I'm glad somebody is saying this

Last weekend while at the NHS Winter Retreat, the attendees were amazed to watch the initial reports of the Costa Concordia sinking roll in - no pun intended.  I'm not going to get into the weeds on this, but suffice it to say that I'm very relieved to see some of the press more latched on to the "over-reliance on electronic navigation" and "a failure of judgement by the captain" and less on "we need safer ships and higher training standards".

Ships today - by and large - are very safe.  Remarkably so.  But the mariners who manage them on the other hand, well, as one myself I can tell you I've grown increasingly concerned over the past 10 years that fewer and fewer are rooted in the fundamentals of that profession.  So many today rely on electronic gizmos - and it's so easy to! - that the most basic principles, such as management of lifesaving on a foundering ship, are going by the wayside.  There was an old Quartermaster aboard my first Navy ship - the crusty  type who is almost irritating to talk to at first.  But I learned quite a bit from him, including evolved use of the Mark 1 Mod 0 Eyeball.  As incidents like these continue, I wonder how long it's going to take everyone to realize how simple the solutions really are.

Low gravity environment

One of the core missions of NHS is to use antiquated technology 'at sea' to develop teamwork and leadership skills.  This we accomplish with our small boats, a mission we will someday expand to Hornet.  Putting participants in an open boat with no engine and forcing them to be reliant on their own abilities to get underway and return safely is rather startling, too.  It has the effect of peeling back that blanket of security most people have in their daily routines and modern technology, leaving most feeling a little vulnerable.  And that's where the education starts - building up from the base of core abilities as individuals, and coming together as a team in a foreign, and highly demanding environment.

But it has another effect as well - it makes people think about the technology they rely on every day.  Some hearken back with anecdotes of the days before cell phones and the internet.  And after a while one question always comes up - as technology makes life, and information, more convenient, are we getting dumber, or perhaps worse, lazier?

Some time ago, I came across the picture above, and I've been thinking about that concept ever since.

Navy abandons its dead? or honors them?

There has been significant press lately on an issue more than 200 years old: thirteen American Sailors, often referred to as the first predecessors of today’s Navy SEALs, remain buried on Libyan soil. The families of some of those Sailors want the remains repatriated to the United States. Navy officials argue that the early practice of burying its dead at sea and along foreign coastlines near the site of death constitutes an official burial, and therefore considers the matter closed. Is the Navy honoring its dead? or doing an injustice to their memory? The issue is hotly contested.

You leave me no choice

A recent South Park episode entitled A History Channel Thanksgiving proved funny and sad all at the same time.  To summarize, the characters in South Park decide that rather than read books about Thanksgiving they'd watch the History Channel instead.  After waiting through Swap People, Hairy Bikers and Ice Road Truckers (I seriously could not have made those up), a show comes on about how the Pilgrims were really aliens from another planet, as were the Native Americans.  I nearly peed myself laughing.  And of course the episode goes on to get dumber and less funny - but as I stopped laughing I realized - this is it.  I'm not the only person who thinks HC programming is crap.  They get a lot of criticism, but stand staunchly behind rednecks and hillbillies as part of their network's programming objectives.  I've long since stopped pausing on HC to see what's on - but if it's part of their master plan, then someone must enjoy that crap.  That South Park episode was the first hint that anyone other than history enthusiasts despise their programming - that the idiocy can be recognized by mainstream viewers.

And so it begins - if this seems stupid to everyone, then you. leave. me. no. choice.

On Steve Jobs

A little off topic this morning?  Maybe.  And I certainly don't want to jump on any bandwagons - I'm far too busy trying to drive a small one.  But as a guy who has never bought a mac or anything with an "i" in front of it, I'm oddly moved by the passing of a guy who is described as a "visionary" and "innovator".  This is a guy who made a real difference doing what he loved, and I've always been inspired by people like him.  And Steve himself was very quick to often point out - it wasn't about the money.  In his own words, “Being the richest man in the cemetery doesn’t matter to me … Going to bed at night saying we’ve done something wonderful… that’s what matters to me.”

Now I'm sure a few regular readers have just realized my connection to all of this - Hornet.  There are a few quotes of his that I think are also pretty pertinent:

"you can't connect the dots looking forward; you can only connect them looking backwards. So you have to trust that the dots will somehow connect in your future. You have to trust in something — your gut, destiny, life, karma, whatever. This approach has never let me down, and it has made all the difference in my life."

"It's really hard to design products by focus groups. A lot of times, people don't know what they want until you show it to them."

"Why join the navy if you can be a pirate?"

So I'm taking some time today to think about Steve and his vision - between everything else that is tugging at me from every angle and all the things I'm pulling my own hair out over.  The chance to take a moment out and dig deep into an idea is a tremendous luxury we can all afford.

