Yeah, I heard McCain on CNN complaining that the lack of training was because we don't give the military enough money.More truth is emerging about these recent ship collisions.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/11/politics/navy-ships-training-expired/index.html
Yeah, I heard McCain on CNN complaining that the lack of training was because we don't give the military enough money.
Not only that but they never have to accept the blame for things gone wrong forcing it onto the lowest common denominator.er have your goals changed at work? It's rarely the leadership that defines the goals be the ones who are involved in the planning of achieving that.
Yeah, I heard McCain on CNN complaining that the lack of training was because we don't give the military enough money.
While I absolutely agree that we spend way too much money on the military, he did make a decent point that when they do cut funding the last thing you usually see take a cut is the fancy new ship being built.
With that said, they are saying that the Pacific fleet is deployed too much is one of the reasons they don't get as much training. For things like navigating the vessel shouldn't the much greater experience make them better despite not having refresher training courses? It's been my experience that after someone is initially trained that experience trumps everything. How often do cargo ship captains retrain?
I picked this quote out of the CNN article:
""Their aggressive deployment schedule gave the Navy more presence, it's true. But it came at a cost, including detrimental effects on ship readiness," Pendleton said. "In fact, we were told that the overseas based ships were so busy that they had to train on the margins. Term I'd not heard before. And it was explained to me that meant that they had to squeeze training in when they could."
Earlier in the article they mention something similar, but I wanted to talk about this because it is absolutely not an element that is unique to the US Navy. This is something that is systemically happening in companies and government organizations all across the entire United States. And that is, you have a lot of job roles being combined, automated, and/or work being delegated to the lower levels. This model works great to increase work place efficiencies and profit margins, which is necessary (not saying this is a bad thing), but it also comes at the price of not fully understanding how these new roles will perform in very specialized and potentially disastrous circumstances. Human beings are amazing, brilliant, and resourceful, but they're not impervious to failure. It's no different than a load bearing structure collapsing after it exceeds its limit. In most corporate circumstances, it just means jobs don't get done, or growth doesn't happen where it should, but in cases like military warships, lives are lost.
But it's not just unique to the lower level workers, either. It happens across the entire spectrum of leadership. The way you see this, and I know you all have seen it, is when new directives come out, and it's up to the lower level management to "figure it out". Ever have your goals changed at work? It's rarely the leadership that defines the goals be the ones who are involved in the planning of achieving that.
Maybe I'm just overreacting 'cause that's what's happening at my own job.
Yep, it's amazing what NAVSEA won't spend of a system they are still using but, we got a new replacement coming out in a few years, so you'll just have to buck up and get the bailing wire out to keep the old and unsexy stuff working.While I absolutely agree that we spend way too much money on the military, he did make a decent point that when they do cut funding the last thing you usually see take a cut is the fancy new ship being built.
With that said, they are saying that the Pacific fleet is deployed too much is one of the reasons they don't get as much training. For things like navigating the vessel shouldn't the much greater experience make them better despite not having refresher training courses? It's been my experience that after someone is initially trained that experience trumps everything. How often do cargo ship captains retrain?
With that said, they are saying that the Pacific fleet is deployed too much
I would say the main issue is that if you're always at sea you have no time to train for emergencies/nonstandard operating environments. While I didn't have anything to do with navigation and don't know what their training regimen was like I do know how different things are between training cruises and operational ones. Normally during work-ups you sail out to sea for a week or so and run different types of firefighting/combat/whatever drills every day. When you're actually deployed operationally you don't do that very much because...well... you're trying to do the actual job, not train to do the job. I'm very confident my ship was less proficient at fighting fires after 8 months in the Gulf than we were when we set out.
So basically it could be bullshit and whatever training they missed wouldn't have been helpful here but I can definitely imagine scenarios where the people piloting the ship might not have been well versed in how to navigate well in crowded shipping lanes.
Yet cruise ships are able to drill while at seas with thousands of passengers on board. The only time they aren't "deployed" is when they are in drydock for a couple weeks every five years. The problem is the military refuses to learn from industry on just about anything and are still stuck in the 1940s in a lot of their processes and mentalities.
It's almost like there's a massively larger margin of error for cruise ships than there is for the military or something, lol.
Great idea though, while we're sailing through the Straits of Hormuz let's create a bunch of simulated incoming air targets to practice interception on and miss the actual incoming air targets. Let's wake up the entire crew and send them to GQ stations for a fire drill so that the people on watch the next night only got 3 hours of decent sleep and will be super alert. That shouldn't affect operational readiness at all. You should be an admiral.
Except what they are fucking up is running into other ships, which is the same military vs commercial. Except commercial ships and crews never go out to the middle of no where to practice.
I find it exceptionally hard to believe the Navy doesn't drill for fires while deployed, but if that is true, just wow. I could see while in an active war zone, but sailing around?
