Skip to comments.
Navy orders stand down of entire submarine force
wavy.com ^
| 01/15/2006
| N/A
Posted on 01/15/2007 12:17:56 PM PST by rwa265
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101 next last
FYI
1
posted on
01/15/2007 12:18:00 PM PST
by
rwa265
To: rwa265
Shouldn't this be something the Navy keeps out of the public eye?
2
posted on
01/15/2007 12:21:05 PM PST
by
TheKidster
(you can only trust government to grow, consolidate power and infringe upon your liberties.)
To: LonePalm; sionnsar; patton; Doohickey; SmithL; TheKidster
Not really.
Want I'm REALLY afraid of is that a "stand down" means thousands and thousands of EXTRA man-hours (or tens of thousands of extra man-days!!!!) of extra training and inspection - instead of a couple of hours of REST and THINKING of an overextended force with too few subs to do too many jobs that is actually what is needed.
You can micro-manage your people to death.
Literally.
3
posted on
01/15/2007 12:24:55 PM PST
by
Robert A Cook PE
(I can only donate monthly, but Hillary's ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!)
To: Robert A. Cook, PE; All
I am interested in this news, since I have a grandson currently serving on a submarine. What does this mean to the ships at sea? Will they have to return to their home ports for the stand-down?
Can some submarine vet chime in here?
4
posted on
01/15/2007 12:27:30 PM PST
by
Palladin
("We have not yet begun to fight."--John Paul Jones)
To: rwa265
5
posted on
01/15/2007 12:28:56 PM PST
by
oyez
(T)
To: rwa265
focus energy and intellect back onto the basics of submarine operations.Reminds me of a story about Vince Lombardi when he was coaching at Notre Dame.
"Gentlemen, this is a submarine."
To: Palladin
What does this mean to the ships at sea? Not much.
Watches still have to be stood. The ship remains on station.
This will be a day where all departments review their proceedures for safety.
We would do this in the VP Navy whenever there was an incident or accident.
7
posted on
01/15/2007 12:40:19 PM PST
by
grobdriver
(Let the embeds check the bodies!)
To: lilycicero
8
posted on
01/15/2007 12:46:56 PM PST
by
RedRover
(They are not killers. Defend our Marines.)
To: grobdriver
You are exactly correct. Submarines at sea stay at sea. However the next return to homeport will have the Squadrons perform inspections to ensure that SOP's bills are written and are being complied with as they are written. Generally speaking - administrative check-up and enforcement.
Retired MCPOC(SS)
9
posted on
01/15/2007 1:06:55 PM PST
by
encm(ss)
(USN Ret.)
To: rwa265
To: Disambiguator
So when did Vince coach at Notre Dame?
11
posted on
01/15/2007 1:11:28 PM PST
by
sine_nomine
(The United States...shall protect each of them against invasion. Article IV, 4. US Constition)
To: Palladin
My son is on maneuvers in the Pacific. He can't say much other than it doesn't effect them too much. Maybe a little extra training.
12
posted on
01/15/2007 1:13:21 PM PST
by
rwa265
To: Palladin
It really depends. Anyone who was out just tooling around will probably have RTP'ed already. Deployed units will continue their current mission and may be directed to perform some training underway with more directed training delivered during the next upkeep.
13
posted on
01/15/2007 1:13:55 PM PST
by
Doohickey
(I am not unappeasable. YOU are just too easily appeased.)
To: rwa265
They obviously need Michelle Manhart to start training the seamen.
To: grobdriver
Pretty much. This sort of thing happened once when we were deployed to the Med. We did training instead of drills for three days on the morning watch, and had to spend a day watching more training when we arrived in La Maddalena for a scheduled upkeep.
15
posted on
01/15/2007 1:16:53 PM PST
by
Doohickey
(I am not unappeasable. YOU are just too easily appeased.)
To: sine_nomine
Right before he started coaching at Lambert Field.
To: Robert A. Cook, PE
we've all talked about this before, and most of us agree
WE NEED MORE BOATS TO COVER THE MISSION!! I don't think that point is made enough.
17
posted on
01/15/2007 1:17:06 PM PST
by
Bottom_Gun
(Crush depth dummy - proud NRA member & Certified Instructor)
To: Robert A. Cook, PE
I guess I was coming from a letting our enemies know our weakness point of view, rather than a inform the public point of view.
18
posted on
01/15/2007 1:17:14 PM PST
by
TheKidster
(you can only trust government to grow, consolidate power and infringe upon your liberties.)
To: rwa265
My brother served on a nuclear sub out of Conn. I thought I heard that once you've been on a sub for an extended period of time, you aren't put on again. Is that true? I'm just wondering if he would be on one of these subs.
19
posted on
01/15/2007 1:20:03 PM PST
by
Cinnamon Girl
(OMGIIHIHOIIC ping list)
To: Richard Kimball
His coach at Fordham later coached at Notre Dame; does that count?
20
posted on
01/15/2007 1:20:51 PM PST
by
You Dirty Rats
(I Love Free Republic!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson