USS Fitzgerald Collision

[MaDef]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Good point about the missing tracks of other ships in the area. Rules of the Road apply to two ships when meeting, crossing or overtaking each other. Provided both crews are situationally aware of their surroundings its relatively easy for two ships to stay out of the way of each other.

When you get three or more vessels in close proximity to each other it can be sometimes difficult to know the best course of action is to avoid a collision. Staying out of the way of one may put you in danger with another. The only options are to take early and substantial action by altering course, reduce speed or stopping. But whatever you choose your actions must be deliberate and made in such a way to be readily apparent to the other bridge. Pussy footing around making small incremental changes can cause a lot of problems.

The course changes of the containership appear to be pretty obvious. But like I said before, it may not be as readily apparent on a RADAR plot as one might think.

I know the Navigation radars are probably better than what I remember, but I do recall that it was pretty easy to lose a contact on the scope due to clutter even on a clear day going in and out of Norfolk.

[Rockstar]

I operated two surface search DARs the old analog an/sps64, used a grease pencil to plot target course and speed on the PPI. Squirrels came aboard one day and installed a new addition called a RAYCAS and rapid radar plots with grease pencils became a thing of the past.

Several years later we were using the digital sps73. The 73 had all sorts of cool bells and whistles you could program, but like the older 64 it performed only as good as the operator that tuned it. Computerized collision avoidance systems and like gadgetry dont do a dang bit of good if the RADAR isnt tuned properly.

Then there's that what you mentioned clutter, weather, sea state, atmospheric conditions, ducting, refraction all of which can affect the performance of even the most precisely tuned machine.

Nothing beats a pair of eyes.

[MaDef]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

I operated two surface search DARs the old analog an/sps64, used a grease pencil to plot target course and speed on the PPI. Squirrels came aboard one day and installed a new addition called a RAYCAS and rapid radar plots with grease pencils became a thing of the past.

Several years later we were using the digital sps73. The 73 had all sorts of cool bells and whistles you could program, but like the older 64 it performed only as good as the operator that tuned it. Computerized collision avoidance systems and like gadgetry dont do a dang bit of good if the RADAR isnt tuned properly.

Then there's that what you mentioned clutter, weather, sea state, atmospheric conditions, ducting, refraction all of which can affect the performance of even the most precisely tuned machine.

Nothing beats a pair of eyes.

Yeah, but even the MK1 eyeball is only as good as the brain it's attached to.

[vienna]

Originally Posted by Onkel Neal

I'm thinking the same thing. How was it possible for this to happen??

I would refer back to the USS Stark incident in 1987:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Stark_incident

It was a likewise situation in which a modern armed US naval vessel with, at that time, very current detection and surveillance systems and, in the case of the Stark, capabilities to fend off attack. Personally, the whole "official" story of the Stark doesn't pass the smell and I rather expect the Fitzgerald's final analysis could very well have a bit of "odor"...




<O>

[Rockstar]

Originally Posted by MaDef

Yeah, but even the MK1 eyeball is only as good as the brain it's attached to.

True. Sometimes the information and responsibilities can be so overwhelming it takes you on a course you dont want to go. That Navy crew has my utmost respect. They volunteered to do an extremely difficult job with no room for error. But, in the end there will be hell to pay for this one.

Im of the opinion that there are two kinds of people in this world. Those who have, and those who will. Its the fool that says it will never happen to me. Be ready for anything.

[Bilge_Rat]

many reasons this could happen. Apparently 500-600 ships pass daily through that stretch. The track of the Cargo ship could have been a reaction to avoiding other traffic.

other issues, visibility. They say it is good, but still easy to lose track of ships. Even if, I assume everyone has running lights, if you have a lot of ships, it is easy to misjudge the distance to any one.

look forward to seeing the accident report.

RIP to those poor sailors and their families.

[Mr Quatro]

Do warships have satellite tracking navigation like cruise ships?

Jim can follow his son on a cruise ship all over the world, right?

They have something called a transponder, right?

Do USN have transponder's?

What if the transponder told the shipping world around the USS Fitzgerald, "Here I am hit me"?

What if the container ship turned off his transponder and the bridge didn't respond to radar thinking that it could just be a fishing boat?

Plus I think the container ship was slowing down when it hit ... looks like just a glancing blow to me. If was it going 14 kts it would've cut the Fitzgerald in half.

Plus, now I hear that the collision may have taken place much sooner around 1:30am.

Lot's of questions and no answers yet: http://www.npr.org/2017/06/19/533432...llision-happen

Acting Navy Secretary Sean Stackley vowed that service officials would answer the question everyone is now asking: how it could have happened.

"In due time, the United States Navy will fully investigate the cause of this tragedy," he said, "and I ask all of you to keep the Fitzgerald families in your thoughts and prayers as we begin the task of answering the many questions before us."

[Aktungbby]

We should be thankful; it could have been a lot worse; I still remember this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melbourne%E2%80%93Evans_collision The bow section sank quickly within a minute; the majority of those killed were believed to have been trapped within...Seventy-four of the 273 crew on Evans were killed. A memorial to the collision is located in Niobrara, Nebraska. The memorial specifically commemorates the three Sage brothers, all of whom were aboard Evans and were killed in the collision. They were the first group of siblings permitted to serve on the same ship since World War II, a result of the policy introduced when the five Sullivan brothers were killed following the sinking of USS Juneau. Collision survivors and family members of Evans personnel have held annual reunions to memorialize the accident. Australian sailors who served on Melbourne often attend. In both incidents, junior officers were in command; the skippers in their captain's quarters: A training film, I Relieve You, Sir, was developed by the USN for junior watchkeeping officers. Based around the events of the collision, the film demonstrates the responsibility junior watchkeeping officers hold, and the potential consequences of failing to do their job. I expect the investigation, as with the 1969 incident, will be a political appeasement/scapegoat affair.

[Gargamel]

So I can't find the article I read last night, it's either on the BBC, or the AP, but they change their headlines so fast, it's tough to go back

So apparently the container ship waited an hour before reporting the collision. So on the track that's posted earlier, it seems the ships collided near where the container ship pulled a u turn and headed west (I believe, I could be wrong). But it's not at the presumed spot at the last little chicane before heading towards Tokyo.

I believe I remember reading that the local coast guard is considering charging the container ship with something akin to dereliction of duty for not promptly reporting the collision when other sailors might have been in peril.

[Bilge_Rat]

more info.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...rald-sank.html

[Jimbuna]

That is the most detailed link I've yet seen.

Thanks for posting.

[Bilge_Rat]

yes, it helps explain the weird track.

Cargo ship was on auto pilot, hit the DD without the crew realising.

once Cargo ship realises what is going on, it reverses course and goes back to collision site.

[Bilge_Rat]

you can also see why the DDs crew may not have spotted the ship until it is too late. Human nature is to look ahead.

[Mr Quatro]

Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat

yes, it helps explain the weird track.

Cargo ship was on auto pilot, hit the DD without the crew realising.

once Cargo ship realises what is going on, it reverses course and goes back to collision site.

Good find Bilge Rat ... track and the 1:30 collision takes care of all of my paranoid thoughts that it was on purpose.

Now they say they might have had to close the watertight hatches before some of the (7) crew members were able to get out, but I also read that it took divers to find them and that they were finding body parts too that means some of them got crushed in the mayhem.

That would be horrible to have to close a water tight hatch on a ship mate, uh?

[Rockstar]

Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat

you can also see why the DDs crew may not have spotted the ship until it is too late. Human nature is to look ahead.

Unfortunetly human nature is not an acceptable excuse for allowing a 800 foot containership with constant bearing decreasing range to t-bone of all places your starboard side. Its called human error. Many unanswered questions. Right now the press is I think being kind to the Navy and the families of the lost sailors.