Far East Cynic

Could be.

More strangely, the lobbyist and his boss both declined to comment on the supposition just days after being widely quoted on the topic. The Navy said, essentially, “No comment.”

But naval analysts and a retired admiral who commanded Atlantic Fleet surface forces say they’re hearing exactly what the lobbyist claimed: 2nd Fleet, in charge of fleet operations for defense of the East Coast and afloat training in the North Atlantic for more than 60 years, could soon be a thing of the past.

“I’m hearing that it’s going away,” said Norman Polmar, a nationally respected naval analyst who stays closely connected with the active and retired Navy. “U.S. national interests are no longer centered in the Atlantic and Mediterranean. … You don’t need a three-star admiral there for the one or two exercises a year.”

Quite a far cry from the great days when USS Mt. Whitney ( also known as witless) led port visits into British ports at the end of large NATO exercises. Of course now Second Fleet has no flagship and those days are long gone.

But this only makes sense if you also get rid of 4th fleet-an organization whose stand up made no sense to begin with.

The one positive side of this is that it would mean that there would be only one fleet for all the ships in CONUS-and given the desire to “load” ships on the Pacific side of the country, this might be a doable thing.

Now if they could just get to one Type commander staff-now you would be talking.

I work with two other retired Navy guys. Because of where we work we have insight into a lot of current Navy news and events. Plus-all of us travel to Navy facilities. We have a saying when we read something particularly atrocious -and for some reason we are reading a lot of atrocious things these days.

We suck.

Here are two examples of how the US Navy is just not getting it:

A greaseless Herndon monument climb-why bother?

When I was in Naples as I walked around the base there-I counted no less than six different Naval Uniforms being worn for daily work. Phib’s right-TFU is only just FU.

We suck.

Cut the number of flag officers down to size.

ABILENE, Kan. (AP) — Warring against waste, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Saturday he is ordering a top-to-bottom paring of the military bureaucracy in search of at least $10 billion in annual savings needed to prevent an erosion of U.S. combat power.
He took aim what he called a bloated bureaucracy, wasteful business practices and too many generals and admirals, and outlined an ambitious plan for reform that’s almost certain to stir opposition in the corridors of Congress and Pentagon.

Now its not clear to me if Gates is being the loyal soldier that he has shown himself to be and is carrying water for others- or if this is his own idea-but he is on the right track about reducing the total number of flag officers. The Navy has more flag officers than it has ships-and that is nothing short of a crime.

So to help the man-I have a suggestion of at least one flag billet that can be put to bed. For the good of humanity, for the betterment of our Navy,  and in the complete interest of saving precious TAD dollars for use by Sailors who actually deserve to use them-I nominate this man, RDML James C. Grunewald to be SECDEF’s first test case for flag downsizing. Try not to let the door hit you on the way out.

Well, maybe not him personally-but returning the staffs he commands back to independent O-6 commands. Specifically, breaking up CTF-57 and CTF-72 into separate Patrol Wings   (commanded by an O-6 P-3 aviator) and returning COMFAIRWESTPAC to an O-6 command (commanded, as it should be, by a TACAIR or Helo aviator) and aligned directly to Commander Naval Air Forces. CTF 57 and CTF-72 would be separate commands aligned to their respective fleets. CTF-57 would be based in Bahrain where it already is and CTF-72 could stay at Misawa.  With the stroke of a pen-that one move alone would save the Navy about 2.5 million ( that’s right MILLION) dollars in TADTAR a year.

Not to mention the overhead in flag writers, drivers, MLC’s, FLag Sec and Flag Aide that could be re-assignedto more productive duties. In addition the several thousands of dollars being spent to create expensive watch floors for these entities in both theaters could be re-programmed to more productive pursuits,  as the CTF-57 guys could be worked into the Maritime Operations center in Fifth Fleet,  and a similar arrangement could be worked with CTF-74 in Seventh Fleet. Or just leave them alone-they already have a pretty strong watch floor in Misawa.

It would also probably lead to savings in staff size as well-as an O-6 command would be forced to leverage assets in theater like JAG and others rather than having their own. It is a win-win.

“But every other task force commander is a flag in Seventh Fleet!”

Bullsh*t. Furthermore-over where they are actually fighting the war, just about every task force save for the carrier task force and the Maritime interdiction task force is commanded by an O-6. So don’t tell me it could not work. And the fact that there are so many flags in the WESTPAC area is a function of politics and tradition-not a matter of operational efficiency.

Not to mention an O-6 commands 74 carrier based  aircraft in Japan and CTF-72 has, on a good day, maybe 7-10 aircraft in theater.

As for COMFAIRWESTPAC or as it is known now-COMNAVAIRFOR FORWARD, it could return to the mission it did so well for so many years, managing aviation readiness and one stop shopping for all aviation readiness issues overseas. And contrary to what the P-3 guys seem to think-that does not mean P-3′s exclusively. In fact, P-3′s constitute only about 11% of the business in theater-something the senior P-3 guys convieniently forgot when they lied and lied and lied to convince the world that they needed to take over COMFAIRWESTPAC in order to have enough span of control to justify a flag officer in theater.

