Fire - USS Bonhomme Richard LHD-6 - 12 Jul 20
https://www.military.com/daily-news/...e-richard.html
15 Apr 2021
The Associated Press | By The Associated Press SAN DIEGO — The U.S. Navy on Wednesday decommissioned the USS Bonhomme Richard docked off San Diego nine months after flames engulfed it in one of the worst U.S. warship fires outside of combat in recent memory. The ceremony at Naval Base San Diego was not open to the public, with the Navy citing concerns over the spread of the coronavirus.
The amphibious assault ship is expected to be towed to a ship yard in Texas for dismantling. The ship that ignited July 12 burned for four days and was left with extensive structural, electrical and mechanical damage. A Navy official said arson was believed to be the cause.
The Navy estimated that repairing the ship would run more than $2.5 billion. Dismantling the ship is expected to cost about $30 million.
15 Apr 2021
The Associated Press | By The Associated Press SAN DIEGO — The U.S. Navy on Wednesday decommissioned the USS Bonhomme Richard docked off San Diego nine months after flames engulfed it in one of the worst U.S. warship fires outside of combat in recent memory. The ceremony at Naval Base San Diego was not open to the public, with the Navy citing concerns over the spread of the coronavirus.
The amphibious assault ship is expected to be towed to a ship yard in Texas for dismantling. The ship that ignited July 12 burned for four days and was left with extensive structural, electrical and mechanical damage. A Navy official said arson was believed to be the cause.
The Navy estimated that repairing the ship would run more than $2.5 billion. Dismantling the ship is expected to cost about $30 million.
I am sure in fine Navy tradition they painted her before the decommissioning and scrapping....on a more serious note a significant impact to the LHD/LHA fleet and schedules with her decommissioning, and others getting lengthy upgrades. I noted 2 LHD's in the yard on way into work today on the East Coast, I am sure the fire watches must be quite robust.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,946
Received 2,852 Likes
on
1,220 Posts
Crikey, I would hate to think the fine if found guilty.
Oh he can go to the chair for that.
10 U.S Code § 910 - Art. 110. Improper hazarding of vessel or aircraft.
(a) Willful and Wrongful Hazarding.
Any person subject to this chapter who, willfully and wrongfully, hazards or suffers to be hazarded any vessel or aircraft of the armed forces shall be punished by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct.
10 U.S Code § 910 - Art. 110. Improper hazarding of vessel or aircraft.
(a) Willful and Wrongful Hazarding.
Any person subject to this chapter who, willfully and wrongfully, hazards or suffers to be hazarded any vessel or aircraft of the armed forces shall be punished by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct.
My old outfit and the ATF are the lead investigators of the fire.
I sure hope they do a better job on this one than they did on the USS Iowa Turret Explosion and a couple of other notable investigations.
Updated article:
https://news.usni.org/2021/07/29/nav...hip#more-87630
.
I sure hope they do a better job on this one than they did on the USS Iowa Turret Explosion and a couple of other notable investigations.
Updated article:
https://news.usni.org/2021/07/29/nav...hip#more-87630
.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,946
Received 2,852 Likes
on
1,220 Posts
I’d love to know the evidence, after such a fire you’re going to have to really struggle to find the cause, yes you might find the base of the fire and whatever set it off, but to try and nail that down to one person in the ship has got to be bloody hard, I would imagine several have an access to the area and I wonder what evidence is there to pinpoint one person, heck you’ve got the civilian construction crews plus the Navy personnel on the ship.
Arson on ships is not a new thing and in the past NCIS Agents were given excellent training re investigating such events and the Navy put a very high emphasis upon the importance of solving those cases.
The ATF also are very good at those kinds of investigations.
The Forensic Evidence in a fire of this magnitude and intensity shall be very hard to secure.
As Nutty notes the human side of the investigation probably shall provide the most useful information.
Reportedly, there were less. than two hundred Sailors aboard the Ship as it was undergoing repair and modifications in the Yard thus the majority of the people aboard the Ship were civilian yard workers.
Identifying possible suspects would require quite a bit of gardening to develop information that might offer some insight into a motive and also show opportunity once the general area of the origin of the fire was determined.
Those not involved but aboard the ship could upon being interviewed would surface some names and Watch Assignments would identify yet more names....and after that it is just eliminating possible suspects till you have but a few to carefully consider.
I am curious as to what information was found that revealed it was a case of Arson and not an accidental fire.
The ATF also are very good at those kinds of investigations.
The Forensic Evidence in a fire of this magnitude and intensity shall be very hard to secure.
As Nutty notes the human side of the investigation probably shall provide the most useful information.
Reportedly, there were less. than two hundred Sailors aboard the Ship as it was undergoing repair and modifications in the Yard thus the majority of the people aboard the Ship were civilian yard workers.
Identifying possible suspects would require quite a bit of gardening to develop information that might offer some insight into a motive and also show opportunity once the general area of the origin of the fire was determined.
Those not involved but aboard the ship could upon being interviewed would surface some names and Watch Assignments would identify yet more names....and after that it is just eliminating possible suspects till you have but a few to carefully consider.
I am curious as to what information was found that revealed it was a case of Arson and not an accidental fire.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
https://nypost.com/2021/08/04/seal-t...homme-richard/
‘Bipolar’ SEAL training dropout Ryan Mays accused of torching USS Bonhomme Richard
‘Bipolar’ SEAL training dropout Ryan Mays accused of torching USS Bonhomme Richard
https://nypost.com/2021/08/04/seal-t...homme-richard/
‘Bipolar’ SEAL training dropout Ryan Mays accused of torching USS Bonhomme Richard
‘Bipolar’ SEAL training dropout Ryan Mays accused of torching USS Bonhomme Richard
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,946
Received 2,852 Likes
on
1,220 Posts
Wow, good to see a no holds barred, regardless of rank accountability, we could do with some of that in the U.K.
