10 ms·

How a preventable disaster killed six marines

167 points by jbegley 7y ago

duelingjello 7y ago
Military family here. My step-brother flies F/A-18’s in the Navy (not exactly the same spec as Marine Hornets but shares many parts), so that’s extra concerning. This is sad and understandable based on how the MIC works. Tens of trillions spent on crap; and chickenshit CO’s blame the victims (soldiers) and coverup incompetence and gross negligence rather than exhibiting leadership, taking responsibility and learning lessons. Don’t join up because your life isn’t worth a damn to pig generals, politicians and corporate schmucks. PS: A roommate of mine in college was a Marine Herc Navigator MOS, for KC-130 and C-130. They would frequently get on the plane drunk from the night before but be expected to function. Squad meetings? At the bar, with mandatory alcohol. He bemoaned the V-22 Osprey as an overpriced death-trap, which it definitely was, in the beginning. I think many military cultures needs to strongly encourage less binge alcoholic consumption for operational effectiveness and because more personnel end up alcoholic, like my grandfather, for one (who was a paratrooper and later an AP (MP)).
- aspaceman 7y ago
  Yeah my experience in the Marines resonates with this a lot. So many training meetings about how drinking and driving was bad, followed by a meetup at the bar. Even during the presentations the officers in charge would joke about it. None of it was ever taken seriously. The best example of double-talk I have in real life. Way they would talk about "partying in Okinawa" was always creepy when you consider the Marines' history there. Not blaming anyone specifically of course. I feel for anyone who feels like they need to drink to get through their days. Just think it's also a good example of CO's talking big but meaning nothing, and that attitude trickles all the way down the chain.
  - C1sc0cat 7y ago
    And your problem is here ? If the meeting attendees where not driving after the meeting, I don't see the problem with social drinking and bonding.
    - aspaceman 7y ago
      Cause that "social drinking and bonding" was always binge drinking.
      - C1sc0cat 7y ago
        What do you mean by Binge?
        jchw 7y ago
        “Binge drinking” is a concept of its own, see for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binge_drinking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binge_drinking
        jdc 7y ago
        "The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism defines binge drinking as a pattern of drinking that brings a person’s blood alcohol concentration (BAC) to 0.08 grams percent or above. This typically happens when men consume 5 or more drinks or women consume 4 or more drinks in about 2 hours." https://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/fact-sheets/binge-drinking.htm https://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/fact-sheets/binge-drinking.htm
        C1sc0cat 7y ago
        Or in British Army terms a normal night out :-)
        aspaceman 7y ago
        Hint: that’s the problem. People take drinking = binge drinking. Especially in the military.
        dsfyu404ed 7y ago
        This seems to be one of those cases where the special interest definition of a term and what the general population considers a reasonable definition diverge. Killing anything less than a 6-pack is generally not considered binge drinking by the population at large. There's also an intent element. Binge drinking involves drinking to get drunk. Killing a 6-pack because you're sitting around with your buddies drinking and watching (edit: American) football is not binge drinking to anyone who isn't a card carrying member of MADD.
salex89 7y ago
I'm not really into military doctrine, but why not just leave all the flying stuff to the Air Force or maybe specialized parts of the Navy? When you look up US air units/forces, there is a bunch of stuff left to the national guards, marines etc. and flying is obviously something to be taken seriously. And it looks like they are more likely to screw it up or take it less seriously.
- aspaceman 7y ago
  The various forces do different things in the air. I'm not super knowledgeable about this, so someone might have more details. Air Force is general flight missions. They tend towards support and recon. Navy is focused on carrier support and sea missions. Marines are focused on CAS and both land and sea missions. Lot of helicopters as well. So each branch takes different responsibilities. I don't think this is an issue of Marines not being good enough to fly, as there are very talented Marine pilots around the world. Instead, these Marines weren't being given the resources and training they needed, and were being ignored by the higher chain. The argument that Marines don't take things as seriously is a little ridiculous.
  - andreareina 7y ago
    CAS = close air support?
    - dsfyu404ed 7y ago
      Correct.
  - remedan 7y ago
    >Marines weren't being given the resources and training they needed, and were being ignored by the higher chain. To me this says that the Marines high enough to make decisions do indeed not take things seriously enough.
  - eaandkw 7y ago
    You should look up the MAGTF concept. Pilots are pilots and they are all very well trained. The Marines generally deploy in a fully functional unit that has a ground element, support element, and air element. There are different sizes of MAGTFs that can support various levels of operations anywhere in the world. One of the many advantages of the MAGTF is that everyone is speaking the same "language" and using the same playbook making communication a lot easier.
LifeLiverTransp 7y ago
Only tangential related, but has anyone else witnessed a middle-managment as a resource approach to this kind of situations lately. Basically, slopy procedure is encouraged, middle-management is hired and instructed to keep cost low and the wagon rolling and beeing new, settles right into this trap of a routine. Once the mess blows up (which it always does), upper management first trys to deflect damage to the lower ranks (as in the article), then regardless of the outcome of this tactics, replaces the middle-management with new faces. In this scenario, even lower tier management who insisted on correct procedure, complained and requested additional resources, would be replaced to prevent a culture of responsibility from growing. The cycle of sloppyness starts a new but not with any significant changes, its basically a attempt to create a synthetic amnesia in a cooperate culture.
js8 7y ago
Hierarchical organizations have many flaws, yet humans continue to largely support them. Why? I think the question "why there are social hierarchies" is the biggest open problem in social sciences. There are many plausible explanations, but no clear winner.
- StreamBright 7y ago
  What is the mode of operation you are suggesting to be used instead? On the top of that, what flaws are you talking about in specific?
  - js8 7y ago
    Same flaws mentioned in the article - lack of accountability in the upper layers of hierarchy, which resulted in loss of human life. Possible solution is more democratic control (by the people down in the hierarchy) over the people who are in charge, for example an independently elected accountability board with a power to penalize and recall the leaders.
    - ip26 7y ago
      So, some kind of democratically elected commander in chief who is the supreme commander of the US military?
      - js8 7y ago
        Yes, but you need a shorter feedback loop too. The U.S. president doesn't make the decisions that would be required to fix the problems that the article is talking about. I am not sure if it's practiced in the U.S., but in Europe lot of universities were historically actually run democratically, the management was elected by academics and students. So something like that.
        ip26 7y ago
        So instead of the public electing the President who appoints generals etc, the military elects its own leaders? Not to be difficult, but I think history teaches us that's how you get a military coup.
jonstewart 7y ago
The preventable disaster—and one that’s cost taxpayers maybe a trillion dollars with the F-35–is that the Marines have fighter jets. The argument we should be having is whether the Navy should have its own fighter jet capabilities in addition to the Air Force... but the argument we’re having is that the Marines also have fight jets and impose silly requirements on their jets.
- anilakar 7y ago
  In that case, the question might as well be whether USA needs a navy at all, considering that the aircraft carrier and its planes have been the deadliest naval weapon system since WWII.
  - jonstewart 7y ago
    No doubt air craft carriers were very effective in WWII, when neither side had high precision radar let alone real-time satellite imagery. They won’t be effective in future wars. Air craft carriers are sitting ducks and will also prove to be a terrible waste of blood and treasure. The Navy is hugely important, and I think there’s even a good argument to be made in favor of the USMC continuing to exist in a quasi-spec-ops/rapid deployment infantry role. I think there’s no good argument to be made in favor of the USMC having fighter jets.
    - mcguire 7y ago
      The Air Force doesn't do close air support. (They barely want to do air superiority. No, really, check out the history of the AAF going into WWII and B-36 in Korea.) The Navy can do close air support, but likes to keep its planes on its ships rather than forward deployed where the Marines need them. The Army uses helicopters for close air support to get around the Air Force, but those have the problem of loiter time. If you did manage to bludgeon the Air Force into handling air support, those units would have to be so tightly tied to the Marines and Army that their careers would be compromised in the Air Force.
      - 7y ago
chad_strategic 7y ago
Devastating story, thank goodness for ProPublica bringing this to light. I served on the ground side and never experienced this level of incompetence. (There was plenty of other fun stuff...) But maybe the shear fact that Marine Officers are on the front line with the enlisted, curbs dangerous behavior. The Air Wing in the Marine Corps is it's own branch. Marine Air Wing commanders are constantly being relieved, and usually make the cover of the Marine Corp times. My thoughts and payers go out to the families. Semper Fi Retired CWO2
nnvvhh 7y ago
Donate to ProPublica!
RickJWagner 7y ago
I was air-crew on a C-130 platform, I got to take part in a night aerail refueling once. It's truly an awesome sight. The aircraft are so big, and so close together. The tanker has colored lights all over it, I expect to help guide the following plane. Through the windshield, it looks larger than life and a little surreal.
tomlocke 7y ago
No one has yet mentioned "Lying to Ourselves," so I will. It's a great essay on this topic.
- mncharity 7y ago
  > Lying to Ourselves[: Dishonesty in the Army Profession] A post[1] and working link[2]. The two HN submissions got no traction. [1] https://warontherocks.com/2015/03/lying-to-ourselves-the-demise-of-military-integrity/ https://warontherocks.com/2015/03/lying-to-ourselves-the-dem... [2] https://apps.dtic.mil/docs/citations/ADA615274 https://apps.dtic.mil/docs/citations/ADA615274