That was wrong then and it’s wrong now. And perhaps-with SECDEF”S and SECNAV’s urging it could finally be undone. Come on deficit hawks! Write your Congressman and SECNAV/SECDEF. Urge that he break up CTF-57 /72 immediately. And while they are at it they could do the same for CTF 54/74 as well. That’s two flag officer clay pigeons down-300 to go.

Sen Jim Webb that is:

Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., is pressing the Defense Department for justification of why the military has so many flag and general officers, and he also wants to know why the military is paying salary and tuition assistance to officers on loan to some Washington, D.C., think tanks.

The requests for information from Webb, a Marine veteran and former Defense Department official who is chairman of the Senate Armed Services personnel subcommittee, appear remarkably similar to the efforts of another military veteran, former Sen. John Glenn, D-Ohio, who once headed the same subcommittee.

Glenn, a retired Marine and former astronaut who headed what was then called the military personnel subcommittee from 1987 to 1994, launched an overhaul of flag and general officer policy after he began asking why the number of senior officers was not dropped at the same rate as the size of the force in the post-Cold War drawdown. Glenn also forced changes in the military’s fellowship program, which basically loaned military officers and civilians to members of Congress to be staffers.

Webb said Wednesday that he is just asking questions at this point.

In the case of flag and general officers, Webb said he wants an explanation why the number of senior officers continues to grow. He has not concluded there are too many, but is asking why there are so many, and what exactly they are all doing. Those kinds of questions began Glenn’s multi-year push to reduce the number of admirals and generals, which he based on the officer-to-enlisted ratio and termed “brass creep.”

Defense Department statistics show there were 38 four-stars, 149 three-stars, 299 two-stars and 464 one-stars on active duty at the end of March.

Brass creep-or ass creep?

He’s probably barking up the wrong tree about the fellowships-they do provide a positive return for the services and more importantly they provide a venue for senior officers to mingle with people who influence political decision making. That’s probably a good thing in the long term.

But complaining about having too many flags? Right on the mark.

The US Navy has more flag officers than it has ships. It has flag officers holding positions that were long held by Captains. To justify this flag creep-it has had re-organization after re-organization, like the at the place I used to work-which was and should be an O-6 command. Yet they got sucked into a flag staff, the current incumbent has used and abused these people mightily. ( Yes Grunie-I’m talking about you!).

Good for Senator Webb. However to get anywhere-he is going to have to turn up the heat and ask for more information from the senior flags who have helped this situation along.

Something that occurred to me-and has bothered me for a long time, is the idea that somehow one generation of serving military is somehow superior to another.

I hate to break it to you-but in the Navy, for a LONG TIME, a lot of great Sailors were out there doing the nation’s business. Long before yellow ribbons were in fashion, Sailors were on station-in hazard like LT Silberman, and showing up for watch, for work, for a brief, or for an UNREP or General Quarters.

One particular thing that REALLY bothers me-and military people of the later generations are sometimes guilty of this- is the disdain that some of the current generation hold the Sailors who manned the fleet during the 1970′s. The popular perception is , not unlike some people feel about folks during the Vietnam era, is that we were all drug addled, pleasure seekers-who were somehow inferior to the new “greatest generation”

Wrong! Wrong! Wrong!. It is just not true.  I’ll let you in on a secret-95%+ of the people on active duty during those years-showed up for work on time, got underway when they were supposed to, and spent a lot of time at sea showing the flag for the United States and launching aircraft, driving ships, or submerging in defense of the United States. I’ll bet if I had the stats- the number of mast cases and other leading indicators was the same or lower. Sure drugs were an issue-but the Navy is a reflection of the nation. And that was the nation then.

And some of them did not come back.

That’s not to diss on the contributions that our Soldiers and Sailors, Airmen and Marines have made in the first decade of the 21st century. But I’m here to tell you that the Sailors of the 70′s worked pretty “f-ing” hard then too-and many of the innovations and safety procedures that today are taken for granted-were bought with their blood.

I made my first embarkation on a Navy ship in 1976-and while there were problems in those days, the USS Paul Foster never missed a commitment during the time I was aboard her. Neither did the USS Nimitz or about every other ship in the Navy in those days. And there were a lot more Sailors and ships.

I’m just saying-everybody works hard.

And that’s all I have to say about that.

I’ve waited a while to write about this-as I wanted to put some space between the event and the commentary. A lot of readers are probably already familiar with the basics, namely the tragic loss of LT Steve Zilberman, USN of Columbus, Ohio in an aircraft mishap in the North Arabian sea. The aircraft was returning from an Airborne Command and Control mission over Afghanistan when it developed problems and the crew had to bailout.

