Jump to content


Photo

Uss Fitzgerald Collision


  • Please log in to reply
163 replies to this topic

#21 Ken Estes

Ken Estes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 13,977 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle
  • Interests:USMC Tanker, Historian

Posted 19 June 2017 - 1324 PM

So it really was towed into port, and as not capable under her own power. The initial USN reports have been remarkably inaccurate and seemingly disingenuous. 



#22 a77

a77

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 609 posts

Posted 19 June 2017 - 1522 PM

So it really was towed into port, and as not capable under her own power. The initial USN reports have been remarkably inaccurate and seemingly disingenuous. 

 

Maybe she was capabel to sail under here own power, but chose not to do that becuse helpe was available. Think if the propeller shaft was a little bent or misaligned becuse of the collision, in a war scenario you can ignore it, but in peacetime,,,,you do not take the risk if you do not have to.


Edited by a77, 19 June 2017 - 1523 PM.


#23 shep854

shep854

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,876 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Birmingham AL, USA
  • Interests:Military History, Aviation

Posted 19 June 2017 - 1551 PM

A bit of context, from a former Burke skipper:

https://warontherock...lisions-at-sea/

HOW COULD THIS HAPPEN? THE FITZGERALD, THE U.S. NAVY, AND COLLISIONS AT SEA


Edited by shep854, 19 June 2017 - 1607 PM.


#24 shep854

shep854

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,876 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Birmingham AL, USA
  • Interests:Military History, Aviation

Posted 19 June 2017 - 1609 PM

I had a similar thought when seeing the crew outside on deck as their ship came to port.

https://www.youtube....h?v=Pk1BN_zxMOw

It was interesting to see signal flags being used.  What is the message they are making?



#25 Halidon

Halidon

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 142 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 19 June 2017 - 1913 PM

So it really was towed into port, and as not capable under her own power. The initial USN reports have been remarkably inaccurate and seemingly disingenuous.

She made her way under power until the tugs showed up, at which point they established a tow to help bring her in. Her forward engineering space was flooded or at least out of action, meaning she was down to one shaft and the pumps needed priority to keep the ship afloat.

#26 Ken Estes

Ken Estes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 13,977 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle
  • Interests:USMC Tanker, Historian

Posted 20 June 2017 - 0013 AM

So, she was really not capable under her own power, was she? Do you understand the difference between Japan's coast guard reporting and the USN? Which one was making light of the matter?



#27 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,649 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:33.8369/-84.2675
  • Interests:WWII Armor, Ferrets, Dingos, Humbers, etc...

Posted 20 June 2017 - 0056 AM

Another good post on the subject over at Commander Salamander's place.

http://cdrsalamander.blogspot.com

#28 Ken Estes

Ken Estes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 13,977 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle
  • Interests:USMC Tanker, Historian

Posted 20 June 2017 - 0628 AM

A ship at sea is a floating city under weigh, providing complete sustenance while performing its given mission. However, one has to be trained and vigilant in order to succeed in the face of the many dangers, the most severe being fire and flooding. Like any workplace, the work areas are themselves potentially lethal to the unwary or unwitting.

 

At any moment, a sleeping crew [up to 2/3 of all hands] can be thrown out of their bunks and enter into a struggle to save the ship and the lives therein. In the case of collision, fire or flooding, a warship will go to general quarters and all watertight doors and hatches are closed, leaving precious little time for those caught in a flooding or fiery space to exit, because if the ship is lost, too many of the crew perish as well.

 

It can happen anywhere and at any time. The Summer Midshipman Cruise of the Atlantic Fleet in June 1965 saw cruisers and destroyers en route to the Caribbean. While standing watch at night on board a DDG while some of our ships refueled and replenished from a replenishment ship,  I overheard the bridge talker pass word to the OOD that a sailor had been killed during the replenishment on the delivery ship. Nothing else had changed and all ships maintained formation and carried on. It was just one sailor, but it was a commonplace.

 

In peacetime, I'd say that ships at sea bear the greater continuous risk whereas most other branches and services see accidents take place on exercises, and fewer in the barracks. The surface ship is the barracks, though, and the crew are the first responders, all of them. If anyone of another service feels slighted, I retract this.

 

Eternal Father, strong to save,
Whose arm hath bound the restless wave, 
Who bidd'st the mighty ocean deep
Its own appointed limits keep;
Oh, hear us when we cry to Thee,
For those in peril on the sea! 

 



#29 Ken Estes

Ken Estes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 13,977 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle
  • Interests:USMC Tanker, Historian

Posted 20 June 2017 - 0636 AM

Japan's coast guard is investigating why it took nearly an hour for a deadly collision between a U.S. Navy destroyer and a container ship to be reported.

A coast guard official said Monday they are trying to find out what the crew of the Philippine-flagged ACX Crystal was doing before reporting the collision off Japan's coast to authorities 50 minutes later.

The ACX Crystal collided with the USS Fitzgerald off Japan's coast, killing seven of the destroyer's crew of nearly 300. The ships collided early Saturday morning, when the Navy said most of the 300 sailors on board would have been sleeping. Authorities have declined to speculate on a cause while the crash remains under investigation.

A track of the much-larger container ship's route by MarineTraffic, a vessel-tracking service, shows it made a sudden turn as if trying to avoid something at about 1:30 a.m., before continuing eastward. It then made a U-turn and returned around 2:30 a.m. to the area near the collision.

The coast guard initially said the collision occurred at 2:20 a.m. because the Philippine ship had reported it at 2:25 a.m. and said it just happened. After interviewing Filipino crewmembers, the coast guard has changed the collision time to 1:30 a.m.

Coast guard official Tetsuya Tanaka said they are trying to resolve what happened during the 50 minutes.

He said officials are planning to get hold of a device with communication records to examine further details of the crash. Japan's Transport Safety Board also started an accident investigation on Sunday.

Adding to the confusion, a U.S. Navy official said it is sticking with the 2:20 a.m. timing for the crash that he said had been reported by the Fitzgerald.

Asked about the earlier time cited by the coast guard, Navy spokesman Cmdr. Ron Flanders said, "That is not our understanding." He said any differences would have to be clarified in the investigation.

Nanami Meguro, a spokeswoman for NYK Line, the ship's operator, agreed with the earlier timing.

Meguro said the ship was "operating as usual" until the collision at 1:30 a.m., as shown on a ship tracking service that the company uses. She said the ship reported to the coast guard at 2:25 a.m., but she could not provide details about what the ship was doing for nearly an hour.

"Because it was in an emergency, the crewmembers may not have been able to place a call," she said.

Coast guard officials are investigating the case as possible professional negligence, but no criminal charges have been pressed so far.

On Monday, the Navy's 7th Fleet identified the seven sailors who died. Navy divers recovered the bodies after the severely damaged Fitzgerald returned to the fleet's home in Yokosuka, Japan, with assistance from tug boats.

 

http://abcnews.go.co...lision-48127236



#30 sunday

sunday

    Bronze-age right-wing delusional retard

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10,090 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Badalona, Spain
  • Interests:Technology, History

Posted 20 June 2017 - 0653 AM

A ship at sea is a floating city under weigh, providing complete sustenance while performing its given mission. However, one has to be trained and vigilant in order to succeed in the face of the many dangers, the most severe being fire and flooding. Like any workplace, the work areas are themselves potentially lethal to the unwary or unwitting.
 (...)


Thanks for that insight.

#31 shep854

shep854

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,876 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Birmingham AL, USA
  • Interests:Military History, Aviation

Posted 20 June 2017 - 0816 AM

From the article I linked:

"In a car accident, the point at which maneuvers by either car will be insufficient to avoid the collision happen in milliseconds before impact, but that point is reached in the tens of seconds or more before impact between ships. Without early action, all either ship can do is to try and minimize the angle of impact."



#32 beans4

beans4

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 330 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:USA

Posted 20 June 2017 - 1051 AM

A bit of context, from a former Burke skipper:

https://warontherock...lisions-at-sea/

HOW COULD THIS HAPPEN? THE FITZGERALD, THE U.S. NAVY, AND COLLISIONS AT SEA

Thanks, I had been in the "how could this happen" group.



#33 sunday

sunday

    Bronze-age right-wing delusional retard

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10,090 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Badalona, Spain
  • Interests:Technology, History

Posted 20 June 2017 - 1102 AM

Small forces, large masses, low accelerations, extended time...