167 points by jbegley 7y ago

Military family here. My step-brother flies F/A-18’s in the Navy (not exactly the same spec as Marine Hornets but shares many parts), so that’s extra concerning. This is sad and understandable based on how the MIC works. Tens of trillions spent on crap; and chickenshit CO’s blame the victims (soldiers) and coverup incompetence and gross negligence rather than exhibiting leadership, taking responsibility and learning lessons. Don’t join up because your life isn’t worth a damn to pig generals, politicians and corporate schmucks. PS: A roommate of mine in college was a Marine Herc Navigator MOS, for KC-130 and C-130. They would frequently get on the plane drunk from the night before but be expected to function. Squad meetings? At the bar, with mandatory alcohol. He bemoaned the V-22 Osprey as an overpriced death-trap, which it definitely was, in the beginning. I think many military cultures needs to strongly encourage less binge alcoholic consumption for operational effectiveness and because more personnel end up alcoholic, like my grandfather, for one (who was a paratrooper and later an AP (MP)).

aspaceman 7y ago
Yeah my experience in the Marines resonates with this a lot. So many training meetings about how drinking and driving was bad, followed by a meetup at the bar. Even during the presentations the officers in charge would joke about it. None of it was ever taken seriously. The best example of double-talk I have in real life. Way they would talk about "partying in Okinawa" was always creepy when you consider the Marines' history there. Not blaming anyone specifically of course. I feel for anyone who feels like they need to drink to get through their days. Just think it's also a good example of CO's talking big but meaning nothing, and that attitude trickles all the way down the chain.
- C1sc0cat 7y ago
  And your problem is here ? If the meeting attendees where not driving after the meeting, I don't see the problem with social drinking and bonding.
  - aspaceman 7y ago
    Cause that "social drinking and bonding" was always binge drinking.
    - C1sc0cat 7y ago
      What do you mean by Binge?
      - jchw 7y ago
        “Binge drinking” is a concept of its own, see for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binge_drinking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binge_drinking
      - jdc 7y ago
        "The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism defines binge drinking as a pattern of drinking that brings a person’s blood alcohol concentration (BAC) to 0.08 grams percent or above. This typically happens when men consume 5 or more drinks or women consume 4 or more drinks in about 2 hours." https://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/fact-sheets/binge-drinking.htm https://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/fact-sheets/binge-drinking.htm
        C1sc0cat 7y ago
        Or in British Army terms a normal night out :-)
        aspaceman 7y ago
        Hint: that’s the problem. People take drinking = binge drinking. Especially in the military.
        dsfyu404ed 7y ago
        This seems to be one of those cases where the special interest definition of a term and what the general population considers a reasonable definition diverge. Killing anything less than a 6-pack is generally not considered binge drinking by the population at large. There's also an intent element. Binge drinking involves drinking to get drunk. Killing a 6-pack because you're sitting around with your buddies drinking and watching (edit: American) football is not binge drinking to anyone who isn't a card carrying member of MADD.

salex89 7y ago

I'm not really into military doctrine, but why not just leave all the flying stuff to the Air Force or maybe specialized parts of the Navy? When you look up US air units/forces, there is a bunch of stuff left to the national guards, marines etc. and flying is obviously something to be taken seriously. And it looks like they are more likely to screw it up or take it less seriously.

aspaceman 7y ago
The various forces do different things in the air. I'm not super knowledgeable about this, so someone might have more details. Air Force is general flight missions. They tend towards support and recon. Navy is focused on carrier support and sea missions. Marines are focused on CAS and both land and sea missions. Lot of helicopters as well. So each branch takes different responsibilities. I don't think this is an issue of Marines not being good enough to fly, as there are very talented Marine pilots around the world. Instead, these Marines weren't being given the resources and training they needed, and were being ignored by the higher chain. The argument that Marines don't take things as seriously is a little ridiculous.
- andreareina 7y ago
  CAS = close air support?
  - dsfyu404ed 7y ago
    Correct.
- remedan 7y ago
  >Marines weren't being given the resources and training they needed, and were being ignored by the higher chain. To me this says that the Marines high enough to make decisions do indeed not take things seriously enough.
- eaandkw 7y ago
  You should look up the MAGTF concept. Pilots are pilots and they are all very well trained. The Marines generally deploy in a fully functional unit that has a ground element, support element, and air element. There are different sizes of MAGTFs that can support various levels of operations anywhere in the world. One of the many advantages of the MAGTF is that everyone is speaking the same "language" and using the same playbook making communication a lot easier.