The details of what caused the mishap are still under investigation-but it appears as if, LT Zilberman found himself in the position of flying the aircraft in order to keep it in a stable configuration while his crew bailed out. What I think has not been accurately told-except within the service community, is how truly frightening it had to be for him and the rest of his crew and how much of a debt of gratitude the rest of us owe this young man for his courageous actions on that horrible day.

I want you to remember this statement as I work through this post, its meaning will become apparent in a couple of paragraphs:

The new propeller is quieter, with less vibration on the airframe and equipment. It provides a little more SHP. It is virtually impossible to pitchlock, since the 8 blades can feather with loss of hydraulic oil pressure. One of the interesting performance attributes of the new prop is the reduced noise inside the airplane. The pilots and crew are able to hear noises they have never heard before. But the problem is, they don’t know if these noises have always been there and they were unable to hear them because of the noise of the old props, or if the new noises are related to the new props

There is that word again: pitchlock. What does it mean? Let me explain. In a turboprop aircraft, the jet engine it has turns at a constant RPM or 100%. When you add power by moving the throttles forward, the engine is not turning any faster. What is happening is that the propellers are changing their pitch to take a larger “bite” of air and thus “pull” the aircraft through the air faster. The changing of the pitch of the propeller is accomplished normally through a hydraulic system in aircraft like the E-2 where the propellers are big and the engine nacelle is too.

The E-2 used to have a four bladed prop. It was similar to the C-130 in some ways and has a variant of the P-3 engine attached to it. The decision was made to go to an eight blade propeller in order to reduce vibration and noise as was stated above. It was also supposed to be easier to maintain since now-individual blades could be changed right on the flight deck-whereas under the “old” system I grew up with,a prop change was a major evolution require the aircraft to be moved to the hangar bay, the new prop “built-up” and balanced, and then the aircraft had to do a low and high power turn on the flight deck and a Functional Check Flight. If you have ever served on an aircraft carrier-you will know that stringing together that series of events is never easy.

If the hydraulic fluid that moves the propeller to its desired pitch is lost or is in the process of being pumped overboard ( e.g. as in a leak) there is a set of teeth that will engage with each other to lock the aircraft propeller into whatever pitch it failed at. It has to be that way because otherwise the propeller would randomly pitch as it moved through the slip stream.  That is bad. C-2s and E-2s have a pitchlock system built into the propellers to “help” the pilot if a propeller loses hydraulic fluid. Unlike the T-34, which has a spring assembly that will drive the prop to feather in the event of a failure, the C-2 and E-2 need hydraulic pressure inside the prop to drive the prop to feather. The pitchlock system is supposed to prevent the prop from going to flat pitch in the event that all the prop fluid is lost.

At least that is how it supposed to work-however if this happens at a low power setting, the prop is going to be at an angle just shy of being perpendicular to the slip stream. E-2 pilots refer to it as flying with a barn door attached to the aircraft. During my time in the community-probably after a fire ( which was a big deal when I was coming into my command tour, as the community had had several), this was the most feared emergency there was. Because the pilot always faced a dilemma, when and if he could shut the engine down and could he get back aboard if he did? Not to mention that if the aircraft pitchlocks at a low blade angle the ability to control the aircraft becomes sporting-to say the least.

So now lets return to the situation that the VAW-121 aircraft found itself in that day:

So after one engine lost oil pressure and then failed completely; after one propeller couldn’t be adjusted to balance the plane; after it was clear that there was no way to safely land, Zilberman ordered his crew to bail out.

He manually kept the Hawkeye stable as it plummeted toward the water, which allowed the three other men to escape.

Time ran out before he could follow.

Zilberman, 31, was declared dead three days later.

On Thursday, more than 250 sailors, officers, aviators and friends gathered to pay tribute to Zilberman at the Norfolk Naval Station chapel.

His widow, Katrina, was presented the Distinguished Flying Cross that her husband was awarded posthumously.

My stomach hurts just thinking about it. What I hope to make you understand is just how gut wrenching this whole sequence of events had to be, and the real courage and presence of mind it took to do this.

When you bailout of an E-2, there is no ejection seat. You strap into the seat, release from it with the parachute attached to your back via a torso harness and then you have to shuffle about 20 feet to the main cabin door and roll out of the hatch.

The pilots? They have a few things to do to get ready for that. Level the wings ( if they can), call the ship,  broadcast their position——oh, and as an extra added bonus,  deal with the  emergency that put them in extremis to begin with.

I want you to think about it, the LT as the Plane Commander- had to know he was in a bad situation. So did the rest of the crew.  For him to get out, he would have to set the auto-pilot and then  hope that he could get the distance to the door, before the aircraft most probably forced the auto-pilot to kick off line and then,  in all probability,  stall and depart controlled flight soon there after. In which case the aircraft noses over and getting to the door is the equivalent of climbing a flat wall with no hand holds.

Assuming he had the altitude left to have time to do so.

And now remember this-he had to know all of these facts when he ordered the bailout.

But what about the ditching hatches,  you ask. ( There are three on the aircraft, two over the cockpit and one over the Air Control Officers seat). What about them? Besides the fact that its doubtful you can fit out them with a parachute on-there is this little matter of an eight bladed mixer turning out there and the laws of inertia.  There is only one way out. Getting out of an E-2 that was sitting still on deck when we practiced bailouts was hard.  Out of balanced flight, with the pilots working to maintain control?

Terrifying.

Yet this young man did it-and three men are alive today because of him. There can be no question of his devotion to his duty and his courage. He’s a hero in every sense of the word-and the Navy and the United States have suffered a terrible loss.

Questions can and should be asked, however, about the system that put this crew in that gut wrenching situation that day. I’ve got three to be precise.

One: This is the third major prop related mishap in the past two years. This is a known problem.  It begs the question of what is being done in terms of training, and more importantly material solutions to fix what appears to be a big issue with a system that “wasn’t supposed to work this way”. Sorry, I kind of keep thinking of watching  a similar situation play out in the early 1990′s with respect to fires on the aircraft.  Go back and ask someone who was in the community then about how many aircraft were lost in a three year period. And more importantly-why are not flag officers in the Naval Air Systems command screaming bloody murder about this?

Maybe they are-the skeptic in my mind kind of doubts it-I’ve seen this drama before.

Two: Why is the US Navy-after some 50 + years of being the jet age, and the advances that have taken place in propulsion systems, still operating aircraft with propellers on the carrier? Jet engines don’t pitch lock-more importantly they would have provided some definite tactical advantages f0r the E-2 in the current operational environments it is operating in. Better dash to station, the ability to accelerate to more reasonable airspeeds for the coming innovation of air refueling to the E-2 and most importantly-it would eliminate a huge hazard to personnel operating on the flight deck.

When I got to my first fleet squadron, they were just two months away from an incident where a blue shirt got chopped to smithereens by a turning propeller when he turned the wrong way after removing a huffer hose. Kid was 20 years old. In the intervening 30 years I can think of at least two other similar mishaps and five others where the propeller struck something metal on the flight deck sending shrapnel through the skin of the aircraft.

Jet engines have their hazards too-I know this, but they also have their advantages.

Three: In conjunction with item two-why, after some forty years, has there not been a redesign of the crew placement in the aircraft to potentially allow the possible installation of ejection seats?  The dome is a problem I know-but ask yourself this, not every AEW aircraft is using a rotodome anymore. Phased array’s are the wave of the future.  And perhaps the dome could be moved slightly and the weight compensated for to allow for an ejection seat.

This is a pipe dream I know-because even as I write this, I can think of about five or six really insurmountable challenges from an engineering standpoint. At the same time-there have been marvelous advances in aircraft design and there were during my time, several unique attempts to convince the Navy to adopt a new airframe for the AEW mission. I was on the record as being in favor of that. I can also tell you that it was never considered a popular position-the P-3 community was not the only community that was fixated on one type of platform for it’s mission.

So let me state it again-I believe strongly that the E-2 could be redesigned into a twin engine jet aircraft with the crew positions to lined up like the Prowler or S-3 ( with canopies too!) and with the advances in avionics could still have the radar work in a manner to perform its mission. It probably would have looked like a “stretch” S-3. I remain convinced it could have been done.

It would cost a little bit of money to be sure-and that was something the leadership of Naval Aviation could not abide. There were after all boatloads of Hornets to buy and JSF.

Most of us, most of the time, live in blissful ignorance of what a small, elite, heroic group of Americans are doing for us night and day. As we speak, all over the globe, American Sailors, submariners and aviators are doing something very dangerous. ‘People say, Well, it can’t be too dangerous because there are no wrecks.’

But the reason we don’t have more accidents is that these are superb professionals; the fact that they master the dangers does not mean that the dangers aren’t real. Right now, somewhere around the world, young men (and women) are landing … aircraft on … pitching decks … at night! You can’t pay people to do that: they do it out of love of country, of adventure, of the challenge. We all benefit from it, and the very fact that we don’t have to think about it tells you how superbly they’re doing their job — living on the edge of dangers so the rest of us need not think about, let alone experience, danger.”-George Will.

One reason I have pretty much parted ways with a lot of the mil-blogging community, is it unrelenting tendency to “pile on” on relatively minor issues while refusing to dig deeper on issues of major import to the military community. It has become almost an article of faith, that a milblog is supposed to echo the right wing party line-regardless of the issue.

A good example of this has been the repeated postings by various bloggers  ridiculing Rep Hank Johnson from Georgia for asking whether Guam would “tip over” from the infusion of 9000 additional service personnel in the form of US Marines moved from Okinawa and additional USAF and Navy personnel who will be sent to the island. 

Of course the island of Guam is not going to tip over. But not one-and I do mean not one-of these so called “expert” military bloggers dug a little further and asked the question that a lot of Congressmen should be asking of the psychopath the PACOM commander: “Why did the United States agree to this incredibly rotten deal in the first place? And second, Admiral Willard-why did you, with all of your Pacific expertise, not speak out publicly about the problems with this deal instead of quietly acquiescing to it, to continue your blind ambition to higher office?”

The deal that was signed for US Japan defense re-alignment is a bad one. Its really bad-and it in turn is creating the pre-conditions that have led to the current government of Japan turning to stone about relocating Futenma MCAS. There are, of course a couple of logical alternatives that would probably satisfy everyone-especially given the obscene amount of real estate the USAF controls in Okinawa. But we didn’t. And part of that is because of the other bad deals we agreed to.

Bad deal #1: Moving the FDNF Carrier Air Wing to Iwakuni. Stupid and completely unnecessary. If anything-that should be the unit moved to Guam. The air wing would have a better ability to train-including with live ordnance.

Bad idea#2: Not agreeing to move Marine aircraft to Iwakuni and Kadena. Between those two options all of  the units could have been accounted for and no movement to Guam would probably have been required.

Bad idea#3: Trying to stick the government of Japan with whole bill for the move. You want to know what is at the heart of DPJ’s objections? That’s it.

Now each of these issues is worth a long blog post in discussion. But the issue for me in this post-is that for all of the condescension that comes from the mil-bloggers about one misinformed Congressman ( who may in fact be a lot smarter than anyone is giving him credit for-Guam is not prepared for its upcoming “invasion”), there is no one asking the really important questions.

Why are we doing this to ourselves? And why didn’t the senior leadership of the US government in 2005 and 2006 listen to the valid objections that were voiced by military personnel who actually had to make it work?

Mil–bloggers whine and whine about the current deficit. If they are so concerned about the monetary situation of the government they should definitely be concerned about these additional costs:

1)      When Carrier Air Wing Five moves to Iwakuni-its going to cost you about twice what it used to cost you to move the air wing aboard USS George Washington. It is also going to cost you a lot more fuel dollars because Iwakuni does not have enough training airspace available for  both the Marines and Navy. Add to that the additional costs of running new DODDS schools and a new hospital and intermediate maintenance facility. ( None of which would have been done if they had stayed put in Atsugi).

2)      Guam is not ready to receive 9000 Marines and the family trail that comes along with them. Sure the Japanese are paying 6 billion yen for the initial construction-but the operating costs from then on, come from your tax dollars. Add on to that the added transportation required to get them to Korea if the balloon goes up.

3)      That’s on top of the extra housing etc needed for the Marines and Navy and Air Force personnel that are coming. Don’t forget the need for additional DODDS schools since Guamanian schools suck.

4)      There is still no new base for Marine helo’s. But take it to the bank-Futenma will close. That is going to be a problem.

5)      And finally-as an extra added bonus, there will be repairs required to the Big Navy harbor.

Hear anything about that from mil-bloggers? Nope. And you won’t either-because the author of this idea was not the current occupant of 1600 PA avenue.

Warning notice! This is a Navy focused post.

An event this week has me waxing nostalgic that I was lucky enough to have served during the supposedly barbaric era of the 70′s and 80′s when the Navy was predominately male, a lot of fun to serve in, and focused on things like actual warfighting at sea.

Instead of being a “global force for good enough”.

The thing that set me off was this announcement.

Rear Adm. Nora Tyson has been assigned as the next commander of the Norfolk, Va.,-based Carrier Strike Group 2, which includes the carrier George H.W. Bush, according to an announcement from the Pentagon. Lt. Justin Cole, a Navy spokesman, said Tyson would be the first woman to command a carrier strike group in Navy history.

Tyson will move from her current assignment as commander of the Western Pacific Logistics Group when her orders are issued in the early summer, Cole said.

Now before one goes all high order and throws out the “M” word against me for the umpteenth time-I would strongly encourage you to take a hard look at Admiral Tyson’s biography. I defy you to find the word “carrier aviator” anywhere in it.

Because you won’t. She grew up in the TACAMO community-who, to date, have produced no male flags, but have produced two women admirals in less than three years.

Now I was in WESTPAC at the same time Admiral Tyson was COMLOGWESTPAC and by all accounts she did a credible job. But to give her a strike group?

Hell, even Tony Winns didn’t get one of those-and he has at least as many diversity points to play, if not more. But then, he’s male-and a P-3 guy.

Now its clear that some would see this criticism as trying to attack her on the basis of being female-but that’s just not it.

It is to me- a clear cut announcement by the Navy-that the wickets that were once de rigeur are no longer required.  Because the Navy is in a hurry. A hurry to prove what, I’m not quite sure. In  hurry to have a woman command a Carrier Strike Group perhaps? It is not like there are not women carrier aviators who are coming up through the ranks who will not one day be ready to accomplish that same objective-with at least some traps under their belt.

