Surface Warfare Magazine - Fall 2016 by Surface Warfare Magazine

Surface Warfare Fall 2016 Issue 52

This Issue:

TheWay

Ahead

Also Inside:

RIMPAC 2016

Changes to LCS Program

And:

Where was the Indianapolis when she sank? Russell Egnor Navy Media Award Winner

SURFACE WARFARE FALL 2016

Surface Warfare Magazine Staff

Commander, Naval Surface Forces

Vice Adm. Tom Rowden

Public Affairs Officer Cmdr. John Perkins

Man. Train. Equip.

Editorial Advisor Lt. Cmdr. Rebecca Haggard

Authorization

Surface Warfare Magazine is published quarterly from appropriated funds by authority of the Chief of Naval Operations in accordance with NPPR P-35. The Secretary of the Navy has determined that this publication is necessary in the transaction of business required by law of the Department of the Navy. Use of funds for printing this publication has been approved by the Navy Publications and Printing Policy Committee. Reproductions are encouraged with proper citation. Controlled circulation. Surface Warfare (USPS 104-170) (ISSN 0145-1073) is published by the Department of the Navy, Director, Surface Warfare (OPNAV N861M), 2000 Navy Pentagon, Room 5B453 Washington, D.C. 20350. Periodicals postage paid at Washington, D.C., and additional mailing offices. Cover: Seaman Cameren Myers watches the stars aboard the USS Chancellorsville (CG 62) in the Philippine Sea. Photo by PO2 Andrew Schneider.

Charter

Surface Warfare Magazine is the professional magazine of the surface warfare community. Its purpose is to educate its readers on surface warfare missions and programs, with a particular focus on U.S. surface ships and commands. This journal will also draw upon the Surface Forceâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s rich historical legacy to instill a sense of pride and professionalism among community members and to enhance reader awareness of the increasing relevance of surface warfare for our nationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s defense. The opinions and assertions herein are the personal views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official views of the U.S. Government, the Department of Defense or the Department of the Navy.

Contributions and Feedback Welcome Send articles, photographs (min. 300 dpi electronic) and feedback to: surface_warfare_maga@navy.mil

Executive Editor Senior Chief Michael Mitchell

Managing Editor

Petty Officer 1st Class Trevor Welsh

Layout and Design Petty Officer 2nd Class Phil Ladouceur Mr. Nicholas Groesch

Contact:

Surface Warfare Magazine Commander, Naval Surface Force, U.S. Pacific Fleet Public Affairs Office, N01P 2841 Rendova Road San Diego, CA 92155 Phone: (619) 437-2735

WWW.PUBLIC.NAVY.MIL/SURFOR

Contents

If it Floats, it Fights.

2 • Commander's Corner

Material Readiness

30 • SERMC Shop in the Spotlight: Pump Shop 5 • The Way Ahead: Navy Adjusts LCS Class Crewing, 31 • Changing How the Navy Readiness, and Employment Schedules Maintenance Featured Article

Personnel Readiness

34 • Navy and Marines Demonstrate Integrated Fire Control

10 • Surface Warfare Community’s 18-3-18 Concept Heritage & Recognition Becomes PCO Pipeline 36 • SURFPAC Surface Warfare 12 • Helping Build the Future: Officer of the Year Interview with Capt. David Welch 38 • Where Was the Indianapolis 15 • New SWO Recruitment Tools When She Sank? 16 • Wade Relieves Kilby at Navy’s ‘TOP SWO’ Command Combat Readiness 20 • Exercise Rim of the Pacific 2016 Concludes

Blogging From the Fleet 43 • My 2016 Surface Week Experience 44 • Command Changes

24 • USS America’s ‘Blue-Green Team’ Demonstrates Capability During Rim of the Pacific 2016 26 • RIMPAC: Beyond Hawaii 28 • Navy Conducts First LCS Harpoon Missile Test 1

SURFACE WARFARE FALL 2016

Commander's Corner I

hope this finds you well, and that you and your families had a good summer. Now that summer vacation is over and folks are sending their kids back to school, I want to let you know what we were doing here at Surface Forces headquarters during a very busy “Sea Control” August. Before I cover that though, I want to reinforce why Sea Control is so central to my thinking these days. Put simply, a Navy lacks utility if it cannot seize and protect operationally relevant chunks of the seascape. One cannot project maritime dominance, one cannot control the skies, one cannot project power—without FIRST controlling the seas from which the Navy operates. That control, that dominance—something we enjoyed in a virtually unchallenged fashion in the decades following the Cold War—is increasingly challenged by the sea-denial strategies of a number of nations, including Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran. As the vanguard of the Navy’s conventional deterrence posture, the Surface Force has chosen to focus on re-establishing our Sea Control emphasis, and the way we’re going to get there is to implement Distributed Lethality. We are working to make our ships more lethal and more resilient in order to present opponents with a daily reminder of our power and the risk to their forces if they step out of line. It was with these principles in mind that we held two critical events in San Diego in August. The tent-pole event was the annual Surface Navy Association’s one-day, waterfront symposium at the Naval Base San Diego, and the second (which preceded the first by two days), was one of the twice yearly gatherings of the Surface Warfare Flag community at a meeting we call “SWFOTS” (Surface Warfare Officer Flag Officer Training

Symposium). I’ll start with SWFOTS. Day one of SWFOTS started with my boss Adm. Phil Davidson laying out his view of the future from the perspective of the Fleet Forces Commander. His emphasis on fighting the Fleet as an integrated combat “system of systems” has at its core, a singular emphasis on regaining our edge in Sea Control. Our discussions over during the next two days kept coming back to the central truths he laid out. Most of the rest of the first day was spent baselining the Flag community’s understanding of the status of the force—with Rear Adm. Ron Boxall (Director of Surface Warfare) laying out his programmatic priorities designed to focus on Sea Control, Rear Adm. John Wade addressing the training and doctrinal implications of a Sea Control emphasis from the perspective of the new Naval Surface and Mine Warfighting Development Center (SMWDC) commander, Rear Adm. Rob Girrier (Director of Unmanned Warfare Systems) describing the symbiotic relationship between manned and unmanned platforms, and Captains Dave Welch (Commanding Officer of the Surface Warfare Officer School) and Rick Cheeseman (Director of Surface Warfare Officer Assignments) describing how our “people” programs are changing to meet the requirements of a more lethal and distributed force. Day 2 was all about conventional deterrence of great powers, the pursuit of which demands a Navy to be ready to fight and win. Notice I wrote “Navy”, and not just a Surface Force. This is because along with Adm. Davidson—who obviously thinks from the Fleet perspective— this discussion included senior representatives of the aviation, submarine, Cyber/Electronic Warfare, and Marine Corps communities. One participant told

COMMANDER'S CORNER

Editorial by

Vice Adm. Tom Rowden Commander, Naval Surface Forces

To read about the recent F-35 missile integration tests, see Vice Adm. Rowden's story on pg. 34.

said that it was like being in the room with great NFL coaches—Belichik, Shula, Gibbs—and just listening to them talk football. Vice Adm. Frank Pandolfe (Assistant to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) started us off with a world tour of the challenges we face—one theme of which was the requirement for the forces in place to be strong and resilient, due to the likelihood that opponents will strike for limited objectives in rapid fashion. Put another way, our conventional deterrence force must present them with powerful reasons not to disturb the peace. The rest of the day was spent in classified discussions led by leaders of the warfighting communities. Rear Adm. Chas Richard (Director of Undersea Warfare Division) spoke to us of the Submarine Force’s increasingly networked approach. Vice Adm. Mike Shoemaker (Commander, U.S. Naval Air Forces) discussed naval aviation’s contributions to Sea Control and Power Projection in a more distributed force, Lt. Gen. Robert Walsh (Commanding General Marine Corps Combat Development Command) talked about Navy/Marine Corps integration, and Vice Adm. Jan Tighe (Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Information Warfare and Director of Naval Intelligence) discussed the importance of cyber and electronic warfare. The highlight of the day was the Chief of Naval Operation’s arrival to close out our discussions. We briefed him on our deliberations over the previous two days, and he shared his thoughts on maintaining maritime superiority in an increasingly challenging environment. The next day, the emphasis was on the waterfront. The Surface Navy Association’s annual San Diego Forum brought together fleet operators from ships and staffs, a

large number of Surface Flag Officers who attended the proceedings, retired SWO’s who still have skin in the game, and industry partners who are responding to the call for a more distributed and lethal force. This audience gathered under the tents at Pier 2 heard much of the same discussion as the assembled Flags the previous two days, albeit at an unclassified level. Speakers included Captain Welch of SWOS, Captain Cheeseman of PERS 41, Rear. Adm. Mark Montgomery of U.S. Pacific Command who gave a superb presentation on the operational challenges posed in the Western Pacific, Rear Adm. Mark Hitchcock who briefed his strike group’s operations in the South China Sea, Rear Adm. Boxall who reinforced his programmatic priorities, and Rear Adm. Wade who talked about the future of NSMWDC. I ended the symposium by gathering up the goodness of both events and bringing it all back to Sea Control. You’re going to hear Navy leadership talk a lot about Sea Control as we move forward. We’re going to talk about killing ships over the horizon, about multiconvergence zone prosecutions of submarines, about outer air battle Anti-Air Warfare, about distributed logistics, about electronic warfare and the networks necessary to tie it all together. We in the Surface Force are rededicating ourselves to these tasks by creating the requisite concepts, building and buying the right sensors, weapons, and networks, and then providing our Sailors with the training and exercise time needed to hone skills to a razor’s edge. This is what it is all about, my friends. We’re going on the offensive, we are embracing Distributed Lethality, and we are focusing our efforts on Sea Control. * 3

SURFACE WARFARE FALL 2016

Photo by PO2 Michaela Garrison 4

FEATURED ARTICLE

commanding guided missile cruisers, amphibious transportation dock ships, destroyer squadrons, or amphibious assault ships. Each division will consist of three Blue/ Gold-crewed ships that deploy overseas. One ship in each division will be designated as the “training ship,” manned by a single crew comprised of seasoned, experienced LCS Sailors. “These training ships will be charged with knowing their mission, training to their mission and training and certifying the remaining six crews in their division,” said Rowden. To simplify and stabilize the ongoing testing and evaluation

program, the first four ships in the class will shift to dedicated, singlecrewed testing ships, whose main mission will be test and evaluate the modular systems being installed on LCS. Like the training ships, testing ships can be deployed as fleet assets on a limited basis if needed; however their primary purpose will be to satisfy near and longterm testing requirements for the entire LCS class without affecting ongoing deployment rotations. “These crews will be focused on the testing requirements for the program,” Rowden said. "This focused approach accommodates spiral development and rapid deployment of emerging weapons

and delivery systems to the fleet without disrupting operational schedules. One of the values of the modularity is that we can modernize the modules independent of the ships, test them independent of the operational ships and then, at the appropriate time, try and install those modernized modules,” he continued. To foster increased ownership, Maintenance Execution Teams will be established within the division structure. These teams, comprised of LCS Sailors, will augment the ship crews within the division in the execution of both preventive and corrective maintenance. Finally, as the number of forward operating

The future USS Detroit (LCS 7).

