The interesting thing about this is that in a case-by-case basis some folks can retain dual citizenships.The destroyer was named after his grandfather and father. Although she has the same name, he is after all John S. McCain III. As far as being borned in Panama, his father was stationed there at that time. Otherwise he would have been borned in America. The Supreme Court has ruled in favor of military dependents borned abroad as American citizenships before. More than military families also use this loophole for American citizenship. America won't deny American citizenship to foreign borned military dependents whether from admirals, corporals, or privates.
While it is the standard move to replace the CO and sometimes the XO when things like this happens I wonder if it was the right choice in this case. A CVN isn't like a destroyer where the CO or XO can easily visit every space on the ship, he has to rely on his officers and chiefs to ensure that HAZMAT and other flammable material is stowed properly. The DIVO's and especially chiefs in charge of the spaces where the fire started and spread the fastest are the ones that need to be slammed, same with any one found to have directly led to this accident.GW skipper, XO sacked following May fire
Investigation blames blaze on unauthorized smoking, poor storage of flammables
By Gidget Fuentes - Staff writer
Posted : Wednesday Jul 30, 2008 21:51:19 EDT
SAN DIEGO — The skipper and executive officer of the nuclear-powered aircraft carrier George Washington were relieved Wednesday, Navy officials said, two months after a major at-sea fire raced through 80 spaces on the ship. Investigators determined that the blaze was started when unauthorized smoking ignited improperly stowed flammables nearby, the Navy said
The Navy’s Pacific Fleet commander, Adm. Robert F. Willard, in his final endorsement of an investigation into the fire, directed that Capt. David C. Dykhoff and his executive officer be relieved of command.
Dykhoff was fired “due to a loss of confidence in his ability to command and his failure to meet mission requirements and readiness standards,” Navy officials said in a statement released Wednesday afternoon.
That same day, Naval Air Forces commander Vice Adm. Thomas Kilcline relieved Dykhoff and also fired the ship’s executive officer, Capt. David M. Dober, “for substandard performance,” according to the statement.
Capt. J.R. Haley, who recently commanded the carrier Theodore Roosevelt, has replaced Dykhoff, and Capt. Karl O. Thomas, the executive officer of the carrier Dwight D. Eisenhower, has been reassigned as GW’s executive officer.
Willard’s recommendations came as he finalized the PacFleet investigation. Navy officials did not provide details on additional actions or punishment of other crew members recommended in the investigation report.
The investigation found that the likely cause of the fire, which caused $70 million in damage, “was unauthorized smoking that ignited flammable liquids and other combustible material improperly stored in an adjacent space,” officials said in the statement. “The fire and the subsequent magnitude of the fire were the result of a series of human acts that could have been prevented. Specifically, the storage of 90 gallons of refrigerant compressor oil in an unauthorized space contributed to the intensity of the fire.”
Navy officials did not release a copy of the report or Willard’s endorsement. However, Capt. Scott Gureck, a Pacific Fleet spokesman, said a redacted copy of the investigation probably would be released in a few weeks, once all disciplinary and administrative actions have been completed.
Rear Adm. Richard Wren, who commands Task Force 70 aboard the Kitty Hawk, “has been directed to consider administrative and disciplinary actions he deems appropriate for those individuals involved in the fire,” Gureck said.
The fire broke out near the auxiliary boiler room shortly before 8 a.m. on May 22 as the carrier began an underway replenishment with another ship near the Galapagos Islands. It quickly spread to nearby exhaust and ventilation trunks and supply spaces, burning in 80 spaces for 12 hours before firefighting teams doused the blaze. In all, 37 sailors were treated for minor injuries, including one sailor who suffered first- and second-degree burns.
George Washington had left its previous homeport of Norfolk, Va., in the spring for its new home in Yokosuka, Japan, where it would replace the conventionally powered Kitty Hawk and join the Forward Deployed Naval Forces, becoming the first nuclear-powered carrier to be based in the region.
The fire has forced the delays in the turnover of both ships and crews in San Diego, now scheduled to begin Aug. 7 when the Kitty Hawk arrives in San Diego, Navy officials said.
George Washington is slated to leave San Diego on Aug. 21 for Japan, where the ship is expected to arrive in late September, they added.
The debate over what Congress will let the navy build is still going on, the next week or so should be interesting.Well, someone important enough just did a cost comparison between the Burkes and Zumwalts and consider restarting the Burke line.
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/95xx/doc9571/Shipbuilding_Testimony.1.1.shtml
Accompanied by a GAO report...
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d08804.pdf
A real pity. I met the CO and XO when the GW was in Rio de Janeiro this past April. Some very professional folks from the CO on down that showed tremendous pride in their ship and work. Unfortunately the blame had to be placed somewhere.The recent fire on the USS George Washington was caused by unauthorized smoking and improperly stowed flammable material. The CO and XO were both fired as well, so far no one else is in line for punishment.
http://www.navytimes.com/news/2008/07/navy_gw_firings_073008w/
While it is the standard move to replace the CO and sometimes the XO when things like this happens I wonder if it was the right choice in this case. A CVN isn't like a destroyer where the CO or XO can easily visit every space on the ship, he has to rely on his officers and chiefs to ensure that HAZMAT and other flammable material is stowed properly. The DIVO's and especially chiefs in charge of the spaces where the fire started and spread the fastest are the ones that need to be slammed, same with any one found to have directly led to this accident.
The other thing that bothers me is that 80 spaces and over 70 million dollars in damage was caused by a cigarette, what if this would of been battle damage, a magazine or other major fire? This may be a sign that damage control is falling to the way side.
Good idea to locate all USN news in one thread.
Regarding the stopping of DDG-1000 to only 2 ships - I've always been in support of cointinuing the Burke class with a Flight-III series of 20+ with more VLS for cruise missiles instead of building huge arsenal battleships. Yes the technology developed with the 2 ships will be useful, but the USN would never have afforded a sizeable class of DDG-1000s.
IMHO the USN needs lots of Burke and of LCS to support the carriers and the Marines.
However at the moment the USN is really going through rough seas... the Virginia SSNs capped at 4 if I'm not mistaken, the LCS suffering delays and cuts, the DDG-1000 stopping at 2...
cheers
So, what exactly caused that fire?The aircraft carrier been docked in San Diego since late May after a ship board fire caused 70-million dollars in damage. The ship's commanding officer, Captain David Dykhoff was relieved of his duties after the incident. He was replaced by Captain J.R. Haley.
The Washington (CVN 73) is expected to arrive in Japan in late September where the deployment has already triggered protests over the use of nuclear power.
Last month more than 13-thousand Japanese protested, many sensitive about the military use of nuclear technology. The U.S. atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945 killed at least 200,000. But the Navy has said the George Washington's fire, which left one sailor with minor burns and 23 others with heat stress, never threatened the safety of the ship's nuclear reactor.
http://www.kogo.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=&article=4132100
See post #23 in this thread.George Washington Departs San Diego for Japan
http://www.navycompass.com/content/view/746/326/
So, what exactly caused that fire?
There isn't any big mystery. Some crew members were smoking in an unauthorized space rather than the smoke deck, their happened to be some illicit hazmat in the space as well that the CPO and Division Officers didn't catch or turned a blind eye on, a fire happened and that was it.I've read it before but wondered if there is anything new on that out. I suspect that there were other causes. On long cruises/transits with exotic port calls some in the crew become complacent and less disciplined.
Well, I'll have to use my own contacts to find more.. stay tuned!
Not 100% approved, but there is a possibility of a 3rd DDG-1000 and/or continuation of DDG-51 new builds.Good idea to locate all USN news in one thread.
Regarding the stopping of DDG-1000 to only 2 ships - I've always been in support of cointinuing the Burke class with a Flight-III series of 20+ with more VLS for cruise missiles instead of building huge arsenal battleships. Yes the technology developed with the 2 ships will be useful, but the USN would never have afforded a sizeable class of DDG-1000s.
IMHO the USN needs lots of Burke and of LCS to support the carriers and the Marines.
However at the moment the USN is really going through rough seas... the Virginia SSNs capped at 4 if I'm not mistaken, the LCS suffering delays and cuts, the DDG-1000 stopping at 2...
cheers
Some interesting laser and energy weapons for the future as well as development of next generation air launched missiles.Navy Wants New Laser Weapons
August 18, 2008
DoD Buzz|by Greg Grant
The Office of Naval Research held its annual partnership with industry conference this week here in Washington, DC. The envelope-pushing Navy lab is particularly keen on developing "game changing" laser beam and hypervelocity rail gun weapons. Much of the available funding is for early phase modeling and simulation.
USS Gerald R. Ford, CVN-78, the next generation CVN is closer towards reality.Navy Awards $5 Billion Contract for Future Aircraft Carrier USS Gerald R. Ford
Story Number: NNS080911-04
Release Date: 9/11/2008 6:35:00 AM
From Naval Sea System Command Public Affairs
WASHINGTON (NNS) -- The Navy awarded a $5.1 billion contract to Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding Newport News Sept. 10 for the detail design and construction of the future USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78), the lead ship in the Navy's newest class of aircraft carrier.
Under this contract, Northrop Grumman will complete the detail design and construction of CVN 78, which includes engineering; integration; related development efforts including drawing and work package development; advanced planning; design weight estimate; lifecycle support products and related logistics data; production planning; test and evaluation; further definition of initiatives to reduce CVN 78 class total ownership costs; and data necessary to support construction of CVN 78.
"This is an exciting day for the CVN 78 Program Office and for the Navy," said Capt. Brian Antonio, CVN 78 program manager in the Program Executive Office for Aircraft Carriers.
"When USS Gerald R. Ford is delivered to the fleet in 2015, it will bring superior warfighting capability and meaningful quality-of-life improvements for Sailors, in addition to greatly reduced lifecycle costs. Most important, CVN 78-class carriers will be able to adapt and evolve to defend this nation and our allies well into the 21st century," he said.
CVN 78 is the Navy's first major investment in aircraft carrier design in more than three decades and features many improvements over the 1960's Nimitz-class design. CVN 78 includes a new flight deck with an improved weapons handling system, advanced arresting gear, a completely re-engineered electro-magnetic aircraft launch system, new and simplified nuclear propulsion plants, a new electrical power generation system and reconfigurable design architecture.
"Together, these improvements provide transformational warfighting capabilities and enable reduced manning, ultimately reducing the total ownership cost of each Ford-class carrier by approximately $5 billion over the life of the ship," said Antonio.
CVN 78 was officially named Gerald R. Ford by the Secretary of the Navy in January 2007 and will be constructed in Newport News, Va. The keel is scheduled to be laid in late 2009, and the ship is scheduled to be delivered to the Navy in 2015. The Navy plans to build 11 Ford-class aircraft carriers, and construction of Ford-class aircraft carriers is projected to continue through 2058.