Conn singled out 36 individuals, including five admirals, who were responsible for the loss of the ship due to either their actions on July 12 or lack of oversight leading up to the alleged arson.
In his investigation, Vice Adm. Scott Conn identified 36 individuals who contributed to the loss of USS Bonhomme Richard (LHD-6) on July 12, 2020. U.S. Pacific Command commander Adm. Sam Paparo will now determine further punishments and accountability actions for the loss of the ship.
Wow, good to see a no holds barred, regardless of rank accountability, we could do with some of that in the U.K.
I am reminded of a Bulldog accident some years ago when the aircraft hit a wall during a forced landing after the engine stopped. The cause of the engine failure was loss of oil pressure, and that was because all the oil had departed via a sump plug that had been poorly secured during maintenance; the Board found the cause to be Aircrew Error (remember those days?) because the QFI screwed up the forced landing! Nonsense, I think we might agree. And without wishing to reopen the Mull debate, regardless of failings at senior levels (Chug's beloved VSOs) there were plenty of people in the Mull chain who did their jobs to the best of their ability but would probably have been found culpable by the sort of investigation conducted by the USN here. Echoes too of the RAF's 1970s policy whereby station commanders were fired for an accident on their unit even when it was plainly for circumstances beyond their control (technical failure, birdstrike etc.).
There is a USN institutional/organisational issue here, but this investigation seems to have been determined to find someone to punish rather than ensure the lessons are learned by the whole fleet. It will be very interesting to see exactly what lessons are learned, and by whom. All I can say is that I am glad the investigation system in the UK (AAIB and MAIB) does not work this way.
From line one of the USNI report of the investigation's findings onwards, it's is clear it was a systemic failure leading to 'an inability to extinguish the fire'. I infer that failure was caused by those at many levels of the chain of command failing to discharge their duties including ensuring their juniors were aware of, and capable of performing theirs. To me that smacks of the VSOs tolerating a slack safety culture. It remains to be seen if punishment is inflicted at the top and corrective training lower down.
Trite I know, 'fail to prepare and you prepare to fail'. It would appear there was a failure to keep damage control training and awareness up to the appropriate levels and standards proscribed. Complacency kills and looses ships. The USN Damage Controlman training used to, and I expect still does include instuctions to practice in port damage control scenarios. I don't know if this regularly includes preparing for maintenance periods with minimal crew.
A cascade of failures – from a junior enlisted sailor not recognizing a fire at the end of their duty watch to fundamental problems with how the U.S. Navy trains sailors to fight fires in shipyards – are responsible for the five-day blaze that cost the service an amphibious warship
Although the fire was started by an act of arson, the ship was lost due to an inability to extinguish the fire,” Conn wrote in his investigation, which was completed in April and reviewed by USNI News this week.
“In the 19 months executing the ship’s maintenance availability, repeated failures allowed for the accumulation of significant risk and an inadequately prepared crew, which led to an ineffective fire response.”
“In the 19 months executing the ship’s maintenance availability, repeated failures allowed for the accumulation of significant risk and an inadequately prepared crew, which led to an ineffective fire response.”
The training and readiness of the ship’s crew were deficient. They were unprepared to respond. Integration between the ship and supporting shore-based firefighting organizations was inadequate
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,946
Received 2,852 Likes
on
1,220 Posts
I am amazed the RAF were still using the sump plugs in the Bulldog, most light stuff replace them with a quick push drain that is a permanent fit in the sump plug hole between overhauls. Though I do know of one failure, on retracts the push bit pulls off and is clipped to the firewall, one company fitting a new engine and with out thinking fitted a normal push drain as there is lots of clearance around the engine….. or there was until it took off retracted the gear and the leg pushed the drain open…. One forced landing later and another engine change..
Anyway, sorry for the thread drift.
You mention the Station Commander can lose his job over an incident, it happens in civi street too, I believe I know of one case of an accountable manager who lost his as he was prosecuted following an incident, even though he didn’t even work on the same site, but couldn’t hold the position with a conviction.
It does appear all the holes sadly lined up and resulted in the loss of the ship.
…
Anyway, sorry for the thread drift.
You mention the Station Commander can lose his job over an incident, it happens in civi street too, I believe I know of one case of an accountable manager who lost his as he was prosecuted following an incident, even though he didn’t even work on the same site, but couldn’t hold the position with a conviction.
It does appear all the holes sadly lined up and resulted in the loss of the ship.
…
Last edited by NutLoose; 20th Oct 2021 at 19:31.
" fundamental problems with how the U.S. Navy trains sailors to fight fires in shipyards "
When they make up the list of training tasks I'll bet that comes near the bottom in terms of chance of occurrence
But its much the same in Civvie Street - how many buildings burn down when they are under repair? Windsor Castle, the art gallery in Glasgow (twice), the opera house in Venice (twice), a couple of office blocks I've worked in in London.................
When they make up the list of training tasks I'll bet that comes near the bottom in terms of chance of occurrence
But its much the same in Civvie Street - how many buildings burn down when they are under repair? Windsor Castle, the art gallery in Glasgow (twice), the opera house in Venice (twice), a couple of office blocks I've worked in in London.................