And before someone points it out-yes there are surface officers who have commanded strike groups, but they at least commanded a cruiser or a DESRON in the strike group. Its very rare-in fact almost unheard of-to see an officer jump from an amphibious ship major command to CSG command. Without at least being a carrier aviator to start with.

Because in the end its not about her talent-but the credibility she will bring to her position.

Zero point Zero.

Which leads to my sea story. A long time ago and in a galaxy far away, a certain multi-engine carrier based aircraft community was in a hurry to show that it could have a female squadron CO. And so, when the selection board time came around-the combat exclusion law having been overturned by a petulant Congress-a female was selected.

(The issue is at Tailhook was not that we took a few liberties with our female party guests. We did. Wink ).

There was only one problem with this woman’s selection-and every male in a certain carrier aviation community knew what it was:

She had never done a department head tour.

She had, however, been a flag aide-to a future CNO. So certainly, she’s qualified to command a squadron right?

Well-not quite. Completion of a department head tour with a number 1 ranking is essential-even in those days. To not have even done one at all was more than an oversight-it was a sign of blatant discrimination.

And every male in the year groups before and after her year group knew it and were screaming bloody murder about it. So much so that, the powers that be sensed a potential black eye in the making for the Navy and this carrier aviation community.

So it was decided that this person must complete a department head tour-in the very same squadron she was slated to command some day. Not without leaving the squadron and coming back to it at a later time to be determined-but within a year and a half of arriving at said squadron and staying in it the whole time.

This is-well how shall I put it-more than a little odd. Plus-since she was still a LCDR, but already screened for command, it guaranteed that no one else could have that coveted number one fitness report till she actually promoted to Commander.

Yea, there’s a real incentive to work with her.

Nonetheless off she went, did a year as maintenance officer, a year as XO then fleeted up to CO. Her assumption of command was hailed with much pomp and circumstance, pictures and headlines all over the place. At the time I was serving as the wing chief of staff-working for the guy who wrote her fitness reports.

And hearing the phrase, “get that bitch on the phone“-more than a couple of dozen times from my boss. ( Who in my opinion was a great leader, who had gotten his position the old fashioned way-he earned it.).

You see, this particular female had learned an important lesson on the way up. Getting along with your contemporaries was for suckers. Placating important and highly placed sponsors was how you advanced. And so she ignored her boss who was merely just another male Captain.

Her reward for a job passably done-selection to a fleet staff air operations officer position. Now as most folks who have been around the block in the Navy will tell you-this particular job requires an in depth knowledge of strike warfare. And its not something you can pick up in just a couple of weeks no matter how hard you work or study.

And, as the poor staff officers, who were condemned to work for her in this period can attest to-since they had to do all the work to make up for what she did not know.

All because the Navy was in a hurry.

The moral of the story here is that sometimes it is not so good to be in a hurry. The Navy has bright, female pilots who are earning their qualifications as carrier aviation pilots and one or two of whom will make flag one day. They will have gotten their promotions the same way their male counterparts did-the old fashioned away.

The same way-the exact same way-their male predecessors did.

And they will have earned the same respect their male counterparts did.

Isn’t that worth waiting for? And isn’t it what the whole idea was when the feminists started us down this crazy path?  ”To just be treated the same as the men“.

Except when its not fast enough to gather good headlines I guess.

And that-boys and girls- is to the Navy’s loss.

The other shoe drops:

As the Navy’s unprecedented response to Haiti’s post-earthquake humanitarian crisis entered its third week, the sudden spike in operational tempo showed no sign of slowing. More warships, Military Sealift Command and Maritime Administration vessels were on station or en route to help answer a desperate call for supplies and medical help.

The large fleet presence raised two big questions that Navy officials said they could not publicly address as the Haiti mission unfolded:

How will it affect deployments? And what will it cost?

As Navy Times went to press Jan. 22, the U.S. had committed some 30 Navy, Coast Guard, MSC and MarAd ships to its Haitian task force, serving as lily pads for helicopters, helping to restore Port-au-Prince’s shattered harbor or evacuating Americans. Some of the vessels were called up from a reserve status, as with the hospital ship Comfort, so the duration of their missions would not have much effect for other units.

But each day a Navy warship spent off Haiti was a day another ship had to take its place elsewhere in the world, or a day it couldn’t prepare for its previously scheduled Navy tasking.

I’m not saying the effort is not necessary-but if the Navy had more ships than flag officers-instead of the other way around-this could be more easily accommodated.

Needs to be raised on this:

SurFor chief: Manning needs mean new duties

He also said ships will be shifting to more independent deployments, which will create smaller carrier and amphibious groups.

Vice Adm. D.C. Curtis, who spoke to reporters at the Surface Navy Association’s annual symposium in mid-January outside Washington, D.C., acknowledged that the size of surface ship crews has declined steadily over the past several years, but added commanders have always tried to be mindful of the toll that manning cuts can take on sailors and their gear.

Despite the cuts, Curtis, who commands the San Diego-based Naval Surface Forces, said the Navy is not trying to reach a minimum crew size.