Continued on next page 7

SURFACE WARFARE FALL 2016

Photo by PO2 Antonio Turretto Ramos Continued from previous page

stations grows to support these ships overseas, Forward Liaison Elements will be established to support LCS in their areas of operations. Lastly, the Blue/Gold Plus model also simplifies ownership of maintenance responsibilities and enhances continuity as the same two crews rotate on a single ship. Single-crewed training ships will complement shore-based training facilities and ensure crews have enough time at sea before deployment. Implementing these changes now, as more LCSs are scheduled for commissioning through the coming years, will ultimately allow the Navy to deploy more ships in a given ABOVE: PO1 James Strotler secures a bolt in place aboard USS Fort Worth (LCS 3). RIGHT: Sailors assigned to USS Coronado (LCS 4) test crane operations. BELOW: Sailors check inventory and do operational tests aboard USS Fort Worth (LCS 3).

period and result in an increased forward presence. The Blue/Gold Plus model allows three out of four ships to be available for deployment compared to the current one out of two ships under the 3:2:1 model. "As we implement these changes, we will continue to make adjustments and improvements based on evolving fleet requirements and technological developments," said Rowden. "Implementing the approved recommendations from this review and continuing to examine other areas for improvement will better position the LCS program for success - both now and in the future." The findings and recommendations

Photo by PO2 Michaela Garrison

of the review enables the LCS program to become more survivable, lethal and adaptable as the ships become regular workhorses in the fleet. â&#x20AC;&#x153;Recent decisions by the Chief of Naval Operations to move the LCS program forward in an exciting new direction reinforce my belief in the LCS program and its promising future,â&#x20AC;? Rowden said. *

Photo by PO2 Antonio Turretto Ramos 8

PERSONNEL READINESS

Man. Train. Equip. QINGDAO, China (August 9, 2016) Lt. Jonathan Greenwald works on a scenario in combat information systems aboard the Arleigh Burke-class guidedmissile destroyer USS Benfold (DDG 65). Benfold is on patrol in the 7th Fleet area of operation in support of security and stability in the Indo-Asian-Pacific. (U.S. Navy photo by Petty Officer 3rd Class Deven Leigh Ellis/Released)

SURFACE WARFARE FALL 2016

Surface Warfare Community’s 18-3-18 Concept

XO Tour: 18 Months

Story by

PO2 Zachary Bell CNSP Public Affairs

Cmdr. Gilbert Clark, XO of USS The Sullivans (DDG 68) monitors the course indicator during a replenishmentat-sea training exercise. 10

Photo by Seaman Daniel Gaither

3 months between tours, during which:

30 days of leave and/or temporary assigned duty station

hanging times often present new threats and in order to stay relevant and effective, things must evolve. The United States Navy is no exception, constantly observing, updating and upgrading every spoke on its wheel. The new Prospective Commanding Officer (PCO) Pipeline program is an improvement to the executive officer (XO) to commanding officer (CO) “fleet-up” construct between tours. The PCO pipeline, formerly known as the “18-318” concept, creates a three month period for training between the XO and CO fleet-up assignments. This allows the PCO to prepare for command, while at the

same time giving a new XO time to get established under a seasoned commanding officer. “We owe it to ourselves and more importantly to our Sailors, that our COs and XOs are provided with the time to concentrate on assuming command and final preparations to lead at sea,” said Vice Adm. Tom Rowden, commander, Naval Surface Forces. The first PCO courses started in March 2016. The full PCO pipeline consists of 30 days of leave and/or assignment to a temporary assigned duty station, and attending the PCO course at Surface Warfare Officers School in Newport, Rhode Island, advanced warfighting training from Naval Surface and Mine Warfighting

PERSONNEL READINESS

Becomes Prospective Commanding Officer Pipeline

Photo by PO2 Justin Wolpert

PCO course at Surface Warfare Officer School Development Center and Center for Surface Combat Systems, and type commander indoctrination. “The time in between the two tours allows for reflection, introspection, and ultimately enables an officer to create a strategic roadmap for their command tour,” Rowden said. With initiatives like Distributed Lethality and advancements and investments in training resources, the program further develops leaders as warfighters. Additionally, the intent is to provide XOs and COs with the tools, resources, and time needed to lead with energy and confidence. “This program is exceptional. Having been ashore for five to six years a lot of things have changed,” said

CO Tour: 18 Months

Advanced warfighting training, TYCOM indoctrination Cmdr. Sean Lewis, who recently began the PCO pipeline process and will become XO of USS Sterett (DDG 104). “This has allowed me to get back to the basics of what the community is doing, and I’ll be able to positively apply that once I get to the ship.” Every step in the pipeline's sequence is intended to invest in the future professional development, expertise, and readiness of our leaders at sea. “These changes in the command tour pipeline are important,” said Rowden. “They are in place to grow effective leaders who can adapt as our force increases its ability to execute Sea Control and how we operate as Surface Warfare Officers, now and in the future.” *

Cmdr. Jay Clark, CO of USS Roosevelt (DDG 80), observes an exercise from the bridge wing of the ship. 11

SURFACE WARFARE FALL 2016

Helping to Build the Future

Photo by Chief James E. Foehl

An Interview with Outgoing Surface Warfare Officers School Commanding Officer Capt. DavidWelch Story From CNSP Public Affairs

ABOVE: Welch delivers remarks during a ceremony to commemorate the 13th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks at SWOS's Memorial Hall. 12

aptain David Welch turned over command of the Surface Warfare Officers School (SWOS) to Capt. Scott Robertson in Newport, Rhode Island, Sept. 9. He oversaw a number of changes during his time there, and he took the opportunity to speak with Surface Warfare Magazine a few weeks before the change of command. Q: As you reflect back on your tour, what are you proud of? A: A lot! I am very proud of the incredible work of the SWOS staff in restoring enlisted engineering and navigation training in our “A”, “C” and “F” schools. SWOS developed a five year strategy to systemically improve enlisted training, and the Surface and Expeditionary Warfare Training Committee (SEWTC) has provided over 260 million dollars in recent budget cycles to fund those improvements. To date SWOS has delivered 40 new or extensively

revised courses, with another 90 courses currently in development. That is an unprecedented amount of change! At the same time, SWOS has implemented a continuum of professional training for Surface Warfare Officers. We now provide formal schoolhouse training prior to every career milestone tour, starting with the Basic Division Officer Course (BDOC) in Norfolk and San Diego, and extending all the way through the Major Commanders Course taught in Newport. I am also very proud of the close partnerships we have cultivated. Our program office at the Surface Training Systems Program Office, PMS 339, provides support. Capt. Bill McKinley has been my close friend and partner in training; and together with the Center for Surface Combat Systems (CSCS) we have worked to ensure there is

no gap between SWOS and CSCS. The Afloat Training Groups have been constant supporters, and I am impressed with the close coordination from our resource sponsors at N96 and N95 down through the Type Command staffs on both coasts. Of course SWOS is able to do so much only because of the incredible talent we have resident in our staff – from the military instructors to the government civilians, who provide consistency and resilience to what we do Q: How has SWOS partnered with key stakeholders to lead improvements associated with Ready, Relevant Learning initiatives as the Navy transitions to Sailor 2025? A: I understand the vision of Sailor 2025, and believe it is an imperative if we are going to continue to assess, develop, and retain talent in the

PERSONNEL READINESS

U.S. Navy. My description of the investment in enlisted engineering and navigation training restoration above means that SWOS and Surface Warfare are poised to lead the way to Ready Relevant Training. In our strategic investment plan, we are focused on delivering the right training at the right time with efficient, impactful “A” and “C” schools backed by short “F” schools in Fleet homeports, creating a continuum of training, using updated, modern training systems. This includes the introduction of virtual reality and simulators with high fidelity, physics-based models, where appropriate. Of course, we still use “hands on” labs as well. SWOS has worked very closely with the CSCS, another key Surface community schoolhouse, to keep our investments on track and aligned with the Sailor 2025 vision. We also coordinate very closely with our resource sponsors in OPNAV N96 and N95, and most especially with the Surface Type Commanders, to ensure we continue to deliver the right training to the waterfront without transferring burden for training coordination to the Fleet. Q: Can you explain the importance of the PBED foundation and practical implementation in integrated tactical simulators? A: PBED – which stands for Plan, Brief, Execute, and Debrief – is a simple concept that encapsulates a consistent, common approach to all manner of operations. In my career, I have not seen a strong emphasis on a repeatable cycle to support planning and decisions. And in my career I think the Surface community has been particularly weak in the “debrief ” phase – we would “get ‘er done” then quickly move to the

next task, without regard to lessons learned. We can learn so much from a more rigorous and transparent approach to the debrief phase. Q: What prompted the return to celestial/Surface navigation and why is it important to teach our officers and quartermasters? A: Following some well-publicized navigation errors – most notably the former USS Guardian (MCM 5) grounding – the Surface Navy took a hard look at our navigation training wholeness. A series of recommendations were put forward following this wholeness study, which were approved by the Fleet Commanders Readiness Council. Some of those recommendations included a reinvigoration of celestial navigation training – to support the Navy’s ability to navigate in the absence of reliable satellite or electronic navigation aids. Q: I understand there is SWOS U at Great Lakes...what is that and why is it Great Lakes and not Newport? A: The Center for Naval Engineering merged with SWOS in 2011. As a result, SWOS assumed

responsibility for training of all seven conventional engineering specialties. In 2014, SWOS also assumed responsibility for the quartermaster rating. This means, in turn, SWOS has learning sites far beyond Newport. In fact we are located in Great Lakes, Norfolk, Mayport, San Diego, Pearl Harbor, Bangor, Yokosuka, Sasebo and Fort Leonard Wood. Since the merger we have executed a methodical and comprehensive update to all enlisted training, with a goal of creating a continuum of professional training in each of these rates. SWOS Unit Great Lakes is our subordinate command, led by Cmdr. Eric Williams – a superb limited duty officer engineer. Cmdr. Williams and his staff of 250 professionals teach all of the “A” Schools and most of the “C” Schools in the eight specialties that we are responsible for training.

