Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

USS San Francisco Commander Guilty Of Hazarding Vessel
Navy/Defense/Electric Boat | 2/12/2005 | ROBERT A. HAMILTON

Posted on 02/13/2005 10:23:15 AM PST by NCSteve

The captain of a submarine that hit a seamount Jan. 8 in the western Pacific Ocean, killing one crewman and seriously injuring 23 others, has been found guilty of operating the submarine unsafely and has been issued a letter of reprimand, effectively ending his career.

Cmdr. Kevin Mooney, the captain of the USS San Francisco, was permanently relieved as skipper after an administrative proceeding known as an admiral's mast. The proceeding was convened by an order of the commander of the Seventh Fleet, Vice Adm. Jonathan Greenert.

Cmdr. Ike N. Skelton, a spokesman for the Seventh Fleet in Yokosuka, Japan, said late Friday night that Greenert determined during the investigation that Mooney failed to follow “several critical navigational and voyage planning” standards.

“By not ensuring those standards were followed, Mooney hazarded the vessel,” Skelton said, reading from a statement issued by Greenert.

The mast concluded that Mooney's crew had access to charts that showed there might have been an underwater obstruction in the area, and that a sounding taken just minutes before the accident did not correlate with the charts that were in use at the time, which should have prompted him to be more cautious.

The news stunned several Navy sources who have been following the accident investigation, particularly because Mooney's actions after the accident were characterized as heroic by everyone familiar with the situation. Despite extensive damage to the ship, he and his crew got it to the surface and kept it floating long enough to limp back to its homeport of Apra Harbor, Guam.

The San Francisco was heading to Australia when it came to periscope depth a little more than 400 miles southwest of Guam to fix its position accurately. Minutes after diving, and while traveling at a high rate of speed, the submarine slammed into a seamount in an area where official Navy charts list 6,000 feet of water.

Other charts of the area, however, show muddy water in the area, which normally indicates shallowness, and other government agency charts show evidence of the seamount less than 150 feet below the surface. The grounding destroyed three of the four ballast tanks in the submarine's bow, shattered the sonar dome and smashed the sonar sphere. In addition, a bulkhead at the front end of the ship was buckled.

Machinist Mate 3rd Class Joseph Ashley was killed when he was thrown more than 20 feet and struck his head on a large pump. Almost two-dozen others were injured so badly they could not perform their duties, though they have all since been treated and released from the hospital in Guam. Seventy-five others received less severe injuries.

The crew saved the ship by constantly running a low pressure blower meant for only intermittent use to force water out of the badly damaged forward ballast tanks, as well as using exhaust from the ship's diesel motor to augment the blower.

Despite the force of the blow, the nuclear reactor and the ship's turbine generators continued to operate normally, and even sensitive electronic and navigation gear continued to function.

On Jan. 20, Mooney was reassigned to Submarine Squadron 15 in Guam, pending the results of an investigation to determine the cause of the sub's grounding. Cmdr. Andrew Hale, the squadron's deputy commander, assumed duties as captain of the San Francisco.

The mast means that Mooney will not face a more serious proceeding known as a court martial, but the letter of reprimand and the decision to relieve him of command “for cause” means that his promising career is over, the Navy sources said.

In a related development, Lt. Cmdr. Jeff A. Davis, a spokesman for the Pacific submarine force commander, said late Friday night that assessment of the damage to the San Francisco is proceeding and that shipyard workers in Guam are planning to make temporary repairs to the bow of the ship so it can be moved under its own power to a shipyard where it can be repaired.

Although the location where it will be repaired has not been determined, Navy sources said it would likely be Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, or Bangor, Wash.

“These temporary repairs will be engineered to ensure a successful transit,” Davis said. “As part of having on-hand materials for potential use in these temporary repairs, a large steel dome about 20 feet high and 20 feet in diameter will be arriving at Guam in the next few days. As of now, no decisions have been made about when USS San Francisco will depart Guam, where it will go, or what her final disposition will be.”

Other Navy sources said that if the assessment determines it makes sense to repair rather than scrap the San Francisco, the Navy will likely use the entire bow section from the recently decommissioned USS Atlanta to replace the badly damaged bow of the San Francisco.


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: submarines; usssanfrancisco
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-177 next last
To: Publius6961

Please pardon my rant, I've just seen this same question asked so many times.


