Navy crashed into huge merchant ship. I'll refrain from my comments of normal truth.
And, got to love blow boaters cutting in front of container ship: https://www.facebook.com/Norsk.Losfo...3622210314699/
Printable View
Navy crashed into huge merchant ship. I'll refrain from my comments of normal truth.
And, got to love blow boaters cutting in front of container ship: https://www.facebook.com/Norsk.Losfo...3622210314699/
Another smashing event....
https://c.o0bg.com/rf/image_960w/Bos...o%20better.JPG
https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/20...OrL/story.html
The pictures we saw down here showed a point of impact on the starboard side. That suggests the container ship hit the navy vessel. If this was anything like a crossing situation, the container ship was the stand-on vessel. Liability will probably be proportioned. Where were the radar watches?
Bobk
Too little information to draw any conclusions at this point. Navy ship was previously damaged and operating on one shaft. So maybe we will hear it was restricted in ability to maneuver and therefore claimed right of way.
I spent 4 years driving an aircraft carrier in and out of Pensacola which doesn't have a harbor pilot. We routinely took the position we had restricted maneuverability. It never ceased to amaze me how many small boats sail and power would cut across the bow so close that they disappeared from sight from the bridge. We honked the horn alot and asked the forward lookouts for body counts.
Bruce
Freestyle
1986 62 CPMY (54 with cockpit extension)
Tampa
I would have assumed that a USN destroyer would have no trouble seeing the possible collision in plenty of time to avoid it, regardless of who had the right of way. But obviously my assumption has proven to be incorrect.. ;)
Don't know which one is worst... the navy destroyer getting rammed by a container ship or the Nantucket fast ferry landing on the jetty. I guess the destroyer is worst but that ferry captain has some explaining to do. For those not familiar with Hyannis you have to make an 60 degree turn into the channel. This guy kept going straight for almost half a mile before hitting the jetty and almost punching thru.
AIS plots shows he was doing 34kts when he missed the turn.
I guess I assumed that a USN destroyer would have the most modern equipment in the world with trained personnel to operate it. BUT, as is indicated, a couple of guys with binoculars might be more effective than a bunch people with their heads in some sort of video display.
A guy on watch with binos would be able to holler, "there's a bigAss boat coming, we need to turn!"
You would think. Here's an interesting take on why, despite all that tech and all those watch standers, stuff happens. http://orrinjohnson.com/blog/2009/02...grounded-ship/
Follow on accounts of the USS Fitzgerald indicate that the area in which the collision occurred is extremely busy, with a lot of traffic. It is not clear which vessel(s) at fault. Looking at the vessels in photos, it appears the destroyer cut across the path of the merchant vessel, which was also much bigger and heavier.
I suspect the seven missing sailors are inside the ship, but who knows? It's tragic any way you look at it.
I had the same questions about lookouts and radar. Sad business.
Yes but nowadays with AIS even in restricted visibility you get a clear picture of what is going on plus where the various target will be along with CPA and TCPA Even without AIS, I mean it's navigation 101... if the bearing to another vessel doesnt change you are risking a collision. Doesn't get more simple than that
What I do not get is that whenever I have converged with a navy vessel or USCG cutter and would have passed with a mile, they always call asking me to change course. Yet in this case they let a container ship ram them???
Well, someone or someones didn't do what they were supposed to. The worst part is the lives lost.. and then the careers ended and gone, and the ship all smashed up. They can repair the ship. The rest of it all is not retrievable, any gate.
The navy crashes ships way too often. Perhaps they need to put a few merchant marines on the bridge?
Terrible to read that the 7 bodies were found in the flooded sections of the ship. The whole thing ridiculous.
The internet says navy doesn't broadcast AIS, but does monitor. A navy ship has tons of people on the bridge (5-10+) compared to a merchant ship (potentially as few as 2, unless one is in the head).
Most merchant ship driver officers spent 4 years learning all about ship driving. The CO and likely many of the officers on the the navy ship studied history in college---something I never understood.
RIP for those that were killed.
At the rate the crash pumps are flowing seems fortunate the boat didn't sink. One also must wonder if stealth played a roll and the cargo ship couldn't see the destroyer on radar? Sad.
I to used to be officer in charge of running navy ships, one day coming into San Diego harbor we were in the channel doing about 8 knots and a sailboat was running right next to us when he suddenly made a 90 degree turn right into us. His mast caught on our catwalk along the flight deck and we were pulling him sideways through the water at 8 knots. The mast finally broke and hit the leg of one of the guys onboard(retired Air Force officer). I understand they got a nice check from the US Goverment.
