Jake Epstein

A US Navy oiler ran hard aground after its captain urged a last-minute shortcut: ‘Let’s try to shoot the gap’

“Let’s try to shoot the gap there.”

Just after noon in the northern Arabian Sea, the captain of a US Navy fuel ship gave the order to take a shortcut through risky waters rather than take a longer, safer route to their destination.

Two hours later, the 677-foot replenishment oiler USNS Big Horn struck the sea floor at high speed, shaking violently as the vessel ran aground. Music was audible on the bridge as sailors missed key navigational warnings.

The Navy command investigation obtained by Business Insider said that the September 2024 incident, initially characterized as an allision, was caused by “a series of poor decisions, failure to follow procedure, application of open water navigation to restricted waters, and failure to exhibit proper risk calculation.”

The ship suffered more than $20 million in damage.

The Navy’s investigation, the details of which have not previously been made public, reveals that the captain and his watchstanders failed to prepare for the shortcut and failed to monitor navigation alerts that could have averted disaster at the last minute.

“The grounding was preventable,” investigators wrote.

The investigation recommended administrative or disciplinary action against Big Horn’s captain and several officers. Military Sealift Command said that both the captain and the ship’s navigator are still employed. It is unclear if they will be permitted to hold their positions again.

“Pursuant to the investigation, all administrative and disciplinary matters were submitted for appropriate review,” command spokesperson Jillian Morris said in response to Business Insider’s query on accountability and discipline. “However, to protect employee privacy, we do not comment on, nor share the details of, the outcome of those matters.”


The Henry J. Kaiser-class fleet replenishment oiler USNS Big Horn (T-AO 198) sails alongside the Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72) during a replenishment-at-sea.

The Big Horn during a replenishment-at-sea with the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln.

US Navy photo



Making a risky choice

Shortly after 12 p.m. local time on September 23, the Big Horn was wrapping up its final replenishment-at-sea with ships from the Abraham Lincoln Carrier Strike Group.

The next move for the Henry J. Kaiser-class replenishment oiler, which refuels warships at sea, was to sail from the northern Arabian Sea to the Duqm port in Oman for a scheduled visit.

The new navigator was drafting route options for the captain to get the Big Horn to a pickup point, where the oiler would embark a harbor pilot to guide the ship into port.

During a conversation with another officer, the transcript of which is included in the Navy’s investigation, the navigator expressed concerns about running aground on a particular route and said they preferred an option through deeper water.

The navigator told the officer that they could take the riskier shortcut and save time. “I’m just scared of right here,” they said, “scared of these shallow points.” The officer said they should present the shortcut to the captain.

The officer said “ask the captain and say, ‘This route is about 10 miles shorter but goes through this. Do you feel comfortable?'”

One route, known as Duqm A, was shorter but ran through known shoal areas. Duqm B was a “deep water” path that added several miles to the journey to the rendezvous point.

Just before 12:30 p.m., with the last replenishment-at-sea ongoing, the navigator asked the captain which route they preferred.

“Let’s try to shoot the gap there,” the captain told the navigator, selecting the Duqm A route, even though it threaded a gap between charted shoals dangerously close to the oiler’s draft. The navigator said that they had checked on the under keel clearance, to which the captain replied: “Rad.”

The Navy investigation into the grounding that followed that decision said that there was no indication that the captain reviewed a paper chart during the decision-making process.

‘Slow down, slow down, slow down’


The Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Daniel Inouye (DDG 118), right, sails alongside the Henry J. Kaiser-class replenishment oiler USNS Big Horn (T-AO 198) as it transfers fuel to the Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS John S. McCain (DDG 56), July 20.

The Big Horn sails between Navy destroyers in July 2024.

US Navy photo



About an hour later, at roughly 1:30 p.m., the Big Horn completed its final replenishment-at-sea and set out for the pick-up point for the harbor pilot. Pilots are standard for most harbor approaches because they have the local knowledge to help ship captains navigate through tight channels.

Duqm A took the Big Horn through a gap between two charted areas of shoal — or shallow — water known as the San Carlos Banks that were not deep enough for the oiler.

Navy investigators wrote that “attention to detail and consideration of the risks should have negated Duqm A as an option.”