41 posted on 02/13/2005 12:28:03 PM PST by brooklin (What was that?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Robe

Holy Cow! I missed the previous post on this. That is some damage. Extends all the way back to the Torpedo Tube shutter doors. No wonder they had to run the diesel to keep the ship afloat. I appears that they maybe had only one (maybe 2) the forward MBT's intact.


42 posted on 02/13/2005 12:36:55 PM PST by SolitaryMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961
"The mast concluded that Mooney's crew had access to charts that showed there might have been an underwater obstruction in the area, and that a sounding taken just minutes before the accident did not correlate with the charts that were in use at the time, which should have prompted him to be more cautious"

They didn't need any gee-whiz gadgetry. From the sounds of it they must have stopped or slowed (probably to get radio traffic) and took a sounding (not hi-tech stuff) and the sounding didn't agree with the charts they were using. This should have made them question the charts and take precautionary steps in moving forward.
43 posted on 02/13/2005 12:40:33 PM PST by WHBates
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: WHBates
During submarine qualifications, you have to understand the systems, not necessarily operate each and everyone of them. In fact, I have never heard for a submarine venting the hot diesel exhaust to the MBT's as a drill or pracfac. The only reason for the procedure is to evacuate the ER is certain emergencies.
44 posted on 02/13/2005 12:42:52 PM PST by SolitaryMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: fooman
Why was he told not to use sonar?

Attack subs never run on active in the open ocean (nor do boomers). The USS San Francisco was using sonar, but as per SOP he was using only passive. Undersea mountains do not make much noise just sitting there. That isn't the problem.

How can the maps be wrong after 50 years of navigation

The captains legitimate error was to rely on Navy charts that were not proven to be accurate. The Navy's error was to provide him with charts and insist that they were "official" and to be relied upon.

The error of the verdict is to imply that placing blame on the captain finishes the matter there and to be structured in such a way as to eliminate the possibility of employing an obviously good commander in training others.

45 posted on 02/13/2005 12:44:55 PM PST by Phsstpok ("When you don't know where you are, but you don't care, you're not lost, you're exploring.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: fooman
No, this does not pass the smell test does it? Seems to me you get one set of maps and those would be the official ones. How many people drive with two or three maps?

He's screwed. The captain always takes the blame right or wrong. The cartographers are truly to blame here (except for the possible sounding which I hadn't heard of till now).

I drive with fifteen maps just in case< /sarcasm>

46 posted on 02/13/2005 12:54:58 PM PST by Nov3 ("This is the best election night in history." --DNC chair Terry McAuliffe Nov. 2,2004 8p.m.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: NCSteve

Does anyone feel that the nat'l exposure this incident received influenced the severity of the decision?


47 posted on 02/13/2005 12:57:49 PM PST by thombo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fooman
I am not neccesarily saying the captain is blame free, but a number of elements are not being examined-including subs running around under water - with some uncontrollable elements.

The universe is not entirely controllable. On one occasion, my husband's boat hit an uncharted, undersea mountain. There was a small (relatively) amount of damage, no one was injured, and presumably, there was no fault found with the Captain. He retained his Command.

Apparently, they did find issues which they felt the Captain was responsible for. Perhaps, people more familiar with subs might find these issues to be minor. But, when that much damage occurs, and someone dies, ANY mistake found is going to be punished.

48 posted on 02/13/2005 12:59:39 PM PST by Dianna
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: thombo
Does anyone feel that the nat'l exposure this incident received influenced the severity of the decision?

Go and look at how many Captains retain control of their Command after an accident. It happens, but seems to be rare. I'd be more willing to believe that the extensive damage and the fact that someone died was the deciding factor over media exposure.

49 posted on 02/13/2005 1:03:24 PM PST by Dianna
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: SolitaryMan
"During submarine qualifications, you have to understand the systems, not necessarily operate each and everyone of them. In fact, I have never heard for a submarine venting the hot diesel exhaust to the MBT's as a drill or pracfac. The only reason for the procedure is to evacuate the ER is certain emergencies.

