Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

USS Fitzgerald Collision Update (Sailors found, bad news)
U.S. 7th Fleet Public Affairs ^ | 6/17/2017 | U.S. 7th Fleet Public Affairs

Posted on 06/17/2017 7:20:21 PM PDT by proust

YOKOSUKA, Japan -- A number of Sailors that were missing from the collision between USS Fitzgerald (DDG 62) and a merchant ship have been found. As search and rescue crews gained access to the spaces that were damaged during the collision this morning, the missing Sailors were located in the flooded berthing compartments. They are currently being transferred to Naval Hospital Yokosuka where they will be identified. The families are being notified and being provided the support they need during this difficult time. The names of the Sailors will be released after all notifications are made.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: collision; deathtoll; maritime; navy; sailors; shipcollision; usnavy; ussfitzgerald
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 261-266 next last
To: UCANSEE2

Start with this

Captain of stricken $1.5bn US Navy destroyer is airlifted to hospital as up to SEVEN sailors are missing or feared dead after it collided with 29,000 ton cargo ship off Japan

Absolutely NOTHING there to back up your fantasy. Sorry.


121 posted on 06/17/2017 10:06:40 PM PDT by 867V309 (Lock Her Up)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: doorgunner69

bookmark


122 posted on 06/17/2017 10:12:19 PM PDT by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2
Nothing of what you previously posted was mentioned in your link.

Trying to prove something here?

123 posted on 06/17/2017 10:12:22 PM PDT by doorgunner69
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: House Atreides

Yes. If there was hostile intent, it will not be concealed. My expectation is that it is not hostile intent. But in this post 9/11 world, nothing is impossible.


124 posted on 06/17/2017 10:13:54 PM PDT by rlmorel (Liberals are in a state of constant cognitive dissonance, which explains their mental instability.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: NCC-1701
Doesn’t US Naval vessels have collision avoidance hardware?

No. What the Fitzgerald has is an AN/SPS-67 2D surface search radar. You get azimuth and range, that's it.

Some misconceptions on this thread about surface search radar - it isn't magic, and what you actually see on it in this situation is a spot of light that slows down relative to your ship. You don't pick up its new course right away until it's actually assumed it and been on it long enough to trend. You don't get doppler, so you have to calculate it.

A sudden maneuver such as the one presented in the track data would not be picked up right away and would probably confuse hell out of any OOD unfortunate enough to encounter it. Visual would help (if you have it). I've conned a ship in these waters and things get crazy pretty quickly when somebody on a standard course goes squirrely on you all of a sudden.

We'll know more when we get both ships' track data and their deck and comms logs. Until then, it's all speculation. But I can tell you from personal experience that conning a ship in restricted waters is not a straightforward thing.

125 posted on 06/17/2017 10:16:05 PM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: All

The container ship “U-Turn” came after the collision according to analysis here:

http://www.vesselofinterest.com/2017/06/mapping-acx-crystals-collision-with-uss.html?m=1

Speculation is that the container ship was on autopilot at 2:30am and hit the Fitz and by the time the container ship senior crew got up to the bridge to disengage the autopilot about 20 minutes passed...then the container ship flips the u-turn.


126 posted on 06/17/2017 10:23:58 PM PDT by Drago
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: sport; All
FWIW for those trying to do quality forensics from the ship track:

Speed at the arrow at the hard starboard turn = 17.3 knots (my guess at impact)
Speed at the next tick mark = 11.2 knots (holy shiite, what happened?)
Speed at the infamous U-turn 7.6 knots. Slowing all the way to the hard port U-turn.
Speed where the tight maeuvering is going on = 2.9-3.7 knots, what I would gather to be minimum steerage speed (I was not a swabbie, just what I have read)
Speed as the 90 ° starboard turn back toward Yokosuka = 1.0 knots.

127 posted on 06/17/2017 10:25:20 PM PDT by doorgunner69
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: doorgunner69
Oh yeah: the hard starboard turn time ans speed tick happens to be right at 16:30 UTC.

What a coincidence!

128 posted on 06/17/2017 10:27:15 PM PDT by doorgunner69
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: doorgunner69

I am not going to be surprised if they find prayer rugs on the freighter that hit the Fitz.


129 posted on 06/17/2017 10:29:38 PM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: Drago

I guess I don’t get why everyone is saying ‘U-turn.’ Sorry for my ignorance. The track of the ship looks like it makes two U-turns to me. Like it made one U-turn to go back the way it came, and then another to go back the way it was going originally. Did it hit our ship after the first U-turn, then try to go back on course or something?

Freegards


130 posted on 06/17/2017 10:31:10 PM PDT by Ransomed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel

>There is a lot of speculation here that the USS Fitzgerald was rammed intentionally.

If just one islam was in control I suspect it.


131 posted on 06/17/2017 10:32:12 PM PDT by soycd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Billthedrill

Some misconceptions on this thread about surface search radar - it isn't magic, and what you actually see on it in this situation is a spot of light that slows down relative to your ship. You don't pick up its new course right away until it's actually assumed it and been on it long enough to trend. You don't get doppler, so you have to calculate it.

A sudden maneuver such as the one presented in the track data would not be picked up right away and would probably confuse hell out of any OOD unfortunate enough to encounter it. Visual would help (if you have it). I've conned a ship in these waters and things get crazy pretty quickly when somebody on a standard course goes squirrely on you all of a sudden.

We'll know more when we get both ships' track data and their deck and comms logs. Until then, it's all speculation. But I can tell you from personal experience that conning a ship in restricted waters is not a straightforward thing.


Oh, poor widdle navy. Anything from an OKC ammonia bomb on a barge to Battlestar Gallictica can sneak up on them and blow them to smithereens.

If your concept of our naval defense is correct, we've wasted a LOT of money.


132 posted on 06/17/2017 10:39:06 PM PDT by 867V309 (Lock Her Up)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: 867V309
Oh, poor widdle navy.

We have seven dead sailors out there, asshole.

133 posted on 06/17/2017 10:40:11 PM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: doorgunner69

I guess the question is whether this happened at the first 180 degree change in course or the third? Like they hit it, went back to check and then turned around and kept going the way they were or did it reverse direction first, hit it then changed direction for the third time?

Freegards


134 posted on 06/17/2017 10:40:38 PM PDT by Ransomed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: Ransomed

Speculation from that site I posted, and the map posted at #119 seem to indicate that the container ship was cruising along on autopilot and didn’t vary course until hitting DDG 62...it right turned as a result of the collision but the autopilot brought it back on course. Container ship crew rushes up to the bridge and disengage the autopilot and “flip a u-turn” to return to the site of the collision to render aid, etc.. Later the container ship heads for Tokyo again. Informed speculation at the moment, but I am sure that accurate track/speed data is available for both ships and an accurate account will come out soon.


135 posted on 06/17/2017 10:41:21 PM PDT by Drago
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: soycd

Yes. In this post 9/11 world, it is impossible not to entertain the idea.


136 posted on 06/17/2017 10:42:19 PM PDT by rlmorel (Liberals are in a state of constant cognitive dissonance, which explains their mental instability.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: 867V309

That is uncalled for.


137 posted on 06/17/2017 10:45:04 PM PDT by rlmorel (Liberals are in a state of constant cognitive dissonance, which explains their mental instability.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: Billthedrill

criticizing your post, not them, not that it matters to you.


138 posted on 06/17/2017 10:45:11 PM PDT by 867V309 (Lock Her Up)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: soycd; rlmorel
Looking at the post indent data and the very erratic track followed by the container ship just prior to the collision with the USS Fitz it is my conclusion that:

  1. Nobody was on the bridge of the freighter
  2. The auto pilot on the container ship had malfunctioned the ship was going in random directions and course changes. Not sure about speed.
  3. The crew of the container ship was totally unaware of the situation as they were all asleep.
  4. The USS Fitz decided the safest thing to do was to just stop making way and let the thing go away.

139 posted on 06/17/2017 10:45:32 PM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel

That is uncalled for.

What, exactly?


140 posted on 06/17/2017 10:46:43 PM PDT by 867V309 (Lock Her Up)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 261-266 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson