Captain Of U.S. Aircraft Carrier Canned

News That Smoking Caused $70M Fire On Nuclear-Powered Vessel Prompts Navy To Act

(AP)  Smoking appears to be the cause of a fire that caused $70 million in damage to the nuclear-powered aircraft carrier USS George Washington.

The announcement by the Navy came as Adm. Robert F. Willard, commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet, ordered that the carrier's commanding officer and executive officer be relieved of duty.

Willard cited lost confidence in the commanding officer and his failure to meet mission standards after the investigation found unauthorized smoking by a crew member appeared to have ignited flammable liquids and other combustible material that were improperly stored. The other man was relieved for substandard performance.

"The fire and the subsequent magnitude of the fire were the result of a series of human acts that could have been prevented," according to a statement released by the Naval Air Forces in San Diego.

The Norfolk, Va.-based carrier was en route from Chile to San Diego when the fire began on May 22.

"The smoking was happening in an unauthorized space and the evidence points to it probably was a lit cigarette that ignited the oil," said Capt. Scott Gureck, a spokesman for the U.S. Pacific Fleet. He said the investigation did not reveal who was smoking.

The Navy also on Wednesday revised the number of sailors injured during the fire from 23 to 37, saying 36 sailors were treated for minor injuries suffered while fighting the fire and one sailor suffered minor burns. All were returned to duty shortly afterward.

Smoking is allowed on aircraft carriers but only in designated areas, said Joe Walker, a spokesman with Naval Air Forces.

Flames were initially spotted near the auxiliary boiler room and air conditioning and refrigeration space in the rear of the ship. The safety of the ship's nuclear reactor wasn't threatened.

Naval officials now say it took about 12 hours to put out the fire because of the location and size. Fire and heat damaged electrical cabling and components running through 80 of the 3,800 compartments across several decks of the carrier.

The crew of the carrier has been temporarily assigned to shore duty in San Diego since shortly after the fire.

Capt. J.R. Haley, who previously commanded the nuclear-powered carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt, has taken command of the carrier, replacing Capt. David C. Dykhoff. Capt. Karl O. Thomas has replaced the carrier's executive officer, Capt. David M. Dober. Dykhoff and Dober have been temporarily assigned to shore duty with the Pacific Fleet, Walker said.

Gureck would not comment on whether the Navy was considering any further disciplinary action against the two men or possibly others involved in the fire.

He said Rear Adm. Richard B. Wren, currently the USS Kitty Hawk carrier strike group commander, will decide what additional administrative and disciplinary measures, if any, will be taken when he takes over as the USS George Washington strike group commander.

The carrier was initially expected to arrive in Japan in early August to replace the USS Kitty Hawk, which is being decommissioned. The George Washington, which is now scheduled to depart San Diego in late August, is due to be stationed at the U.S. naval base in Yokosuka.

The USS George Washington, the fourth Navy ship to bear the name, was commissioned July 4, 1992. It is a Nimitz class nuclear-powered supercarrier with a crew of 3,000 but can carry up to 5,000.

[libsluv2spit]

the liberals are right..a person should be outright fired and PUNISHED for every incompetent and mediocre mistakes..

humm we cant..they have the liberal unions that make sure that never happens..

wonder why

[pensacola88]

In in the 80''s a Navy Captain was canned for running aground int San Francisco Bay with the USS Nimitz. Last year, a Navy Sub Captain was canned for running into a submerged mountain with his submarine in the Pacific Ocean. This year, the Commander of the Air Force was canned for a bomber unknowingly flying off with 6 nuclear bombs from one of his bases and complaints that his style of management in Iraq was not conducive to mission fulfilment.

The point is clear, when we take the best we have and place it in the hands of a trusted leader, we don''t give a second chance to make serious errors.

[TommyCraig]

"You are right. The fire on USS Forrestal was caused by a navy pilot who fired his weapons while still on deck (scared and nervous $hit). And that navy pilot, "my friends" is the one who wants to be the Commander-in-chief today. I am not kidding you".
Posted by nikosk1 at 05:45 PM : Jul 31, 2008

You have no Idea of what you are talking about! You are repeating the same lies that others have spread on the internet.
I do not support John McCain. However, he deserves the truth to be published (I disagree with the "swift-boating" of John Kerry as well).
The missile was fired from an airplane across from him, not behind him. The video plainly shows this. The only way he could have had anything to do with this is if he actually wet-started and the missile was activated (heat seeking capability turned on)and electronically free. Missiles can''t normally be launched while wheels on deck (activated by scissor switch).
An electrical surge is the most likely source.

Quit spreading foolish stories from foolish agenda driven sources!
By the way, I was a weapons systes tech in the navy...

[barbaram99]

Sir are ye saying McCain..the nam vet. The one running for oval office. The POW. That one..
They canned a Capt. Well he wrote his tickit. Now will they lower his rank..

[babooph]

He gets fired for an accident -Bush fails the nation & world for 7 years & remains in-the US is doomed.Slow death from here.

[morganbarber]

I was surprised the Captain wasn''t allowed to procure a scapegoat, which would be a more traditional solution. Glad the Admiral held him accountable. If that fire had spread to the right spot, the whole ship would have looked like a small nuke detonating. Lots of metal and people dropping to the ocean floor real fast.

[nebrmom]

Being the mom of a sailor onboard the USS Kitty Hawk, who''s crew was to have already been aboard the Washington. This has been a major hardship on the crews of 2 ships. Sailors lives and their families that were being moved to a new command were all put on hold. The $70 mil pricetag.. not so sure it was out of range... there was a lot of electrical damage and that all needed repair. And back to this fire... ok... there are a lot of theories out there that aren''t being mentioned... scuttlebutt.... And some young men making a huge mistake.. I won''t go any farther.
And smoking on ship... by golly these men are out there for months at a time working 12 hours on 12 off 7 days a week... let them have their smoke break... anyone out there addicted to smoking???? Well not a pretty site if you have a 1000+ at sea going through withdrawl!! Talk about mistakes that would be made!!! Let them have a smoke!!!
Why don''t we put ourselves int eh shoes of those at sea. think about a huge fire onboard. no land to go to.it is a very serious thing! Be below deck and have nothing but smoke. no fresh air...And 5000 people needing rescue.OK I think all said and done those 37 injured men fighting this fire saved lives of those on board A huge thanks to them and a a job well done!
To the dumb- who put a burning cig on oil rags in a non smoking place. hope they place proper punishment on him, and any others who were involved.
How dare they put the lives of fellow sailors at risk!

[tjm4809]

I think we are missing an important point. It''s the type of disaster that could''ve have occurred that needs to be considered. This was "near miss" event. If there was any damage to the nuclear reactor or the crew. This would have been an epic disaster for not just the Nuclear navy but all floating vessels with large capacity crews. I am sad for the CO and XO but my concern is for what would''ve resulted if the fire had reached just one more of the right compartments onboard. This is a floating reactor with planes and a crew. Remember TMI (three mile island) it was a "near miss" and it led to no nuclear reactors being built in the US to this day. Except for the recent AP1000 contract in SC (30 years). i believe there was a sense of complacency or culture onboard that accepted smoking in un-authorized areas because it was convenient. You change that mindset from the top. I think when you look at culpability, I agree it was just one guy breakingthe rules...but the question is why did he or she feel so comfortable doing it. It was probably something that occurred much more frequently than we will ever hear about. I think the proper message is being sent and I thank God no one died and there was no potential meltodown.

[causeway_v]

Before blaming this on smoking they shoulda checked on John Mccain''s whereabouts - he has a history of starting fires on US aircraft carriers

[observer2020]

GOP: Opinions are like a-holes...everyone has one (or in your case, two). I''ve seen a lot of "tough" men cry like babies when called to the carpet. AND seen women stand up for HER troops and take the heat.

[barbaraf4]

This is why the Captain goes down with his ship. Who wants to stay around and be an example for other Captains?

[ioweign]

The nickname for the Forrestal was "USS Zippo"...

Posted by IOWEIGN at 11:02 AM : Jul 31, 2008

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The nick of the Forrestal was the "ForestFire"

The Zippo was one of the other 4 carriers that caught fire in Vietnam.

Posted by Nancy_Naive at 11:07 AM : Jul 31, 2008

From Wikipedia:
Nickname: Forrest Fire, Firestal, Zippo, The FID

She was the largest aircraft carrier since Shinano of World War II vintage, and the first to specifically support jet aircraft. The ship was affectionately called "The FID", because James Forrestal was the first ever Secretary of Defense, FID standing for "First In Defense". This is also the slogan on the ship''s insignia and patch. She was also informally known in the fleet as the "Zippo" and "Forrest Fire" because of a number of highly publicized fires onboard.

http://tinyurl.com/5wl56l

[newsjunky5]

Even if the cause was smoking, it was "unauthorized" either then, there, or both.
Smoking shouldn''t be banned on carriers because of this. We already don''t allow alcohol consumption (with certain "medical" exceptions, ie. after ditching an aircraft and being plucked from the sea) Some navies allow limited alcohol consumption by crew, on board.
These sailors are living at sea for long periods of time. Banning smoking in safe areas on a huge ship would hurt morale, and wouldn''t have prevented this violation.

[observer2020]

GOP...yes, in the military, women know how to follow rules and regulations and do it very well. It was the bad choice of the individual not to follow the rules that caused the fire. They made the wrong choice by smoking where smoking was prohibited. They knew what they were doing was wrong and the commanders take the heat...literally and figuratively. GOP...the indiviudal smoking was not identified as male or female...get it right before you start with the testoserone shower.

When I was in, cigarettes were 2 bucks a carton, when everyone else was paying 10 bucks. THey were called duty free, which means no taxes were added. I don''t know how much they are now. I would think the person who was burned might have been the one who started it, because everyone else was injured by smoke.

[xraytwonine]

was the smokes free?

My typing sklills s.uck

There are sayings on board a Navy ship. It is "The Smoking Lamp is lit" and "The Smoking Lamp is out"...that is when we are either allowed or not to smoke. And yes, there is designated areas to smoke. Usually at the fan-tail. Think about it, with the Afterburners kisking in, there is a solid flame shooting out the exhaust of the plane....Jet fuel is a very high flash point diesel....takes a lot of heat to burn.

Constellation not Constillation, I should proof read before hitting publish.....

Nancy_Naive, in the early eighties, I was in a squadron on board the USS Constillation, or the Connie as we used to say.....unless you were in the Navy, don''t start insulting things you don''t know about. The Forestall was a tragic accident that was not caused by a sailor, but a pilot who released a bomb that started the chain reaction.