Continued on next page 13

SURFACE WARFARE FALL 2016

Photo by Chief James E. Foehl

Photo by MCC James E. Foehl

Continued from previous page

ABOVE: Welch provides a tour of the school to Commander in Chief of the People's Liberation Army (Navy) Adm. Wu Shengli. RIGHT: Welch and his relief, Capt. Scott Robertson, the new commanding officer of SWOS, salute as Vice Adm. Rowden looks on during the change of command on Sept. 9. 14

Q: Tell me about the visit by the People's Liberation Army (Navy) CNO and your visit to China. How did that come about and what came of those meetings? A: The previous Chief of Naval Operations, retired Adm. Jonathan Greenert, and his counterpart in the People's Liberation Army (Navy) Adm. Wu Shengli agreed to strengthen military-to-military ties. SWOS interactions with counterparts from the PLA(N) have been part of this initiative. We hosted Admiral Wu at SWOS in September 2014 when he was in Newport for the International Seapower Symposium. He toured our training facilities, then sat and took questions from a dozen prospective commanding officers who were here for training. In February 2015, we hosted a delegation of PLA(N) commanding officers, prospective commanding officers, and various staff officers for two and a half days. We provided a series of briefs on how the U.S. Navy trains and develops its Surface Warfare Officers, which led to extensive interactions between operators from both navies. The visit culminated with a series of maneuvering exercises in our shiphandling trainers, with bridge teams manned by both American

and Chinese deck officers. The bridge teams used the Code for Unalerted Encounters at Sea (CUES) and practiced a variety of communications and maneuvering exercises. Most recently, in October 2015, I led a delegation of commanding officers and prospective commanding officers on a reciprocal visit to China. We visited the aircraft carrier Liaoning and the Submarine Naval Academy in Qingdao, visited their Naval Command College in Nanjing, and met with Adm. Wu in Beijing. Adm. Wu took questions for over two and a half hours from our delegation. We were also able to visit the Forbidden City, the Great Wall at Mutanyu, and enjoyed an evening of free time in Beijing. I am hopeful that SWOS will continue to be involved in future engagements with the PLA(N). Q: Vice Adm. Rowden uses the term, "Warfighting First." How does the realignment of the SWOS staff to support the Distributed Lethality and Naval Surface and Mine Warfighting Development (SMWDC) Center warfare tactics instructors (WTIs) incorporation along specific warfighting areas of expertise support this? A: Great question! Vice Adm. Rowden has certainly reinvigorated

our community with his emphasis on honing our tactical skills, and the necessary return to Sea Control as a central tenet for how the U.S. Navy must operate. SWOS has made some important changes that will provide the platform to teach these concepts. The work currently underway within our community, led by SMWDC, will provide improved doctrine and tactics to be taught at SWOS and in other locations. The introduction of WTIs at SWOS and other training centers will provide an important method of bringing that renewed tactical skill to the classroom. While I

PERSONNEL READINESS

was very pleased with the content of the courses and the quality of instruction, the introduction of three WTIs to SWOS has already improved what we teach and how we teach it. There is still work to be done, and as various community initiatives come to fruition, SWOS must be prepared to adapt to the positive changes that will follow. I am energized by what I see coming in the next 3-4 years! Q: What message would you like to leave the readers about SWOS? A: If readers have not been to SWOS in several years, it has changed â&#x20AC;&#x201C; I believe very much for the better. We are not fixated on the past, though we certainly use past experiences to inform our assessment of the current situation, and will seek to apply previous lessons learned as part of the decision making process. Rather, SWOS looks to the future. We seek to build on the solid foundations in both enlisted and officer training. For example, we have in place a continuum of professional training in our officer community and will soon have the same continuum in each enlisted rating. SWOS has that solid foundation established in material readiness training and in navigation, seamanship and navigation training, from E1 to O6. We must advance training on tactics and operations in a similar fashion. That wonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t happen in a vaccum at SWOS, but rather in cooperation with NMWDC, CSCS and other stakeholders. And as we develop tactics and the subject matter experts, SWOS provides a great platform to deliver that training. For those who would consider an assignment at one of the many SWOS learning sites, SWOS is a dynamic, fast-paced and rewarding assignment. A tour at SWOS provides Officers, Chiefs and Sailors with the opportunity to cultivate and deepen their professional knowledge while training the next generation. *

New SWO Recruitment Tools Overview Overhauled the SWO section of the USNA admissions homepage ahead of next year's applications. We went from two paragraphs to 20 pages, including an overview plus personal testimonials from junior officers and serving midshipmen on why they picked SWO and what they do.

From Navy Personnel Command

www.usna.edu/SWO/index.php

Launched "Midshipmen Early Ship Selection" pilot program for summer 2016 cruise. First ship experience plays a huge role in retention decision, so the design here is to empower commanding officers with opportunity to offer two midshipmen per ship a chance to early ship select. This opportunity is for USNA and NROTC. Collaborated with NSTC to overhaul NROTC website ahead of 201617 application season. Looks similar to USNA site, with added diversity of personal testimonials of midshipmen who just selected SWO from colleges and universities all around the country. www.nrotc.navy.mil/swo/swo_1.html

Experimenting with social media outreach very successfully with a high volume, high capacity online tool called "Slack." It allows large group Q/A online. Used successfully as a pilot with junior officers at sea and ashore to talk about slates, assignments, etc. Will launch effort in the fall to invite midshipmen into dedicated sessions to learn more about opportunities as a SWO. Instituted process with CNRC that will pick future SWO OCS candidates through a board comprised of SWO junior officers. Formerly the picks were done by a computer. * 15

SURFACE WARFARE FALL 2016

Wade Relieves Kilby at Navy’s ‘Top SWO’ Command

Story From SMWDC Public Affairs

Photos By

PO2 Phil Ladouceur

CNSP Public Affairs 16

PERSONNEL READINESS

“We’re recruiting and investing in our youth. Remember, we don’t rise to the level of our expectations; we fall to the level of our training.” -Rear Adm. Kilby

ith the sound of the Navy Band and the serene backdrop of the Pacific Ocean, the Naval Surface and Mine Warfighting Development Center (SMWDC) held its first change of command ceremony at Naval Base San Diego, Aug. 5. Rear Adm. John Wade assumed command of SMWDC from Rear Adm. Jim Kilby during a pierside ceremony led by Vice Adm. Thomas Rowden, commander, Naval Surface Forces. “Jim Kilby has been here from the beginning, bringing this command into existence and leading the Surface Navy into greater tactical proficiency during critical times,” said Rowden. “He has been at the forefront of creating warfare tactics instructors whose impact will be felt for years.” SMWDC headquarters opened in San Diego, June 9, 2015 with four bicoastal divisions. Those divisions

include an operational Mine Warfare Division in San Diego; an Integrated Air and Missile Defense Division in Dahlgren, Virginia; an Amphibious Warfare Division in Little Creek, Virginia; and a Sea Combat Division – also located in San Diego. Though SMWDC was formed officially a year ago, Kilby assumed command Aug. 5, 2014, during the pre-commissioning stages. “We came here two years ago with a plan to raise the tactical acumen of the Surface Warfare community at the individual, unit, and integrated levels,” said Kilby. “Warfare tactics instructors are now the conduits to systematically institutionalize that effort on surface ships and staffs. Patience is required. We won’t realize the potential of this effort tomorrow, in a year, or possibly the next decade, but we will realize it – we must. We only have to read the newspapers to get a sense of the

Continued on next page

TOP: Rear Adm. Jim Kilby. CENTER: (left to right) Kilby, Vice Adm. Tom Rowden, and Rear Adm. John Wade. BOTTOM: Rowden and Kilby applaud as Wade takes command of SMWDC. 17

SURFACE WARFARE FALL 2016

Continued from previous page

CENTER: SMWDC's WTI badges. 18

complexity of the environment that our ships and Sailors are operating in every day.” Akin to TOPGUN for the Navy’s best aviators, SMWDC is charged with increasing the tactical proficiency of the Surface Fleet by selecting an elite cadre of Surface Warfare Officers (SWOs) to become Surface warfare tactics instructors (WTIs) – the tactical best of the best. WTIs come from three Surface Warfare communities: integrated air and missile defense, amphibious warfare, or anti-submarine/antisurface warfare. They’re identifiable in the fleet by their red and black patches. Under Kilby’s strategic vision, 84 SWOs graduated from SMWDC’s intensive 3-5 month WTI courses in Virginia and San Diego. And graduates have quickly become tactical force multipliers in the fleet by leading advanced Missile and Surface Warfare exercises, mentoring combat watch teams on cruisers and destroyers, and writing and updating warfare doctrine. Since opening, SMWDC WTIs have “rewritten and revised 19 tactical publications” Kilby said. “For the commanding officers in the crowd, I need you to continue to beat this drum and have your best young officers apply for the WTI program,” said Kilby. “We’re recruiting and investing in our youth. Remember, we don’t rise to the level of our expectations; we fall to the level of our training.” WTIs also led SMWDC’s pilot Surface Warfare Advance Tactical Training (SWATT), a three-week exercise inserted between a ship’s basic phase and its Composite Training Unite Exercise. This effort tactically prepares cruisers, destroyers, and amphibious ships for deployment. Kilby’s staff successfully led two bicoastal trial SWATTs with the John C. Stennis

Carrier Strike Group in 2015 and Destroyer Squadron 26 in 2016. Operationally, SMWDC led the Mine Counter Measures (MCM) operations for Vigilant Shield 2015 in the Southern California (SOCAL) operating area, and integrated with the Republic of Korea Navy during the Ulchi Freedom Guardian exercise in 2015. Kilby was the operational commander for the SOCAL portion of the Navy’s largest multinational exercise, Rim of Pacific (RIMPAC) 2016. Kilby and his Mine Warfare Division, Commander Task Force 177, integrated with six partner nations and 24 units to form an international cohesive coalition that successfully disposed of 77 inert mines near SOCAL military installations. As SMWDC’s first commanding officer, he conducted more than 80 ship visits to explain the importance of the new command and how it benefits junior SWOs. He met with congressional leadership, Secretary of Defense, Dr. Ash Carter, two consecutive Chiefs of Naval Operations, and multiple allied leaders to increase international command partnerships. His successor, Wade, comes from Commander, Naval Surface Force, U.S. Pacific Fleet as the former chief of staff. He is only the second admiral to lead SMWDC. “I thank Jim for establishing SMWDC and setting the standard; I’m ready to get to work,” said Wade. “Jim, you brought SMWDC to life. You’ve taken an idea and a vision and made it a reality. And I promise as the new commander to give it my all and take the football down the field. Everything we do is focused on our ships and our Sailors to ensure they have the confidence and competence to employ their weapons systems to fight and win if called upon.” *

COMBAT READINESS

Man. Train. Equip.