The Big Horn sailed through the San Carlos Banks at 17 to 18 knots. In transit, the ship’s system triggered safety alarms. They were silenced but had visual cues; there is no indication that they were acknowledged.

Meanwhile, the ship’s fathometer — which measures water depth under the hull — showed the water growing progressively shallower.

At 2:12 p.m., the vessel began vibrating as it struck the sea floor.

“Slow down, slow down, slow down,” the captain said.

“We must have hit a shallow spot somewhere, but there is nothing on the chart,” he said moments later as the ship came to a full stop.

Crew members reported fuel leaks on both main engines.

“We must have hit a shallow spot. We must have hit a sand bank,” the captain said.


The Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Chung-Hoon (DDG 93) conducts an emergency breakaway drill with the Henry J. Kaiser-class fleet replenishment oiler USNS Big Horn (T-AO 198). Chung-Hoon, part of the Nimitz Carrier Strike Group, is in U.S. 7th Fleet conducting routine operations.

The grounding cost the Navy more than $20 million.

US Navy photo



The damaged oiler was anchored and later towed into Duqm.

A ‘preventable’ blunder

Investigators found that the members of the bridge team appeared “unreasonably” focused on meeting a 3 p.m. harbor pilot pick-up time, which contributed to the decision to take the risky shortcut at high speeds.

“We gotta haul ass,” the navigator told an officer at one point. In a separate conversation with the captain, they said they believed they could make it, if only slightly behind schedule.

“If we cut corners we’ll get there,” the captain said, per the investigation.

“Yes sir!” the navigator replied. That was minutes before the ship ran aground.

Although the captain later said he did not believe he was operating in restricted waters and was unaware of any safety hazards or navigational concerns, investigators concluded that the Duqm A track met the definition of restricted waters under Navy policy, meaning a formal navigation brief should have been conducted before entering the area.

“However, no members of the bridge team, including the Captain and Navigator, seemed to realize they were steaming into restricted waters,” the investigation said. “No consideration was given for a required navigation brief, a more detailed plan, or thorough review of the proposed track prior to steaming through.”

The command investigation also found that, when the Big Horn ran aground, the ship was operating with two separate electronic navigation chart databases, and there was some confusion among the officers about which one was in use at the time. Safety contours and the shoal area were not clearly displayed.

Records indicate there was music was playing on the bridge up until the grounding. Tug boats brought the Big Horn into port the following day.

The grounding caused extensive damage to the Big Horn’s hull, internal support structures, port propeller, and port rudder. According to Navy cost breakdowns, expenses included roughly $7.5 million for towing, $8.6 million for services in Oman, $1.9 million for fuel offloading, and $2.4 million in additional costs in the US — totaling more than $20 million.




Source link

Headshot of Chris Panella.

A US Army general says new command tech lets him ditch the ‘hourlong staff meeting’

New US Army warfighting software is speeding up and simplifying the command job, a commander said recently, sharing that it lets him scrap the “hourlong staff meetings” to make decisions.

The Army, like other services, believes that future wars will be determined by the speed of decision-making. That’s where the new Next Generation Command and Control, or NGC2, program is expected to make a substantial impact and modernize how the service fights.

At Fort Carson, Colorado, the Army’s 4th Infantry Division has been testing NGC2 in a series of exercises. The most recent one, Ivy Sting 4, added more components to the system, with different types of sensors and weapons on the battlefield feeding into one system that everyone can access.

“So it’s all in one place, and it’s there very, very quickly, so that the staff can see it across their functional systems,” said Maj. Gen. Patrick Ellis, commander of the 4th ID, at a recent media roundtable, explaining that “the fires person can see what the logistician sees, can see what the intel person sees.”

“I don’t have to have the hourlong staff meeting anymore,” the general said.


Soldiers stand around an artillery piece preparing to fire it in a field.

The Army’s new NGC2 system is predicting supply needs and simulating enemy actions.

US Army photo by Pfc. Thomas Nguyen



“If we’re actually using the technology as the tool that we’re prepping on and that we’re also fighting on,” he said, “I could sit there, I can look at it, I can make decisions, I can say, ‘Hey, here are my priorities for this or that.’ We all agree on it, we click save, and that’s done.”

