“The Ninth Man”...I saw that movie too...:)
By its very nature, skepticism is involved any time you are using logic to examine things. In cases like these, though, I do not discount anything, including terrorism, especially in a post 9/11 world (as I have explicitly said in half a dozen to a dozen separate postings).
However, if you are going to look at anything in a logical manner, you have to stratify things.
In looking at human error in ship collisions between civilian vessels and warships in modern history, probably 95-99% are due to human error, and I am guessing closer to 99% than 95%. This is just a guess, I don’t know. But if someone can find me an example out of 100 maritime collisions that aren’t due mostly to human failure with some small component of natural mechanical failure built in, I would like to see it.
Some portion of what is left over is due to mechanical failure only throughout modern history.
And if we get generous, we might even allow an example of a civilian vessel intentionally, though hostile intent, ramming a military warship on the high seas. (The USS Cole does not count, nor do the interactions over the years with Soviet vessels during the Cold War, as those are simply hostile by nature and not civilian vessels no matter how the Soviets classified them)
As a matter of fact, it has never happened to a US warship in modern history, and the obstacles to making it happen, especially choosing a 30,000 ton vessel to carry out the assignment, is so miniscule that treating it with a comment saying it is “easy” is just not true, and is, in fact, risible.
As I’ve said before, there is a missing component to this incident that will explain what happened. I think we are all curious what it is, but I think the Navy is right to keep it in confidentiality until the investigation is complete, at a minimum.
USS Frank Evans and HMAS Melbourne.
The moments leading up to the crash of the USS Frank E. Evans and the HMAS Melbourne.