PACIFIC OCEAN (August 15, 2016) Sailors assigned to the Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Shoup (DDG 86) participate in a crash and salvage drill on the ship's flight deck. Shoup is currently underway conducting routine operations in the Pacific Ocean. (U.S. Navy Photo By Petty Officer 2nd Class Eli K. Buguey/Released)

SURFACE WARFARE FALL 2016

Photo by PO2 Eli K. Buguey

Exercise Rim of the Pacific 2016 Concludes Story By

Lt. Miranda Williams RIMPAC Public Affairs

ABOVE: USS Howard (DDG 83). RIGHT: USS Stockdale (DDG 106) steams in close formation as one of forty ships and submarines representing 13 international partner nations during RIMPAC 2016. 20

he worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s largest international maritime exercise concluded Aug. 4, after more than a month of training events conducted in and around the Hawaiian Islands and Southern California. Twenty-six nations, more than 40 ships and submarines, 200 aircraft, and 25,000 personnel participated in Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) 2016, more countries and personnel than in any previous year. This yearâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s RIMPAC marked the 25th in the series that began in 1971 and is now held every two years. Hosted by U.S. Pacific Fleet, RIMPAC 2016 was led by Vice Adm. Nora Tyson, commander, U.S. 3rd Fleet, who served as the combined task force (CTF) commander. Royal Canadian Navy Rear Adm. Scott Bishop served as deputy commander of the CTF, and Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force Rear Adm. Koji Manabe was the vice commander. Other key leaders of the multinational force included Commodore Malcolm

COMBAT READINESS

LEFT: Marine Cpl. Ryan Dills communicates with other assault amphibious vehicles while traveling from USS America to Royal Australian Navy HMAS Canberra (L02).

Photo by Staff Sgt. Christopher Giannetti

Photo by PO1 Ace Rheaume

Wise of the Royal Australian Navy, who commanded the maritime component; Brig. Gen. Blaise Frawley of the Royal Canadian Air Force, who commanded the air component; and Royal New Zealand Navy Commodore James Gilmour, who led the amphibious task force. “RIMPAC 2016 was an unqualified success; the collaboration and cohesiveness between participants proved that we can operate effectively with our partner nations and that we will be ready in the Pacific if or when we’re called upon,” said Tyson. “We operated as an effective team while simultaneously strengthening the skills of each and every participant. To safely and effectively execute an exercise of this scale and scope is a tribute to the leadership and skill of every participating unit. I could not be more proud of everyone who took part, and I value the friendships that we built.” Tyson said the involvement of so

Continued on next page 21

SURFACE WARFARE FALL 2016

Photo by PO1 Jason Noble Continued from previous page

ABOVE: USS Princeton (CG 59), the People's Liberation Army (Navy) destroyer Xian (153) USS Stockdale (DDG 106) underway in formation. 22

many different countries working together to successfully accomplish RIMPAC was a strong reminder of the unity coalition forces can exhibit in a real-world situation. “From the beginning harbor phase to the closing ceremony reception, the different nations have demonstrated their capability and proven themselves to be very adaptive during the entire exercise,” said Tyson. “It’s all about our working together and becoming better partners and understanding how we work together in different scenarios. We’ve certainly accomplished what we set out to do with RIMPAC and proven that we’re stronger as allies because of it.” This year’s exercise participants were Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Denmark, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, People’s Republic of China, Peru, the Republic of Korea, the Republic of the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Tonga, United Kingdom, in addition to the United States. The U.S., Australia and Canada

have participated in all 25 RIMPACs since 1971. RIMPAC 2016 marked the first time Denmark, Germany and Italy participated in the maritime exercise. Each nation displayed capabilities ranging from disaster relief and maritime security operations to sea control and complex warfighting exercises, including a mass casualty drill, replenishments at sea, submarine search and rescue, aircraft refueling and multi-day diving operations. Additionally, a harpoon missile shoot from littoral combat ship USS Coronado (LCS 4) and amphibious operations in the Southern California area of operation were exhibited for the first time during a RIMPAC training scenario. “RIMPAC 16 was a tremendous opportunity for all of us,” said Bishop. “We worked with exceptionally talented men and women from across the Asia-Pacific region, and we had the opportunity to share knowledge and develop a better understanding of other’s perspectives. These experiences will benefit us all.” Commodore Wise said this year’s exercise also had several real-world

challenges that tested RIMPAC participants. “We had a very successful exercise on the back of ensuring safety as a high priority, including a brief pause in the exercise program to deal with Hurricane Darby during a key phase of the force integration period,” said Wise. “For me, the impact of the hurricane on July 25 showed how adaptive both the ships at sea and the staff in the relevant headquarters could be, and therefore worked together to achieve both a safe exercise and develop strategies in good time.” The RIMPAC 2016 theme of capable, adaptive partners highlights participating nations demonstrating the flexibility of maritime forces to meet regional and global challenges for mutual benefit. The world’s largest international maritime exercise, RIMPAC provides a unique training opportunity that helps participants foster and sustain the cooperative relationships that are critical to ensuring the safety of sea lanes and security on the world’s oceans. RIMPAC 2016 is the 25th exercise in the series that began in 1971. *

COMBAT READINESS

Photo by PO1 Jason Noble

Sailors aboard USS Princeton (CG 59) fire an RGM-84 Harpoon anti-ship missile during an international sinking exercise.

Sailors assigned to USS Howard (DDG 83) man the helm during an underway replenishment.

Photo by PO2 Siobhana McEwen

Sailors assigned USS Shoup (DDG 86) heave on a mooring line as the ship returns to Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam.

Photo by PO2 Holly L. Herline 23

SURFACE WARFARE FALL 2016

USS America’s ‘Blue-Green Team’ Demonstrates Capability During Rim of the Pacific 2016 Story By

Capt. Michael W. Baze Commanding Officer USS America

ABOVE: Sailors and Marines prepare to man the rails of USS America. 24

mphibious warfighting is ever-evolving and today’s Navy and Marine Corps team is more versatile and adaptable than ever before. his year, the amphibious assault ship USS America (LHA 6) proudly served as the amphibious task force command and control platform during the 2016 Rim of the Pacific Exercise (RIMPAC). Embarked flag staffs from the Royal New Zealand Navy and Expeditionary Strike Group 3 joined America’s crew alongside over 800 U.S. Marines from 3rd Marine Regiment. These Marines

make up the Provisional Marine Expeditionary Brigade-Hawaii for the exercise and were joined by Marines, Soldiers and Sailors from Australia, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, Republic of Korea and Tonga. United States rotary wing and tilt-rotor Navy and Marine Corps aircraft, as well as multiple aircraft from other RIMPAC participant nations, operated with America during the exercise to improve interoperability while honing the skills needed during amphibious operations. America is capable of supporting a wide range of Navy/Marine Corps missions across the spectrum of

conflict, from peacetime operations like humanitarian assistance/ disaster relief, defense support of civil authorities and theater security cooperation; to non-combatant evacuation operations; to full combat operations in support of Marine landing forces. In addition to this inherent versatility, America is well suited as a command and control platform at the center of an amphibious readiness group. An aviation-centric platform, America truly provides unmatched flexibility in supporting the Marine Corps’ current and future fleet aircraft and was designed with enhanced aviation capabilities in

COMBAT READINESS

Photo by PO1 Joseph M. Buliavac

Photo by PO3 Kyle Hafer mind to optimally sustain and support the Marine’s newest aircraft — the MV-22 Osprey and the F-35B Joint Strike Fighter — during extended global deployments. For example, the hangar bay is about 40 percent larger than past similar platforms and includes a second high-bay hangar crane area to improve aviation maintenance capabilities. America also carries more aviation fuel and possesses more space for aviation repair activities. In addition to supporting the MV-22 and F-35B, it can support a wide range of Marine aircraft such as the AV-8B Harrier II, CH-53D/E Sea Stallion, UH-1N Iroquois and AH-1W Super Cobra, as well as Navy helicopters such as the MH-60S. For RIMPAC, America embarked MH-60R

helicopters that participated in both anti-submarine and anti-surface warfare training with participating nations. During RIMPAC, the bluegreen force engaged in realistic and relevant training to strengthen our own and our partners’ abilities to communicate and conduct complex maritime operations safely, efficiently and effectively. The embarked Marine forces learned more about ship-to-shore movements and eventually launched into the Army’s Pohakuloa Training Area via Marine Corps aircraft, assault amphibious vehicles and landing craft air cushions for

combined arms training and live fire ashore. All of this training and planning from sea to shore culminated in a final training event, including an amphibious assault beach landing. America and her crew helpled to strengthen the bonds of understanding, friendship and teamwork with the many nations contributing to this year’s RIMPAC. We are excited to have the opportunity to improve interoperability with not only our Marine counterparts but with all countries involved in this diverse and intricate exercise. *

ABOVE: USS America underway for RIMPAC 2016.

BELOW: Marines assigned to 2nd Battalion, 3D Marine Regiment board a CH-53 Sea Stallion helicopter on USS America.

Photo by PO1 Ryan Riley 25

SURFACE WARFARE FALL 2016

Photo by PO2 Stacy M. Atkins Ricks

Rim of the Pacific: Beyond Hawaii Story By

Capt. Bob Baugham

Vice commander, CTF 177 SMWDC

or a second time, the worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s largest multinational maritime exercise, Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) 2016 found its way to Southern California (SoCal). It arrived in the form of Commander Task Force (CTF) 177 and mine countermeasures. RIMPAC SoCal was a two-pronged effort with CTF 177 conducting combined mine warfare operations in the waters off San Diego. The task force was comprised of U.S. and Canadian ships, explosive ordnance disposal technicians, clearance divers, and autonomous underwater vehicles, unmanned underwater vehicles. Personnel from the U.S., Canada, Australia, Germany, Japan, and Norway

participated; their units operated both afloat and ashore. U.S. Navy mine countermeasures (MH-53) helicopters were embarked on boththe amphibious dock landing ship USS Pearl Harbor (LSD 52) and operated ashore. Simultaneously, CTF 176 conducted amphibious operations training out of Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton with U.S. Marines and Mexican navy tank landing ship ARM Usumacinta (A 412). With RIMPAC SoCal concluded, I want to take a look at the accomplishments and successes of our fine service men and women that paved the wake to victory. Let me start with some of our firsts.

COMBAT READINESS

RIGHT: Explosive ordnance disposal technicians retrieve an inert mine during a mine-hunting exercise in support of the Southern California portion of RIMPAC 2016.

LEFT: Three combat-rubber raiding crafts, piloted by members of the Royal Australian Navy and Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force return to the well deck of amphibious dock landing ship USS Pearl Harbor (LSD 52) after an underwater surveillance exercise as a part of the Southern California portion of RIMPAC 2016.

Photo by PO2 Bryan Jackson

For RIMPAC SoCal 2016, this was the first time that: • We used a dock landing ship, USS Pearl Harbor (LSD 52), as an afloat forward staging base that hosted coalition divers, unmanned underwater vehicles, and marine mammal systems. Pearl Harbor also embarked Task Group 177.1, which the Australian Navy led. • The littoral combat ship USS Freedom (LCS 1) participated with an embarked expeditionary mine countermeasures company. • Two marine mammal dolphin systems platoons deployed in the same exercise supporting mine countermeasures operations at sea • A Norwegian team participated, employing the HUGIN Autonomous Underwater Vehicle. • Unmanned underwater vehicle operators from Explosive Ordinance Disposal Mobile Unit 1 conducted missions around ships and piers in a confined harbor operating environment. • The mine countermeasures ship USS Champion (MCM 4) coordinated with Coastal Riverine Squadron One to cut a moored training shape. Our unmanned underwater vehicle assets conducted hours and hours of search operations covering boat lanes, sea lanes, and San Diego Bay harbor areas. These exploratory operations resulted in the detection of mine-like contacts for reacquisition, identification, and neutralization missions conducted by remotely operated vehicles and coalition divers. For airborne mine countermeasures operations, Helicopter Mine Countermeasures Squadron (HM) 14 executed mine hunting, mechanical and magnetic minesweeping system missions from Pearl Harbor and while based ashore at Naval Air Station North Island. The Royal Canadian Navy’s Kingston-class coastal defense vessels HMCS Saskatoon (MM 709) and HMCS Yellowknife (MM 706) provided a surface mine warfare search capability utilizing towed side scan sonar and the HUGIN Autonomous Underwater Vehicle. They also provided a force protection and patrol capability.

From there, explosive ordnance disposal and clearance divers took over. U.S. and Canadian dive teams conducted reacquisition, identification, and neutralization missions on mines and mine-like bottom objects. Meanwhile on Pearl Harbor, divers and unmanned underwater vehicle teams from Australia, Japan, and Germany operated closely with the U.S. dolphins to clear approaches to San Clemente Island in support of CTF 176 amphibious operations. Champion conducted mine hunting and neutralization missions, identifying and neutralizing bottom and moored mine shapes. Mechanical mine sweeping culminated in the cutting and recovery of an inert mine. When it was all said and done, the combined force located 493 contacts, 77 mines, executed 294 flight hours, conducted 34 pouncer operations, 78 dives, 77 unmanned underwater vehicle missions, and 220 hours of marine mammal operations. Of course, while actual mission accomplishment is important, it’s not the main reason we conduct RIMPAC. It’s really about building relationships and capability with our coalition partners. A common challenge we always talk about in multi-national exercises is bringing together different countries and units with different standard operating procedures – and learning to work together as one force. This is no easy task. Coordinating and communicating between units to accomplish the mission can be challenging as people learn each other’s tactics, techniques and procedures, and unique capabilities and limitations. What starts as a challenge often becomes a success – and RIMPAC SoCal is no exception. While the events conducted during this exercise may have enhanced the ability to ensure a systematic and synchronized approach to mine warfare search and clearance operations, the biggest win was the participating units and countries exchanging best practices and lessons learned, allowing us to come together in a potential real-world crisis. We are ready to train, fight, and win as a combined team. *

SURFACE WARFARE FALL 2016

Photo by Lt. Bryce Hadley

Navy Conducts First LCS Harpoon Missile Test Story From Program Executive Office Integrated Warfare Systems

ittoral combat ship USS Coronado (LCS 4) successfully executed the first livefire, over-the-horizon missile test using a Harpoon Block IC missile, July 19, during the Navy’s Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) exercise. The test event validated the operation of the Harpoon missile aboard a littoral combat ship and provided the necessary engineering data to support future ship upgrades. “This Harpoon [demonstration] on USS Coronado supports the Navy’s larger distributed lethality concept to strengthen naval power at and from the sea to ensure the Navy maintains its maritime superiority,” said Rear Adm. Jon Hill, program executive officer for Integrated Warfare Systems (PEO IWS). The Harpoon installation aboard Coronado involved the collaboration of fleet and industry partners, such as ship designers, system design and sustainment experts, and installers to rapidly adapt and install the missile on Coronado. “The incorporation of an ‘off-the-

shelf ’ Harpoon missile on USS Coronado in less than four months was no small feat and supports [the Chief of Naval Operations’] focus on accelerated learning to bring capabilities to the fleet faster,” said Capt. Joe Mauser, PEO IWS Harpoon lead. Harpoon is an all-weather, overthe-horizon weapon designed to execute anti-ship missions against a range of surface targets. It can be launched from surface ships, submarines and aircraft and is currently used on 50 U.S. Navy ships: 22 cruisers, 21 Flight I destroyers and seven Flight II destroyers. The test is part of a greater strategy by the Navy to increase the lethality and survivability of littoral combat ships, which includes demonstrating and deploying over-the-horizon capability on Coronado and USS Freedom (LCS 1) in the near term. “With every deployment, LCS is bringing increased capability to the fleet, and USS Coronado is no exception,” said Rear Adm.

John Neagley, PEO for LCS. “The Harpoon demo is yet another example of the power and promise of these warships.” In September 2015, Director, Surface Warfare Rear Adm. Peter Fanta directed the installation of a technologically mature, over-thehorizon capability across in-service littoral combat ships to support the Navy’s distributed lethality concept. Priority was given to Coronado and Freedom as ships preparing to deploy in fiscal year 2016. In the case of Coronado, an inservice variant of the Harpoon Weapon System (HSLCLS 9/10 and Block 1C missile) was selected as a proven off-the-shelf combat capability. While this demo represents the first over-the-horizon Harpoon test from an Independence-variant LCS in an operational setting, no decision has been made on which over-the-horizon missile will be integrated into the LCS platform. That will be determined by a future competitive contract award. *

MATERIAL READINESS

PACIFIC OCEAN (Aug. 19, 2016) Electricianâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Mate 1st Class Sergio Arellano, assigned to the amphibious dock landing ship USS Comstock (LSD 45), positions chains while performing maintenance on a main propulsion diesel engine. The Makin Island Amphibious Ready Group is conducting integrated training with Amphibious Squadron Five and the 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit in preparation for an upcoming deployment. (U.S. Navy photo by Petty Officer 3rd Class Abby Rader)

Man. Train. Equip.

SURFACE WARFARE FALL 2016

SERMC Shop in the Spotlight: Pump Shop Story & Photo by

Scott Curtis

SERMC

ABOVE: PO3 Brittany Alldredge and PO1 Raul Coronado prepare to measure the shaft alignment on a firemain pump. 30

umps are arguably the most used pieces of gear onboard ships. Every day on every class of ship in the U.S. Navy, thousands of motors are coupled to thousands of pumps moving seawater, fuel, potable water, bilge and other fluids and air. If the shafts on those pumps and motors are misaligned, a common ailment, they begin to vibrate. The vibration can be difficult to detect and cause the pump to run less efficiently. Eventually, misaligned pumps will fail, resulting in major maintenance expenses due to failed bearings, couplings and other expensive machine components. Because machine downtime is so costly to the Fleet, high-tech tools like laser alignment tools allow Sailors to quickly, easily and accurately keep pumps in the fleet running smoothly, adding years to their service life. In an average calendar year Southeast Regional Maintenance Center’s (SERMC) Pump Shop repairs more than 60 pumps. Before returning them to the Fleet, all pumps and motors are calibrated using a precision laser alignment tool. The laser ensures the shaft of the motor and pump are properly aligned along horizontal and vertical planes, or “co-linear.” “Using the laser, we are able to align the motor and pump shafts quickly and accurately,” said Machinists Mate 3rd Class Brittany Alldredge. “We mount the laser and laser sensor on the pump and motor shafts

and rotate them as the laser sensor measures hundreds of points, essentially eliminating math errors and other common mistakes.” All of the data points are collected and transmitted to a handheld computer. The computer visually displays the necessary vertical and horizontal alignment corrections to scale. “It’s much cheaper in the long run to keep the pumps running efficiently than it is to rebuild or replace a piece of gear,” said Petty Officer 1st Class Raul Coronado. “The pumps we return to the fleet are highly calibrated and will run at peak efficiency which greatly reduces bearing, seal, shaft and coupling failures.” Additionally, Sailors assigned to SERMC return to the fleet at the end of their tour with vital skills and Navy Afloat Maintenance Training Strategy (NAMTS) qualifications. The NAMTS program provides Sailors in the electricians mate, engineman , gas turbine machinist, hull technician and machinist mate specialties with onthe-job, rating-specific training. NAMTS training is available to Sailors on shore duty at SERMC, leading to the knowledge and proficiency to perform essential fleet maintenance and repairs while underway which often would normally have required the ship to return to port. *

MATERIAL READINESS

Condition Based Maintenance Plus Changing How the Navy Schedules Maintenance Story By

Ronald Graffius NAVSEA, Maintenance Engineering Division with

Rose Gaffney

CACI Principal Engineer

Michael Byrne

Readiness Engineer, APM for LCS CBM+ Program

PHOTO: Sailors conduct maintenance on an air lock door aboard USS Ross (DDG 71).

ave you ever wished you didn’t have to climb down all those ladders just to take that one meter reading in shaft alley? Ever dream you didn’t have to spend forever and a day preparing for maintenance? Significant time and effort goes into tagging out a system, gathering tools, parts and hazmat, disassembling a component or system for inspections and cleanings only to occasionally catch problems. If you’ve ever hoped for a quicker way to obtain accurate readings and a better way to schedule maintenance, you’re not alone.