The Army has facilitated the development of NGC2 with both the 4th ID and 25th Infantry Division in Hawaii and industry teams, including Anduril and Lockheed Martin, pursuing a Silicon Valley-style approach aimed at moving faster and rapidly integrating soldier feedback, delivering fixes immediately rather than months or years later.

On the heels of Ivy Sting 4, more than two weeks of field testing that involved live-fire exercises and an electronic warfare jamming scenario, Ellis and others said that NGC2 was making planning and executing battlefield missions more effective.

“We are no longer fighting with the network; we are now fighting using the network,” Ellis said.

During the Ivy Sting 4 testing event, 20 different types of sensors, such as drones, electronic warfare systems, artillery, and Stryker vehicles, were linked together.


A soldier holds up a radio to his mouth and holds a notebook. He's standing in a mountainous location.

The latest live-fire exercise included a variety of systems, weapons, drones, and capabilities.

US Army photo by Staff Sgt. Dane Howard



Data and artificial intelligence capabilities provide real-time information on the sensors. Soldiers can see how much ammunition they’ve got left or whether a Stryker will need maintenance or fuel soon. Simulations can predict what resources will be needed for certain tactics or actions, including different ways an enemy might attack.

As different platforms are brought onto NGC2, broadening what the platform can do, Army command and soldiers can see and communicate using the same data. The system is breaking down the silos that have previously hindered information flow.

“I’m feeling empowered as a commander to make more, better, and faster decisions because I’ve got access to all that data,” Ellis explained.

Many NGC2 components are being built with off-the-shelf technology and standard commercial software practices, and the vendor teams involved are working on the ground with soldiers. The closer working relationship means soldier feedback is being incorporated more quickly.

“We work through these obstacles, and we learn how to do something, and once we run into a roadblock, we figure out a way to solve that problem, and then that problem is now solved for the Army,” he said. “We’re not relearning these lessons over and over again.”




Source link

Amanda Goh

Zooey Deschanel says there’s one side of herself she never lets her kids see

Zooey Deschanel, 45, says she’s mindful of how she shows up around her kids.

On Thursday’s episode of “Call Her Daddy,” the “Elf” actor spoke about being bullied as a child and how it shaped her identity and her approach to parenting.

Though she still has moments of insecurity, Deschanel says she doesn’t let her kids see them.

“I have a daughter and a son, and I don’t want them to ever think like, ‘Oh, Mommy’s insecure,’ or, you know, like, ‘My mom doesn’t like…'” Deschanel told host Alex Cooper.

“I always want them to think I’m happy with myself and, like, because they get their self-esteem from their parents, you know. So yeah, it’s important to me to, like, show up with confidence,” she said.

Deschanel shares two children with her ex-husband, Jacob Pechenik. The pair split in 2019 after four years of marriage.

The actor said she’s aware that Hollywood can be brutal to women when it comes to their appearance, but says she tries not to let that kind of commentary affect her.

What’s important is having a strong sense of self, she said.

“My identity was never super wrapped up in my appearance. I always made an effort to be like, what I’m presenting is more about my style and like, artistic and creative expressions versus, ‘Oh, like I’m so just naturally perfect,'” Deschanel said.

“All those things are so ephemeral and, you know, they change, and they’re subjective. And so I think not having my identity so wrapped up in what I looked like when I was 25 is really great,” she said.

Deschanel says she tries to be fully present with her kids whenever she isn’t working, including doing school drop-offs and pickups, taking them to playdates, and attending their extracurricular activities.

When she is working, she focuses on attending the important events.

“I get that sometimes you can’t, but try to get there for like, whatever, the big game or the school play or like those big things, because those are the things they remember a lot,” Deschanel said.

Deschanel joins other celebrities talking about how they try to instill confidence in their kids.

Speaking to People in 2024, Carson Daly said he’s honest about his own struggles with his kids and treats them like adults so they feel safe discussing difficult topics with him.

“I’ve always talked to them like they were 30 years old,” Daly said.

In May, Kate Winslet’s daughter, Mia Threapleton, told Elle that her mother tried to instill body confidence in her from a young age, including when she was insecure about showing her shoulders while swimming.

“My mom said: ‘No, this is strong. So many people would love to be able to swim the length of the pool the way you do — think of it as a positive thing,'” Threapleton said, recalling her mother’s words.




Source link