HMNZS Manawanui has Sunk!

[daftandbarmy]

Credit to the RNZN that it actually published the report openly. BZ RNZN

Unlike what other country's Navy might have done, or not done?

 

[daftandbarmy]

Flogging around the fleet: is it still a thing?


Commander Yvonne Gray and two other Navy officers charged over sinking of Manawanui


Three senior Royal New Zealand Navy officers, including the commanding officer, have been charged over the loss of HMNZS Manawanui after the ship struck a reef off Samoa.

The charges have been laid under the Armed Forces Discipline Act 1971, alleging errors on the bridge on the evening of October 5, 2024, led to the vessel grounding on a known navigational hazard southwest of Tafitoala village on Upolu Island.

Commander Yvonne Gray, Lieutenant Commander Matthew Gajzago and a third officer will face court martial over the sinking of the ship.

HMNZS Manawanui sinking: Commander Yvonne Gray, Lieutenant Commander Matthew Gajzago, Lieutenant Thomas Beamish will face court martial

Three senior Royal New Zealand Navy officers - including the commanding officer - have been charged over the loss of HMNZS Manawanui after the ship struck

www.newstalkzb.co.nz

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

That is standard British naval practice going back to the days of Drake and Hawkins. A British naval captain that fails to bring back his/her ship must face a court martial to defend his/her honour and prove positively no wrong on his or her part. This is just the modern version of this.

P.S. The most well known such court martial was that of Captain Bligh over the loss of the Bounty.

 

[Cloud Cover]

That is standard British naval practice going back to the days of Drake and Hawkins. A British naval captain that fails to bring back his/her ship must face a court martial to defend his/her honour and prove positively no wrong on his or her part. This is just the modern version of this.

P.S. The most well known such court martial was that of Captain Bligh over the loss of the Bounty.

In this particular case under the naval tradition you are referring, is the onus really on the accused to prove correctness or is the burden in the Admiralty to establish and prove negligence or some other misdeed, dereliction or feasance?

 

[SeaKingTacco]

In this particular case under the naval tradition you are referring, is the onus really on the accused to prove correctness or is the burden in the Admiralty to establish and prove negligence or some other misdeed, dereliction or feasance?

Yes.

 

[OldSolduer]

So the Captain, the XO and the navigator?

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

In this particular case under the naval tradition you are referring, is the onus really on the accused to prove correctness or is the burden in the Admiralty to establish and prove negligence or some other misdeed, dereliction or feasance?

The Crown would establish that the ship didn't come back as "prima facie" proof of negligence. Then the CO had to prove it wasn't his/her fault, i.e. a lack of negligence.

I don't know if that still holds true in today's world.

 

[OldSolduer]

The Crown would establish that the ship didn't come back as "prima facie" proof of negligence. Then the CO had to prove it wasn't his/her fault, i.e. a lack of negligence.

I don't know if that still holds true in today's world.

It reads to me "guilty until proven innocent".

 

[Eaglelord17]

I always thought the rule was the captain goes down with the ship?

 

[GR66]

I always thought the rule was the captain's career goes down with the ship?

FTFY with the modern update

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

I always thought the rule was the captain goes down with the ship?

That was neither a rule nor a tradition, but often case a suicidal matter in the days of merchant vessels of the 17th and 18th century: The captaincy contracts of the days, enforced by the insurers of the commercial trip had specifications that the Captain was responsible to the investors for the value of the ship, should anything happen to it, but was exonerated if he failed to come back himself. Considering the rules that also made him and all the other members of the family subject to jail time for debt should he be unable to pay his debtor, many captains chose suicide to save the family fortune.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

It reads to me "guilty until proven innocent".

It was pretty much that until the 20th century.

 

[RangerRay]

It was pretty much that until the 20th century.

Didn’t Jack Aubrey survive many BoI?

 

[brihard]

That was neither a rule nor a tradition, but often case a suicidal matter in the days of merchant vessels of the 17th and 18th century: The captaincy contracts of the days, enforced by the insurers of the commercial trip had specifications that the Captain was responsible to the investors for the value of the ship, should anything happen to it, but was exonerated if he failed to come back himself. Considering the rules that also made him and all the other members of the family subject to jail time for debt should he be unable to pay his debtor, many captains chose suicide to save the family fortune.

Huh. Fascinating bit of history, thanks for that!