I work with the USAF daily, and they are literally decades behind commercial in processes and mentalities and the result is far higher costs with significantly reduced safety and availability.
Maybe you are right that the Navy is just so overworked, they can't be expected to not run into other ships. It is so much harder with all of their equipment and extreme performance to not hit things than huge ships with less performance deployed 100% of the time with a fraction of the crew.
I would say the main issue is that if you're always at sea you have no time to train for emergencies/nonstandard operating environments. While I didn't have anything to do with navigation and don't know what their training regimen was like I do know how different things are between training cruises and operational ones. Normally during work-ups you sail out to sea for a week or so and run different types of firefighting/combat/whatever drills every day. When you're actually deployed operationally you don't do that very much because...well... you're trying to do the actual job, not train to do the job. I'm very confident my ship was less proficient at fighting fires after 8 months in the Gulf than we were when we set out.
So basically it could be bullshit and whatever training they missed wouldn't have been helpful here but I can definitely imagine scenarios where the people piloting the ship might not have been well versed in how to navigate well in crowded shipping lanes.
Eight months? I'm so glad I got out when deployments were almost always six.
99% of the time at sea there are no other ships in sight, being in a crowded shipping lane is definitely an anomaly. Not sure what the solution is, but if civilian leadership wants us to maintain the same force projection, they definitely need to bump up manpower levels so they actually have time to train. These kind of things will only continue if they don't.
The level of knowledge of the average sailor today, compared to what I was exposed to 30 years ago is almost impossible to compare. So called electronic techs don't have multiple schools (A school, B school, and advanced training) anymore. They are literally equipment operators who only know how to follow procedures. They have no big picture clue of the systems on their vessel. Submarine qualifications are a joke. In the old days a sailor had to know what every valve, switch, or circuit breaker did in their compartment and then they had to know about valves, and breakers all over the submarine from end to end. This current crop has no clue and they better be treated like snowflakes or they are going to complain to HR. I'm f,ning serious. They are destroying the Navy from the inside by short changing them on training. This is no place for OJT and that's basically their program now.The military pisses away money like there is no tomorrow, but then cuts training back like crazy. I work on military contracts, and generally they care much more that we spent all the money than that we actually completed the work.
At least they are starting to get rid of the rot.It appears that the former commanding officers of the Fitzgerald and the McCain are being charged with negligent homicide in the deaths of the sailors in their commands.
https://www.news4jax.com/news/natio...igent-homicide-charges-over-deadly-collisions
This is a shocking development. I don't think this is the right thing to do. First of all to prevent this from happening again systematic changes are needed. Getting rid of a guy or two really doesn't do anything. Secondly if you charge people with crimes you will essentially incentivize people to not cooperate with reporting of errors and with solving these issues. Why would they when cooperation just creates more liability for you?It appears that the former commanding officers of the Fitzgerald and the McCain are being charged with negligent homicide in the deaths of the sailors in their commands.
https://www.news4jax.com/news/natio...igent-homicide-charges-over-deadly-collisions
The are already operating in a constant CYA mode as it is. Need to get rid of several useless rear admirals and clean house.This is a shocking development. I don't think this is the right thing to do. First of all to prevent this from happening again systematic changes are needed. Getting rid of a guy or two really doesn't do anything. Secondly if you charge people with crimes you will essentially incentivize people to not cooperate with reporting of errors and with solving these issues. Why would they when cooperation just creates more liability for you?
It's easier to blame the leadership to appease the affected families then go back later and amend the procedures. Better training and holding individuals accountable for their actions, as in the sailors performing the specific jobs that led to the collisions, will lead to change. The sailors on watch that night should be the ones who's feet are held to the fire first.This is a shocking development. I don't think this is the right thing to do. First of all to prevent this from happening again systematic changes are needed. Getting rid of a guy or two really doesn't do anything. Secondly if you charge people with crimes you will essentially incentivize people to not cooperate with reporting of errors and with solving these issues. Why would they when cooperation just creates more liability for you?
That's mostly what they do at sea, is drill, drill, drill, drill. This is the way it is, at least in the submarine fleet. Security violations, fires, ect.Except what they are fucking up is running into other ships, which is the same military vs commercial. Except commercial ships and crews never go out to the middle of no where to practice.
I find it exceptionally hard to believe the Navy doesn't drill for fires while deployed, but if that is true, just wow. I could see while in an active war zone, but sailing around?
I work with the USAF daily, and they are literally decades behind commercial in processes and mentalities and the result is far higher costs with significantly reduced safety and availability.
Maybe you are right that the Navy is just so overworked, they can't be expected to not run into other ships. It is so much harder with all of their equipment and extreme performance to not hit things than huge ships with less performance deployed 100% of the time with a fraction of the crew.