Continued on next page

Photo by PO1 Theron J. Godbold 31

A sset M anagement Capability

SURFACE WARFARE FALL 2016

Prognostics/Diagnostics Health Management CBM+ Condition Based Maintenance Usage-Based PM Schedule/ Time-Based PM Run to Failure

Technology M aturity Level

Continued from previous page

Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) understands these issues and is responding by bringing Condition Based Maintenance Plus (CBM+) to the fleet. CBM+ uses sensors and technologies to capture data and diagnose issues. Instead of periodic, scheduled maintenance, CBM+ predicts failures through the use of algorithms and then schedules maintenance only when it is actually needed. This allows Sailors time to focus on other duties while simultaneously sustaining the reliability of their equipment. We all know that budgets limit what technologies can actually be installed, but with the right analysis and decision making, the purchasing of CBM+ enabling technologies can be an affordable and worthwhile investment. The Navy needs to consider the costs of calibration, repairs, replacement, test equipment requirements, training, and other costs associated with maintaining the CBM+ technologies and the equipment being monitored. CBM+ is a logical extension of NAVSEAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s existing CBM strategy that has been successful for years. CBM+ makes it easier, faster, and more efficient to schedule only necessary maintenance by allowing for the continuous monitoring of the condition of our equipment and systems. As shown above, instead of running equipment to failure or performing preventive maintenance based on a calendar, equipment run-time or usage-based factor, a more desirable approach can be applied to measure material condition in order to determine the right time to perform maintenance. As CBM+ technologies evolve, the Navy will be able to collect data that will aid

in predicting when equipment will fail thereby reducing corrective maintenance costs. RCM Supports CBM+ Reliability centered maintenance (RCM) principles are the base that CBM+ is built upon. Using RCM, the Navy can ensure sensors are properly installed and placed where they can detect the failure modes that are trying to be prevented. When sensors are installed using RCM analysis and tied to preventive maintenance tasks in the Planned Maintenance System (PMS), maintenance can be triggered based on specific events such as reaching a particular equipment run time or exceeding a measured limit. Unfortunately, there are numerous sensors on ships today that do not align to any PMS tasks and do not provide useful performance information because they are capturing data from areas unrelated to significant functional failures. Functional failures occur when the system or equipment fails to operate within the designated parameters. To prevent this mismatch from happening with new acquisitions, NAVSEA is working with program executive offices and field activities to ensure the proper placement of sensors using RCM analysis. Additionally, NAVSEA is taking the necessary steps to ensure that CBM+ is included in all future contracts to hold equipment providers accountable for proper sensor placement, installation, and compatibility with existing and follow-on data systems. The use of CBM+ technologies is not only gaining attention in the Navy because of its proven success in the commercial world and throughout the Department of Defense, but because it can reduce the administrative burden on shipâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s force. Additionally, using CBM+

MATERIAL READINESS

technology improves the operational readiness and availability of equipment and will reduce future maintenance requirements. CBM+ Test Pilots The Navy is ambitiously working towards having sensors and CBM+ enabling technologies aid in scheduling preventive maintenance tasks when needed. To this end, a number of CBM+ technology pilots have been initiated with the hope of significantly helping the future fleet, Sailor quality of service and equipment availability. Examples of the benefits CBM+ implementation offers are explained in the pilots detailed below. When the littoral combat ship (LCS) class was being designed, engineers, architects and designers knew the unique concept of operations, optimal manning and offship maintenance plan presented a special opportunity ABOVE RIGHT: Sailors troubleshoot a high frequency receiver in the radio room aboard USS Bataan (LHD 5).

Photo by Seaman Zachariah Grabill

BELOW RIGHT: Sailors monitors the simulated halon run time aboard USS Ross (DDG 71). to apply CBM+ to this fleet asset. Therefore, they worked early in the ship’s lifecycle to apply sensors to key equipment. LCS 1, 2 and 3 have leveraged the highly “sensorized” equipment sets delivered to the fleet as part of a CBM+ pilot testing a technology called the Machinery Reliability Management System (MRMS). The pilot saw a number of successes including the prediction of impending failures for equipment being monitored. These potential failures were headed off by thorough analysis of data received from over 6,800 sensors. Overall, the LCS CBM+ pilot was instrumental in the sustainment of both LCS 1 and 3 during their maiden overseas deployments and garnered positive feedback from their crews and shore-based support teams. The pilot achieved several objectives: predicting remaining useful life of equipment, diagnosing failures, assisting in the scheduling of maintenance tasks for upcoming availabilities, reducing crew workload, and helping operators and maintainers make smart decisions that reduced risks and impacts to the ships’ operations and schedules. Lessons learned from this pilot will help inform and shape the future of LCS CBM+. Another exciting pilot is underway. This pilot attempts to automatically schedule needed maintenance by linking data received from sensors and analyzed through a remote monitoring system directly to the Navy’s existing PMS scheduling tool (SKED) onboard ships. During a recent test conducted in a lab environment, the pilot successfully demonstrated the communication and transfer of engine data to SKED that resulted in a recommendation to the work center to schedule seven associated MRCs. Once the pilot is

Photo by PO1 Theron J. Godbold successfully tested on board ships and business rules are developed and tested to ensure correct scheduling, this direct maintenance scheduling capability will reduce the scheduling burden placed on Sailors while ensuring maintenance is performed only when the condition shows it is needed. NAVSEA is doing its part to advance maintenance scheduling to the next level and to improve the Sailor’s ability to assess equipment and systems by implementing CBM+. In time, the use of properly placed sensors and advanced CBM+ technologies will allow the automatic scheduling of the correct maintenance at the right time, so less time will be spent reviewing, planning and performing maintenance. As CBM+ technologies are implemented in the fleet, the time spent manually entering data, conducting tag outs and disassembling equipment will likely decrease as well. And hopefully, those painful trips down to shaft alley will decline too. * 33

SURFACE WARFARE FALL 2016

Illustration courtesy of Lockheed Martin

Navy and Marines Demonstrate Integrated Fire Control Story by

Vice Adm. Tom Rowden Commander, Naval Surface Forces

ABOVE: Illustration of the Navy’s first live fire demonstration to successfully test the integration of F-35 with NIFC-CA. 34

n Sept. 12, at the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico, a new frontier in Navy Integrated Fire Control-Counter Air (NIFC-CA) was achieved. A simulated AEGIS Baseline 9 configured ship engaged a low flying cruise missile target with an SM-6 missile, based solely on targeting data provided to the ship by the sophisticated sensors carried by a Marine Corps F-35B. This test is yet another example of how the Surface Force and its Marine Corps partners are extending operational horizons, distributing lethality, and increasing offensive fire power. The NIFC-CA program has been making steady progress for several years, and carrier strike groups have deployed with the capability since March 2015. However in those strike groups, the elevated sensor was an E-2D linked back to the ship in a Cooperative Engagement Capability network. In essence, this lethal capability was limited to CSG operations by its reliance on the E-2D. In this recent test, the elevated “sensor” was the F-35B, which

relayed its data back to the test “ship” through the Multi-Function Advanced Data Link (MADL). This test hints at the promise of future Surface Force lethality, in that F-35B configured LHA’s or LHD’s will not only be able to employ those aircraft in traditional ground support roles, but will now be able to sense, target, and destroy low-flying cruise missiles or strike aircraft far beyond the horizon. Consequently, AEGIS Baseline 9 ships, equipped with SM-6 missiles, like the one used in this test will be able to accept fire control data from any variant of the F-35 in the future. This will allow for longrange surface-to-air engagements when part of a traditional CSG, as part of an “up-gunned ESG” Adaptive Force Package alongside our Marine Corps partners, or even as part of a Joint integrated fire control engagement with U.S. Air Force F-35A’s providing the target location. Neutralizing enemy cruise missiles and low flying aircraft at range is just one of the dramatic leaps forward the Surface Force is making in terms of extending offensive

battlespace. Recent modifications to the Tomahawk Land Attack Missile (TLAM) have put the Navy on track to employing this weapon as a ship-killer out to the full extent of its range at around 1,000 miles. Additionally, the future frigate program is looking into a variety of surface-to-surface missile options for future frigates and also possible back-fit options for the entire LCS fleet. Earlier this year, Secretary of Defense Ash Carter described the Navy’s success in altering the SM-6 missile for use as a high-speed shipkiller. The Surface Force is going on the offensive, focusing once again on Sea Control by implementing the concept of Distributed Lethality. We are looking at every ship as a potential offensive weapons platform. We are operating them in new and novel ways, and we are putting potential adversaries on the defensive while making them work harder to find and target us. Many thanks to the entire team of folks — USMC, USN, White Sands Missile Range, and industry — who came together to demonstrate this awesome new capability. *

HERITAGE & RECOGNITION

Heritage.

