Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[tidla]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-40314128

What occurred here?

Busy shipping lane and a state of the art warship.

[biggriffin]

Guessing the naval ship was in stelth mode, the box jockey didn't see him on the radars. When he decided to turn round and go back to collect his packed lunch.

[Lizzie Zoom]

Yep. Someone will lose their command!

No modern warship with the speed and agility the US destroyer has, along with very high tech radar and IT resources should ever be in a position of being pranged by a slow moving, giant, container ship travelling at well under half the speed the destroyer is capable of.

I feel sure that it will be quickly established to have been a misjudgment by the naval command as can happen when these ships are being maneuvered, may be deliberately as an exercise around the merchant ship.

My late father, 26 years in the Royal Navy, and a signals officer on many destroyers, often recalled incidents when his commander would use a large ship to exercise their fast cross over maneuvers, that in war are essential to fully protect the capital ships of the fleet. He often also reminded us of the dreadful miscalculation made by the command of the cruiser HMS Curacoa when circumventing the RMS Queen Mary during World War II.  Then though both ships were traveling at great speed, in a zig zag pattern due to U boat activity and both captains "got it wrong" with the result the Curacoa was sliced in two with 337 crew lost.

I just pray that the 7 American sailors reported missing are found alive, but that is doubtful.

[Doctor Gollum]

On a converging course, the overtaking vessel should have taken avoiding action... Either by altering course to port and or changing speed... They probably held their course and failed to appreciate just how fast the container ship was moving.

[Lizzie Zoom]

On a converging course, the overtaking vessel should have taken avoiding action... Either by altering course to port and or changing speed... They probably held their course and failed to appreciate just how fast the container ship was moving.

Yes, all of 14.6 knots

Top speed of destroyer, 30 knots.

My comments and knowledge in the above post apply. A modern, let alone old, destroyer is a fast moving vessel that is highly agile due to its needs to undertake anti-submarine duties, let alone screening of the main ships of the fleet.  A commander of such a vessel is highly trained, as are his subordinate officers, and should never miscalculate a manoeuvre as this crew would SEEM to have done. A naval commander is considered a far superior officer to any merchant captain. He should never put his command at such risk whilst having to carry out very complex exercises crossing the fleet (or a "target" ship used for exercise purposes only). My father would squarely place the blame on the commander on watch when this collision occurred, and no doubt will any Naval. Board of Enquirery unless other extraordinary factors come to light, such as a helm failure, or a deliberate action by a dissatisfied member of the crew.

[Lizzie Zoom]

On a converging course, the overtaking vessel should have taken avoiding action... Either by altering course to port and or changing speed... They probably held their course and failed to appreciate just how fast the container ship was moving.

Yes, all of 14.6 knots

Top speed of destroyer, 30 knots.

My comments and knowledge in the above post apply. A modern, let alone old, destroyer is a fast moving vessel that is highly agile due to its needs to undertake anti-submarine duties, let alone screening of the main ships of the fleet.  A commander of such a vessel is highly trained, as are his subordinate officers, and should never miscalculate a manoeuvre as this crew would SEEM to have done. A naval commander is considered a far superior officer to any merchant captain. He should never put his command at such risk whilst having to carry out very complex exercises crossing the fleet (or a "target" ship used for exercise purposes only). My father would squarely place the blame on the commander on watch when this collision occurred, and no doubt will any Naval Board of Enquirery unless other extraordinary factors come to light, such as a helm failure, or a deliberate action by a dissatisfied member of the crew.

[Doctor Gollum]

Don't know where you plucked that number from... Would still require at least a third more to pass safely.

At the end of the day marine law requires a safe distance to be maintained from large commercial vessels of at least 1000m ahead and astern and 150m abeam.

She shouldn't have been anywhere near it.

And basic seamanship requires an understanding of allowing for the effects of wind and tide on not only your vessel but also those around you.

[Lizzie Zoom]

Don't know where you plucked that number from... Would still require at least a third more to pass safely.

At the end of the day marine law requires a safe distance to be maintained from large commercial vessels of at least 1000m ahead and astern and 150m abeam.

She shouldn't have been anywhere near it.

And basic seamanship requires an understanding of allowing for the effects of wind and tide on not only your vessel but also those around you.

The figure of 14.6 knots has been given by the Japanesse authorities of the speed the container ship was doing at the time of the collision. The 30 knots for the US destroyer is the published top speed for this class, but no doubt can do more. The Royal Navy Daring class of destroyers also have a published top speed of 30 knots. Classes of Royal Navy destroyers during WW2 had a published top speed of 36 knots.

I fully agree with the points you make, but it could be the US commander was on an exercise as I described of circumventing the large container ship as they would a fleet large unit, such as an aircraft carrier, as they would in war. They have to practice those maneovers, but could well have got it wrong as they can, as my father used to explain. Moving a screening force of one set of destroyers from port to starboard, and the other section from starboard to port takes skill and much practice.  My father reckoned it was scary at times, but always excillerating and exciting being executed at top speeds, with utter faith being placed with your captain to "do it right" whilst my father was responsible for executing the signals by flags to initiate it all.

As I said someone will lose their command, IF it was "human error" on the part of the commander on the bridge. Blame certainly cannot be placed with the container ships captain.

[Varche]

They have found the missing crewmen. Presumably in a horrible tin sandwich.

I wonder if a military satellite has footage of the incident?

[Doctor Gollum]

They have found the missing crewmen. Presumably in a horrible tin sandwich.

I wonder if a military satellite has footage of the incident?

The black box on the ship will reveal all...

As for the suggestion that they were using the container ship to practice wartime manoeuvres under exercise conditions is proposterous... there are at least seven very good reasons exactly why this doesn't happen. Especially not in a busy shipping zone.

Officer of the watch on the Destroyer will be lucky to drive a desk once he's been written up.

[biggriffin]

They have found the missing crewmen. Presumably in a horrible tin sandwich.

I wonder if a military satellite has footage of the incident?

The black box on the ship will reveal all...

As for the suggestion that they were using the container ship to practice wartime manoeuvres under exercise conditions is proposterous... there are at least seven very good reasons exactly why this doesn't happen. Especially not in a busy shipping zone.

Officer of the watch on the Destroyer will be lucky to drive a desk once he's been written up.

.

He's an American, bet he gets a medal for averting a catastrophic incident, then there's the film rights,
I bet Tom Hanks plays officer of the watch.

[Lizzie Zoom]

They have found the missing crewmen. Presumably in a horrible tin sandwich.

I wonder if a military satellite has footage of the incident?

The black box on the ship will reveal all...

As for the suggestion that they were using the container ship to practice wartime manoeuvres under exercise conditions is proposterous... there are at least seven very good reasons exactly why this doesn't happen. Especially not in a busy shipping zone.

Officer of the watch on the Destroyer will be lucky to drive a desk once he's been written up.

Well it DOES happen as computer simulations only go so far in meeting the navies operational needs. Usually though nothing untoward happens and the public are unaware of such dummy runs.

[Rods2]

More information including the merchant's ships course.

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

It looks more like a 'T' collision than a glancing blow.

I don't know what the US equivalent career ending of 'incurring the admiral's displeasure' is?

[Rods2]

Don't know where you plucked that number from... Would still require at least a third more to pass safely.

At the end of the day marine law requires a safe distance to be maintained from large commercial vessels of at least 1000m ahead and astern and 150m abeam.

She shouldn't have been anywhere near it.

And basic seamanship requires an understanding of allowing for the effects of wind and tide on not only your vessel but also those around you.

The figure of 14.6 knots has been given by the Japanesse authorities of the speed the container ship was doing at the time of the collision. The 30 knots for the US destroyer is the published top speed for this class, but no doubt can do more. The Royal Navy Daring class of destroyers also have a published top speed of 30 knots. Classes of Royal Navy destroyers during WW2 had a published top speed of 36 knots.

I fully agree with the points you make, but it could be the US commander was on an exercise as I described of circumventing the large container ship as they would a fleet large unit, such as an aircraft carrier, as they would in war. They have to practice those maneovers, but could well have got it wrong as they can, as my father used to explain. Moving a screening force of one set of destroyers from port to starboard, and the other section from starboard to port takes skill and much practice.  My father reckoned it was scary at times, but always excillerating and exciting being executed at top speeds, with utter faith being placed with your captain to "do it right" whilst my father was responsible for executing the signals by flags to initiate it all.

As I said someone will lose their command, IF it was "human error" on the part of the commander on the bridge. Blame certainly cannot be placed with the container ships captain.

Like the K-class submarines 'Battle of May Island'

[Nick W]

More information including the merchant's ships course.

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

It looks more like a 'T' collision than a glancing blow.

I don't know what the US equivalent career ending of 'incurring the admiral's displeasure' is?

They'll probably make him a close personal aide to the President. That seems to be a good way of oppsing anybody's career