NNNN 

What really grinds my gears

Some of you might remember the news last year about the sudden sinking of the Sailing School Vessel (SSV) Concordia off the coast of Brazil.  All 64 people onboard survived after an annoying stint in the ship's liferafts.  The Canadian Transportation Safety Board released its report yesterday, blaming human error due to insufficient training standards.  The investigation found that the officer on watch had several opportunities to avoid the capsizing, including tracking the very squall that did them in visually and on radar.  The master of the ship was below sleeping, but had fully identified the threat of increasingly inclement weather.

Now, a sail training professional I am not, but a maritime professional I am.  I hold a US merchant mariner's license (chief mate unlimited tonnage) and have been a commissioned Naval Officer for 5 years (qualified OOD in two weeks and SWO in 5 months, for those who understand what that entails).  I've sailed aboard a half dozen tall ships, volunteering my time as a deckhand.  But all of that aside, this is relatively simple common sense stuff.  After all, as one of my early mentors pointed out, there is nothing in seafaring that is overly complicated, it's putting those simple things together and making good and timely decisions that makes or breaks your value.  In the simplest of terms, this has EPIC FAIL written all over it, and there is more than one person who ought to have their knickers hoisted for this.

Back again

Okay folks, sorry for the long absence.  Things have been very busy lately but I don't need to tell you - between the retirement of ADM Roughead and ADM Mullen, a new CNO - things are pretty exciting.  And here at NHS things are no different.  Yeah, we're still working on what we're working on, including new promotional and informational materials for the HORNET Project, along with a fresh round of website updates.  And all of it has kept me pretty busy.  Thankfully, its all exciting stuff and so that helps keep the motivation up.

One of the biggest projects recently has been a revamp of the website, conversion to .aspx format and updating the content.  We're still not done with this, but most of what's new is posted.  A quick word on this - yesterday we found that our "join our mailing list" link was not working properly, so if you have joined since Monday, please go back and join again to ensure we don't miss you in future mailings.

We've also been churning and burning on new HORNET promotional material for donors to keep the press on there.  Most of these will be published on our website soon, and snippets have already been published in our weekly newsletter, The Pennant.  Part of the reason that I've taken so long away from the blog is that I've been very wrapped up in those publications, and the website material.  It still isn't perfect, but it's getting there. 

Grab a Snickers. Or just snicker, whatever.

So what's that saying so often made by the ubiquitous 'them' - about the best laid plans?  Yeah, well let's just say that I've grown soft and intolerant of traffic not having to drive onto Naval Station Norfolk in the mornings for going on two years now.  Nearly every single member of the crew we put together this morning was late - myself included.  And as I cursed everything from the Navy for not having more gates to the city for not designing a better traffic pattern to myself for not getting up earlier to the damned drivers who insist on tailgating the Monomoy where I can't see them - if I could kill with my mind it would have been a bloodbath.

Museum ships - damage control

As an amateur historian-type and active-duty SWO (surface warfare officer) I'm getting pretty fed up with reading about museum ships and their plight. That's because while I, perhaps more than most, appreciate the significance of these floating (wait for it) treasures, as I learn more and more about their management the sinking feeling in the pit of my stomach gets worse and worse.

Navigating whitewater

There is something to be said about people who can handle whatever you throw at them - the US Navy breeds these people in droves. After all, the current operational tempo - meaning the pace of operations - is so high that its difficult to find time to maintain, equip and train our ships before sending them out again. But that's the climate we've been operating in for years now, and we're all sort of accustomed to what ADM Harvey calls a 'professional whitewater'.

In fact, in my personal life and in NHS, people are constantly commenting on how busy I am, how many things I'm tackling. Some have said I simply don't know how to relax. But the truth is, I don't really want to. Because in and amongst all of this, I've found a simple enjoyment from doing all that I can with what I have, where I am. People talk about living like it's some sort of bucket list of personal enjoyment experiences. I contend that making your mark on the world starts with a lot of chiseling, and that's what I'm trying to do. And so I think it's safe to say that I've learned to actually enjoy the professional whitewater. Every hard-fought paddle stroke is another chisel mark on the world - and no matter how small, over time, they will make a difference.

Hat tip ADM Harvey, and to everyone else who gets this post - plot your course, keep the screws turning and I'll see you on the other side of the horizon.

NNNN

I can feel it coming in the air tonight...

Yeah that's right - Phil Collins. There are some classics that overcome their corniness in context. Okay, maybe that wasn't one of them.

The Board Meeting of Board Meetings is fast approaching. For anyone who still doesn't understand why we're going to the Outer Banks in January - think of a large luxurious beach mansion, the wide open spaces of the National Seashore, stockpiles of drinks and munchies, and all the most creative, industrious people you've ever put together in one place. Set them in relative isolation in that environment, and let them crack away at some of the most ambitious NHS projects ever. The result is sure to be one exciting 2011 season for NHS.