LOL, your response surprises me. What you say is certainly true but being an MM doesn't make you an effective auxiliary man on board the boat but qualifications does. Knowing you boat and its class is important. During qualifications I was expected to understand all the systems on board. However, I was required to absolutely understand and operate the systems I stood watch on and was responsible for maintaining. I don't know how many patrols you were on but on every one I was on (only 5 years worth) we had to improvise in some way or another
50 posted on 02/13/2005 1:06:41 PM PST by WHBates
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: NCSteve

Let me quibble over the wording. There is no guilty finding under Article 15 but rather one is found "in violation." Guilty is a finding of court-martial. For the skipper it's the difference between a ruined career and a ruined career with a federal conviction that would trash his pension eligibility also.

LT, USN (Ret)
Former Navy legal officer (paralegal administrator)


51 posted on 02/13/2005 1:09:22 PM PST by jimfree (Freep and Ye Shall Find)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nita Nupress

"Who are we hiding from?"

You can't hide a nuke sub that is doing 30 kts. Subs do not run silent at that speed. So why no active sonar? A very good question. Next question: At 30 kts, would active sonar have given them warning soon enough to avoid the "mountain"?


52 posted on 02/13/2005 1:10:43 PM PST by GGpaX4DumpedTea
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: NCSteve

In these budget-conscious times, you don't get an attaboy when there is major damage to expensive government property. Not to mention the implications to operations with the loss of an asset.


53 posted on 02/13/2005 1:15:20 PM PST by VRWC For Truth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nita Nupress
I've been wondering myself why they were not using active sonar.
Is that common practice during peacetime? If so, why? Who are we hiding from?

Active sonar frequency range is designed to localize discrete metal objects --AKA "targets".
Regardless of what you see on "Voyage to the bottom of the Sea" and Hollywood movies, it is very poor for general navigation.

54 posted on 02/13/2005 1:17:16 PM PST by dread78645 (Sarcasm tags are for wusses.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: judicial meanz; submarinerswife; PogySailor; chasio649; gobucks; Bottom_Gun; Dog Gone; HipShot; ...
Ping to the Steely-Eyed Killers of the Deep
55 posted on 02/13/2005 1:18:59 PM PST by Doohickey ("This is a hard and dirty war, but when it's over, nothing will ever be too difficult again.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Phsstpok
Attack subs never run on active in the open ocean (nor do boomers). The USS San Francisco was using sonar, but as per SOP he was using only passive. Undersea mountains do not make much noise just sitting there. That isn't the problem.

The article states "and that a sounding taken just minutes before the accident did not correlate with the charts that were in use at the time,"

I'm not that familiar with Navy technology, but what DOES one use to get a "sounding" for depth, if not sonar?

56 posted on 02/13/2005 1:23:39 PM PST by SauronOfMordor (We are going to fight until hell freezes over and then we are going to fight on the ice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: NCSteve
"...and that a sounding taken just minutes before the accident did not correlate with the charts that were in use at the time, which should have prompted him to be more cautious."

This is what did him in right here. The proper procedure for going deep goes like this:

OOD: "Quartermaster, take a sounding." QMOW: "Sounding is 1800 fathoms, matches chart." OOD: "Very well Quartermaster. All stations, Conn. Going deep."

Any other response from the QMOW means you do not go deep until the discrepancy between charted and actual depth is resolved.

57 posted on 02/13/2005 1:23:49 PM PST by Doohickey ("This is a hard and dirty war, but when it's over, nothing will ever be too difficult again.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fooman

The charts don't matter (in this case), as long as they were up-to-date. What did him in as I explained in another post was the discrepancy between charted and actual depth.


58 posted on 02/13/2005 1:26:16 PM PST by Doohickey ("This is a hard and dirty war, but when it's over, nothing will ever be too difficult again.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SauronOfMordor
I'm not that familiar with Navy technology, but what DOES one use to get a "sounding" for depth, if not sonar?

Fathometer. Low power, high frequency, short duration ping directed straight down.

59 posted on 02/13/2005 1:26:16 PM PST by dread78645 (Sarcasm tags are for wusses.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: dread78645
Fathometer. Low power, high frequency, short duration ping directed straight down.

Thanks, I get it now. So what the Navy investigators are implying is that, once he saw the fathometer readings did not jibe with his chart, he should have gone to dead slow and taken more readings (which may have shown him that the charts were out to lunch)

60 posted on 02/13/2005 1:31:47 PM PST by SauronOfMordor (We are going to fight until hell freezes over and then we are going to fight on the ice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-177 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson