Wednesday, August 23, 2017
As my students know, I spent five years
on active duty in the US Navy. This was preceded by four years as a
“Midshipman,” while attending Dartmouth College, prior to commissioning as an
“Ensign” the most junior officer rank.
Three of my active duty years were “sea
duty” on the USS Lansing, a 300 plus foot long radar picket destroyer (DER388).
One of the most responsible duties of a naval officer at sea is standing
“Officer Of the Deck” watches. I was also Officer of the Deck during general
quarters and “special sea detail” (circumstances involving greater potential
hazards to the ship like entering and leaving port
In the capacity of “officer of the deck”
safety of the ship is one of his (or her) primary responsibilities. He is “on watch” quite literally. Officer of
the Deck watches are particularly important during the hours from 10PM in the
evening until 7 AM or so when the ship’s captain may be asleep or, at least, no
on the ship’s bridge.
In discussion of the collisions with
container ship and abstract speculations about causes of these two catastrophic
collisions, why has been no mention the fact that respective officers of the
deck failed to carry out their duties Were they not on the bridge, looking about them, carrying out their
primary mission ensuring the safety of their ships? Along with the ship’s captains (who have –
properl _y been targeted) why have they not
been mentioned as complicit in these happenings. How could these officers of the not have seen the
huge bulk of a container ship and maneuvered to avoid it. Why are discussions of these catastrophes
couched in abstractions? Was the officer
of the deck not on deck? Was he relying
on some IT system rather than viewing the circumstances of this ship through
the bridge window shields, anticipating the problem, summoning the captain to
the bridge and, in the meantime taking the necessary evasive action.
Perhaps the US Navy has become a
different organization, with different definitions of responsibility than when
I served. However I find it hard to
understand why collisions between naval vessels and container ships could not
have been avoided if officers of the deck and the captains who qualified them
as watch standers had been following the practices and precautions that were
viewed as imperatives during my years of active duty naval service.
1 Comments:
To some extent, they have been. In the Fitzgerald case "Several junior officers were relieved of their duties due to poor seamanship and flawed teamwork as bridge and combat information center watch standers. Additional administrative actions were taken against members of both watch teams." http://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=102002
Post a Comment
<< Home