Remember, the meeting is open to anyone who wants to attend and share in our craziness. The more opinions, the better the result. And since our board normally communicates and conducts its business via email, these face-to-face meetings have become pretty rare in the last year.

BT

Yesterday's fierce rant hasn't yet served its purpose - I don't think anyone actually read the entry. But nevertheless, inactivity frustrates me. Wherever you go to the source of a problem, you can be assured it is getting worse in the absence of activity. Just as ships and men rot in port, idle hands are the devil's playthings, - fill in your favorite saying here - , most initiatives wither and die with inactivity. The thing that bothers me about the Downtown Norfolk waterfront is that all of those non-profits - including Virginia - have vast numbers of volunteers ready to go, if someone would only lead them. But as it is, the inactivity keeps those otherwise ardent supporters at home, fighting off criticism on the internet.

Sad, really. When I walk around down there - and I know nothing has changed, nothing is growing. But to see assets - valuable assets - built in the name of public charity, all sitting idly, NOT accomplishing their mission, and not even trying to - it bothers me.

BT

After all this discussion about inactivity, I'm sure there is someone who is going to chime in and complain that NHS has been rather inactive for the last month. But that assumption is incorrect. True, I've not been writing much, but that's because much of what I'd otherwise write about is up for consideration at the Board Meeting, and therefore out of bounds for the time being. We've got two hot ticket projects - including one GIANT project - in the works, and I'll be cranking out the blog entries as soon as everything has been decided. Stay tuned.

NNNN

The soapbox is getting too high to get off of

Recently there has been some discussion about replacing Navy crews with civilian mariners in the engineering plants of the amphibious ships in our Navy. This has been implemented already in our fleet auxiliaries and replenishment ships, seemingly with great success. The shift would only seem natural, then, that we might continue this trend into additional areas of the Navy. But I believe it represents a distinct nose-dive in the operational readiness and training of our active duty Sailors - and it is applicable to NHS because one of our primary purposes is to preserve our Naval heritage of excellence at sea, even if it is only in the use of small boats used to train youth groups and volunteers.

We're taking a detour here from my normal realm of discussion and diving into my professional pool as a career Naval Officer, but much of my philosophy in that regard carries over into NHS, so I believe it worthy of discussion here.

Being a licensed Merchant Marine officer as well as a Surface Warfare Officer (SWO), I feel qualified to make the following observations about the differences between the Navy and Merchant Mariners:

Merchant Mariners have higher professional training and licensing standards than the Navy. Hands down. My lowly third mate's license and 1-2 years of concentrated study at sea gave me a significant leg up, not only in ship handling and management but also in seagoing culture, that my USNA and NROTC colleagues didn't have. I subsequently qualified OOD and SWO much MUCH faster than people I truly believe to be my intellectual equals or betters. The Navy's belief in on-the-job training can only go so far.

The Merchant Marine doesn't seem to overburden its people with collateral duties that significantly detract from the time they spend doing their actual jobs in the shipboard environment. That's not to say damage control (DC) and force protection (FP), but mess cranking and visit, board, search and seizure (VBSS) are two severe detractors.

And perhaps most importantly, Merchant Marine officers generally have no shortage of highly experienced professional mentors ready at hand. I have served under some great officers in the Navy, but very few that I didn't feel were somehow scrambling to get by. There was a certain cool professionalism in many of my Merchant Marine mentors, as if their years of experience had really given them great preparation to do their jobs well. I've seen that a few times in the Navy, but I don't feel that it is by any means prevalent.

BT

A well regulated and governed Navy - any professional military organization for that matter -should embody three things:

1. well prepared, flexible combat units that are equally capable of performance in routine and irregular conditions,
2. efficient and self-sufficient sustainability and survivability in regular and combat operation, and
3. a disciplined corps of professional personnel dedicated to preservation and exemplification of the previous two principles.

It seems to me that the Navy is giving up on all three principles when it considers proposals like this one. There was a time when our officers were well rounded seagoing professionals - at sea because they chose to be and not because it was the only career progression open to them in a bad economy. There was a time when our crews were composed of proud Sailors, each a technical expert in some realm of the operation of their command, and king of some small patch of deckplate because it had their name beside "POIC" (Petty Officer In Charge) on the bulkhead. We had great schools, bred fantastically efficient personnel who cared - deeply - about what they did. What happened?

BT

I can't propose a solution to this that anyone might take seriously. But what I can say is that it is my sincere hope to take the best of what the Navy is and has been - including the legacy of pride in efficiency and readiness - and put it into NHS. Someday, we will build a world-class organization, even if it is very small. Our boats can and will be a hallmark of these traits, and show off in some small measure the pride we have in being Sailors.