PHILIPPINE SEA (Sept. 15, 2016) Chief Chris Davis has his combination cover placed on his head during a chief petty officer pinning ceremony aboard the amphibious transport dock ship USS Green Bay (LPD 20). Green Bay, part of the Bonhomme Richard Expeditionary Strike Group, is operating in the Philippine Sea in support of security and stability in the Indo-Asia-Pacific region. (U.S. Navy photo by Petty Officer 3rd Class Patrick Dionne/Released)

SURFACE WARFARE FALL 2016

SURFPAC Surface Warfare Officer of the Year Story by

PO2 Phil Ladouceur CNSP Public Affairs

RIGHT: Lt. Cmdr. Katie Jacobson

BELOW: USS Preble (DDG 88) prepares to moor at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam following an independent deployment to the Western Pacific.

very day that Lt. Cmdr. Katie Jacobson went to work aboard USS Preble (DDG 88), she had a smile on her face. Whatever challenge might present itself in the course of the day, that was just part of being a Surface Warfare Officer (SWO). “That’s one of the many things that I think makes being a SWO fun, being challenged to solve complex problems that really matter,” said Jacobson. “And every day that I stepped aboard Preble, I could feel the energy. You just know something is extraordinary about that ship and about that crew.” And it’s to that crew and work environment that Jacobson credits her selection as the Naval Surface Forces, U.S. Pacific Fleet's 2015 Surface Warfare Officer (SWO) of the Year. Vice Adm. Tom Rowden, Commander, Naval Surface Forces, U.S. Pacific Fleet (CNSP), announced Lt. Cmdr. Katie Jacobson as the winner July 14. “I am impressed by everyone who was nominated by their command for this award and all are to be commended as true warfighting professionals,” said Rowden. “To be named SWO of the Year shows a

Photo courtesy Lt. Cmdr. Katie Jacobson

superior level of performance within our community.” Individual Award, Team Effort Created in 2009, the award recognizes the SWO who best personifies the ideals of the surface warrior ethos through excellence in warfighting, leadership, and mission accomplishment. The commanding officer of the ship submits a nomination through the chain of command. In Jacobson's case, the nomination was sent to Destroyer Squadron (DESRON) 23, and then the DESRON selected her as their nominee to send to CNSP. The finalists were selected, and each had to take a lengthy exam

covering broad portions of surface warfare knowledge. Ten officers from across the Pacific Fleet Surface Force were nominated for the award. To compete for the award, they were required to demonstrate their knowledge on a variety of topics, including tactics, engineering, and navigation. “I had stellar leadership, peers and colleagues; and the crew, they were supportive," said Jacobson. "It not only bolstered my individual success, but the success of the team. So being the SWO of the year, it’s an individual recognition, but I couldn’t have done it without the Preble crew.” Jacobson also thanked the staff of

Photo by PO2 Johans Chavarro 36

HERITAGE & RECOGNITION

Photo courtesy PO2 Naomi VanDuser

DESRON 23, and the others who were nominated for the award. “I would like to congratulate my peers who were nominated for this distinction,” she said. “I’m very honored to serve alongside them in what I consider to be the world’s finest Navy.” She said that not only are there years of training and learning at a command that have accumulated, but that she was also the direct beneficiary of that collective knowledge. “Surface warfare is really a team sport,” she said. “It’s about passion for the profession. Everyone contributes to the success of the group or to an individual.” Taking Control of Change Her drive to constantly find ways to

improve the command was noted by Cmdr. John Bowman, commanding officer of Preble, who was executive officer during the time Jacobson was aboard. “She was an innovator, looking for problems and finding solutions,” he said. “It’s no surprise to me that [Jacobson] was selected as the SWO of the Year.” Jacobson served as the weapons officer and combat systems officer on board Preble from May 2012 to June 2015, deploying twice in the U.S. 7th Fleet area of operations. She said that sometimes great improvements can be made by small, easily achievable changes, by taking charge of factors you have control over to balance the ones you don’t. “Life on a ship is inherently

"And every day that I stepped aboard Preble, I could feel the energy. You just know something is extraordinary about that ship and about that crew." -Lt. Cmdr. Jacobson

dangerous, but we can mitigate those risks by changing the things that we can shape,” said Jacobson. “How much sleep a person receives the night before a major evolution, that’s something we can affect and those are things that have to be looked at and should be looked at to see if things make sense and if they don’t -- well, then we change them.” The first major change she was a part of on Preble was switching to shorter watches, with more time off. “That allowed for our crew to get in the normal circadian rhythm,” said Jacobson. “At least it allowed for the opportunity to do so with static watches. It went over very well with the crew.” Jacobson says that these kinds of small changes in conditions made a huge impact on morale and unit cohesion. “Sleep is paramount to being a good Sailor, a good decision maker, and a good warrior,” she said. Jacobson joined the Navy in 2004 after graduating from the Tulane University Naval Reserve Officer Training Corps program in New Orleans, and holds a Master of Science in Operations Analysis from the Naval Postgraduate School. She is currently assigned to the Federal Executive Fellowship Program at Research and Development Corporation in Washington, D.C. *

USS Preble (DDG 88) during an exercise with the Bonhomme Richard Expeditionary Strike Group.

SURFACE WARFARE FALL 2016

Deck Logs of Tank Landing Ship Provide Key Details

HERITAGE & RECOGNITION

Photo by PO1 Eric Lockwood

homas Helm, a scholar and onetime crewman of USS Indianapolis (CA 35), described the loss of the ship in his 1963 Ordeal by Sea as follows: “Midnight [on 30 July 1945]—a moderately heaving sea and clouds covering a half moon now nearly three hours old. The Indianapolis, with her 9,950 ton displacement spread over 610 feet, sliced her way westward into what must forever be referred to as an approximate position of 134 degrees 48 minutes East and 12 degrees 2 minutes North. The exact latitude and longitude will never be known…” In the seventy-one years since Indianapolis sank, and the fifty-three years since Helm’s dire prognosis for her discoverability, the wreckage of Indianapolis eludes detection. The Discovery Channel documented explorer Curt Newport’s unsuccessful expedition to find the wreckage of Indianapolis in 2001 and National Geographic featured another expedition to find her in the incongruously named 2005 program "Finding of the Indianapolis." Why It’s So Hard to Find the Ship It is difficult for under water explorers to locate the wreckage of Indianapolis for physical and historic reasons. The ship went down in the Philippine Sea in some of the deepest and most difficult terrain on Earth. In its immediate investigation of the sinking, the Navy estimated an ocean depth of over 1200 fathoms (nearly 1.5 miles) where Indianapolis sank. The depth of the area is more accurately in excess of three miles. The official Navy position for the sinking is an estimated dead reckoning position of where Indianapolis should have been on Convoy Route Peddie if following its routing instructions exactly; which Capt. Charles McVay, commanding officer of Indianapolis, reported he was when picked up by USS Ringness (APD100) on 3 August. Inability to send out on S.O.S. message because of damage to the ship’s electrical and communications systems, coupled with the delayed

rescue, caused the exact latitude and longitude of the ship to be lost. Finally, Japanese submarine commander Mochitsura Hashimoto, captain of Indianapolis’s attacker I-58 reportedly destroyed his records before surrendering to Allied forces—and U.S. intelligence failed to recover the location Hashimoto reported for sinking Indianapolis in his messages to Kure the day after the attack. The above mentioned difficulties do not make narrowing a possible area that Indianapolis went down impossible. Revisiting the archival records of the sinking revealed several clues capable of providing a better sense for where Indianapolis actually was on Route Peddie in the first minutes of 30 July 1945. Archival Records, Paired With a Personal Blog Prove Key One piece of the Indianapolis story capable of providing a better idea of the ship’s location when sunk has been present in accounts of the sinking and historical treatments, but mentioned only as a side note. Mcvay revealed in an oral history that approximately twelve hours before the attack, Indianapolis passed an American tank landing ship (LST). He described the event on 29 July as follows: “We had no incidents whatsoever [on July 29th]. We passed an LST headed toward Leyte as we were also, on Sunday, and talked to them. They were north of us and they were preparing to go further north in order to get out of our area to do some anti-aircraft shooting.” Indianapolis chroniclers Richard Newcomb and Thomas Helm both mentioned the encounter in their respective books on the sinking. Both placed the encounter around midday on the 29th, stated that the LST was moving north, referenced a brief radio conversation between the two ships, and indicated the LST’s intent to move further north for anti-aircraft firing training. An after action report from the Peleliu

Story By

Dr. Richared Hulver NHHC Histories and Archives Division Photos from NHHC

ABOVE: Hulver reads about Indianapolis.

Continued on next page 39

SURFACE WARFARE FALL 2016

Continued from previous page

Command dated 6 August 1945 prepared using survivor accounts addressed the passing as well, minus radio contact: "Radio silence had not been broken prior to the attack, but an LST had been spoken visually at about 1400 (-9 ½) on Sunday 29 July. The Indianapolis had passed this vessel on approximately the same course." Such an encounter at sea on a heavily traveled convoy route would generally be considered routine. The fact that an LST was the last American ship to see Indianapolis afloat, however, and that the encounter took place on the day of the attack makes it a significant piece of the Indianapolis story. In the seventy-one years since the sinking, the identification of that LST was either lost or its importance overlooked. Information posted online, however, has recently helped identify the LST in question. A key contribution came from John Murdick, from Mackinaw City, Michigan, who wrote a blog post entitled, “Francis G. Murdick— My Father,” accompanied by a WWII era photograph of a smiling young Sailor. Moved to commemorate his father’s naval service on Memorial Day 2015, the blog’s author recounted a story his father told him about being aboard an LST bound for Leyte in July 1945 and getting passed by Indianapolis. The young Sailor did not find out until much later that Indianapolis was sunk on

that voyage. His son was thankful his father’s ship did not suffer a similar fate in the same dangerous waters. Historians at NHHC consulted the National Personnel Records Center for Francis G. Murdick’s service records to see if the story might offer a lead in identifying the LST. The historical record confirmed the memory; personnel files for Seaman First Class Francis Murdick listed him as a passenger on board LST-779 when she departed Guam on 27 July 1945—one day before Indianapolis sailed, a discovery that merited further research in the U.S. Navy’s World War II deck logs held by the National Archives and Records Administration in College Park, Maryland. The timing of LST-779’s anti-aircraft training and her movement northward from Peddie fits exactly with historic accounts of Indianapolis’s passing an LST on the cruiser’s final voyage. Deck logs for LST-779 indicated that she left Port Apra Harbor, Guam, at 1500 on Friday, 27 July en route to Samar, Philippines. She would follow Convoy Route Peddie to her destination. Indianapolis cleared the same harbor at 0910 the next day (28 July) en route to Leyte Gulf. Shortly after midday on the 29th the two ships passed. LST-779 did not specifically mention her encounter with Indianapolis in her deck log that day, but the log did recount exactly what McVay

“We passed an LST headed toward Leyte as we were also, on Sunday, and talked to them. They were north of us and they were preparing to go further north in order to get out of our area to do some anti-aircraft shooting.” -Capt. McVay

BOTTOM LEFT: McVay gives testimony.

