USS Fitzgerald Collision

[Mr Quatro]

Originally Posted by Gargamel

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.

Me either ... the last I heard radar sweeps 360 degrees

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

Here is article by CDR Bryan McGrath (Ret.) which discusses how this kind of things can happen. CDR McGrath was CO of USS Bulkeley (DDG 84) from 2004 to 2006.

Originally Posted by Mr Quatro

Me either ... the last I heard radar sweeps 360 degrees

It may do so but that doesn't guarantee legible picture. Radar isn't God's Eye whcih reveals everything in all conditions...

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by Mr Quatro

Me either ... the last I heard radar sweeps 360 degrees

The problem with radar is that it picks up a lot of stuff. Most of which you may not need to be concerned with, but within that data is the one thing you need to know about.

I may be going out on a limb here, but I think that the vast majority of naval personnel are humans.... and humans make mistakes. That's not an excuse, but perhaps an explanation.

[Rockstar]

Originally Posted by Platapus

The problem with radar is that it picks up a lot of stuff. Most of which you may not need to be concerned with, but within that data is the one thing you need to know about.

I may be going out on a limb here, but I think that the vast majority of naval personnel are humans.... and humans make mistakes. That's not an excuse, but perhaps an explanation.

Like I said earlier a RADARs performance is only as good as the operator that tunes it. A difficulty also arises in busy shipping lanes especially at night. When trying to visually identify RADAR contacts. It's not easy and takes a bit of time.

[Gargamel]

I can understand missing a fishing vessel or pleasure boat on radar in the fluff that shows up on the screen. But as I said, this is a friggin skycraper, knocked on it's side, floating towards you. At some point the majority of the returns from the starboard side will be that vessel, probably blocking everything behind it.

My intuition tells me (groundlessly) that it is probably the container ship at fault, as they were supposedly on autopilot only in a busy shipping lane. But the destroyer should have had ample time to make appropriate manuevers to avoid a collision.

I'm not totally familiar with the maritime right of way laws, but I am VERY familiar with the racing rules of sailing (RRS), which were based upon the naval rules at the time. I know if you have right of way, yet still do not try to avoid a collision, you can be found at fault too.

[Rockstar]

At night navigation lights can tell you if the other vessel is less than 50 meters in length or greater. How greater is really hard to tell sometimes.

Lights can also tell you general heading and target angle of the other vessel.

Why the Fitzgerald didn't see it in time to take action and avoid collision baffles me to no end.

[Mr Quatro]

Radar does have a lot of clutter especially in sea lanes.

http://greenfleet.dodlive.mil/files/...RA-12968-D.pdf

Sailor’s Creed

“I am a United States Sailor.

I will support and defend the
Constitution of the United
States of America and I will
obey the orders of those
appointed over me.
I represent the fighting spirit of
the Navy and those who have
gone before me to defend
freedom and democracy
around the world.

I proudly serve my country’s
Navy combat team with honor,
courage and commitment.

I am committed to excellence
and the fair treatment of all.”

In this United States Navy with its nuclear-powered warships, computerized guidance systems, and the most accurate search radars in the world, you, the lookout, play a critical role in safe ship operations. Your trained human eye is far superior to the most sophisticated equipment.

As a lookout, you are the eyes and ears of the ship, and your alertness and skill ensures the safety of the ship. In the naval service there is probably no Rule of the Road more conscientiously observed than Rule 5 of the Navigation Rules,
Commandant Instruction M16672.2, which states:

“Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper look-out by sight and sound as well as by all available means appropriate in the prevailing circumstances and conditions so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and of the risk of collision.”

[Peter Cremer]

My brother was a 3rd class radarman on the Kenneth D. Bailey DDR 713 in the late 1950's and this 'accident' is like what happened to his ship. His ship was practicing some kind of maneuvers and had stay in formation and this meant (apparently) playing 'chicken' with the civilian freighters. He and the other radar operators started sending messages to the bridge, long before the collision, telling them that the ship was on a collision course with another ship and they could tell that all their warnings were being ignored. They continued to notify the bridge until they were ordered to 'shutup'. Shortly after that, the ship was rammed and one sailor was killed. The sailor's time was up and he was just riding the ship back to the States as a civilian. He said that at the inquiry, NOT EVEN ONE RADARMAN was called to testify. It was a complete 'white wash' for the captain.

I just thought I would throw this in to show that this stuff has happened before and more than likely it will happen again. The way things are now, just because you are a Captain of a U.S. Navy warship doesn't mean other ships are going make an effort to get out of your way.

[em2nought]

Originally Posted by Peter Cremer

My brother was a 3rd class radarman on the Kenneth D. Bailey DDR 713 in the late 1950's and this 'accident' is like what happened to his ship. His ship was practicing some kind of maneuvers and had stay in formation and this meant (apparently) playing 'chicken' with the civilian freighters. He and the other radar operators started sending messages to the bridge, long before the collision, telling them that the ship was on a collision course with another ship and they could tell that all their warnings were being ignored. They continued to notify the bridge until they were ordered to 'shutup'. Shortly after that, the ship was rammed and one sailor was killed. The sailor's time was up and he was just riding the ship back to the States as a civilian. He said that at the inquiry, NOT EVEN ONE RADARMAN was called to testify. It was a complete 'white wash' for the captain.

I just thought I would throw this in to show that this stuff has happened before and more than likely it will happen again. The way things are now, just because you are a Captain of a U.S. Navy warship doesn't mean other ships are going make an effort to get out of your way.

We had a guy die from slipping on ice and hitting his head. Medical gave him some aspirin, and sent him to bed. No one notice him missing for a few days, and by then he was in a coma. He later died. Nobody received any grief over it at all. Admiral said these things happen, oh well.

The bad thing about the Fitz is still the closing the hatch on that one hero. I'd rather have taken chances with sinking. You know the USN isn't going to want a broken toy. They'll fix it, but they'll probably quietly retire the Fitz as soon as they can to get a shiny new toy.

You'd also think that people might start realizing that it's unlucky to put "Fitzgerald" anywhere within a ship's name.

[Rockstar]

Not Gordon Lightfoot's Ballad of Edmund Fitzgerald! Glorifying another totally preventable accident at sea.

[Rockstar]

A report of one side of the story is Fitzgerald 'suddenly' altered course and crossed the path of the ACX Crystal. It also goes on to say Fitzgerald did not respond to any warnings. Keep in mind thats only one side of the story.

The U.S. Navy is still investigating.

http://news.trust.org/item/20170626101937-6xsul

[Mr Quatro]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

A report of one side of the story is Fitzgerald 'suddenly' altered course and crossed the path of the ACX Crystal. It also goes on to say Fitzgerald did not respond to any warnings. Keep in mind thats only one side of the story.

The U.S. Navy is still investigating.

http://news.trust.org/item/20170626101937-6xsul

Too busy to check, right now ... was that the article that said the container ship had been on autopilot, but saw the problem and was slowing down and turning and flashing it's lights at the destroyer all at the same time?

If so then that explains why the ship hit at an angle and wasn't going 14kts or it could've been a lot worse.

[Aktungbby]

BOTTOM line: from my roofer, a seventy year old Quartermaster(helmsman) navy retiree, aboard USS Ticonderoga; and my brother: helmsman aboard both USS Oklahoma City and USS San Bernadino, also a retiree; They were sleeping aboard the destroyer.... I defer to their practical expertise in the matter....

[Aktungbby]

Preliminary findings in the investigation into the collision between the USS Fitzgerald and a Philippine cargo ship off the coast of Japan in June suggest the accident was caused by multiple errors by the Fitzgerald's crew and a failure to take action in the minutes leading to the collision, according to two defense officials.
"They did nothing until the last second," one official said. "A slew of things went wrong." A second official said the crash "will wind up being our (the US Navy's) fault."

[Buddahaid]

The bridge crew lost situational awareness....

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...itzgerald.html