Posted on 06/19/2017 10:20:48 AM PDT by Kaslin
Crystal then left the area (perhaps Fitzgerald said they were OK) but later called Crystal for assistance and turn 3 was made as Crystal tried to return to the area of the collision and was again told that Fitzgerald was OK and didn't need anything which led to turn 4 as Crystal again began leaving the area toward Japan.
That's the only thing I can think of that would explain that big loop and aiming at a return to the area of the first turn.
Agreed.
And as a Marine who has been on ship a time of two, it should be noted that I have a huge amount of respect for our navy - they perform a hell of a job.
“I’m going to say we never find out - surprise”
Sadly I agree; and as unsatisfying at the would be to my curiosity, if it prevents our enemies from gaining an advantage, I can live with that.
Gosh.
I thought we were looking at an accident.
Is this a thread about time at sea?
Please try to stick to the subject.
Now what?
You don't seems to agree The caliber and intelligence of It must be as a result of Barry's tenure. AGREE ?
on the use of words in the
common English Language,
newcomers to FR seems to
have slipped dramatically.
I have to agree. And, remember all of the talk a couple of years ago about the Russians/Chinese being able to blind US surveillance systems?
Not only that, but how about a little low-tech, as in a sailor with a pair of binoculars or night vision. One on each bridge wing and one on aft lookout. These sailors should have seen it coming even if the radar was down.
I’m wondering if the Fitzgerald was up alongside the Crystal, and then Crystal decided to turn hard to port or what ever direction.
There’s some speculation the first U turn was to return and offer assistance. The second series of circles may be for the pilot to board. Both plausible. Still the freighter not notifying of the collision for so long is extremely odd.
The sailing forums offer some very good perspective. Lots of the contributors are ex-Navy and plenty are familiar with rules of the road in the area of the incident.
I’m ex-Navy too but the flight deck offers little insight. I also have many years experience sailing off the coast of CA around the shipping lanes. It’s busy around LA Harbor but I have to believe it pales in comparison to traffic heading into Tokyo.
If the bridge of the Fitz sounded anything like this it explains a lot.
https://pilotonline.com/news/military/audio-confusion-reigned-before-destroyer-s-collision/article_c7472be8-efcb-5763-93bb-aab66d820175.html
“Benson was among those injured in the collision with the ACX Crystal container ship, which occurred about 56 nautical miles of Yokosuka, Japan. However, it appears he will be OK. Still, it was a close call.”
“Benson “was asleep when the accident happened and his cabin was destroyed by the impact at 2:30 a.m. on Saturday,” reported UK Daily Mail, quoting Vice Adm Joseph Aucoin as saying Benson is “lucky to be alive.”
Let me return that respect to the finest fighting force to ever have walked the earth.
Or, as we often derisively used to say: “Cargo” that sits in the chow line lol
Yep.
You don’t have any experience investigating military accidents, do you?
You’re just woofing.
Why don’t you tell us how much time you stood in the chow line?
It doesn’t matter until the facts come in.
thank you, very informative.
Yes.
Aren’t destroyers loaded with systems to prevent intentional rammings?
No, I don’t.
I spent my entire Navy career avoiding accidents. Unlike the dimwit crew of the Fitzgerald.
They cost the lives of SEVEN sailors. This due to their inability to avoid a lumbering cargo ship at sea.
It doesn’t even matter, given the capability of the Burke class, if the cargo ship intentionally rammed them. The Fitz can go all speed ahead in a matter of seconds with those twin turbos. She can achieve 40kts in about 2mins. And she can turn a 180 in about a mile.
So tell us a plausible bullshit story on how this was not the fault of the Fitz crew. Any plausible bullshit story will do.
Completely different situations between the two. A combatant naval vessel of this type should never be "rammed" by a merchant ship in open waters. This was an error in navigation, not a security breach in a hostile harbor.
No, because you're someone who comes along after the fact and documents anecdotal evidence, gossip and innuendo but apparently has never actually been there or done that.
Well, it’s like I already wrote.
It could be incompetence.
You are correct that seven sailors died.
As I wrote the night this story was released,
“I’m an old Soldier, but tonight my heart is with The United States Navy.”
Look it up.
By the way, I watched people not only skate-by, but actually get promoted after their negligence resulted in two deaths.
I want people punished if there was negligence resulting in these deaths.
But, I also feel a sense of loyalty to all the Sailors on that ship until it is PROVEN that some were negligent.
I’m well aware of how different the two situations are. But the issue of situational awareness and continual close monitoring of a ship’s surroundings exists always, everywhere. A mere “navigational error” does not begin to describe how a US Navy destroyer ends up in a collision at sea with an enormous cargo ship.
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.