SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  The Lounge    Seven US Sailors are missing after a US Navy destroyer collided with a 21,000 ton cargo ship 56 miles off the coast of Japan.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 ... 39

Moderators: Chris Orndorff, LDD
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Seven US Sailors are missing after a US Navy destroyer collided with a 21,000 ton cargo ship 56 miles off the coast of Japan. Login/Join 
Info Guru
Picture of BamaJeepster
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
Here's the AIS track of the Container ship ACX Crystal at the moment of collision.


Can you make heads or tails of that track or explain it to a landlubber?



“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
- John Adams
 
Posts: 25811 | Location: TN/KY | Registered: June 29, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Happily Retired
Picture of Bassamatic
posted Hide Post
Unbelievable.



.....never marry a woman who is mean to your waitress.
 
Posts: 2496 | Location: Lake of the Ozarks, MO. | Registered: September 05, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
That rug really tied
the room together.
Picture of bubbatime
posted Hide Post
Ship is heavily flooded and non navigable according to Japanese media?!

Where the hell are the missing 7? Did they fall out into the ocean when it was ripped open, or smashed to bits in an internal room/hallway or something? Probably need cutting torches to find some casualties.

My father in law tells stories of finding dead WW2 sailers in the 70's aboard hastily repaired WW2 ships/carriers. They hastily welded over bomb holes,trapping dead, missing sailors within, according to him (tall story, or plausible, I don't know)


______________________________________________________
Often times a very small man can cast a very large shadow
 
Posts: 3769 | Location: Floriduh | Registered: October 16, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Ammoholic
Picture of Skins2881
posted Hide Post
God, please let these sailors be OK. I'll worry about who's getting fired or court marshalled later. That's some serious damage.



Jesse

A couple SIGs and a few others
 
Posts: 9488 | Location: Loudoun County, Virginia | Registered: December 27, 2014Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
The collision happened at 2:30 a.m., and I would guess the CO was never woke up. The damage is right where the captains cabin is on a DDG, IIRC. I'd suspect that many standard procedures were neglected here. Hell, the CO has night orders detailing under what circumstances he is to be notified no matter what time it is, particularly when a contact has a CPA (closest point of approach) within a certain distance. The results of the inquiry will be interesting, but I just can't see anything but a catastrophic failure here, especially given the impact on the starboard side.

T&P for the injured and missing Sailors.
 
Posts: 286 | Location: Oklahoma City, OK | Registered: April 07, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Nullus Anxietas
Picture of ensigmatic
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
No, sailing ships do not have right of way first.

They do over powered vessels, unless the powered vessel is restricted in her ability to maneuver or is not under command. (And, IIRC, [active] fishing boats???)

Doesn't matter. Doesn't apply here.

quote:
Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
The ACX Crystal is 730 feet long and 39,565 Deadweight tons.

And takes about a bazillion feet to stop or significantly change course.

The destroyer was wrong on two counts: 1. Both were powered vessels, so the vessel to starboard was the stand-on vessel. That was the container ship. 2. The freighter was (much more) limited in her ability to maneuver, so was the stand on vessel in that regard, as well.

I was never in the Navy, so I'll forego commenting on the likely career futures of the CO and, possibly, several other officers.

My hopes and prayers for the missing sailors Frown




"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system,,,, but too early to shoot the bastards." -- Claire Wolfe
 
Posts: 11224 | Location: S.E. Michigan | Registered: January 06, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
wishing we
were congress
posted Hide Post
Balze, help me out.

Did the cargo ship do a 180 degree turn about 30 minutes before the collision?
 
Posts: 9279 | Registered: July 21, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Big Stack
posted Hide Post
One of the areas that was struck was a berthing compartment. They were likely in there when the ship was hit.

quote:
Originally posted by bubbatime:
Ship is heavily flooded and non navigable according to Japanese media?!

Where the hell are the missing 7? Did they fall out into the ocean when it was ripped open, or smashed to bits in an internal room/hallway or something? Probably need cutting torches to find some casualties.

My father in law tells stories of finding dead WW2 sailers in the 70's aboard hastily repaired WW2 ships/carriers. They hastily welded over bomb holes,trapping dead, missing sailors within, according to him (tall story, or plausible, I don't know)
 
Posts: 17119 | Registered: November 05, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Nullus Anxietas
Picture of ensigmatic
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by sdy:
Balze, help me out.