NNNN

Ruminating on Pearl Harbor, or, The infamy of creating bad stereotypes

I've been thinking this morning, that as I sit writing this, 69 years ago, a Japanese force of four carriers and accompanying strike group equivalents were preparing to launch thier surprise attack on Pearl Harbor. I've been to Pearl several times, in fact I joined my first Navy ship there. Now that I think about it she looked at the time like she might have just survived the battle. But I digest. I remember the strange feeling seeing a ship of the Japanese Maritime Self Defense Force - for all intents and purposes the Japanese Navy - tied up pierside with full honors. At colors, honors were exchanged with great ceremony and respect. I won't pretend I wasn't a little chapped at this - in fact, when I later learned that several US Sailors walking down the pier had treated Japanese Sailors badly, I - shamefully - quietly agreed with them. Yes, even I was a dumbass Ensign.

There is a concept that both flourishes and eludes us today - the idea of degrading your enemy in your eyes to be something less than human to justify your hatred and killing of them - and the fact that once created the image doesn't just go away. In this case, the killing might have ended long ago but that seed of hatred is planted deep, especially in those who have never had any other experience with the Japanese than reading about and studying Pearl Harbor and WWII. It might not be readily apparent, but how many times today will you hear about "the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor". That's like saying "The War of Northern Aggression" or "War Against the Huns". And not that I mind too much, but just think about it.

The simple fact of the matter is this - we have been at peace with the Japanese since September 2, 1945. In that time, we've seen the rise of Japan as a mutually beneficial trading partner and economic powerhouse, as well as a most trusted and valuable ally.

When our adversaries are dead, wounded, captured, capitulated or otherwise neutralized, they cease to be our enemy. This is a fundamental concept in the Law of Armed Conflict. Fight me no more and we will live on together, in peace.

And so, as part of my recompense for previously ignorant thoughts on the subject, I can say honestly that I am extraordinarily proud of my nation's partnership with the Japanese, without which we would undoubtedly find our mission much more difficult. The peace was hard-won, but I can think of no better outcome from the struggles and tribulations of our proud veterans than the peace they helped forge in the crucible of WWII.

Hats off.

BT

And on a lighter note, have you seen the Jap. Navy, well- JMSDF, lately? They are complete badasses! Try an UNREP with them sometime and you'll see how locked up a ship can be, and how smart execution can look.

Eyes RIGHT!

Where do you think they got AEGIS from? You didn't think that their ships and ours look so similar by coincidence, did you? Rock on, Japan. Good to have you on our team. I look back in the annals of history with great disappointment that we were ever such horrible enemies.

NNNN

Patriotism through villiany

I've received a few emails this week asking questions about why we're dressing up as the British this weekend - and one in particular that directed me to an old online discussion bashing NHS.

First, I should point out that the Naval Heritage Society (NHS) was formed in late 2009 from what until that point had been the Lobsterback Society (LS) - which itself was formed in 2006. The primary goal of the LS was to educate our fellow Americans about their revolutionary heritage by presenting them with the opposition faced by the Founding Fathers - a bunch of really pissed off government officials, their troops, weapons and equipment - all supported by the rule of law. How is it, after all, that common people - who just want to live happily, raise their families and get on with their lives - would put those lives on the line for an idea? The answer isn't so simple. You or I might never think of attacking the local magistrate's house to protest anything, thus risking being arrested and locked up. Most cops might be a little soggy in the midsection these days, but they are still very intimidating! And they do have their elite - think of being run down by a SWAT team. Not fun.

So, the idea was that we would get dressed up in costumes as British soldiers and play a sort of 'police' roll, enforcing now defunct laws and practicing those outrages that the Americans found to be so grievous that they would - as a result - turn on us. And even with the knowledge that we can't actually hurt you, many people were still very intimidated by the big muskets with gleaming bayonets. Very persuasive - sit down, shut up, take what we give you. And most adults tend to comply. Ironically enough it's the kids that usually end up taking a stand first, and when the crowd then realizes that we can be beaten back mob style, we are. And I find it quite interesting how well that whole small scenario parallels the opening of the Revolutionary War in Virginia - something we're setting out to re-create this weekend.

One of the nagging doubts facing most early patriot organizers was the 'might' of the British Military. When the last colonial governor made himself a fort barricading one of the only roads connecting North Carolina with Norfolk and occupied it with troops - and not just any troops, some were the elite 'SWAT team' types - the colonists decided to come out in force and see what - if anything - they could do. As it turns out, the small victory they ended up achieving there convinced more and more people that the "united we stand" principle could in fact beat the British military machine. Patriot ranks swelled, and the rest, as they say, is history.

BT

So, onto the issues with the Lobsterback Society.

We adopted a British Marine impression, primarily because they were everywhere in history that we would need to operate in the present day. They were also formed into fairly fluid groups - and it would not be out of the ordinary to see a dozen or so of them at an engagement. If Royal Navy ships were around, more often than not the marines were provided to shore-based commanders for tasking.

We researched the uniform to some degree, using patterns for pieces of the uniform as we could find them to assemble the complete costume. The underlying administrative goal of the LS had always been to provide ALL costumes and equipment to participants free of charge, and so we weren't just building one impression, we were manufacturing them. That said, economy of scale had to prevail - machine stitching throughout and some corners - such as installation of pockets etc - had to be cut in order to make the process affordable. After all, these are costumes - worn a few times a year. The resulting product was quite good I think, and ended up incorporating many details of the historical uniforms, such as buttons and wool, both of which ended up being purchased in quantity from good quality stock.

The problem with our costumes is generated by what I think of as 'hard core' reenactors, who enjoy researching their costumes to the most minute details and reproducing with care as much as they can. I see this point of view quite clearly - mostly because if I were outfitting myself, I would choose to go that route. I have done this in the past, such as when I reenacted a private in the 5th New York Infantry (Civil War), my costume was immaculate - thoroughly documented and accurate to the type of thread that was used to assemble my cartridge box. But that sort of authenticity is simply not necessary when dealing with the mission of the LS, or of NHS for that matter. Neither our participants nor our audience really care much about what we're wearing - to them, its more about doing things reminiscent of the historical examples. Things such as assembling a full boat crew and being able to maneuver with great efficiency, navigate across great expanses of water, and in the specific realm of the marines - field a small unit that functions much like a small unit might have around that time - with the primary focus on combat readiness and tactics rather than the minute details of the costume. We do have some in the administrative establishment that strive for authenticity, which results in constant improvements to the costumes and equipment in circulation, but everyone has to start somewhere.

Don't take this as a knock against 'hard core' types, either - we, all of us that are involved in the reenactment hobby - bring something to the table. We should all strive to learn from each other, to work together to some degree and just have fun with our mutual love of history. And as far as I am concerned or ever will be concerned, the more involved the merrier! The more viewpoints, the better. The more ATTENTION TO THE SUBJECT the better.

A second issue arose concerning the name Lobsterback Society. It is absolutely true that the term 'lobsterback' is NOT an 18th century term - at least not in North America. Rather, the term was coined after the war - long after, in the 19th century to be exact - by American authors. It seemed appropriate, then, that we should adopt this popularized term generated by Americans after the conflict because, well, we ARE Americans looking back after the conflict. Critics of our use of that name should also note that our official motto was PRODITORES SUGUNT - Latin for treason sucks. It's all about fun here, after all.

I personally find it quite funny that the references many of the arguments provide were given long before on the LS website.

BT

In 2009, three years after the LS began, it was decided that our ever-expanding projects were leading us farther and farther afield of the original mission of simply being 'the bad guys'. Membership numbers climbed higher and higher, interests diversified, and suddenly we no longer fit the mold of what we had created. It was decided to transition to become what we now know as NHS, building a ubiquitous Navy component as our primary focus while still maintaining support for our beloved marines.

We are still, and will remain, an easy target for 'hard core' criticism. I don't really mind that, in fact I rather enjoy revelling in my comparative normalcy - making me look 'normal' isn't easy to do. Besides, we're proving quite a tough turd to flush.

NNNN

Diversity was an old, old wooden ship

Survey says - nope, you probably didn't get the movie reference. Deduct two points.

As we gear up for the annual reenactment of Great Bridge in Chesapeake VA, we're discussing how to mesh what NHS has become with the programming of previous years. Last year at this time, NHS was known as "The Lobsterback Society" - a group dedicated to teaching Americans about their revolutionary origins by portraying the antagonists in the Revolutionary War - the British. And we did that rather well, if I say so myself. When the crowd, irritated by having to swear a loyalty oath to King George or some other abuse, decided to heckle and rebuff the troops, they each discovered a little more about what it took to be a patriot in those uncertain times. After all, those gleaming bayonets and bright red coats have a certain way of intimidating the opposition. Takes some gall, even when you know we can't hurt you or break your stuff, to stand up to that. Point was well recieved.

Now, we're incorporating an entirely different mission into the programming. We still have the original goal of using the 'bad guys' to show you how difficult it can be to stand up for what's right. And we're finding that moral fortitude can be a difficult pill for some to swallow. That's because this year, for the first time in our programming, we are marching into the fray, as it were, with participants who don't fit the historic mold of who we're pretending to be. Let me explain.

Over the past year, we've worked with several youth groups to take NHS programming - the "crucible" concept of training, teamwork and leadership - to a broader audience. In the process we've worked with men and women, young and old, of numerous ethnicities and religions. It was never a big deal, an oarsman is an oarsman and your position in the boat is wholly dependent on your skills, not your demographic. But as we all know, this was not the case in the 18th century. While some may argue that the British Marines (they weren't 'Royal' until 1802) were comprised of men of many different ages, and the occasional disguised female, there are no historical examples (that I've seen) of African, Asian, Hispanic, or Middle Eastern mainstream British Marines in that time period. There were examples of some diversity in the Continental Marines, where several African Americans are known to have been enlisted and served with some distinction on various ships. But not amongst the British.

I should note that almost every Navy in the world at the time recruited from just about anyone they could find to do the job, and so diversity was very common amongst sailors. So thankfully our boat crew - diversity and all - is rather authentic. But amongst our "British Marines" this year we are very likely to have some Hispanic, African American and/or Asian participants, and I know this is going to cause a little heartburn among the die-hard authenticity nuts. To anyone who has a problem with this - our Bylaws are quite clear:

No person because of race, color, creed, sex, age, disability or national origin shall be unlawfully denied membership, unlawfully excluded from participation, or otherwise subjected to unlawful discrimination.

Participants may be excluded from participation in an activity based on unsuitability for the physical requirements of participation and resultant increased risk to their personal health or safety, or the health and safety of other Participants. However, no Member or Participant shall be excluded from attendance at an official function on the basis of physical unsuitability for activities that constitute only a portion of that function.

These provisions, or some adaptation thereof, are required of every 501(c)3 organization by Federal Law. And because this seems as appropriate a venue and time as any, let me expand on this:

It is my sincere hope and goal that the Naval Heritage Society should never cater to any specific enthic group, gender or religion in any way, shape or form. I won't support any effort to recruit people from any specific demographic, or ensure their retainment. I will however strive to ensure fair treatment of all members and participants, provide a prejudice- and harassment-free environment for conduct of operations and activities, and work to bind all persons that choose to participate in the spirit of our common humanity and the realization of the benefits that can be derived from the power of the concerted community above the capabilities of the individual.

I am more than willing to let go of a little historcial authenticity here to ensure everyone learns something. There are plenty of other historical anachronisms to tackle before anyone can begin telling people to "go home - your skin is the wrong shade".

Dismount, SOAPBOX!

NNNN

Ship of fools

Okay. I just HAD to vent about this - after all, it's virtually in my back yard (not the way NHS is - ha!) and a major point of local attention in the last several months.

To paraphrase for those who haven't heard, Schooner Virginia - a ship built less than a decade ago to be a sail training platform, goodwill ambassador of the Commonwealth, and preserver of our seafaring heritage - is on the rocks. After running hard aground in the red ink of her own ledgers, the program was shut down and the ship tied up at a Norfolk dock, where she has been waiting for salvation. That was last year. Now fast forward to 2010, when the ship's SEVEN FIGURE DEBT (!) is crippling most efforts to stabilize her situation by other 501(c)3 organizations, such as Nauticus.

Let me say for starters that I am NOT the Will King who is Executive Director of that program. Same name, I know, very confusing.

.

In short, the problem stems from two critical issues: intended mission and basic business plans. And in this case, they are relatively well entwined.

All of the stated purposes of the program are great and very meaningful. They are also sugared fluff. Why should I say that? Because although the people that conceived and fostered this project probably had great visions of their noble schooner plowing the waves, they did not consider the limitations of such a hull form in terms of accommodations and deck space, which equals REVENUE. It's one thing to say you want sail training and all that, and make that your "mission", but if you insist on a design that cripples that mission, you're doomed from the start.

As has been pointed out in several articles and in discussion, the program also lacked a compelling story - some kind of historical background for people to get behind, that would anchor the vessel to its community. The original ship, built in the early years of the 20th century, was obsolete even when built. According to the ship's own history page (now removed), the original's mission of "sail training for pilots" was even called into question by lawmakers at the time when the pilots began taking the ship out for drunken benders in Chesapeake Bay. Yeah, great precedent. And I'm not even touching the fact that her design was modelled after America's Cup yachts- yes, yachts. Sleek, fast, with little space for accommodations and even less appeal to the common masses. It's easy to draw the connection to it as an elitist symbol - in fact, that is the distinct impression she gives me.

Couple all of this with the fact that the half-baked project was totally enabled by one-time grants and other funds that WERE NOT EARNED by the program, nor could be earned by the program. The majority of the funds for construction and to support her first several years of operation came from the same place - the government. So it's understandable that taxpayers should be irked by the utter failure of a scheme that they helped get off the ground. Where, after all, was the business plan? Surely those people couldn't have expected the 'free money' to last forever? But yes, yes they did.