LifeLiverTransp 7y ago

Only tangential related, but has anyone else witnessed a middle-managment as a resource approach to this kind of situations lately. Basically, slopy procedure is encouraged, middle-management is hired and instructed to keep cost low and the wagon rolling and beeing new, settles right into this trap of a routine. Once the mess blows up (which it always does), upper management first trys to deflect damage to the lower ranks (as in the article), then regardless of the outcome of this tactics, replaces the middle-management with new faces. In this scenario, even lower tier management who insisted on correct procedure, complained and requested additional resources, would be replaced to prevent a culture of responsibility from growing. The cycle of sloppyness starts a new but not with any significant changes, its basically a attempt to create a synthetic amnesia in a cooperate culture.

js8 7y ago

Hierarchical organizations have many flaws, yet humans continue to largely support them. Why? I think the question "why there are social hierarchies" is the biggest open problem in social sciences. There are many plausible explanations, but no clear winner.

StreamBright 7y ago
What is the mode of operation you are suggesting to be used instead? On the top of that, what flaws are you talking about in specific?
- js8 7y ago
  Same flaws mentioned in the article - lack of accountability in the upper layers of hierarchy, which resulted in loss of human life. Possible solution is more democratic control (by the people down in the hierarchy) over the people who are in charge, for example an independently elected accountability board with a power to penalize and recall the leaders.
  - ip26 7y ago
    So, some kind of democratically elected commander in chief who is the supreme commander of the US military?
    - js8 7y ago
      Yes, but you need a shorter feedback loop too. The U.S. president doesn't make the decisions that would be required to fix the problems that the article is talking about. I am not sure if it's practiced in the U.S., but in Europe lot of universities were historically actually run democratically, the management was elected by academics and students. So something like that.
      - ip26 7y ago
        So instead of the public electing the President who appoints generals etc, the military elects its own leaders? Not to be difficult, but I think history teaches us that's how you get a military coup.

jonstewart 7y ago

The preventable disaster—and one that’s cost taxpayers maybe a trillion dollars with the F-35–is that the Marines have fighter jets. The argument we should be having is whether the Navy should have its own fighter jet capabilities in addition to the Air Force... but the argument we’re having is that the Marines also have fight jets and impose silly requirements on their jets.

anilakar 7y ago
In that case, the question might as well be whether USA needs a navy at all, considering that the aircraft carrier and its planes have been the deadliest naval weapon system since WWII.
- jonstewart 7y ago
  No doubt air craft carriers were very effective in WWII, when neither side had high precision radar let alone real-time satellite imagery. They won’t be effective in future wars. Air craft carriers are sitting ducks and will also prove to be a terrible waste of blood and treasure. The Navy is hugely important, and I think there’s even a good argument to be made in favor of the USMC continuing to exist in a quasi-spec-ops/rapid deployment infantry role. I think there’s no good argument to be made in favor of the USMC having fighter jets.
  - mcguire 7y ago
    The Air Force doesn't do close air support. (They barely want to do air superiority. No, really, check out the history of the AAF going into WWII and B-36 in Korea.) The Navy can do close air support, but likes to keep its planes on its ships rather than forward deployed where the Marines need them. The Army uses helicopters for close air support to get around the Air Force, but those have the problem of loiter time. If you did manage to bludgeon the Air Force into handling air support, those units would have to be so tightly tied to the Marines and Army that their careers would be compromised in the Air Force.
    - 7y ago

chad_strategic 7y ago

Devastating story, thank goodness for ProPublica bringing this to light. I served on the ground side and never experienced this level of incompetence. (There was plenty of other fun stuff...) But maybe the shear fact that Marine Officers are on the front line with the enlisted, curbs dangerous behavior. The Air Wing in the Marine Corps is it's own branch. Marine Air Wing commanders are constantly being relieved, and usually make the cover of the Marine Corp times. My thoughts and payers go out to the families. Semper Fi Retired CWO2

nnvvhh 7y ago

Donate to ProPublica!

RickJWagner 7y ago

I was air-crew on a C-130 platform, I got to take part in a night aerail refueling once. It's truly an awesome sight. The aircraft are so big, and so close together. The tanker has colored lights all over it, I expect to help guide the following plane. Through the windshield, it looks larger than life and a little surreal.

tomlocke 7y ago

No one has yet mentioned "Lying to Ourselves," so I will. It's a great essay on this topic.

mncharity 7y ago
> Lying to Ourselves[: Dishonesty in the Army Profession] A post[1] and working link[2]. The two HN submissions got no traction. [1] https://warontherocks.com/2015/03/lying-to-ourselves-the-demise-of-military-integrity/ https://warontherocks.com/2015/03/lying-to-ourselves-the-dem... [2] https://apps.dtic.mil/docs/citations/ADA615274 https://apps.dtic.mil/docs/citations/ADA615274