Navy pulls captain of TR

[svandamme]

Of all things and requirements, I do not think popularity is really the most important part of the Carrier Captain Job.

[tabs]

Modly insisted the that decision was his alone. He praised Crozier but said he had concluded that the captain "allowed the complexity of the challenge of the COVID breakout on the ship to overwhelm his ability to act professionally."

HA what a load of manure.

My bet is the Captain was on the line to his Superior officer...and when that failed he let his conscience be his guide, as he concluded that his asset was in danger of not being functional. You do not get to be a Captain in charge of a major asset if you do not know how to and ADHERE to bureaucratic protocol and or doctrine.

Bureaucratic protocol ossifies initiative and creativity.. there have been many times on the field of battle where the lack of initiative turned victory into defeat. The reason why Napoleon was a successful commander is that he applied novel tactical approaches in his engagements with an enemy who were using ossified tactical doctrines. Caesar at Alesia is a prime example of using a creative tactic to meet the extingencies of the circumstances.

[Deschodt]

Originally Posted by svandamme

Of all things and requirements, I do not think popularity is really the most important part of the Carrier Captain Job.

I'd say it's a good indication that his crew appreciated that he took a bullet for their safety though, wouldn't you say?

[Baz]

Originally Posted by pmax

Yes, yes, but what about the cook ?

[Hard-Deck]

I continue to agree w/ HASC. I am close to this and I know what’s up... An over reaction.

April 2, 2020

WASHINGTON, D.C. – House Armed Services Committee leadership – including Chairman Adam Smith (D-Wash.) and Subcommittee Chairs Joe Courtney (D-CT), John Garamendi (D-CA), and Jackie Speier (D-CA) – today issued the following statement after Acting Secretary of the Navy Thomas Modly announced that Captain Brett E. Crozier will be relieved of his post as commanding officer of the U.S.S. Theodore Roosevelt, an aircraft carrier that has been grappling with the spread of COVID-19 cases among its Sailors:

“While Captain Crozier clearly went outside the chain of command, his dismissal at this critical moment – as the Sailors aboard the U.S.S. Theodore Roosevelt are confronted with the COVID-19 pandemic – is a destabilizing move that will likely put our service members at greater risk and jeopardize our fleet’s readiness.

“The COVID pandemic presents a set of new challenges and there is much we still do not know. Captain Crozier was justifiably concerned about the health and safety of his crew, but he did not handle the immense pressure appropriately. However, relieving him of his command is an overreaction.

“Throwing the commanding officer overboard without a thorough investigation is not going to solve the growing crisis aboard the U.S.S. Theodore Roosevelt. What’s more, we are very concerned about the chilling effect this dismissal will have on commanders throughout the Department of Defense. Dismissing a commanding officer for speaking out on issues critical to the safety of those under their command discourages others from raising similar concerns.

“We are also concerned about the lack of guidance from Department of Defense leadership. Secretary Esper continues to say that commanders and non-commissioned officers should be calling the shots, forcing them to make decisions on matters outside of their expertise while under immense pressure.

“As the crew continues to grapple with this health crisis, the Navy should be focused first and foremost on the safety of our service members. Once they are secured, there will be ample time to identify what went wrong and who is to blame.”

[svandamme]

Originally Posted by Deschodt

I'd say it's a good indication that his crew appreciated that he took a bullet for their safety though, wouldn't you say?

I would think he could have done more if he would have done it while remaining their captain.


Now they had to relieve him mid cruise. That's just not a good thing.

[greglepore]

Originally Posted by flipper35

My understanding is the leak is the major reason for the discipline.

Tell me you're not implying that you have knowledge that the source of the leak was the Captain or his staff???

[Seahawk]

I trust your judgement. More to follow.

Originally Posted by Snapper33

I continue to agree w/ HASC. I am close to this and I know what’s up...An over reaction.

[tabs]

I do not do well in hierarchical bureaucratic systems, I do not have the common sense to shut the fk up. I do know how to play the game and can manipulate the system to my benefit.

I do much better when I rise or fall on my own initiative.

