If there was that one guy that went in repeatedly to save his fellow sailors, I think I'd have taken my chances with letting the ship sink before I'd have closed the hatch on him that last time. :salute:

yes, but unfortunately it is standard emergency procedure. It sounds callous, but the loss of life would have been much greater if the ship had sunk.

also, not to be gruesome, but drowning is actually one of the least painful way to die. You pass out very quickly. I did a lot of scuba diving when I was younger and it is a possibility which you have to be aware of on each dive.

apparently, one seaman went back in several time and rescued 20 others, before he was sealed in. I would not be surprised if he is awarded the MOH.

agreed. Not an excuse, but an explanation. I would not be surprised if the investigation finds that the bridge crew on the DD was not really paying attention to what was going on, because it was the dead of night, they were bored, it was routine, etc.

There are at least two recorded instances of U-Boats colliding with each other at night in the middle of the atlantic. In both cases, the cause was the same, lookouts being fixated on the target/action, instead of watching their assigned sector.

ultimately, it comes down to training/discipline. There is a reason why everyone on board has to be trained 100% in their job, know exactly what to do 100% of the time and that officers have to enforce discipline. It is to prevent disasters like this.

Deepwater Horizon is a good example. There are several good articles on what happened. The rig could have easily been saved and the blowout prevented if the crew had followed their standard emergency protocol, instead when the problem occured, most froze or panicked. The movie is a farly accurate portrayal of what happened.

I completely disagree. Not only am I too a diver, but I was a medic for many years. I actually had to deal with drownings and near drownings. Asphyxiation/Drowning is one the most painful ways to die "naturally". It is not the "pleasant" get a mild headache, hallucinate some, and then drift off associated with hypercapnia (High Co2). It is a violent and painful struggle for the return to normal mechanical ventilation. As one holds their breath near the end, the Co2 gets exchanged into the air in the lungs, which reduces the effects of hypecapnia. As you can no longer hold your breath, you then expel that CO2, and inhale the water. That's where the pain comes from. Unless the person is very disciplined in holding their breath, they are still conscious when this occurs.

As a former IEMT and rescue certified diver, I also agree that drowning is not an easy way to die. While there are instance, especially with children where drowning can occur quickly and with little notice, those are the exceptions not the rule.

Former paramedic here, I disagree as well.
Drowning is horrible, especially if you are in a situation where you realize, "Okay, this is it.".
Once you start to "breath" water because (untrained) you cannot suppress this reflex, it must be absolute terror.
Sure, it is quicker and not as terrible as other ways to go, but quicker isn't always better.

Trained, you can suppress this reflex and pass out before you know it.
Just watch combat divers/SEALs during training... happens all the time (being rescued then, of course, though).

If the story about the sailer saving 20 shipmates before dying himself is true, we have a textbook medal of honor candidate here. I despise the term "hero" as it is used so inflationary especially in combination with US military things, but this guy sure was one - if reports so far are accurate.

Hats off, really. Amazing.

Just a reminder, that in 2012 USS Porter (DDG 79) collided with oil tanker in Strait of Hormuz and earlier this year USS Lake Champlain (CG 57) collided with South Korean fishing vessel. In USS Porter's case accident was caused by navigational errors made by destroyer's crew but I don't remember details anymore.

https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais...ry:34.5/zoom:9


This screen shot shows the number of other ships in the area, pretty busy shipping lanes. What it doesnt show is the Fitzgerald on account they probably didnt have AIS up. If reports are correct both ships were heading in the same general direction.


https://cdn-business.discourse.org/u...12a56ae0fb.JPG

I'm impressed that a container ship of that size is also amphibious....

its not a real island. :O:

now that's it's not a terrorist plot to do in a USN warship ...

What kind of accident is it? The container ship was obviously on a plot for Tokyo trying to get the best track for port.

The destroyer was obviously on the way home back to port, just hours away at 1:30am on a moonless night. The mid-watch had just been on for 90 minutes.

No look outs must have been stationed outside on a moonless night.

The captain was asleep means no warning of a collision had been sounded.

Loss of life will have to be blamed on someone. As for the (7) sailors not all were found in one piece, meaning the were crushed by the collision.

The destroyer track could reveal if it was straight and true meaning no one knew what was about to happen.

I hope terrorist don't see anything in all of this to hi-jack a ship and do the same thing.

On a Navy ship underway there are ALWAYS lookouts, you have a min of 3. Port, Starboard and Aft. I spent 5 years in the fleet and in those 5 years there was only one instance where the lookouts were not stationed on the fantail & bridge wings and that was due to high seas. they were still on station, just inside were they wouldn't fall overboard.

I am the landest of lubbers, but I would imagine that lookouts, especially in high traffic areas is a naval tradition.

My expert opinion: This was caused by a series of unrelated mistakes, any one of which might not have been a problem, but all together resulted in this bumping. I don't think there is a single cause of accidents like this.

I agree, and have my own theory by now, after thinking about this incident for days.

I assume the Fitzgerald tracked the Crystal for a while, noticed current course and speed won't cause a problem, and maybe stopped tracking the ship for some reason (shifting attention, negligence, who knows) - then the autopilot of the Crystal adjusted course, unnoticed by the Fitzgerald, establishing collision course.
This, in combination with a missing or failing lookout (that is there 24/7) probably caused this accident, and killed 7 sailors.

But, let's see what the investigation team will come up with.
I usually hate too early speculations, but this seems rather plausible.

Look outs have been known to miss very large things at see (See also: Titanic), so even if they were posted, they possibly might not have seen the container ship. And even if they did see the lights (which I would assume is a given for any naval ship in these waters, including the destroyer), they might have been so close to them that they didn't comprehend how that the lights were all from the same ship.

But what I don't understand is how radar, even the simplest navigational ones, didn't pick up either ship, at the very least a sky scraper on it's side. Especially considering the waters they were in, the visibility conditions, and the destroyer has some of the best radars on the planet.