All I can think of is this - aren't these people 'adults'? Aren't these the 'responsible type' of 'successful people' I am supposed to look up to and learn from? What the hell happened? Why do decision makers buy off on these things? And not to say the program shouldn't have received a helping hand in start-up, but shouldn't they have had a viable (and in fact bullet-proof) plan to stand on their own?

I WILL NOT pine for the loss of the Schooner Virginia. Instead I think it ought to be an example to everyone else thinking about such projects - myself included. In fact - I will go so far as to DAMN THEIR IDIOCY because from now on, it will be just that much more difficult for another such idea to get off the ground, no matter how well conceived, thought out and planned.

BT

The last point I make in reference to rebuilding. This region DESERVES a tall ship of its own. A center of community pride and enthusiasm cruising our local waters. But it is not that schooner.

Of course, in my biased opinion, it ought to be a warship of some historical note - something that was built in Virginia for the public service, and used exclusively in that regard throughout its life. Give me a square-rigger with stout, hearty lines and capacity for 150 students by day and 50 overnight. Something manned by a crew of 20 talented, dedicated educators, with an administration that looks after them as their first priority. Let her be the embodiment of efficiency and good order, the very best of working people coming together.

Sadly, I grow less and less confident that it can or will ever happen.

NNNN

BY THE WAY - Oh web "master"

I just took a jog over and had a look at our website. "Counter is updated daily" seems to be negated by the fact that our 'fundraising goal' deadline is November 1. Updated daily, that is, until November 1, after which you'll forget about it. Way to go! AND... the PayPal link has stopped working. Seems these days that your work is more than a little mildly discouraging.

Before we get into another war turning pages pink, is there some motivation I can provide beyond the constant harping? I'd love to give positive encouragement! But no, you're sooo touchy. I mean seriously, do your frickin job or quit - 'all there is to it. And before you think about turning my blog pink again, remember the lesson that you should have learned on that occassion - if you force me to engage you, the sequence of combat will only end in your demise... or at least severe embarassment.

Forty three, check. (imaginary pencil on hand) still not getting the quotes. Hmmm.

The thing that irritates me the most about NHS - and the thing that motivates me beyond words - are the contributions of others (or lack thereof). Many of us have signed on for responsibilities above and beyond the typical show-up-and-row mentality. It also provides an outlet to relieve stress and occasionally a viable reason to have a beer before lunch. But I digest.

It is SO motivating to see the products of other people's labor, and how it compliments my own in the push toward the NHS master goal of global domination. But when people take on responsibilities especially voluntarily, and don't meet them, I get irritated. Irked, if you will. REALLY MAAAAAAAAAAD.

You Dockyard volunteers, the Saturday morning beer this weekend shall be my tribute to you! May I never forget your contributions! To our webmaster, consider yourself ON NOTICE.

BT

I don't know why I'm so fixated on beer this afternoon. I almost NEVER drink heavily (not like apparently I was supposed to in college), I just enjoy one now and again. But one other idea I had last night revolved around one of the other hobbies I've been thinking of taking up lately (yes, there are others) - beer making. I'm thinking we need to pick up a home beer-making kit, and brew some Dockyard Ale or Dockyard Bitter or Dockyard Porter. Dockyard IPA, maybe a nice Dockyard Stout. You get the idea. Not thinking of becoming a micro-brew but it WOULD be kind of nice to brew our own concoction and provided it's palatable, wheel it out on special occasions.

And in case anyone else is wondering, I already have plenty of spirits hidden buried in the Dockyard to celebrate whiskey planks, launchings etc. No, I won't tell you where or what they are, you'll just have to stick around long enough to find out. They are, by the way, worth the wait. Unlike what I'm sure will come of the above rant.

NNNN

Checking e-mail

Happy Monday everyone! I'm sure most of you are rubbing your eyes and auto-piloting yourselves from your warm beds through your morninig routine and arriving at the office, where, because you're not busy enough you're reading my blog. Slackers. That's okay, this blog gets completed in the time I spend waiting - in the Navy there is plenty of it. What can I say except they should take away my laptop. Complaints? Sounds like someone's got a case of the Mondays.

So while I wait for the morning meeting, I've been answering e-mails from devoted (more or less) readers. I have to say I find it a little strange that some of you haven't figured out that the NHS Dockyard is the yard behind my house - I thought I explained that enough. And how can you be angry about that? Shouldn't you be impressed? Unless you're one of my neighbors - and I know you aren't because mine are awesome - I can't think of much grounds for complaint. After all, does anyone have shop space they are interesting in providing? (crickets) Thought so.

Also, if you're looking for real pictures, check out the NHS Gallery on Facebook.

I'm just continually flabbergasted that the majority of emails I recieve from this blog are from 'casual' readers - whose three whole glances at the blog over as many months has produced a strange fictional world in their mind that I just don't live up to in real life. Odd, because so many people who actually take the time to VISIT say the operation is larger than they expected.

