Posted on 05/24/2022 4:32:15 AM PDT by billorites
The U.S. Navy has released its report into the submerged grounding of the nuclear-powered fast attack submarine USS Connecticut on an uncharted seamount in the South China Sea in October, revealing an “accumulation of unit-level errors” leading up to the incident.
The investigation ultimately determined the grounding was preventable. The submarine’s Commanding Officer, Executive Officer (second in command), and “Chief of the Boat” were previously relieved of their command “due to loss of confidence.”
The USS Connecticut (SSN 22) grounded on an uncharted seamount “while operating submerged in a poorly surveyed area in international waters in the Indo-Pacific region” on October 2, 2021.
Following the incident, USS Connecticut returned to Guam for damage assessments. Although the propulsion plant of USS Connecticut was not impacted, the submarine is expectd to be unavailable for operations “for an extended period of time” due to the damage sustained in the incident.
The incident also resulted in minor injuries to were sustained by eleven crew members.
According to the heavily redacted report, the grounding “resulted from an accumulation of errors and omissions in navigation planning, watchteam execution, and risk management that fell far below U.S. Navy standards.”
“Prudent decision-making and adherence to required procedures in any of these three areas could have prevented the grounding,” the report adds.
The investigation also highlighted specific areas for improvement in the deployment training and certification process, which the Navy is urgently implementing across its Submarine Force. The investigation also includes 28 corrective actions, of which 14 actions are complete, 13 actions are in progress, and one is enduring.
Rear Adm. Christopher J. Cavanaugh, Commander of the U.S. 7th Fleet, further recommends that the Commanding Officer (CO), Executive Officer (XO), Navigator (NAV), Officer of the Deck (OOD), Assistant Navigator (ANAV) face “nonjudicial punishment” for violation of “Dereliction of Duty” and “Improper Hazarding of a Vessel” for negiligence and that the administrative chain of command initiate detachment for cause.
“In implementing these significant improvements, the Navy will become a more effective fighting force. Given the inherently dangerous nature of Naval operations, we cannot become a risk-averse or zero-defect organization, but prioritizing safety will engender a culture of greater attention to detail in operational tasks, enhanced procedural compliance, and a questioning attitude that constantly seeks improvement – which increases the readiness of our forces and the Navy’s lethality in combat,” the Navy said in a statement.
Retired COB (1987)
“...heavily redacted...” would seem to indicate there could have been additional non-cooperative players in the area as well. Everything would have been passive in that case guaranteed.
I suspect there is way more to this tale than is being disclosed to the public.
“OK, Boomer.”
________________________
No, it is a Fast Attack.
Not a bubblehead myself, but after the USS SanFran seamount collision, it was noted that they were using outdated sea charts. That, and the Asian waters have been know to spring up visible islands seemingly overnight, it’s not outside the realm of possibility that even more up to date charts could be out of date. Mapping the pacific sea floor is not a trivial task.
My 0.02¢
Thank you for your service, Chief...:)
When I first heard of it, I viewed it as the wages of having a combat ready military, an unfortunate accident. I wasn’t ready to hang everyone up by the yardarm.
But one never knows.
On its face alone, that released verbiage might indicate an absolute fever swamp of ineptitude like what was seen on the USS Fitzgerald collision.
But again...I always keep in mind, this is the NIS and Navy brass dedicated to keeping their image pure. I never trust them to be impartial.
It’s still a full-on mystery to One Guy who was a sailor in the surface fleet and deployed to the Med and to the Red Sea.
There must be some technology that bubblehead squids use that skimmers aren’t privvy to!
How many women on board, and what was their role/duty stations at the time of the incident?
“I suspect there is way more to this tale than is being disclosed to the public.”
__________________________________________
Of course that’s always the case with subs right.
We had a radioactive leak on a sub I was on, supposedly it was just pumped out and never reported at all. It eventually made it through the grapevine what had occurred. Then when we had come in to port from 3 months out at sea (a couple of days after the spill), we were sent back out for an additional two weeks clean-up before they let us get off the boat. Talk about a disappointed crew. One guy had apparently sat in the leak and tracked some of it into the birthing area and it was nightmare.
They never told us how much radiation was on our TLDs. But I did get a letter, sent to my mother’s address, after I had been out of the Navy for a while that states I had exceeded my maximum lifetime acceptance of radiation and that I should receive no xrays or spend time in the sun etc. I’ve pretty much ignored it. So far, so good.
The guy who supposedly sat in the water was removed from the boat immediately upon return and I never heard from or about him again. If I remember correctly, his name was Rex Herkert. I didn’t know him well and I believe he was he was a nuke MM, I was just an non-nuke MM that just qualified that patrol, probably 20 at the time.
Anyhow, the point is, I don’t think the Navy reports half of what they do regarding subs, understandably. And when they do report it, it’s half of the story and a quarter of that gets released to the public.
We of course had war games and on two occasions we had collisions, one with an underwater mountain and one with another submarine we were hunting. Both times we were patrol quiet and practically hovering we were moving so slow.
ICWYDT
“accumulation of unit-level errors”
In other words, they are all incompetent. We are in trouble.
For one thing they were using out of date charts.
For another they ignored reports of a plume of muddy water, a signature of a potential underwater eruption.
I’m sure someone ‘in the know’ can add to that list, those are two factors I recall from reports shortly after the grounding.
Thank you for your reply. Makes me wonder how any vessel can sail with out of date charts.
PRECISELY!
It looks like the exact way the seamount could have been avoided will remain classified for now.
No specific answers here, but important, overall naval standards were lax, across the Navy.
“Accidents happen, but the constant and uninterrupted drumbeat of avoidable accidents throughout the Navy and Marine Corps suggest a growing tendency for personnel at every level to disregard longstanding Navy rules, regulations and practices, where Navy operators—for a variety of reasons—feel they—and they alone—are the best arbiters of what rules to follow. And that, frankly, is doing a far better job of sinking the Navy than any “pacing threat” yet.”
The USS Connecticut (SSN 22) grounded on an uncharted seamount “while operating submerged in a poorly surveyed area in international waters in the Indo-Pacific region”
I would think it is the Navy top brass at fault for failing to have proper charts.
That is the right question, along with the number and role of other favored “minorities” (including sexual). The illiterate use of pronouns in the story seems to be a deliberate effort to hide the sex of those responsible.
🤪
Wow, they’re all fortunate to be alive.
Thanks for the link.
“During the transit to Guam, Connecticut identified seven Sailors who would benefit from mental health treatment. During his interview, the IDC [Independent Duty Corpsmen] stated that number grew to approximately 50 Sailors.”
Must’ve been a very frightening experience, but the crews used to be screened for mental stability during damage control training, etc. That’s nearly half of the crew who broke down - that’s a very dangerous level of weakness.
I suspect many were removed from submarine duty. Of course they may have been pushed to the brink by living a year with bedbugs. That’s hard to believe that they couldn’t get rid of them for a whole year - that’s actual torture.
I couldn’t imagine a collision at that speed, I’m surprised more didn’t die.
Here’s a good link to the pictures of the damage:
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.