It may be just an illusion caused by the camera angles, but in the pictures I have seen it looks like there is a kink in the hull just where it was struck by the container ship. The platform/framework at the stern also looks like it is not parallel to the waterline and the windows on the bridge don't seem to be aligned with the main deck: were they before the incident? Could she have a broken back or is this just so thing caused by taking digital photos......?
Here's some pictures of the ferry at the yard: http://www.thehulltruth.com/10382117-post50.html
http://i806.photobucket.com/albums/y...pskaodbvy6.jpg
http://i806.photobucket.com/albums/y...psajnxjj47.jpg
From an operational point of view, it appears that the other ship was the "stand on" vessel so the destroyer, as the "give way" vessel should have taken the initiative to avoid it. When you add to the fact that the destroyer was, by far, the more agile vessel, it could have avoided the collision much easier regardless of who was the stand-on vessel.
EVEN if the destroyer had been the stand on vessel, obviously (I hope) the duty officer on board the destroyer would have ordered some immediate maneuver had he/she been aware of the proximity of the other vessel. I cannot believe that anyone would have stood there, seeing a MUCH larger ship on a collision course, and said "Maintain course and speed! Don't worry, WE have the right of way!"
So clearly there was a serious failure of the folks on watch - whether they were viewing data displays or physically looking out...surely we still have people stationed to actually LOOK outside, right? Or maybe the watch standers reported and the OD elected not to do anything. That's a pretty scary scenario.
It will be interesting to hear the final report on the links in the chain that caused this to occur. Like most such incidents, there is usually several things that "went wrong." Typically if one of the links in the "went wrong" chain had been broken, the situation and, in this case, the death of 7 sailors could have been avoided.
Some similarities with the CG 43' that hit the Stono River Bridge near me in Feb. Six crewmen, all the modern aids imaginable, clear night, bridge lit, no traffic, no seas and a stationary bridge--WHAM. How does that happen? Wonder if it'll come down to youth and inexperience? The coasties were all really young.
Stop this nonsense. It is because of INCOMPETENCE. One can be young, and just have a slight amount of experience, and still be competent. Experience and wisdom are more important in abnormal situations.
It takes very little skill to avoid collision with a freighter. It takes very little skill to not hit a stationary bridge (tons of idiot pleasure boaters don't crash into the bridge every day).
Both the navy and coastguard crash were in fair weather conditions.
Gee, imagine if we tried to go to the moon today.
NY Times has the AIS trace of the ship plotted. Seemed to be chugging along in a straight line until things got all pear-shaped. Then it looks like nobody wanted the responsibility of being in command.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...rald.html?_r=0
Maybe it's nonsense. Generally speaking experience and wisdom come with age. But as you indicate, not always. If you read the NTSB marine accident reports involving the CG, for example, you will see that there is some sort of correlation between accident rates and the operators' age. You're right when you say age is not the only determinant of ability or experience. But a lot of what happens on the water is age related because many of the younger folks believe they are bulletproof; a/k/a unguided ability. Not mentioning any names.
I understand. To me it's akin to kids who can't do long division because calculators are ubiquitous. I see parents who are scared to death their kid might burn their hand on the stove. The kid will get burned sooner or later; I would hope it would be on the stove as opposed to a life and death situation. So who's fault is that? Not the kid's I would argue.
Must agree that the snowflake culture has us expecting less and less of young adults. And they have lowered confidence and expectations in their own ability and responsibility as a result. We reap what we sow.
There is sure a lot of brutal finger-pointing here. Can we wait for the investigation? At least 3 agencies will do one.
While I cannot speak to todays navy some 50 years ago I was a radarman on a destroyer and yeah we stopped at Yokuska on the way to Vietnam.
1) a radarman in CIC was always assigned the "scope". When you had the duty, you did not leave the scope for even 5 seconds. Hell, the butt-kit was literally bolted to the side of the console!So this guy was connected to another RD on the bridge who stalked the OD. Nine months of 'A' school was certainly sufficient to train about collision course and CPA.Back then we would use a grease pencil to extend the "pecker trail" to the center of the scope. You had your grease pencil, a rag and a cig in your mouth.
2} Then, as now, the radar was watched 24/7 even when 1000 mile from nowhere. Merchantmen and yes, 95000 ton cruise ships with 5000 soles aboard, do not post a constant radar watch.
3) Something went real wrong here-even assuming the container ship did a wild 180. This class of destroyer can stop in it's own length at flank speed!
USS Braine, DD630, Constellation battle group-if you care. Geez, I am getting old.
Gary
If you want to know who the seven sailors who died on the Fitzgerald were, there is an article about them in the NYTimes. It is very affecting. They died protecting their country.