Did the cargo ship do a 180 degree turn about 30 minutes before the collision?

Looks like about 5 nm from the collision. Assuming a cruising speed of 12 kts, that'd be about right.

More than enough time for that destroyer, if they were paying attention, to avoid. (But, I'm making several assumptions in asserting that.)

The USS Fitzgerald is an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer. Here's a demonstration of how fast they can turn:





"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system,,,, but too early to shoot the bastards." -- Claire Wolfe
 
Posts: 11224 | Location: S.E. Michigan | Registered: January 06, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Tinker Sailor Soldier Pie
Picture of Balzé Halzé
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by BamaJeepster:
quote:
Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
Here's the AIS track of the Container ship ACX Crystal at the moment of collision.


Can you make heads or tails of that track or explain it to a landlubber?


OK, so here's what I can make out with the info at hand.

The ACX Crystal at approximately 0125 local time is doing 18.5 knots right before she appears to change course. This is (according to the reported collision time) about an hour before the incident.


At 0136 local time the ship is doing 14.6 knots right before she changes course again.


She then travels a little bit before coming about and reversing course to now head West. She appears to maintain a speed of 14.6 knots on this heading. It is now 0227 local time. Three minutes before the reported collision time. (However, that doesn't seem to match what I see.)


At 0234, the ship has slowed to just over 12 knots.


At 0240, the ship has cut her speed almost in half in just six minutes doing over 8 knots. It's somewhere around this time that I believe the collision happened.


The ship then stays in the area for about an hour and a half.


And the ACX Crystal then gets underway again around 0420 local time, less than two hours after the collision.




The ACX Crystal is currently underway for Tokyo. She seems to be able to maintain normal speed. She'll probably unload her cargo and then head to shipyard for repairs.


~Alan

Acta Non Verba
NRA Life Member (Endowment)
Family, Guns, Country

"My guns are always loaded."
~R.G. Justified

What whiskey will not cure, there is no cure.
 
Posts: 17312 | Location: Out of Jersey, Into Utah | Registered: October 29, 2012Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of mcrimm
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by ensigmatic:
quote:
Originally posted by sdy:
Balze, help me out.

Did the cargo ship do a 180 degree turn about 30 minutes before the collision?

Looks like about 5 nm from the collision. Assuming a cruising speed of 12 kts, that'd be about right.

More than enough time for that destroyer, if they were paying attention, to avoid. (But, I'm making several assumptions in asserting that.)

The USS Fitzgerald is an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer. Here's a demonstration of how fast they can turn:


I served on the Truxton (DLGN-35) back in the early 70's. We had a guy jump over the side just out of Pearl. I can still remember that ship heeling over as the skipper spun the ship around.

The ship was like a sports car.

Sailers were sleeping. Unbelievable.

Mike



I'm sorry if I hurt you feelings when I called you stupid - I thought you already knew - Unknown
...................................
When you have no future, you live in the past. " Sycamore Row" by John Grisham
...................................
Liberalism is a failure to find pathways to intelligence in your brain. - David Lawrence
 
Posts: 945 | Location: Kalispell Montana & South for the Winter | Registered: December 24, 2013Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Too clever by half
Picture of jigray3
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by sigcrazy7:
quote:
Originally posted by whanson_wi:
dreadnaught is correct. Looking at the damage, this was entirely the fault of the destroyer. Nautical rules of the road have at least one thing in common with automobiles in the US - when you get to an intersection at the same time, the car/ship on the right has the right-of-way, and the car/ship on the left stays clear. If you've got damage on your right side, you've managed to do absolutely everything wrong.


I have very limited knowledge of maritime rules, but I always thought that sailing ships had right of way first, then powered vessels determined by size.


The vessel with right of way is referred to as the stand-on vessel, and the vessel without right of way is called the give-way vessel. There are a number of situational rules that determine which is which, regardless, all vessels have a duty to give way to avoid a collision. While sail powered vessels generally have right of way it is really about maneuverability. Holding course in a recreational sailboat under sail expecting a freighter to alter course is not only ignorant it is a misinterpretation of the rules of the road.




Never try to teach a pig to sing. It's a waste of your time, and it annoys the pig.
 
Posts: 9457 | Location: Richmond, VA | Registered: December 11, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Nullus Anxietas
Picture of ensigmatic
posted Hide Post
The speed decreases seem consistent with a stand-on vessel recognizing the give-way vessel does not appear to be preparing to give way, no?