HERITAGE & RECOGNITION

RIGHT: LST-779.

remembered from the meeting. At 1300, LST-779 held general quarters to conduct firing exercises and began moving north of Peddie. At 1324, she released eight target balloons and shot five down. The crew secured from gunnery practice at 1353. With firing exercises completed, crew secured from general quarters at 1410 and the ship resumed her regular route. A reason for the omission of the encounter with Indianapolis or the exchange of signals between the two ships in the LST’s deck logs is unknown. Nevertheless, the timing of LST-779’s anti-aircraft training and her movement northward from Peddie fits exactly with historic accounts of Indianapolis’s passing an LST on the cruiser’s final voyage. There is little doubt that LST-779 is the anonymous ship from the Indianapolis story. As the tank landing ship moved north for their firing exercises, those who may have caught a glimpse of the cruiser were the last Americans to do so. In approximately eleven hours, the cruiser would be in the sights of a Japanese submarine. That fateful meeting of LST-779 and Indianapolis provides critical information regarding the Indianapolis sinking, namely, that the cruiser was ahead of schedule on Route Peddie and slightly south of it. The encounter offers a previously unknown data point along Route Peddie the day of the sinking that helps establish the location of Indianapolis. Additionally, LST-779’s deck logs are the closest thing to the missing Indianapolis deck logs that will ever be found. LST-779 traversed the same waters at the same time, recording specific information about weather and sea conditions. The deck

logs make it possible to better understand exactly what natural circumstances Indianapolis encountered—new data that can help researchers better determine where Indianapolis would have been when torpedoed and how survivors in the water would have been at the mercy of the movement of the sea. Additionally, LST-779’s being unable to see any survivors or wreckage as she passed where the sinking was on Peddie the following morning, and an absence of survivors’ recollections of seeing a ship the first morning in the water, indicates that neither were in the other’s line-of-sight. Deck Logs Tell a Different Story Instructions for Indianapolis established seven routing positions along Route Peddie. A chart with positions and times for which Indianapolis passed each up until the sinking was presented at the court of inquiry to determine if McVay would face court-martial. That chart indicated that Indianapolis reached the third point on her route, CFL (12°30’N, 138°00’E), at 1200 on 29 July. The deck logs for LST-779, however, tell a different story. At 1200 on 29 July LST-779 recorded a position of 12°22’N, 137°23’E, approximately 43 miles south-southwest of point CFL. Between 1200 and the initiation of maneuvers for anti-aircraft firing practice at 1300, logs for LST-779 indicate that the ship moved at full speed. When Indianapolis made first contact with LST-779, the tank landing ship was reportedly beginning to move northward for practice. That meant that the meeting likely took place shortly after 1300 and even further south-southwest of point CFL than LST-779’s noon

Continued on next page

SURFACE WARFARE FALL 2016

Continued from previous page

position. During that daytime meeting, Indianapolis was zigzagging at approximately 15 knots. Sometime between 1930 and 2000 Mcvay determined that the visibility post-sunset was poor enough for Indianapolis to cease zigzagging and increase speed to 17 knots. That increased speed for the ship’s final four hours would move her even further ahead of schedule on Route Peddie. Unfortunately, it also appears that Mcvay likely maintained his route slightly south of Peddie while Lieutenant Hopkins definitely kept LST-779 slightly north of Peddie following his ship’s gunnery evolutions. When LST-779 traveled past where the Indianapolis survivors would have been in the water at 0800 the morning after the sinking, she was much too far north—about 10 miles—to have any possibility of spotting them. Those new findings indicate that Indianapolis was, in all probability, ahead of schedule and not exactly on Route Peddie, information that does not merit further indictment of Mcvay. To the commander of a combatant ship, the U.S. Navy left much discretion. McVay was given the option of leaving Guam on Friday, 27 July, steaming at 24-25 knots to arrive at Leyte on the morning of Monday, 30 July. That was unsatisfactory because McVay felt that the engines of Indianapolis needed a rest after the high speed run, transporting

atomic bomb components from San Francisco to Tinian, between 16-26 July. He opted instead for the routing instructions that called for a slower speed and put him at Leyte Gulf one morning later. McVay was so adamant about a morning arrival in Leyte Gulf because Indianapolis had a large contingent of untested crewmen in the ship’s company and he wanted to arrive at dawn so that the ship could conduct anti-aircraft firing practice in the final stretch of the voyage. The war was not yet over, and McVay, anticipating that his ship would take part in the invasion of the Japanese home islands, did not want to take an untrained crew into a critical phase of the war. McVay’s eagerness to arrive at Leyte in time to squeeze in precious training perhaps enticed him to keep slightly ahead of schedule early in the voyage to mitigate unknown factors that might slow him down later. It is an unfortunate circumstance that Indianapolis’s track placed her in the path of submarine I-58. The new information regarding Indianapolis’s progress on Route Peddie does not change any of the questions about accountability, it does, however, provide new intelligence for exploration to identify a new search area. Teams have tried to find Indianapolis in the past, but failed, partly because she is three miles down, but also because they were looking in the wrong place. *

ABOVE: The entry from LST779's deck log.

BLOGGING FROM THE FLEET

LEFT: Vice. Adm. Tom Rowden takes a group photo with USNA midshipmen during one of the 2016 Surface Warfare Week Kickoff briefs.

Photo by Lt. Madisyn Hansen

My 2016 Surface Week Experience Story by

Midshipman 2nd Class Alex Ashley U.S. Naval Academy

t the conclusion of my sophomore year, I left the United States Naval Academy (USNA) to embark on another summer of training. I had already experienced a training session the previous summer on board a Navy ship and was ready to see what new things this summer had in store. Professional Training for Midshipmen (PROTRAMID) is a program that familiarizes USNA midshipmen about the different service communities the Navy offers prior to commissioning. It allows midshipmen, like myself, to learn and subsequently make an educated decision when deciding which community we want to serve in. This was one of the next summer training experiences I was to embark upon before I began my junior year at USNA. There is a common perception among midshipmen that the surface warfare week of PROTRAMID is redundant because of the surface cruise that is required for most midshipmen during their pervious summer of training. Coming into a week of surface warfare officer, or SWO-oriented training, I too

thought I’d seen everything it could offer during my cruise last year. However, I can confidently say that by the end of this year’s SWO week my opinion had changed greatly. The first thing that helped change my mind was hearing Vice Adm. Tom Rowden, commander, Naval Surface Forces, talk about his views and goals for PROTRAMID and his experiences as a SWO during his 34-year career. Of particular interest to me, was his anecdote of leading a major humanitarian aid effort in Africa. He described pulling into a port and seeing the people in need directly benefit from the ship’s coordination efforts and the profound gratitude that was expressed toward him and his Sailors. His story had a way of reminding me that the Navy prides itself on being there when emergencies occur or when people are in need and that the surface Navy is a large contributor to make things better in the world. It was at that point that I realized how much opportunity a SWO has to make the world a better place through missions like counterpiracy, humanitarian assistance and

disaster relief, and ensuring freedom of the seas in the uncertain times in which we live. While Vice Adm. Rowden’s experiences made me look at surface warfare missions with much admiration, I still had lingering anxiety that surface week would be a redundant experience considering last summer’s surface cruise. However, I was impressed by how much this year’s training would build upon last year. Rather than repeating last summer’s grey-hull orientation, we were introduced to platforms and missions that don’t usually come to mind when you think about surface warfare. We saw riverine squadrons and amphibious landings and weapons demonstrations, we rode amphibious craft to ships, and we witnessed other aspects of surface warfare that midshipmen might’ve not considered prior to their service selections. Despite the range and rewarding nature of surface warfare missions, the SWOs we encountered said it was not the execution of these missions that was their favorite part of their jobs. Instead, they said it was their shipmates. The opportunity for person-to-person leadership on a daily basis was cited as a major contributor to job satisfaction at every level. To me, this was indicative of an encouraging, people-first culture in the surface community. My mindset coming out of surface warfare week is not the same one I had going into summer training. It began with the idea that I had already seen everything and there were no questions left to ask. I instead left feeling more educated and confident to make my service selection when it comes time to next year. * 43

SURFACE WARFARE FALL 2016

Command Changes Carrier Strike Group 9 Rear Adm. James Bynum, June 2016

Expeditionary Strike Group 7 Rear Adm. Marc Dalton, August 2016

Mine Counter Measure Squadron 7 Capt. James Miller, June 2016

Carrier Strike Group 4 Rear Adm. Scott Conn, July 2016

A mphibious Squadron 8 Capt. Larry LeGree, June 2016

USS Bataan (LHD 5) Capt. Eric Pfister, June 2016

Carrier Strike Group 5 Rear Adm. Charles Williams, July 2016

Destroyer Squadron 9 Capt. Douglas Kunzman, August 2016

USS M akin Island (LHD 8) Capt. Mark Melson, August 2016

Carrier Strike Group 8 Rear Adm.Dale Horan, July 2016

Destroyer Squadron 21 Capt. Henry Adams, August 2016

USS A merica (LHA 6) Capt. Joseph Olson, August 2016

Expeditionary Strike Group 2 Rear Adm. Roy Kitchener, August 2016

Naval Beach Group 1 Capt. Robert Rochford, August 2016

USS San A ntonio (LPD 17) Capt. Darren Nelson, July 2016

WWW.PUBLIC.NAVY.MIL/SURFOR

USS Green Bay (LPD 20) Capt. Nathan Moyer, July 2016

USS Somerset (lpd 25) Capt. Darren Glaser, July 2016

USS O'K ane (DDG 77) Cmdr. Colby Sherwood, June 2016

USS Bunker Hill (CG 52) Capt. Joe Cahill, July 2016

USS Bainbridge (DDG 96) Cmdr. Martin Robertson, June 2016

USS Pinckney (DDG 91) Cmdr. Frank Walter, August 2016

USS Chancellorsville (CG 62) Capt. D. Wilson Marks, July 2016

USS Gravely (DDG 107) Cmdr. Ted Carlson, July 2016

USS Chief (MCM 14) Lt. Cmdr. Michael Tyree, June 2016

USS Normandy (CG 60) Capt. Derek Trinque, August 2016

USS Wayne E. Meyer (DDG 108) Cmdr. Vince Fortson, July 2016

USS Patriot (MCM 7) Lt. Cmdr. Joseph Hamilton, August 2016 45