BLUEMOMENT

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/22/20101127/tu ... 6b408.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Commander Coles will continue to serve in the Royal Navy and he will be reappointed to a post where his talents and experience can be used to best effect."

Be interesting to find out what happened, but knowing nothing whatsoever about naval procedure, can it really be 100pc his fault even if it is 100pc his responsibility IYSWIM?

Mark wrote:http://uk.news.yahoo.com/22/20101127/tu ... 6b408.html

"Commander Coles will continue to serve in the Royal Navy and he will be reappointed to a post where his talents and experience can be used to best effect."

Be interesting to find out what happened, but knowing nothing whatsoever about naval procedure, can it really be 100pc his fault even if it is 100pc his responsibility IYSWIM?

I am not Naval but have worked in a chain of command and even if he had delegated monitoring the vessel's position, calculating predecited heights of tide etc. it's still his responsibility. If I were in charge of a vessel with 10m draft in an area with extensive areas charted at less depth than that, I would be keeping a very close eye on position and depth myself. One can only imagine that more than one person's attention became distracted from such matters.

The errors may not all have been poor Cdr. Coles' own but the fault is 100% his for not detecting those faults and remediating same before it all went pear shaped.

On the other hand, how many of us, having had an encounter with the bottom, are now considered to be better sailors for it? (At least 3!).

You can be sure that Commander Coles would never let such a thing happen again (if given the chance). One view is that sidelining him now is a waste of his training (perhaps that was faulty?) and its cost. I am not sure that making an example of him will make any difference to the frequency of future groundings. I recall that the Navy has had a few.....

Will his Dazed Kipper be rescinded?