USS Fitzgerald Collision

[daft]

I think there is a lot more to this than we are hearing. Something is really fishy with 4 similar incidents i a relatively short timespan. And then, seemingly unconected, we have the sonic attack against the US embassy in Cuba. It does make me wonder.

[Von Due]

Originally Posted by daft

I think there is a lot more to this than we are hearing. Something is really fishy with 4 similar incidents i a relatively short timespan. And then, seemingly unconected, we have the alledged sonic attack against the US embassy in Cuba. It does make me wonder.

Corrected. So far there is no evidence of an actual attack. Another thing is it is not just US diplomats that are have reported health problems. From Business Insider:

A mystery machine that emits harmful, silent waves defies any immediate explanation.
Business Insider has reached out to other experts on non-lethal weaponry and will update this post if a plausible explanation emerges.

http://nordic.businessinsider.com/so...ng-loss-2017-8

I would think it would pay off more looking for more likely possible root causes. One could look at the culture in the navy, from the top all the way down to individual sailors.

[Kaye T. Bai]

Navy confirms all of the missing sailors in the John McCain crash are dead.

[daft]

All thoughts to the families of the dead sailors. Did the tanker hit in a bearthing area again?

[daft]

Originally Posted by Von Due

Corrected. So far there is no evidence of an actual attack. Another thing is it is not just US diplomats that are have reported health problems. From Business Insider:

http://nordic.businessinsider.com/so...ng-loss-2017-8

I would think it would pay off more looking for more likely possible root causes. One could look at the culture in the navy, from the top all the way down to individual sailors.

Yes, I read that as well and was in part what made me speculate as to other, non-public reasons for what is happening. Is it even possible for the Navy in general and the 7th Fleet in particular to be so lax in it's regulations and procedures that som many ships actually collide in such a short timespan? Yes, it's entirely possible and means there are many changes coming for guys and gals in blue...

[Von Due]

It is entirely possible that one of many reasons is the not uncommon illness technosis, the delusion that technology replaces entirely the need for humans. Technology is best used as a complement, not a replacement and it is one of several things they might need to look at.

[daft]

Indeed. Occam's Razor would suggest that's where to start. We'll see where this ends.

[daft]

Apparently a Chinese ship is supposed to have "shadowed" the tanker. It also seems to have turned sharply to the left just before the collision.



However, ema nimble destroyer should have time to avoid...

[Von Due]

Originally Posted by daft

It also seems to have turned sharply to the left just before the collision.

Sharply for a tanker at speed is what? 2 km turn radius? 0.3 degrees per second? If US destroyers can be out-maneuvered by tankers then the US Navy need to sit down and do a lot of thinking.

[daft]

Yes, that's what I said. How on earth a destroyer fails to stay clear is utterly bewildering. And as has been proven many times over by now, they really do need to sit down and re-evaluate and reform. Whatever the reason, it's costing lives.

[daft]

Corporal Frisk is always level headed and analytical. Good read:

https://corporalfrisk.com/2017/08/28/collisions-at-sea/

[Aktungbby]

Todays insightful WSJ article in it's entirety:

WASHINGTON—The majority of ships operating in the U.S. Navy’s Seventh Fleet, where two destroyers have been involved in fatal collisions since June, weren’t certified to conduct basic operations at sea related to war-fighting, according to U.S. Navy records.
As of late June, eight of the 11 cruisers and destroyers in the Seventh Fleet, and their crew members, weren’t certified by the U.S. Navy to conduct “mobility seamanship,” or basic steering of the ship, according to U.S. Navy records provided to two House Armed Services subcommittees. The Navy also said that seven of those ships had expired training certification in the areas of cruise missile defense and surface warfare, which test a crew’s ability to defend a ship or to conduct attacks.
The USS Fitzgerald collided with a Philippine-flagged vessel on June 17, killing seven crew members. The USS John McCain collided with a Liberian-flagged vessel Aug. 21, killing 10 sailors. Neither the Fitzgerald nor the McCain were certified for the majority of the mission operation requirements that the Navy periodically evaluates.
The Seventh Fleet’s destroyers and cruisers generally met certification in other areas such as maintenance, communications, navigation, explosive safely and search and rescue.
It is unclear what role the lack of proper certification played in the collisions, and Pentagon investigations are under way both into the collisions and into larger questions of naval operations.
But the certification reports suggest that the U.S. Navy may have knowingly sent ships to sea that weren’t fully certified for the missions they were conducting, said Bryan Clark, a senior fellow at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.
“This appears to be endemic of a systemic problem,” Mr. Clark said. The Seventh Fleet destroyers and cruisers “may not have had sufficient practice to do the difficult transits they were doing,” given the crowded waters they operate in.
Adm. Bill Moran, the vice chief of naval operations, and Rear Adm. Ronald Boxall, the Navy’s director of surface warfare, are scheduled to appear before two House Armed Services subcommittees Thursday on the collision of the USS Fitzgerald and USS John McCain. Lawmakers received the records earlier this week, ahead of Thursday’s joint hearing.



Also testifying will be John Pendleton, who has written extensively about the U.S. Navy for the Government Accountability Office, including in a series of reports that warned about overworked sailors and shortened training schedules.
After a ship has undergone maintenance, the U.S. Navy periodically conducts monthslong tests of its sailors on their ships to ensure they can properly maneuver the ship and conduct military operations.
The U.S. Navy has acknowledged cutting back on certification procedures in the face of growing demand, according to past GAO reports.
The Navy repeatedly has said that increased demand on the Seventh Fleet has resulted in cutbacks on training and certifications. That pressure has only increased in recent months with each North Korean missile or weapons test, as the fleet conducts more exercises and patrols with the same number of ships.
Navy Cmdr. Bill Speaks declined to comment on the certification records, but said the review of naval operations begun after the two fatal collisions would encompass training, professional development and operational certifications.
“It is the Navy’s responsibility to ensure that all of our sailors receive the skills they need to perform their jobs at sea safely and effectively, and we take that responsibility very seriously,” he said.
In the last two years, the cuts in certification testing appear to have only increased, based on reports provided to lawmakers. The GAO found that roughly 7% of cruisers and destroyers had expired certification in 2015. The latest figures show that figure has since jumped to 37%.
On Aug. 24, Adm. Moran drafted a memo ordering a comprehensive review of naval operations, including “gaps between required [certifications] standards and actual employment practices.” In that memo, Adm. Moran called the collisions a “disturbing trend of mishaps.”

It is the observation of this poster that the motivation for improvement often comes after the needless loss of life...in this case 17 young sailors who had a reasonable expectation of a decent nap while someone qualified drove the boat. We won't discuss the cashiering of six officers and one fleet admiral as a convenient scapegoating for budget deficiencies at this juncture.