipment and on and on
https://www.militarynews.com/news/a...cle_48954138-3aab-11e9-acde-77ab8b60cb48.html

https://www.navytimes.com/news/your...erald-probe-the-navy-doesnt-want-you-to-read/

As a former U.S. Navy submariner, I encourage you to stop speaking about the U.S. Navy from a position of ignorance. It's offensive.

I'm fully entitled to my opinion. I am not speaking of your performance or of the Navy when you were in it, but the Navy over the last 10 years has shown itself to have many problems. While I respect what you did and what many others do daily, the organization itself admits to some serious issues and they surfaced in a couple of cases. In addition, they've had problems with new builds.

Doubting they have fully addressed the problems is a reflection on the limited time since their reports and the difficult times since then. That doesn't mean they won't address them but from 2019 until today isn't a great window for addressing issues.

Now, I didn't mean to turn this into a battle with my 7 words on the end of a post. I'm now out of this conversation. You can continue to attack me if you'd like, but I won't respond further.

You, too, huh? Again, the U.S. Navy's Seventh Fleet was operating beyond it's means, because civilian overseers were insisting that their wishes be done. You and olderboater are still failing to see that the U.S. Navy's Second Fleet, Third Fleet, Fourth Fleet, Fifth Fleet, and Sixth Fleet didn't have the problems of the Seventh Fleet. I wish you two would wonder about why that is -- it's the same navy. I'm done for tonight; it's almost my bedtime.

Leeky - Thank you for your service. While we are indebted to all of our sailors for their service, "submariner" is a particular title of distinction. You have been a member for 10 years and I don't recall reading about your service previously. While I have appreciated your posts, I will pay even closer attention to them now that I know from where your wisdom comes.

Awww, shucks, ma'am. You're very kind, Judy, and I appreciate it. Being a submariner was the most enjoyable job I ever had, so I don't feel like my time was a service. Now as far as any perception of wisdom coming from me, it's all smoke and mirrors. Just ask Capt J and olderboater.

My post is factual and the problems facing the Navy as far as seamanship go. It is proven, with articles from the Navy all over the internet, a problem with training (or lack thereof), a problem with different types of navigation systems in each ship and no cross training, a problem with too much online training versus classes, undermanned ships, and various other issues that the Navy has admitted to and has said they''re making changes. DO NOT TAKE IT PERSONAL. But I guess it's pretty hard to run into other ships when your ship is underwater!

Your posts and olderboater's posts are factual in that they describe problems that the U.S. Navy and specifically the Seventh Fleet is or was experiencing. Where both of you are off base is in your assumption that the problems are of the U.S. Navy's own making; that the military created the problems.

What I've read is that the Seventh Fleet was undermanned, under-trained, under-upgraded, and over-worked because of a lack of funding that has been going on for many years. The U.S. Navy does not determine it's own budget; it is at the mercy of Congress. The Seventh Fleet predicted the outcome of trying to accomplish missions without the proper resources. Unfortunately in this country, sometimes it takes bad publicity to make the people-in-charge (that's civilians) fix the obvious. The fix is either provide the necessary resources to do the desired missions or reduce the missions to match existing resources. That fix is out of the U.S. Navy's control.

These are warships, not yachts, and their captains will try to make do with what they have to accomplish a mission, even if it results in a bad outcome. It's a cultural thing, an unspoken standing order. After all, they won't have the luxury of asking an enemy to wait while the U.S. Navy's problems are fixed.

Just to clarify one thing, I made no assumption as to the cause of the Navy's problems. I think they are many and very complex and very much include Congress and include civilian political appointees put in charge of them. I also said nothing about those serving in the Navy. Just the Navy has some issues and the two most prominent incidents are just part of it and should have been enough to get them help in solving some. But then that would require all those responsible at all levels of government to admit to their own roles in the situation. Capt J pointed out training issues as were described in the reports, but he didn't say anything about the underlying cause.

I don't blame you for being bothered by it, but have to point out it's like being an honest lawyer or business man or a politician who really does care or any of millions of people. It's like someone who went to a college that is now the center of a scandal. On the other hand, if we ever intend to correct the problems, whether with a state or city or country or business or military branch, then we need to admit they're there and open dialogues seeking real solutions with all parties accepting their role in where things are.

Now, I do still have doubts, as I'm pretty sure you do, that the real needed corrective steps have taken place.

And I know I said I was out of this thread but felt I needed to clarify.

The accidents were both a matter of incredibly poor seamanship and training and have nothing to do with any of the above. Both vessels bridges were properly manned at the time. The military did create the problems by not continuing the training that they always did.

Very well put Leeky. We have almost 1.5M Americans serving in the military and what, tens of trillions of dollars in assets. All that is dependent on Congress for funding and direction, and civilian contractors to do their jobs right before the military makes do with what they get and have to do. There are going to be many problems of all kinds. When they happen the military investigates the cause, takes responsibility and works to do better. The military doesn't discontinue training. They never refuse an offer of more training. They're told to cut budgets then they make the best bad choice they can. These things deserve notice and comment. That's how they get changed. But no way should any branch of our military be treated with anything but the utmost respect. We should be careful of the tone of our comments out of heightened respect in these times. And before we come down on the 7th fleet, my father served proudly in the Fighting 7th. WW II and Korea

Capt J, what I highlighted is an incorrect statement by you. The Seventh Fleet fell behind on their training because their mission assignments didn't leave enough time for training. That info is in some of the links that you have provided on this subject.

Also, in the links that you have provided was the fact that the Seventh Fleet was short-handed, meaning that existing crews were over-worked to cover for missing crew. So, the vessels' bridges were properly manned with exhausted and under-trained personnel. The U.S. Navy didn't create those problems, even though you say they did.

Capt J, I've been lurking on YF nearly every day, usually twice-a-day, since 2009. I "know" you well enough to state that once you assume a position, it's a safe bet that you will not change that position, even if presented with contrary facts. So, I'll leave you with what Marmot once said to olderboater: "You're only proving that you don't know what you're talking about."

NYCAP123, I'm not coming down on the 7th Fleet. They were royally screwed!!!