U.S. Navy to Withdraw Forces From La Maddalena

[280PLUS]

as Part of Transformation
Story Number: NNS051129-01
Release Date: 11/29/2005 10:46:00 AM


From Commander, U.S. Naval Forces Europe/Commander, U.S. 6th Fleet Public Affairs

NAPLES, Italy (NNS) -- In a move to adjust its forces to meet current and future readiness needs in the European theater, the United States and Italy have decided to remove U.S. Navy forces from La Maddalena, Sardinia.

The U.S. and Italian governments are working on a timeline for the withdrawal of forces.

The United States has determined that the capabilities provided by the installation are no longer required due to the realities of the new century’s security environment.

The facility was originally built to meet Cold War security threats.

The departure of the Navy will affect approximately 1,800 people employed on the base. Approximately 1,100 are U.S. Navy personnel serving aboard USS Emory S. Land (AS 39) and the associated submarine support squadron. There are an additional 475 military members, 150 local nationals and 75 U.S. Navy civilians employed at the Naval Support Activity. Including family members, there are approximately 2,500 U.S. personnel stationed at La Maddalena.

No decision has been made on a prospective homeport for Emory S. Land, a maintenance and logistics support ship that provides support and repair services to U.S. Navy ships.

Future U.S. requirements will be considered in re-locating resources to support theater-wide transformation and security plans.

The scheduled removal of U.S. forces in La Maddalena is not expected to impact the Navy’s mission of providing peace and security in the region.

 

[WT]

Good. Bring them home!

Looks like we had more sailors protecting Sardinia than we currently have protecting Boston, New York and Baltimore harbors.

 

[Werewolf]

I have fond memories of La Madellena. On each of two Med Runs while serving on USS Sandlance SSN-660 we tied up to the tender there.

Palau was the town on Sardinia across from La Madellena. Not a lot to do there at night but the people were friendly, the restaurants good, the hotels comfortable and the liquor was cheap. After being couped up on a sub for 4 weeks La Madellana/Palau was a really nice place to take a break.

From there it was an over night ferry ride or an hour flight to Rome either of which could be picked up at some town I don't recall the name of further south on what was called the emerald coast. Beautiful country. Would have made a nice place to have been stationed on shore duty. Harumph! I never got that lucky...

 

[Old Dog]

Looks like we had more sailors protecting Sardinia than we currently have protecting Boston, New York and Baltimore harbors.

Of course, in La Mad, the people there actually liked us, sailors on liberty there are treated much better by the locals than in Boston, NYC and Baltimore, and have much more fun ...

 

[raghorn]

I enjoyed several brief refits in La Mad as well.

 

[k_dawg]

what *I* want to know is..

why didn't the US have a "withdrawal timeline" from Sardinia a hell of along time ago????




[ note: for those without any sarcasm detectors.. ]

 

[raghorn]

When I visited La Mad back in the 1980s it was basically a rock off the coast of Sardinia with a couple of buildings on it. The Italians allowed a submarine tender to tie up there so that U.S fast attack submarines patrolling the Mediterranean would have a secure place to tie up for maintenance and replenishment between patrols. It was a bit more efficient than having to return to Norfolk, Charleston or Groton for downtime. Now that the cold war is over, it has probably outlived its usefulness. Not sure why it took this long to close it, maybe because it was a pretty darned nice place to visit.

 

[Drizzt]

Would have made a nice place to have been stationed on shore duty.

What kind of sailor would ever wish for shore duty?


I'm just saying that because I never could get shore duty either, other than A school and C school.

 

[WT]

drizzt -

FWIW, according to the US Navy website ..... as of today 12/1/05.

32,515 sailors are at sea.
472,608 are ashore ..... drinking coffee, reading the papers, not doing much to protect their country.

 

[shaldag]

Once, while visiting Old Ironsides, I asked a sailor "what do you have to do to be stationed here?"

He replied "be related to a congressman".

 

[280PLUS]

I visited Old Ironsides too, the kid that led us around was one A-Jay squared away sailor. I don't know if he as related to "anybody". If I go again I'll ask the same question.

As far as those numbers is it possible they mean sailors actually "at sea" and some of the rest are on ships but not "at sea" today but will be sooner or later. The whole Navy doesn't go to sea at once. Or at least it didn't use to...

 

[WT]

I think the USS CONSTITUTION counts as sea duty.

The Navy has 89 billets open in Baghdad. Can't find anyone to fill them.

 

[HankB]

472,608 are ashore ..... drinking coffee, reading the papers, not doing much to protect their country.

Hmmm . . . maybe we can transfer some of those sailors to a new "brown water navy" assigned to patrolling the Rio Grande . . .

 

[280PLUS]

I think the USS CONSTITUTION counts as sea duty.

Yes, IIRC they "get underway" every six months to turn the ship around so it weathers evenly. Therefore they qualify for sea pay.