“It is not our mission ‘to do more with less.’ It’s not our mission to see how many jobs one person can do or two people can do. … Yes, we have reduced our manning because we had to.”

In a word-bull sh*t.

The Surface Force and the Navy in general, chose to reduce manning as a “guns or butter” choice to accomplish what Uncle Vern wanted-showing Don Rumsfeld that he was “transformational”.

Oh and it freed up money that paid for the war-and never went for the so called “re-capitalization” of the Navy.

Furthermore-there is a mixed track record when you start to try to shuffle around jobs traditionally formed at a certain paygrade. Certainly the recent rash of operational accidents and CO firings (the wicked witch of the Far East being an exception) that the Navy has witnessed to date-is a sign you have to be careful. Although a fair argument can be made its not the paygrade-its the refusal to invest in training because that two has been raped to feed the IA monster.

The better question to ask is why no one banged on the desk and said that the cuts had gone into the bone-not just the flesh a long time a go.

UPDATE!!!: A pretty interesting comment thread on this incident can be found here. Its 100+ comments! Worth the time to read. I stand by my assessment and the one that was found in the comments here “a predetermined female success story”.

Navy: Cruiser CO relieved for ‘cruelty’

By Philip Ewing – Staff writer
Posted : Thursday Jan 14, 2010 9:50:27 EST

The commanding officer of the Yokosuka, Japan-based cruiser Cowpens was relieved of duty Wednesday after being punished for “cruelty and maltreatment” during her time in charge, the Navy announced. In an unusual move, she is being permitted to continue on to an assignment in the Pentagon.

Capt. Holly Graf was brought before an admiral’s mast with Rear Adm. Kevin Donegan, the commander of Carrier Strike Group 5, after an inspector general’s investigation found problems with her “temperament and demeanor vis-a-vis her subordinates,” said Cmdr. Jeff Davis, a spokesman for 7th Fleet.

Davis said he could not elaborate about what the IG had found about Graf’s treatment of her crew, but he said it had been taking place “over a length of time,” including when the ship was in port and at sea. Specifically, Donegan found Graf guilty of violating Article 93 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice — which covers “cruelty and maltreatment” — and Article 133, “conduct unbecoming an officer,” according to information provided by Davis.

Replacing Graf in command is Capt. Robert Marin, Davis said, who had already been scheduled to take over for her some time in January. Marin had been aboard the Cowpens since the end of December, making preparations for a normal change of command, so Donegan “ordered the change of command be executed immediately based on the non-judicial punishment and in the best interests of the ship and crew,” Davis said.

Davis said he didn’t think an exact date had been set yet for a normal change of command, but that Marin was to have taken over before the end of January. Graf is under orders to move on to a new assignment on the Navy Staff in the Pentagon, Davis said — a move already scheduled before her relief this week.

Her continuing into a job to which she had already been assigned is unusual for a Navy captain who has been relieved; many fired COs are assigned to the staff of their parent command and their careers effectively ended.

Graf is a 1985 graduate of the Naval Academy, according to her official Navy biography; she commanded the destroyer Winston S. Churchill, among other assignments, before taking command of the Cowpens in March 2008.

Or at least how to get through cruise……..

Courtesy of the World Famous Hack Eagles.

(Anybody notice that over on the working man’s coast-you don’t see no stinking videos?).

Phibian posted this. When I saw it-I just had to send it far and wide.  This is so true of my Navy, and a lot of other places in DOD. Are they listening? Nope.

Sign No. 1: Conspicuously posted vision or value statements are filled with vague but important-sounding words like "excellence" and "quality"

These words are seldom defined and the concepts they allude to are never measured.

Sign No. 2: Bringing up a problem is considered more as evidence of a personality defect rather than as an actual observation of reality

In a dysfunctional company, what it looks like is not only more important than what it is, it is what it is. If you don't believe that, you are the problem. A surprising amount of information is classified. Dysfunctional companies have more state secrets than the CIA. Anything that might embarrass the boss turns out to be a national security issue.

Sign No. 3: If by chance there are problems, the usual solution is a motivational seminar

Attitude is everything, especially in places where facts are embarrassing or inconvenient. In a dysfunctional family, there's an elephant — usually a drunken abusive parent — in the parlor, but no one ever mentions him. To appear sane, you have to pretend that the elephant is invisible, and that drives you crazy. Businesses are full of invisible elephants, too. Usually they are things that might cause difficulties for people with enough clout to prevent their discussion. The emperor may be naked, but if you have a good attitude, you won't mention it.

Sign No. 4: Double messages are delivered with a straight face

Quality and quantity are both job one. You can do it both cheaper and better, just don't ask how. If you're motivated enough you should know already.

Sign No. 5: History is regularly edited to make executive decisions more correct, and correct decisions more executive than they actually were

Those huge salaries require some justification.

Sign No. 6: People are discouraged from putting things in writing

What is written, especially financial records, is purposely confusing. You can never tell when you might need a little deniability.

