Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveyJ576
... Even though this ensign was considered highly competent, he still managed to run the Decatur aground. He was subsequently tried by court-martial and received a letter of reprimand.
Bouncing back from this incident, this determined officer transferred to submarine duty and eventually moved on to command the submarines C-5, D-1, and E-1 in addition to several submarine flotillas and squadrons. In 1912 he received the Lifesaving Medal for saving an enlisted crewman from drowning......
|
As a landlubber, it is my understanding that grounding a ship is what the Navy refers to as a "bad thing". It tends to limit the commanding officer's upward career mobility.
Do you think that Nimitz was ordered to the Submarines because it would have been his best change to get a command again? From my readings I understand that in the early parts of the 20th century, submarines and submarine duty was not looked at favorably career wise.
If Nimitz had not transfered to Submarines, would he have been given a "second change" with commanding a surface ship?