Posted on 06/19/2017 10:20:48 AM PDT by Kaslin
Last Updated Jun 19, 2017 11:37 AM EDT
TOKYO -- Japan's coast guard is investigating why it took nearly an hour for a deadly collision between a U.S. Navy destroyer and a container ship to be reported.
A coast guard official said Monday they are trying to find out what the crew of the Philippine-flagged ACX Crystal was doing before reporting the collision off Japan's coast to authorities 50 minutes later.
The ACX Crystal collided with the USS Fitzgerald off Japan's coast, killing seven of the destroyer's crew of nearly 300. The ships collided early Saturday morning, when the Navy said most of the 300 sailors on board would have been sleeping. Authorities have declined to speculate on a cause while the crash remains under investigation.
A track of the much-larger container ship's route by MarineTraffic, a vessel-tracking service, shows it made a sudden turn as if trying to avoid something at about 1:30 a.m., before continuing eastward. It then made a U-turn and returned around 2:30 a.m. to the area near the collision.
The impact crushed the starboard side of the Fitzgerald. The ship was listing as it sailed into its home port in Yokosuka, Japan, Saturday, CBS News correspondent Ben Tracy reports. The commander of the U.S. 7th Fleet said the sailors' actions kept the ship from sinking.
"This was not a small collision," Vice Adm. Joseph Aucoin said. "It was right near the pilot's house, and there is a big puncture."
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
I don’t know. I’m just going by the blue chart track, pure speculation at this point.
(This is a web discussion forum, not a court of law.)
That scenario just makes it worse. If you’re in charted ‘restricted’ waters, and another ship breaks that perimeter, then all eyes should have been on that ship.
No way it should have gotten that close.
Most of what I’ve heard seems to suggest that they were close to port, perhaps heading back in and were dealing with traffic. (You wouldn’t set up a patrol box in congested shipping lanes except in time of war)
Somebody was negligent at best.
“Aren’t destroyers loaded with systems to prevent intentional rammings?”
Of course, if it was in the context of wartime it would never happen.
My basic premise is that the Crystal misled the Fitz about its intentions to deliberately create a collision.
In the last thirty seconds: “Don’t worry, I’m turning to port, I’ll pass behind your stern.”
Then turn to starboard.
how fast can a destroyer start its engines and move quickly out of the way?..
I'm just looking for reasons not to blame our US NAVY..
Not even close to all -- Navy watches rotate every four hours at sea. The collision occurred during the midwatch (midnight to 4AM). There would have been multiple people standing watches in engineering spaces, CIC (Combat Information Center), and on the bridge. I'd expect that about 1/4 of the crew would have been awake and on their stations at the time of the collision.
that’s only plausible if the ship was within 1000 meters, which should never have occurred. And he was going slow too, as evidenced by the fact the Fitz was not cut in two.
the Fitz should have ensured a full nautical mile of separation no matter what the other captain said. and notwithstanding any other circumstances.
I would like to think that the Merchie was at fault. I have stood copious hours of Bridge watch,as an OOD, in out Navy. I cannot come up with any set of circumstances that would absolve the Bridge watch, that night, of responsibility for the collision. Sad to say, errors in judgment on the part of the Bridge watch are most likely the reason for this event. Until the Navy investigation is completed, all we have is speculation as to those events that led to the collision.
Sigh...
My smart phone has a tracking app that uses GPS.
“My smart phone has a tracking app that uses GPS.”
Are you actively engaged in classified missions involving the security of the United States?
If not then you’re OK.
8^)
If they did mislead them, then the Navy already knows that, and is acting accordingly.
The point was, maybe the ship got rammed by a freighter because everybody on board was asleep. What other explanation is there? It was a joke. For crying out loud.
Track any ship you want!!
http://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/centerx:135.5/centery:31.8/zoom:6
provided there was any bridge to bridge communications.
Merchies seem to be reticent to talk on that radio.
I was merely pointing out that the COST of a ‘tracking system’ is about zero these days.
All well and good. But the Bridge watch on the DDG should have never taken their eyes off the Crystal,if it was that close. Believe the radio message, but visually confirm the action stated is being taken.
Assuming (I know, I know...) that USS Fitzgerald sighted ACX Crystal when she was around point #5 on that chart, wouldn’t normal procedure be to steer a bit starboard and pass the container ship port-to-port, before beginning that eastward turn?
Who cares? Reporting to an outside agency in an emergency is last thing on the 'to do' list.
Radar doesn't control anything. IF the radar wasn't working (and there are no facts supporting that position) at best it would be a contributing factor. It can't be a causal factor.
Board hasn't convened yet.
Unfortunately, there aren't any.
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.