Author US Navy Japanese container ship collision  (Read 2530 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: US Navy Japanese container ship collision
« Reply #60 on: July 14, 2017, 04:38:11 PM »
Sounds similar to situations you get between aircraft but at a much slower speed. Isn't there some kind of automated system in shipping where ships automatically communicate with each other and alert the crews to danger if there's a collision risk?
Sort of like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_collision_avoidance_system

It's been a while since I stood a bridge watch but I am not aware of any automatic warning system on Navy ships.  There is an ample number of personnel on watch at all times while a U.S. Navy ship is underway.  Typically on the bridge there would an officer of the deck (OOD) an assistant OOD, one or more OOD's under instruction, the quartermaster of the watch (Navigator) and two or more helmsmen.  Also on watch  there would be a Combat Information Center (CÍC) team consisting of a CIC Watch Officer and 2 or more radar operators who would be instructed to report to the bridge and track any contacts within a certain distance, typically 5 Nautical miles but that would vary according to operating conditions.  There are also port and starboard and an aft lookouts.  There are several radar repeaters on the bridge and one in the captain's sea cabin.  As you can see there are a lot of "eyes on" while the ship is steaming and an automatic warning system has no doubt been considered unnecessary heretofore.  That may change with this incident but I think it will be found that an unfortunate series of errors on the part of personnel on both of the ships occurred 

Merchant ship's are much more sparsely manned and underway watches may consist of 2 or three people with "Iron Mike" (a computer) doing the driving.    Some of those ships probably do have a sensor based automatic warning system but likely not all.  If Bracken's theory is correct and the Fitzgerald was the stand on vessel when the merchantman made an untelegraphed abrupt turn to port the latter vessel would be at greater fault. Bear in mind that ships have collided in broad daylight in overtaking and crossing situations due to miscommunications.   

 

Re: US Navy Japanese container ship collision
« Reply #61 on: July 14, 2017, 04:45:08 PM »
It's been a while since I stood a bridge watch but I am not aware of any automatic warning system on Navy ships. 

There is an ample number of personnel on watch at all times while a U.S. Navy ship is underway.  Typically on the bridge there would an officer of the deck (OOD) an assistant OOD, one or more OOD's under instruction, the quartermaster of the watch (Navigator) and two or more helmsmen.  Also on watch  there would be a Combat Information Center (CÍC) team consisting of a CIC Watch Officer and 2 or more radar operators who would be instructed to report to the bridge and track any contacts within a certain distance, typically 5 Nautical miles but that would vary according to operating conditions.  There are also port and starboard and an aft lookouts.  There are several radar repeaters on the bridge and one in the captain's sea cabin.  As you can see there are a lot of "eyes on" while the ship is steaming and an automatic warning system has heretofore been considered unnecessary.  That may change with this incident but I think it will be found that an unfortunate series of errors on the part of personnel on both on ships occurred. 

Merchant ship's are much more sparsely manned and underway watches may consist of 2 or three people with "Iron Mike" (a computer) doing the driving.    Some of those ships probably do have sensor based automatic warning systems but likely not all.  If Bracken's theory is correct and the Fitzgerald was the stand on ship when the merchantman made an untelegraphed abrupt turn to port the latter vessel would be at greater fault. Bear in mind that ships have collided in broad daylight in overtaking and crossing situations due to miscommunications.   

Stop exaggerating your past achievements... do they even have bridges on herring fishing vessels ??

Re: US Navy Japanese container ship collision
« Reply #62 on: July 15, 2017, 05:29:20 PM »
Well She is in dry dock now.  Check out the patches they put over the huge hole below the water line. 








Re: US Navy Japanese container ship collision
« Reply #64 on: July 31, 2017, 09:26:12 PM »
Looks like it might be a half billion in repairs to put the Fitzgerald right.  Wow.

Quote
While it’s too early to craft a complete repair estimate, several naval analysts told USNI News a $500-million bill to fix to the warship was not out of the question.

https://news.usni.org/2017/07/27/repair-bill-uss-fitzgerald-collision-will-cost-fix-uss-cole-terror-attack

Re: US Navy Japanese container ship collision
« Reply #65 on: July 31, 2017, 09:46:10 PM »
Looks like it might be a half billion in repairs to put the Fitzgerald right.  Wow.

https://news.usni.org/2017/07/27/repair-bill-uss-fitzgerald-collision-will-cost-fix-uss-cole-terror-attack
I note with some amusement, and cynicism, the banner ad on that site: "The U.S. Naval Institute thanks its corporate sponsor GENERAL DYNAMICS" and then, from the article itself, "The biggest difference in cost will be the replacement and upgrading the electronics* of Fitzgerald."

*you mean the $$$ 'electronics' we already had on it couldn't detect or avoid some huge merchant vessel? Really makes me comfortable that we can detect some Nork Diesel sub much less the Russian stuff.

Re: US Navy Japanese container ship collision
« Reply #66 on: August 01, 2017, 03:27:23 PM »
*you mean the $$$ 'electronics' we already had on it couldn't detect or avoid some huge merchant vessel? Really makes me comfortable that we can detect some Nork Diesel sub much less the Russian stuff.

It really makes me uncomfortable that you appear to be blissfully unaware of the storied history of the USS Donald Cook.

Re: US Navy Japanese container ship collision
« Reply #67 on: August 01, 2017, 03:47:09 PM »
It really makes me uncomfortable that you appear to be blissfully unaware of the storied history of the USS Donald Cook.
That was the one in which Russian claimed it disabled the electronic system and defensive systems with a fly-over using some kind of emp-like type of weapon/scrambler.

Re: US Navy Japanese container ship collision
« Reply #68 on: August 01, 2017, 03:56:25 PM »
disabled the electronic system and defensive systems with a fly-over using some kind of emp-like type of weapon/scrambler


Probably just another lone gunman.

Another Ship Collission?!
« Reply #69 on: August 20, 2017, 07:43:11 PM »
Apparently it is not only the real John McCain that is getting unsteady. Ok, bad joke. Another collision between a US Naval vessel and a merchant vessel. I want, ahoy, Capt. Kelly Sweeney to comment on this one.
http://www.live5news.com/story/36177013/us-7th-fleet-uss-john-s-mccain-collides-with-merchant-ship-near-strait-of-malacca


https://t.co/6bHUovT8eI

No real details yet but here is some info on the merchant vessel:
https://www.vesselfinder.com/vessels/ALNIC-MC-IMO-9396725-MMSI-636017930
https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/details/ships/636017930
https://www.fleetmon.com/vessels/alnic-mc_9396725_35660/

Re: Another Ship Collission?!
« Reply #70 on: August 21, 2017, 12:59:04 AM »
Another collision between a US Naval vessel and a merchant vessel.


Probably just another lone gunman.

Re: US Navy Japanese container ship collision
« Reply #71 on: August 21, 2017, 01:01:36 AM »
Something seems to be interfering with or disabling their guidance system.  ???

Re: US Navy Japanese container ship collision
« Reply #72 on: August 21, 2017, 02:23:15 AM »
Something seems to be interfering with or disabling their guidance system.  ???


That's too bad.

Re: US Navy Japanese container ship collision
« Reply #73 on: August 21, 2017, 04:46:25 AM »

That's too bad.

Almost embarrassing.

Re: US Navy Japanese container ship collision
« Reply #74 on: August 21, 2017, 08:03:43 AM »
Almost embarrassing.

No almost about it.  It is embarrassing.  It could have something to do with Obama's deep cut back of the number of mid grade officers in the military.  A lot of expertise and mentors for junior officers was lost.

Re: US Navy Japanese container ship collision
« Reply #75 on: August 21, 2017, 11:10:23 AM »
Not enough minority lesbians in command.