The Navy has 89 billets open in Baghdad. Can't find anyone to fill them.

I'd like to hear more about this.

 

[jkswiss]

The people who have it easy in the Navy, have it EASY. I think its just the same small fraction of the Navy that goes to sea, time and time again, while dental techs get to work 6 hour days.

 

[Can'thavenuthingood]

Yes, IIRC they "get underway" every six months to turn the ship around so it weathers evenly. Therefore they qualify for sea pay.


Must be a 3 or 9 month schedule. Otherwise wouldn't they be defeating the purpose? Same side out Jan-Jul every year?

Vick

 

[280PLUS]

Must be a 3 or 9 month schedule. Otherwise wouldn't they be defeating the purpose? Same side out Jan-Jul every year?

Hmmm. not sure about that. Sounds like I need another road trip to beantown to find out!

 

[LeonCarr]

A buddy of mine's Dad retired from the Navy, 20 years, Chief Petty Officer, and spent exactly 52 days at sea.

Just my .02,
LeonCarr

 

[Rockrivr1]

I remember when I was in the Navy back in the late 80s early 90s we had a Doonsbury cartoon clip taped to bulkhead in our workspace. The first window showed a guy in full gear in the roasting desert sweating his butt off. The second window showed an airdale on a flight line in the desert trying fix a jet. The third and last window of the clip of two sailors. The first had his feet propped up on a control station reading a newspaper. The quote stated:
Buuurrrrrrrrr - Damn, someone turn down the air conditioning. Hey isn't it time to launch another missile? The second sailor was standing behind the one seated. He stated: Guess what? Their serving french toast and sausage for breakfast in the mess hall.

I always got a kick from that. Then again, I worked the flight deck on the USS Midway. 6 years in. 6 years at sea. Well, except for that time that they were refitting the Grey Lady with some new stabilizing equipment. Every hear of a carrier doing a 46 degree roll. Yeah, the stabilizing equipment worked REAL good!!

 

[Old Dog]

Is this the week everybody gets to bash the Navy?

 

[WT]

Rockrivr1 - yup, I have. My father's ship took at 46 degree roll at 1020 hours, 18 December 1944. The COWPENS and MONTEREY looked like billboards with the planes sliding off the decks.

Its not bash the Navy week. Its time to look at the $400 billion that is being spent on the military every year and trying to figure out why? Our Army and Marine Corps are in dire need of ground pounders, yet we have way too many zoomies and swabbies.

 

[Rockrivr1]

WT - Your father and I have something in common. We both know that a 46 degree roll on a carrier is a very BAD thing!!!! lol I had just come off the deck into our workspace when it happened. Before I knew it, I was holding the coffee pot and standing on the bulkhead. The fridge we had in the space fell over and blocked the hatch. If she went over I was doomed.

By the time the helmsman and captain got us stabilized, we had loose planes, munitions and people all over the deck. Not to mention a few men overboard. I slept with my flotation vest on that night.

 

[popaye85]

Not doing much?

drizzt -

FWIW, according to the US Navy website ..... as of today 12/1/05.

32,515 sailors are at sea.
472,608 are ashore ..... drinking coffee, reading the papers, not doing much to protect their country.

All of the sailors (including Hospital Corpsman) who are currently taking fire in Iraq and Afganistan, the ones who are manning intel watch stations, the ones who are training other sailors and soldiers, as well as those who are serving in THOUSANDS of other jobs, critical to our national defense, would like to thank you for your complete disregard/disrespect for their service.

For most sailors, shore duty is a chance to get updated training or have a chance to see their kids grow up for a short time.

Oh, and we drink coffee and read papers onboard ships as well.

 

[WT]

I wish I could be sure that those hundreds of thousands of sailors on the beach are doing work critical to our national security.

 

[Old Dog]

Well, you might be pleasantly surprised. A great many of the shore duty jobs are every bit as tough as many jobs on deployable units, especially for the folks working in intermediate maintenance activities (on the aviation, ship or submarine side), training commands, medical commands, communications facilities, logistics commands, supply facilities, training squadrons, administrative, personnel and pay support activities, recruiting duty ...

WT, your numbers also don't give a fair picture. Of the numbers you give for those not at sea, a large percentage of those personnel are on regular shore duty (and shore tours are typically much shorter than sea duty tours), or either just coming from, or in transit to, sea duty. Of those in transit to sea duty, many of those personnel are currently undergoing advanced or refresher training, security screening or simply on PCS leave.

Your numbers also include those in boot camp, OCS or OIS, initial rating or specialty training, etc.

The numbers of those who are not available for sea duty, and should be on sea duty, are in fact larger than the Navy would desire, but they're not available because they are currently undergoing long-term training, are currently in some type of medical status (patients or on limited duty), or have been disqualified for duty and are awaiting reassignment, or in a legal hold status or custody (brig, correctional custody) ...