Accidents are not planned which is why they call them accidents. Good training along with a proper mental attitude should hopefully minimize their rate of occurrence. Is the quality of training in our military services as good as what is offered at the maritime academies? Possibly, but I believe that some degree of arrogance is often at play. The pecking order generally gives the right of way to Military vessels over just about anything else. Many of us have witnessed the sailboat flexing his perceived "right of way" which just as often as not is wrong. There is no right of way. In crossing situations we are all responsible even if the other guy is a jerk. Many folks in a position of authority feel that the rules don't apply to them, which is very unfortunate as we frequently see on the news. Sometimes it's just plain old confusion as to what action to take until it's too late to correct the mistake. A case in point was the Andrea Doria collision with the Stockholm in the 50's where both vessels "saw" each other on the radar as well as eventually visually and the wrong maneuver was made. On the water it is seldom 100% the fault of one party, blame is usually shared because Navigation Rule #1 was not followed. Each skipper is required to take whatever action necessary to avoid a collision even if it violates another rule.
It really get's me angry when I hear about another tragedy that should have not happened and in this case causing the loss of 7 young people who didn't even get a chance to live a normal life through no fault of their own. You can bet that quite a few careers will be over no matter the blame. We are all diminished because of this.....RIP young sailors.........
Walt
The Containership was in the Navy ships "danger zone" and clearly had the right of way as proof by the damage on the starboard side of the navy ship.
Rules of the Road are governed by the Collision Regulations. They spell out which vessel is the Stand-On Vessel and which vessel is the Give-Way Vessel.
They also explain actions to take for crossing, meeting and overtaking situations.
Every pleasure boat operator who must give-way to another vessel, that means the operator who has to move, must take "early and substantial action to avoid a collision."
The stand-on vessel must "maintain course and speed."
Danger (Give-Way) Zone
Danger Zone
The green sector on your boat, that sector defined by your green sidelight, is your Danger Zone or your Give-Way Zone.
This extends from the centreline on your bow (dead ahead) to 22.5º abaft the starboard beam, or 112.5º from the bow, along your starboard side.
When another skipper sees your green light, he has the right of way...green for go. When you have a boat in your green sector, you must take early and substantial action to avoid collision.
I have personally seen a boat operator, looking at his chart plotter, maneuver the boat per the plotter to ensure it was in the channel entering a narrow cut (Knapps Narrows). BUT, the boat was actually heading straight at the land to the left of the cut. Someone who was actually LOOKING advised the operator and his initial response was, "No, we're right on course, look!" [pointing at the chart plotter]. He was finally convinced that looking outside (bright, clear day) and seeing where the boat was and where it was heading was more accurate than navigation by video game. ;)
Thank you for your service Sir. My Dad was on the the John W. Thomason (DD-760), served in the Korean War. Sailors back then were made of steel. I was in the Navy from 1980-1984. We were tough but nothing like you guys. We even had airconditioning on my ship. There's no excuse for this collision to happen. The military has transformed into something like the boy scouts. My buddies ship went on a West Pac with 50 women onboard. 25 women got pregnant on the trip. You dont hear about that on the news. Its politically incorrect to talk about. Who knows what they were doing on the bridge tracking that ship. Prolly some young officer of the deck was on duty playing a game on his iphone
Here is bridge audio from another navy ship that crashed into a large merchant ship: http://up-ship.com/blog/?p=20200
Sounds like the guy holding the wheel was the only one who knew what was going on.
"The USS Fitzgerald was damaged on the right side — the starboard side — and maritime law requires ships to give way to the vessel on their starboard side. When asked about this Sunday, the Seventh Fleet commander, Vice Admiral Joseph Aucoin, declined to answer."
My experience with industrial (mainly chemical) accidents is it usually takes two things gone wrong to cause an accident, Two things done wrong at the same time. This was also true for an explosion in PR that leveled a building with lots of lost lives. That one had three issues. I suspect this accident will be relatively easy to figure out, but we may never hear the results. Very sad that so many lost their lives over a totally avoidable situation..... avoidable in the usual course of events. Now if this was an act of terrorism ....
Bobk
The USS Fitzgerald Is At Fault. This Is Why.
June 19, 2017 by John Konrad
http://gcaptain.com/uss-fitzgerald-fault/
Good article. The way I see it when a ship under way does not comply with rules of the road there is a potential for collision.
Compare these two bridges and evolutions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2Sjwryjr6Q
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKCDB5Ke3BU
Interesting videos which indeed show a sharp contrast. Way too many bodies on the carrier bridge, way too many people talking and relaying informations and orders Not a problem coming in NY Harbour where everybody will stay out of the way but obviously not very efficient at night in busy shipping lanes