Condottiere wrote: ↑
Sun Mar 22, 2020 9:54 am
Risk tends to work on statistics, which is where commercial departs from military.
Routine voyages don't have anything catastrophic happening to them, and if it does, it's usually calculated in on how preventative measures are executed in terms of cost effectiveness, as well the cost of consequences, when it does happen. It's the reason corporations are more willing to pay fines, than letting individual executives face actual incarceration, so that future decision makers understand that there are no consequences to themselves for acting for the maximum benefit of the corporation, outside of some sacrificial lower rung lambs.
In one of the Disasters At Sea episodes, the owners of the ship that sank did indeed try to throw the crew, both the dead and survivors , under the bus by blaming them for failing to do proper maintenance. Luckily, one of the survivors had kept documentation in his home office. The documents nailed the butts of the corporation's executives for the failures, of course the same documents showed that the USCG also hand failed to follow their own rules and regulations.
The military knows that during hostilities, the enemy will actively attempt to incapacitate ship systems, so keeping them online during hostilities as long as possible is a high priority.
Keeping a ship fully operational goes far beyond hostilities, the military likes to keep the ships in active service for as long as possible because of the cost to build them. In that aspect the military in my opinion has some corporate traits.