RN Sub run aground
I don't know the exact reasons why Cdr Coles was removed from Command but it should be borne in mind that this was his second SSN Command (a very very rare occurence) & he was chosen to bring Astute into Commission because of his experience. All of that will have been taken in to account, I don't doubt. He may have been in Command of Astute for a while now, I don't know, & maybe was due to leave anyway in the New Year (Commands are often only about 18 months - 2 years long) & if the repairs required are to take a while, meaning that she would not go back to sea before Cdr Coles was due to be replaced anyway, perhaps the decision was taken to allow the new CO to bed in for a long period before recommencing sea trials.
It sounds a bit daft that everyone on board would think he's going to ground himself everytime he's in shallow water, I've flown with pilots who have made pretty bad landings and no one really thinks that means they are going to screw up every landing from there on in. People are people, they make mistakes!
I agree that the submarine commander should face a court-martial and be suitably punished if found culpable. Accountability is the bed-rock of any well run organisation.
Just imagine the consequences if the RAF did not publicly punish officers who made negligent wheels up landings - it would happen again and again.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 2,584
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As none of you paragons have deigned to say which bit is bs no one is any the wiser. I'm hard pushed to see why it's bs though as it is seems pretty factual to me - that's just what happened/happens.
Or are you saying logic doesn't enter into it and the Navy does that because its always done thet, or its backward or just plain nasty?
If I'm that wrong do please let us share your wisdom?
Or are you saying logic doesn't enter into it and the Navy does that because its always done thet, or its backward or just plain nasty?
If I'm that wrong do please let us share your wisdom?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Lancashire
Age: 48
Posts: 550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the aircraft world you're taught from early doors the importance of integrity.
Integrity & the 'blame culture' are mutually exclusive.
Other than getting rid of a skilled captain with many years of experience, what has really been achieved other than PR for the benefit of the rags???
He is just as capable, if not more so, than before the accident and his training will have taken years and cost many £'s. Not to mention the loss of experience.
I'll let you join the dots.
The bloke made a mistake, show me someone that has not.
Integrity & the 'blame culture' are mutually exclusive.
Other than getting rid of a skilled captain with many years of experience, what has really been achieved other than PR for the benefit of the rags???
He is just as capable, if not more so, than before the accident and his training will have taken years and cost many £'s. Not to mention the loss of experience.
I'll let you join the dots.
The bloke made a mistake, show me someone that has not.
Last edited by Thelma Viaduct; 3rd Dec 2010 at 14:10.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Kettering
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"He is just as capable, if not more so, than before the accident"
So you would want to reward failure and keep him in the job.
It's the RN, not a modern PC classroom where no answer is wrong, nobody is stupid or incompetent and nobody takes any responsibility when they make a monumentally gash decision. Bleh, what am I saying...
So you would want to reward failure and keep him in the job.
It's the RN, not a modern PC classroom where no answer is wrong, nobody is stupid or incompetent and nobody takes any responsibility when they make a monumentally gash decision. Bleh, what am I saying...
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Lancashire
Age: 48
Posts: 550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How is keeping the job you already had a reward for failure???
Promoting him would be a reward for failure.
The chances of him repeating his 'error of judgement' must be slim to zero, and therefore all his training and experience has gone to waste.
The easy option is sacking him and that's the bottlers choice.
I'm out of this now, got nothing further to add.
Promoting him would be a reward for failure.
The chances of him repeating his 'error of judgement' must be slim to zero, and therefore all his training and experience has gone to waste.
The easy option is sacking him and that's the bottlers choice.
I'm out of this now, got nothing further to add.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Tullahoma TN
Posts: 482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He is just as capable, if not more so, than before the accident
How do you know that he is "just as capable"? Furthermore, "accident" is not the same as "negligent mistake." The grounding may or may not have been an accident. We PeePruners don't know which it was.
... and his training will have taken years and cost many £'s.
Maybe his training was flawed. Again, we don't knoiw.
Not to mention the loss of experience.
Napoleon I: "Don't show me a good man ( i.e., officer. ). Show me a lucky man."
How do you know that he is "just as capable"? Furthermore, "accident" is not the same as "negligent mistake." The grounding may or may not have been an accident. We PeePruners don't know which it was.
... and his training will have taken years and cost many £'s.
Maybe his training was flawed. Again, we don't knoiw.
Not to mention the loss of experience.
Napoleon I: "Don't show me a good man ( i.e., officer. ). Show me a lucky man."