Still, there is something iffy in this case, that could even be understood as hostile action.

#34 RETAC21

RETAC21

    A la lealtad y al valor

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12,161 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Madrid, Spain
  • Interests:Military history in general

Posted 20 June 2017 - 1335 PM

Looks like a COLREG assisted collision to me, one of the many that happen year on year. One ship interpretation differs from the other ship, add poor watchkeeping (a classic is to turn the alarms off because, at night, they annoy the bridge crew) and you get a collision.



#35 Marek Tucan

Marek Tucan

    Powerpoint Ranger, Chairborne

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,487 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Versailles, France

Posted 20 June 2017 - 1351 PM

Where is captain's cabin / sea cabin on Burke? Somewhere in the impact area? His injury is probably the weirdest - if he was thrown by the collision, more sailors would probably suffer the same, but so far it seems that apart from the seven poor souls trapped by flooding, he is the only serious injury.



#36 Ken Estes

Ken Estes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 13,977 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle
  • Interests:USMC Tanker, Historian

Posted 20 June 2017 - 1521 PM

The sea cabin is close to the bridge. No more than one level down. Specifics elude me for any given class.

 

 

A DDG remains far more agile than any merchantman, hence, has 'last clear chance to avoid.'  This time it did not hold true. Explaining will be the story.

 

 

The sea lanes will be tricky. A passage of the Str of Gibraltar can cost twice the alphabet in registering contacts, and that was in 1971.



#37 shep854

shep854

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,876 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Birmingham AL, USA
  • Interests:Military History, Aviation

Posted 20 June 2017 - 1707 PM

http://www.businessi...tzgerald-2017-6

Navy sailor sacrificed himself to save 20 lives after the USS Fitzgerald collision


"The Fitzgerald was struck below the waterline, and [Fire Controlman 1st Class Gary Leo] Rehm Jr.'s family was told by the Navy that he went under and saved at least 20 sailors, according to WBNS-10TV in Columbus, Ohio.

"But when he went back down to get the other six sailors, the ship began to take on too much water, and the hatch was closed, WBNS-10TV said."


Edited by shep854, 20 June 2017 - 1707 PM.


#38 JasonJ

JasonJ

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 7,445 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 21 June 2017 - 0420 AM

 

I had a similar thought when seeing the crew outside on deck as their ship came to port.

https://www.youtube....h?v=Pk1BN_zxMOw

It was interesting to see signal flags being used.  What is the message they are making?

 

 

The 8 flags hoisted along the mast seem to mean the following:

 

Flag that follows is from the International Code of Signals.
I have a pilot on board.
Absence of flag officer or unit commander (Inport)
All personnel return to ship; proceeding to sea (Inport).

No or negative.
I am disabled; communicate with me.
Do not pass ahead of me.
I require a tug.

 

http://www.navy.mil/...lags/flags.html

https://en.wikipedia...Code_of_Signals


Edited by JasonJ, 21 June 2017 - 0426 AM.


#39 JasonJ

JasonJ

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 7,445 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 21 June 2017 - 0609 AM

Looks like a COLREG assisted collision to me, one of the many that happen year on year. One ship interpretation differs from the other ship, add poor watchkeeping (a classic is to turn the alarms off because, at night, they annoy the bridge crew) and you get a collision.

 

I can't say anything for the causes of other collisions on the yearly basis, but, it seems to me that the destroyer violated rule 15 in here on page 27 of 74. The container ship was in the right to keep cruising as it was. The destroyer should have changed course ahead of time.

crossing.jpg


Edited by JasonJ, 21 June 2017 - 0620 AM.


#40 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Welcome to the new world disorder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 39,774 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Looking at Elephants from the wrong end

Posted 21 June 2017 - 1101 AM

 

http://www.businessi...tzgerald-2017-6

Navy sailor sacrificed himself to save 20 lives after the USS Fitzgerald collision


"The Fitzgerald was struck below the waterline, and [Fire Controlman 1st Class Gary Leo] Rehm Jr.'s family was told by the Navy that he went under and saved at least 20 sailors, according to WBNS-10TV in Columbus, Ohio.

"But when he went back down to get the other six sailors, the ship began to take on too much water, and the hatch was closed, WBNS-10TV said."

 

 

Well thats one to name a warship for if you ask me....






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users