Re: US Navy Japanese container ship collision
« Reply #76 on: August 21, 2017, 11:25:23 AM »
Not enough minority lesbians in command.
Obama's Navy reminds me of Gary Busey in the great Steven Seagal movie "Under Siege"  https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5424b4c0e4b0dd777eb2ebe1/t/542f65fbe4b0f0018bb3324f/1412392445454/

Re: US Navy Japanese container ship collision
« Reply #77 on: August 21, 2017, 12:44:10 PM »
Not enough minority lesbians in command.
funny lol

Re: Another Ship Collission?!
« Reply #78 on: August 21, 2017, 03:05:50 PM »
Apparently it is not only the real John McCain that is getting unsteady. Ok, bad joke. Another collision between a US Naval vessel and a merchant vessel. I want, ahoy, Capt. Kelly Sweeney to comment on this one.
http://www.live5news.com/story/36177013/us-7th-fleet-uss-john-s-mccain-collides-with-merchant-ship-near-strait-of-malacca


https://t.co/6bHUovT8eI

No real details yet but here is some info on the merchant vessel:
https://www.vesselfinder.com/vessels/ALNIC-MC-IMO-9396725-MMSI-636017930
https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/details/ships/636017930
https://www.fleetmon.com/vessels/alnic-mc_9396725_35660/

"Merchant ship" used in most news article titles is so vague.

The JS McCain collided with the Alnic MC, which is a Liberian-registered 600 ft. oil tanker, a 30,000 ton ship, and was carrying nearly 12,000 tonnes of oil from Taiwan to Singapore.

Re: Another Ship Collission?!
« Reply #79 on: August 21, 2017, 03:42:09 PM »
"Merchant ship" used in most news article titles is so vague.

The JS McCain collided with the Alnic MC, which is a Liberian-registered 600 ft. oil tanker, a 30,000 ton ship, and was carrying nearly 12,000 tonnes of oil from Taiwan to Singapore.
Yes, a very small tanker.  Who owns it? I know the registry is Liberian but that is very common place to register ships as less regulars and costs are less. The management company is Stealth Maritime (statement from them below.) Also last I heard a storm was preventing searches for the missing seamen. Not good. The Navy has suspended operations due this latest incident!
https://www.wsj.com/articles/navy-begins-broad-review-of-collisions-with-10-sailors-still-missing-1503329812
http://web.stealth.gr/


Re: US Navy Japanese container ship collision
« Reply #81 on: August 22, 2017, 01:39:19 PM »
Active investigation of lone gunman theory confirmed.

Starting here:


Vice Adm. Joseph Aucoin removed from duty
« Reply #82 on: August 22, 2017, 10:45:03 PM »
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/uss-john-s-mccain-collision-us-navy-removes-commander-7th-fleet-joseph-aucoin/

Goodness, our Navy has reverted to some friggin outside sales call center style of operations?
"and review basic training in a video posted online."

Re: US Navy Japanese container ship collision
« Reply #83 on: August 22, 2017, 10:47:52 PM »
4 in one year is too many. Seems like someone might be doing test runs at our Navy. As Noory would say, there are no coincidences. Perhaps it's a portal?


Re: US Navy Japanese container ship collision
« Reply #84 on: August 22, 2017, 10:48:41 PM »
4 in one year is too many. There are no coincidences. Seems like someone might be doing test runs at our Navy.
I agree and I'm suspect....

Re: US Navy Japanese container ship collision
« Reply #85 on: August 22, 2017, 10:51:28 PM »
I agree and I'm suspect....

Sorry I changed my OP. I do that.  8)

Re: Vice Adm. Joseph Aucoin removed from duty
« Reply #86 on: August 22, 2017, 11:05:31 PM »
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/uss-john-s-mccain-collision-us-navy-removes-commander-7th-fleet-joseph-aucoin/

Goodness, our Navy has reverted to some friggin outside sales call center style of operations?
"and review basic training in a video posted online."

That took longer than I thought it would.

Re: US Navy Japanese container ship collision
« Reply #87 on: August 22, 2017, 11:12:49 PM »
I agree and I'm suspect....

Me too...CHINA!  8)