By the way, there is a Dockyard Map posted on FB as well, complete down to the Pagan Altar.

BT

All this week work continues in the evenings - the yard will be open 4-7 pm Tuesday, 7-9 pm Wednesday and 4-7 pm Thursday. Weekend hours (9 am - 7 pm) begin Friday.

We'll be finishing the stem patterns and preparing the fasteners on No. 2 for removal, so come on out.

NNNN

NHS Recognizes Breast Cancer Awareness Month

The National Breast Cancer Foundation estimates that each year, over 200,000 women will be diagnosed with breast cancer and over 40,000 die. One woman in eight either has or will develop breast cancer in her lifetime. Approximately 1,700 men will be diagnosed with breast cancer and 450 will die each year.

If detected early, the five-year survival rate for breast cancer exceeds 96%. Mammograms are among the best early detection methods, yet 13 million U.S. women 40 years of age or older have never had a mammogram.

I for one would like to promote healthy breasts! And so for the rest of the month, my blog is now pink! NOT because the smart ass web master decided to take revenge for my constant criticism, but because of a great cause worth standing up for!

I want to take this opportunity to encourage my readers to add their support to this cause. There are many fantastic organizations out there that do great things in the fight - and a quick search will yield many of these. From walks and concerts to fundraising drives and collections, there's bound to be a way that you can enjoy contributing.

BT

(maniacal laugh) Match point, "webmaster".

NNNN

HAPPY 235 NAVY! and a few other comments

On 13 October 1775 the Continental Congress passed a bill authorizing the procurement, fitting out, manning, and dispatch of two armed vessels to cruise in search of munitions ships supplying the British Army in America. The legislation also established a Naval Committee to supervise the work. This was the first step toward creation of a national naval force, that through various reiterations has become the US Navy of today.

BT

On a totally unrelated topic and as a complete and total rant, I want to point out the recent political candidates - and there are several - being heckled for reenacting.

I am not going to stand up for these folks, but neither will I add to the barrage. It bears pointing out that the general public is coming out to say they find most historical reenactments silly and inane. That's nothing new. The idea takes a lot of getting used to and most younger people I know who do reenact won't talk to their other friends about it. It's a source of embarrassment, ridicule and criticism. Is this fair? Why or why not? Politically charged race and religious issues aside, there are other factors here, less easy to examine. Why are reenactors so easy to criticize?
The concept, when viewed from the outside, is highly suspect. Line up "opposing forces" across a field, then shoot blanks at each other and pretend to fall down to simulate death. A historical event that caused so much pain and suffering is romanticized in melodrama for the "education of the public". Then the participants get up, brush off and head back to their camps to lounge around and talk about how cool it was, while the public generally tries to figure out exactly what it was that they just saw.

The same concept, as viewed from the reenactors' perspective, is quite different. In the interest of preserving history, educating the public and building their own understanding of historical people and events, they invest piles of time and money to produce an impression that allows them to transform in one way or another into a living representation of their subject. The fights demonstrate period tactics and maneuvers and allow the public insight - in living color - into the events that transpired and helped shape the nation, other nations and the world. Generally speaking, unpleasantness is kept to a minimum, in the interest of keeping things appropriate for families. And the events add a further layer of interest in that each one is a meeting, where like-minded folks can gather together to discuss their hard work in the recent interim and enjoy each other's company.

So... two sides of the same coin. But unfortunately, there's a rub. The repulsive view of the coin is on the face - the obverse is a bit concealed in the modern social atmosphere. This causes many people to not want to get involved, limit their involvement or keep their involvement quiet. And the coin is relatively flat - it is difficult to see and understand both sides simultaneously. That is to say, the farther afield you go to see your side, the less and less you see the other.

We have a great saying in the Navy, that perception is reality. This is clearly the culprit here.

I would like to think that I live on the edge of the coin, but I think I'm straying back more and more toward that ugly face view of it lately. For instance, I just can't see the merits of battle reenactments anymore - for many reasons. Of course, I will continue to support the direction dictated by the NHS Board of Directors - so if they say go shoot and fall down, that I will do. But the overall direction of NHS in general is shifting farther and farther away from the back of the coin, partially in search of recruits, partially for fundraising, partially because it was getting boring - and moving toward something easier for most people to understand, get on board with, and support. We saw this in the past year where for every event in costumes we had three without. 2011 will be even farther afield from reenacting - mark my words.

BT

I just noticed last night that the webmaster thinks he can turn my blog background pink as some sort of compensation for the errors in the NHS website. Shouldn't you be fixing the uneven text size and really bulky HTML code instead of messing around with my background? Just saying.

NNNN