"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system,,,, but too early to shoot the bastards." -- Claire Wolfe
 
Posts: 11224 | Location: S.E. Michigan | Registered: January 06, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Tinker Sailor Soldier Pie
Picture of Balzé Halzé
posted Hide Post
Almost reminds me of the USS Frank E. Evans in the south China sea in June of 1969.

That was a much worse disaster though.

http://www.historynet.com/uss-...-south-china-sea.htm


~Alan

Acta Non Verba
NRA Life Member (Endowment)
Family, Guns, Country

"My guns are always loaded."
~R.G. Justified

What whiskey will not cure, there is no cure.
 
Posts: 17312 | Location: Out of Jersey, Into Utah | Registered: October 29, 2012Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of domcintosh
posted Hide Post
I intend to withhold judgment until we learn more about the details that lead up to this. There is a whole lot of swiss cheese that had to line up for this.

The large questions include
How the entire bridge team let it get this far.
Were there extenuating circumstances (high contact density, engineering casualty).
Was the CO, or the XO if stationed as the Command duty Officer, called to the bridge for this.
Why did the container ship turn back on itself.

Edited to add:
While I'm still withholding judgment, I'm also hoping that something was wrong on the Fitzgerald prior to the collision. Her Starboard damage and the port bow damage to the ACX Crystal suggests a Crossing Situation of two Power-driven vessels. I expect the largest question will be "why did you cross in front of her."



The opinions expressed in no way reflect the stance or opinion of my employer.
 
Posts: 5414 | Location: Stationed in Kitsap Washington w/ the USN | Registered: November 04, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of old rugged cross
posted Hide Post
Terrible, Prayers for the sailors missing.
As has been mentioned multiple times. Odd with all the sailors on board and all the technology. Mind boggling that this could happen with all that is at stake. What in the world?




"Practice like you want to play in the game"
 
Posts: 11315 | Registered: September 21, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
His Royal Hiney
Picture of Rey HRH
posted Hide Post
reminds me of the joke about the navy ship and the lighthouse.

But seriously, how the fuck would a US Navy ship underway at 2:30 AM get hit by a big ship? I can understand the cargo ship not seeing the destroyer, that's how it should be. But how can the destroyer with a complete watch on station could miss the cargo ship??? I certainly hope no one was sexting their girlfriend while manning the radar.

So all those somali pirates have to do is go after a navy ship at 2:30 AM and they can take over the bridge???



"It did not really matter what we expected from life, but rather what life expected from us. We needed to stop asking about the meaning of life, and instead to think of ourselves as those who were being questioned by life – daily and hourly. Our answer must consist not in talk and meditation, but in right action and in right conduct. Life ultimately means taking the responsibility to find the right answer to its problems and to fulfill the tasks which it constantly sets for each individual." Viktor Frankl, Man's Search for Meaning, 1946.
 
Posts: 13029 | Location: Bay Area, CA | Registered: March 24, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
wishing we
were congress
posted Hide Post


pic above is from Marine Traffic for ACX Crystal




pic above is a blow up at 1740 UTC

1740 point goes from 8.5 knt to a complete change of course and 2.9 knt at 1752

just guessing, and don't how much to rely on the data points, but collision may have been between 1740 and 1752

230 am Japan would be 1730 UTC

Balze, sound right ?

doesn't that 180 deg turn at 1705 seem odd ?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: sdy,
 
Posts: 9279 | Registered: July 21, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Hobbs
posted Hide Post
With almost 12 years at sea aboard 4 different Navy ships but having never stood a single underway bridge watch, I can't wrap my head around how this could have happened. From the damage, it's as though they never saw it coming and it wasn't a small dhow (like we ran over while I was stationed aboard the JFK in 2004), it was a huge freakin' lit up commercial ship. WTH

Prayers for ship and crew
 
Posts: 3250 | Location: Bathing in the stream of consciousness ~~~ | Registered: July 06, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
wishing we
were congress
posted Hide Post


This is the ACX Crystal track from 9am 16 June (left side)to 4pm 17 June (right side)

This message has been edited. Last edited by: sdy,
 
Posts: 9279 | Registered: July 21, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 2 3 4 5 ... 39 
 

SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  The Lounge    Seven US Sailors are missing after a US Navy destroyer collided with a 21,000 ton cargo ship 56 miles off the coast of Japan.

© SIGforum 2017