Sign No. 7: Directions are ambiguous and often vaguely threatening

Before you respond to a vague threat, remember this: Virtually every corporate scandal begins with someone saying, "Do it; I don't care how." That person is seldom the one who gets indicted.

Sign No. 8: Internal competition is encouraged and rewarded

The word "teamwork" may be batted around like a softball at a company picnic, but in a dysfunctional company the star players are the only ones who get recognition and big bucks.

Sign No. 9: Decisions are made at the highest level possible

Regardless of what it is, you have to check with your boss before doing it. She also has to check with her boss.

Sign No. 10: Delegating means telling somebody to do something, not giving them the power to do it

According to Webster's Dictionary, you delegate authority, not tasks. In dysfunctional companies you may have responsibility, but the authority lives in the office upstairs.

Sign No. 11: Management approaches from the latest bestseller are regularly misunderstood to mean what we're doing already is right on the mark

"Seven Habits of Highly Effective People," "Good to Great" and "Who Moved My Cheese?" all seem to boil down to, "quit griping and do more with less."

Sign No. 12: Resources are tightly controlled

Your department may need upgraded software, but there's been a spending freeze since 2006. Cost control is entry-level management, but in a dysfunctional company anything more sophisticated is considered too touchy-feely. Whatever you propose, the first question you will be asked is if it can be done cheaper.

Sign No. 13: You are expected to feel lucky to have a job and know you could lose it if you don't toe the line

Dysfunctional companies maintain control using the threat of punishment. Most will maintain that they also use positive rewards … like your paycheck. A few people are actually fired, but most of those who go are driven to quit.

Sign No. 14: Rules are enforced based on who you are rather than what you do

In a dysfunctional company, there are clearly insiders and outsiders and everyone knows who belongs in each group. Accountability has different meanings depending on which group you're in.

Sign No. 15: The company fails the Dilbert Test

Dysfunctional organizations have no sense of humor. People who post unflattering cartoons risk joining the ranks of the disappeared. When an organization loses the ability to laugh at itself, it is headed for big trouble. If you'd get in trouble for printing this article and posting it on the bulletin board at work, maybe it's time to look for another job before this one drives you crazy.

As previously noted, I stopped at the Naval Academy while on my way home from Wallops Island. As they were getting ready for their parade. I thought I would stay and watch it. 

I have not been to USNA for a very long time. Outwardly, it looks as historic and beautiful as it ever did. The midshipmen looked young-too damn young-but their eyes were full of the idealism that fills a 20 year old who is proud of doing something different and in concert with other young men. They had the same pride I did 30 years ago-feeling as if I was unique.

But then of course, I had to remind myself of the other side of the story-the continuing compromises that the Academy and my own beloved alma mater have made to appease the gods of diversity. When women demanded entry into the service academies and men a lot smarter than me, correctly pointed out it would forever ruin the "system"-women said all they wanted was to be treated exactly like the men. Smart people knew better. And now 30 years later they have succeeded in irrevocably changing the institution. And its not for the better.

This weekend was the reunion of the class of 69. Unlike today's breed-they could feel strongly that their experience, while different, was at least common to that their predecessors had gone through. The plebe system, the rites of passage, the common bond that gets established by a shared trial.

It still looks impressive-however my view of the USNA is colored by the knowledge of what it has given up. Which has been very well documented by Professor Bruce Fleming.  He's exposed the fact that the emperor has no clothes. That there are two admission standards at the Naval Academy-one for women and minorities and a different one for white men. He was suitably retaliated against for that this fall -for telling the truth-were it not for tenure he probably would have been fired.

It still looks on the surface like it might have 30 years ago-but knowing folks tell me its radically different. So i guess I should count my blessings that I had to be a Cadet when it was a good experience.

Here are the pictures:

Bancroft Hall

One of the things that suprised me was that the Academy had both a US Navy band and a midshipmen band. Do they really need both? With a student body of 4400, they ought to be able to put together a band. It would seem to me that it would make more sense to use the Navy band where it could better support the fleet.

Taking the field.

As I watched the Mids on the parade ground, I was suprised ( not really) at how many women held battalion, regimental and company command. It was far out of whack with the Academy's demographics. Women only make up about 15 % of  the brigrade ( a number too high in and of itself), but by my quick math, greater than 40% of the cadets in command were women. I'm sure there is no favoritism at play here.

Sitting next to us was a LCDR who was a selected recall reservist- he was an instructor at the Academy. 14000 Sailors posted to Iraq and Afghanistan to do Army work-and the Navy can still find the ability to use reservists at the USNA?  Don't get me wrong-he was a very nice guy and was most patient as people asked him questions.   His daughter was seeing her first parade though-and she was a joy to watch:

The colors were brought forward:

I mentioned too that the class of 69 was having it's reunion this particular weekend:

Catching up-noting the ravages of time.

And finally one more shot of the brigade:

Fly Navy! The best always have!