Posted on 06/21/2017 6:16:08 AM PDT by artichokegrower
I agree totally. The “root cause” of this deadly event is HUMAN arising out of “policies” generated by liberal Congresses over decades and acquiesced to by so called “conservative Republicans” and weak Admirals.
I’ve spent countless hours on a Navy Destroyer Bridge with the combat phone hung around my neck and binoculars in my hand “looking” for surface ships or fixed obstacles. ANY messing around was just absolutely come down hard on by the OOD !!! Too early to tell but SOMEBODY, or SOMEBODIES, was/were not doing their job!
“hanky panky”
My thought as well (for both the OOD - and/or the captain). I can’t think of any other “distraction” that would lead to this level of failure to follow protocol.
“”The “root cause” of this deadly event is HUMAN arising out of “policies” generated by liberal Congresses over decades and acquiesced to by so called “conservative Republicans” and weak Admirals.”””
—
I totally agree. And the ‘root cause’ is not limited to the Navy and those who have acquiesced to these liberal policies. We see these problems in Corporations and throughout all level of Government.
“that destroyer has the power to slam into reverse and practically leave its bow anchors behind”
Yep - the video from the source is pretty impressive:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Vih4tGmqjs
I worked on Jewel of the Seas an RCCL ship for about 10 months, 10 years ago. Of course I always wanted to go on engine room & bridge tours. In the wake of 9/11/2001, those are not casual events, the crew takes the whole concept of bridge/engine room tours VERY seriously.
Now, that particular ship & its sisterships was (for its time) rather unique in that ship power was derived from 2 qty DC-9 turbine engines driving “azipods” which look like an old style desktop fan, upside down. Yes, jet engines. Intake air came down a freaking huge pipe 13 stories tall and exhaust, same. Now that kind of ship isn’t in the business of performing whiz-bang maneuvers but when it was time for that ship to start up and take off, it did, with gusto. Immense power. Those destroyers have the power to bury the bow underwater if they are thrown into hard reverse.
That ship could sail into a channel between 2 rock jetties and turn around in place with 30 feet of clearance fore and aft, and I saw it do that 20 times into Bermuda. One guy actually stood on the bow and another on the stern with laser scanners which looked a lot like bar-code scanners and I would imagine the “turn around inside your own length” was a subroutine that could be invoked in the ships nav computers. But it was still hard to believe it was going on, even watching it over & over.
Ten years ago.
I find it hard to believe that such a destroyer does not have an “emergency collision avoidance” button of some sort.
You mention a kind of what might be called a “cowboy” attitude, I can’t really say and obviously cannot know. Tend to doubt it, but there you go. I can tell you, stuff happens on the water with those ships about 4 times as fast as you think while the situation is developing.
First thing one has to determine is if the captain was up on all the gender rules on whether his people were gender specific!!!
I do not disagree with gcaptain’s conclusion, that Fitzgerald was probably at fault for the collision. But he is dead wrong on a couple of points in his article. Bridge to Bridge radio does not route through radio central. The only person on a naval vessel that uses it is the Captain, the OOD or JOOD. No junior radioman answers then relays to radio watch supervisor to pass to the bridge. We use the standard phraseology of mariners to communicate with other ships. “will pass you port to port, or am coming starboard to course 250 (a true compass bearing not a relative bearing.) We do give orders to our helm using right standard rudder or Left full rudder. We do not use those terms on the Bridge to Bridge radio. gcaptain makes it sound as if the captain of a merchant ship does everything on the bridge. At the time of collision, with the destroyer, the 3rd mate was most probably the only licensed officer on the Crystal’s bridge. The 3rd mate (most junior licensed officer on the ship) traditionally stands the midwatch. It was on this watch that the collision occurred. the Crystal’s captain was probably getting some shut eye before they entered the traffic separation lanes leading to Tokyo Bay. He would have been on the Bridge for that.
COLREGS is the demarcation line on a chart where the ROTR (Rules Of The Road) shift from US inland rules to international rules or visa-versa.
In international waters any ships maneuvers agreed to over the radio have no legal standing if a collision occurs. International rules clearly states what the responsibilities for maneuvering between vessels is (Rules 8, 18 just to name a couple). Radio communications are primarily for acquisition of confidence between 2 vessels. This is not true for US inland rules.
Come on, she was on her cell phone & putting on her makeup in the rear view mirror.......cut her a break! An it might habe been a heavy flow day too.
Violation of rule 15: "When two power driven vessels are crossing so as to involve risk of collision,the vessel which has the other one her starboard side SHALL keep out of the way and SHALL, if the circumstances of the case admit, AVOID CROSSING AHEAD OF THE OTHER VESSEL." "SHALL", not a "may" or "should" as these as distinct legal terms.
Several articles I read said that the Fitzgerald was not under way at the time it was struck.
And it sure looks that way to me. The impact photos seem to show a single impact with no scraping as you would expect if the Fitz had been under way.
So if the Fitz was stationkeeping (sea anchors?) at 2am, how long would it take to get the ship moving with no warning?
Also other reports seem to say that the Captain was on the bridge, and that his chair was crushed which is why he was injured and evacuated.
???
I know EXACTLY why as I live it every workday.
I've been the chief engineer in the USCG Academy Ship Simulators since I retired from the same service in 1991. I've taken and passed the DWO ROTR test every year. I even got my 100-ton license certification last year. I assist teaching every USCG prospective CO/XO/OPS since 1991.
It all comes down to experience and simulator time. Notice I said "AND". Just passing a book test does not mean you can translate ROTR text into the graphics of real life. Any more than a kid getting a learners permit to drive a car and they set out 10 minutes latter to drive from Maine to Orlando making sure they go through every major city along the rte95 way.
Secondly, this is a highly perishable set of skills and knowledge. One 4 year desk job as active duty and you have to start at the bottom again.
Training, testing, training, testing and training some more. That is the answer. The tools of the trade (i.e. radar) are only as useful as the performance of the operators of those tools.
Yes Sir!
Absolutely...........(re corporations too)
The reviews on Amazon for this book are worth checking out. Very entertaining.
Obviously neither ship obeyed that rule. The theory is that the skipper of the tanker was literally asleep at the wheel and the skipper of the destroyer was either asleep ( which is unlikely) or thought he could keep on course and still avoid a collision.
Somebody is going to jail.
Wanna bet it was a woman?
The cargo ship was probably lit up on their detectors, well, like a big effin ship on the water.
There was no "didn't see it coming"
Probly the backup cam was on the fritz.
Ship's captain, are you?
Yeah, that stand on and right of way gets pounded on heavy even in small boat handling. You go behind the crossing boat, unless you are on a jet-ski (snark)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.