[flatbutt]

“As the crew continues to grapple with this health crisis, the Navy should be focused first and foremost on the safety of our service members. Once they are secured, there will be ample time to identify what went wrong and who is to blame"

Therein lies the best advice that could be extended to our entire nation.

[cabmandone]

Originally Posted by Deschodt

there's a viral video of his entire crew on deck shouting his name and clapping for him as he disembarked... so he must have done something right.

Sorry but no. Going outside the chain of command and using non secured methods of communication are not a good thing. The people that achieve the rank necessary to lead a group like this are trained to handle these situations within the chain of command. It seems this guy panicked and that can't happen no matter the situation.

[Crowbob]

Had he been Secretery of State he'd have gotten away with it.

[cabmandone]

Originally Posted by Crowbob

Had he been Secretery of State he'd have gotten away with it.

Intent is terribly hard to prove!

[jyl]

Originally Posted by cabmando

Sorry but no. Going outside the chain of command and using non secured methods of communication are not a good thing. The people that achieve the rank necessary to lead a group like this are trained to handle these situations within the chain of command. It seems this guy panicked and that can't happen no matter the situation.

Hard to say without insider knowledge. One scenario is that he did everything he could through approved channels to get his crew help, then realized no help was coming and that in another week there would be thousands sick (R0 with 5000 men crammed together must be 10, 20, more?) and made a deliberate decision to send the letter, knowing that it would get help for his crew at the cost of his career.

[Hard-Deck]

The Captain had a nuclear-powered vessel that has to have a minimum crew complement for national security safety. Ships have tight quarters resulting in a multiplying infection rate and justified fears not only for stemming further infection, endangering the lives of sailors but also the safe operation of a nuclear vessel. He wasn't receiving any assurances and sent out a plea. Due to including too many cc's, he's lost his command. Result: In the near future when in a crisis situation; when overwhelmed, higher-level commanders being unable to respond quickly to an emergent and rapidly developing threat, a subordinate commander will be intimated to take any action beyond waiting for the return SATCOM call or secure email and lives will be lost. The TR skipper is an American Hero. He will be vindicated.

[John Rogers]

In that post I mentioned earlier, we sent a paper letter! That is what he should have done! Any electronic communications is tenuous at best.

In a side note, I am surprised that there was not an admiral on the TR because usually the group commander likes to ride on the biggest ship around. When I was on the USS Enterprise during Vietnam as soon as we got on station the admiral transferred to us. The nuclear carriers (1 back then) have a really fancy stateroom for the admiral and Commander Davis asked to borrow it for my Engineering Watch Officer/Supervisor qualification interviews since I was the 1st E6 to get that far.

[Kraftwerk]

China had their own version of this story early on, a doctor spoke up about Covid 19 and was
disciplined and silenced, later the virus got him. Similar, but with a different stage and actors,
here the chain of command was worried about alerting enemies to a vulnerable asset, U.S.S. Theodore Roosevelt, when the enemy was already attacking and multiplying on board.
All in all an unfortunate yet interesting debate, be safe out there.

[pavulon]

dysfunction is intolerant of truth.

[Hard-Deck]

Originally Posted by pavulon

dysfunction is intolerant of truth.

“Bureaucracy is the enemy of talent”.

[greglepore]

Originally Posted by Snapper33

The Captain had a nuclear-powered vessel that has to have a minimum crew complement for national security safety. Ships have tight quarters resulting in a multiplying infection rate and justified fears not only for stemming further infection, endangering the lives of sailors but also the safe operation of a nuclear vessel. He wasn't receiving any assurances and sent out a plea. Due to including too many cc's, he's lost his command. Result: In the near future when in a crisis situation; when overwhelmed, higher-level commanders being unable to respond quickly to an emergent and rapidly developing threat, a subordinate commander will be intimated to take any action beyond waiting for the return SATCOM call or secure email and lives will be lost. The TR skipper is an American Hero. He will be vindicated.

This.

And there was a group commander (admiral) on board afaik. Doesn't mean he was listening.

I agree with the OPSEC comments but the fact of the matter is no one is going to screw with a carrier group in peacetime, really.