# Navy Maintenance Problem?



## Charles Spencer (Apr 8, 2016)

They didn't lubricate the gears before starting the engines?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ittoral-ship-in-singapore?cmpid=yhoo.headline

I'm former Army and if one of my guys had done this with a truck I would have lost my mind.  We have maintenance checklists for everything.  I assume the Navy does the same.

Come to think of it, if I had done this with a used car when I was young my dear old dad would have concluded that I was an idiot.


----------



## strantor (Apr 8, 2016)

Former U.S. Navy submariner here.
Yeah there are checklists for everything.



> if one of my guys had done this with a truck I would have lost my mind.



He (the captain) probably did too, right around the same time he lost his job.

Humans make bad judgment calls and stupid mistakes. Part of the reason why we're replacing ourselves with robots.


----------



## kvt (Apr 8, 2016)

If We had done something like that in the AF we would have no longer been in the AF or we would have been a lot lower rank and making little rocks out of big rocks.


----------



## Superburban (Apr 8, 2016)

One of the bad aspects of being in command, you do not get much choice in who is assigned under you, but you get blamed for their failures.


----------



## michael.kitko (Apr 8, 2016)

Current submariner here and I completely agree, we have checklists for everything and somebody would have gotten fired.

Mike "Squirrelly" Kitko


----------



## strantor (Apr 8, 2016)

michael.kitko said:


> Current submariner here


Cool! I've never met another brother of the phin online before (apart from facebook of course)
Where are you stationed and what's your rate?

I was an FT, served on the USS Oklahoma City SSN 723 out of Norfolk 2005-2009 


michael.kitko said:


> I completely agree, we have checklists for everything and somebody would have gotten fired.


Article only mentions the captain (SOP, fire the captain) but I imagine he wasn't the only one. The probably carved a line straight down through the chain of command from the captain to the seaman who last scrubbed the engine room bilge, firing, demoting, and shaming poor souls.


----------



## 51cub (Apr 8, 2016)

I saw a submarine once, the USS Drum. I know a guy that was a Corpsman Senior Chief in the subs, though. Being I was an EO3, should I be worried all these fleet guys hanging around me?


----------



## gjmontll (Apr 8, 2016)

And yet another bubblehead here.  FTG1(SS) on the Haddock (SSN-621) '71-'74, (and rode the Permit, (SSN-594) for one patrol in '74)
Some years later, I heard of some US surface ship having its reduction gears ruined because the sailor couldn't read well enough to understand the procedure.


----------



## michael.kitko (Apr 8, 2016)

I am a current Nuc MM1 up here in Groton, CT. I am currently at Subschool teaching the QAI and QAO courses, not to mention the ever popular Gage Cal course. As far as where I have been stationed, I've been on the USS Albuquerque (2003-2007 Groton Years, 2008-2012 Round the world to San Diego Years) and USS New Mexico (2012-2015). I will tell you, old boats over newbies any day and The west coast is the best coast statement, is so true.

Mike "Squirrelly" Kitko


----------



## 51cub (Apr 8, 2016)

Okay, now we really are needin' more 'Bees up in here


----------



## strantor (Apr 8, 2016)

Groton....uughhh....
I was in subschool when I outgrew the ability to repress bad memories. Groton has thick folder taking up half the room in a cranial filing cabinet labeled "less than stellar experiences."

However I do have a pleasant recollection of eating at cracker barrel once a week come hell or high water. It was the only place in the state of Connecticut to get chicken fried steak and sweet tea (JUST sweet tea, not peach or mango or persimmon or passionfruit sweet tea). Too bad that was 45 minutes up 95 so it doesn't count for "Groton."


----------



## gjmontll (Apr 8, 2016)

My pleasant eating memory from Groton was the "submarine sandwich" shop right across the street from the main entrance to SubBase. But of course, in New England, they're not subs, they're grinders. Anyhow, lunch was often their Lobster Grinder, only around $3 as I recall. (this was 1970.)


----------



## Dr Stan (Apr 19, 2016)

The CO & the Chief Engineer are probably toast.  This is an example of poor training resulting in failing to follow SOP.

BTW, MR2 AKA Machinery Repairman 2nd class (E-5) machinist in the real world.  I repaired so many screw-ups I cannot remember just how many.  Spent 2 years on the USS Coral Sea CVA-43 (carrier) and a year and a half on the USS Samuel Gompers AD-37 (repair ship).

One very interesting incident on the Gompers.  We were across the pier from the USS Longbeach, a nuclear powered cruiser.  A valve was removed from the steam system and I was repairing said valve over on the Gompers.  To keep the radioactive water from flowing out of the pipe it had been frozen on either side of the valve before removal.  Well they lost shore power (think BIG extension cord) and thus the N2 freezing unit quit letting the ice melt.  After power was restored and the pipe refrozen men were sent down to the engineering space with 5 gallon plastic GI cans.  They were filled up carried over to the Gompers and emptied into a storage tank.  Later when we were moving piers we made a loop out past the 3 mile limit.  Somehow the valve on the storage tank opened all by itself and discharged the radioactive water into the Pacific ocean.


----------



## Charles Spencer (Apr 19, 2016)

gjmontll said:


> My pleasant eating memory from Groton was the "submarine sandwich" shop right across the street from the main entrance to SubBase. But of course, in New England, they're not subs, they're grinders. Anyhow, lunch was often their Lobster Grinder, only around $3 as I recall. (this was 1970.)



$3.00 in 1970?  Boy, they must have been counting on drunken sailors throwing their money around.  I got my first high school minimum wage job in 1970.  It paid $1.45 an hour.

Of course we were on the silver standard then so that translated into over 1 oz. of silver (one quarter= over 5 grams).  Therefore, $3.00 would be over 60 grams.


----------



## fixit (Apr 19, 2016)

I have done machine design in the past. If the lube must be present (on) before start up & people are involved, you better put a sensor on the lube line to prevent start up unless lube is present. Should be easy, pressure switch, flow switch, or program line in control logic. Protecting the operator from injury or the machine from damage is a must. 

fixit


----------



## strantor (Apr 19, 2016)

fixit said:


> I have done machine design in the past. If the lube must be present (on) before start up & people are involved, you better put a sensor on the lube line to prevent start up unless lube is present. Should be easy, pressure switch, flow switch, or program line in control logic. Protecting the operator from injury or the machine from damage is a must.
> 
> fixit



I agree from a machine design standpoint.  I design control systems for industrial machinery, and had I designed this system for use in a factory for example, then for sure it would have a mechanism to inhibit startup without lube.

But this wasn't designed for use in a factory by marginally skilled laborers. It was designed per U.S. Navy specs, intended to be operated by "highly trained" and intelligence tested operators. There is a lot more entrusted to Sailors than factory workers; a lot more functions are manual and/or require human judgement and knowledge. A lot less idiot proofing than what most of us are used to. I speculate that the Navy's reasoning is to make the ships more versatile; more able to operate in crippled conditions. The ship should never prevent the crew from doing whatever they need to do to accomplish a mission or escape death. I don't know anything about the machinery in question but I can only assume that no such failsafe was implemented because it was deemed that in some conceivable casualty situation, that failsafe would hamper the crew from knowingly operating the ship to its own detriment to avoid an even worse fate.


----------



## Dr Stan (Apr 19, 2016)

While far less serious & costly I remember a brand new fire & flushing pump from one of the then new Spruance class destroyers arriving on the Gompers for repair.  Seems like a crewman had started the pump before opening the sea suction valve and it was never opened.  They had also switched from bronze to monel for the main castings which had turned various shades of blue.  That would have been in 1977 shortly before I was honorably discharged.


----------



## fixit (Apr 20, 2016)

strantor said:


> I agree from a machine design standpoint.  I design control systems for industrial machinery, and had I designed this system for use in a factory for example, then for sure it would have a mechanism to inhibit startup without lube.
> 
> But this wasn't designed for use in a factory by marginally skilled laborers. It was designed per U.S. Navy specs, intended to be operated by "highly trained" and intelligence tested operators. There is a lot more entrusted to Sailors than factory workers; a lot more functions are manual and/or require human judgement and knowledge. A lot less idiot proofing than what most of us are used to. I speculate that the Navy's reasoning is to make the ships more versatile; more able to operate in crippled conditions. The ship should never prevent the crew from doing whatever they need to do to accomplish a mission or escape death. I don't know anything about the machinery in question but I can only assume that no such failsafe was implemented because it was deemed that in some conceivable casualty situation, that failsafe would hamper the crew from knowingly operating the ship to its own detriment to avoid an even worse fate.



I agree with you BUT it happened. killing the idiot will not prevent it from happening again. Disabling damage will not save the ship in combat, only assure a total loss.

fixit


----------



## brino (Apr 20, 2016)

strantor said:


> Humans make bad judgment calls and stupid mistakes. Part of the reason why we're replacing ourselves with robots.



Hmmmm.....replacing ourselves with robots.....
How do we know that's not one of those stupid human mistakes I've been hearing about?

-brino


----------



## John Hasler (Apr 20, 2016)

fixit said:


> Disabling damage will not save the ship in combat, only assure a total loss.


Operating a ship (or aircraft, or vehicle) in such a way as to seriously damage it can save your life in combat.  Example: your destroyer is ambushed by an enemy heavy cruiser and suffers damage that results in loss of oil to a gearbox.  You know you can outrun him and get back to the safety of your air cover in 30 minutes.  You are fairly sure that the gearbox will run for an hour without oil but will be irreversibly damaged.  What do you do?


----------



## Dr Stan (Apr 20, 2016)

fixit said:


> I agree with you BUT it happened. killing the idiot will not prevent it from happening again. Disabling damage will not save the ship in combat, only assure a total loss.
> 
> fixit





John Hasler said:


> Operating a ship (or aircraft, or vehicle) in such a way as to seriously damage it can save your life in combat.  Example: your destroyer is ambushed by an enemy heavy cruiser and suffers damage that results in loss of oil to a gearbox.  You know you can outrun him and get back to the safety of your air cover in 30 minutes.  You are fairly sure that the gearbox will run for an hour without oil but will be irreversibly damaged.  What do you do?



Both of these statements are pure conjecture.  To steal a phrase "in combat the first thing to go are the plans".

When I was on the USS Coral Sea we had a couple of sailors purposely sabotage the ship.  One was setting avionics storerooms on fire, and another was putting scouring powder in the spring bearings (24" babbitt bearings that support the main shafts).  They were eventually caught & sent to Ft Leavenworth, but the damage did cause a reduction in operational status.  The sabotage had nothing to do with a foreign power, but was done in an attempt to keep her from deploying and remain in her home port.  The attempt failed and the damage was repaired in the Philippines.


----------



## strantor (Apr 22, 2016)

brino said:


> Hmmmm.....replacing ourselves with robots.....
> How do we know that's not one of those stupid human mistakes I've been hearing about?
> 
> -brino


Oh it is, for sure. I didn't advocate the concept, just observed it. And to further observe... it looks to me like we're at or near the point of no return. All the corners and sharp edges of the world have been padded, all the daily critical thinking carried out by phone apps and interactive Web pages. You can now order your doritos and non-dairy cheese product sauce by pressing a button in your pantry. The number of people qualified to keep the gears of the world turning, or rather the number of people more qualified than robots, is dwindling to a depressing low. Robots shall inherit the earth.


----------



## 4GSR (Apr 22, 2016)

Ok guys, we are getting off topic here.  Fixing to get a locked thread if you don't get back on track.


----------



## Bill Gruby (Apr 22, 2016)

The original post was about a mechanical failure due to Human error, not robots taking over the world. Get back to the original topic please. Thank you.

"Billy G"


----------

