quote:

...was protecting a sub or something else on the surface (yeah, I'm really reaching here)

quote:

Originally posted by stoic-one:
Step away from the shovel.

quote:

Originally posted by Hobbs:

quote:

Originally posted by stoic-one:
Step away from the shovel.

Good advice LOL but just to clarify, a sub on the surface for what ever reason.

quote:

Originally posted by stoic-one:
I'll just say that the only time I've seen a forward deployed sub on the surface and not in port, the ship I was on was unreping reactor feed water to it, which happens pretty much never.

quote:

Originally posted by Rightwire:
So, a warship with millions of dollars in sophisticated radar and sensors, a CIC staffed with sailors focused on threat detection and avoidance, look outs all over the ship scanning for anything the sensors might miss, and a bridge crew coordinating all of those efforts and while maintaining the ability to make drastic changes in course and speed.... got hit by a cargo ship 10x it's size?

Seems a lot like a corvette running around an abandoned airport with people standing up through the T-tops looking for obstructions, and some how managing to get surprised and hit by a metro bus.

All charts, graphs, timelines aside, there is something really wrong here. How do that many people tasked with the safety and security of a vessel... fail?

It seems to me that the US Navy spends a lot of time and money to train professionals to man warships so that they are safe from harm. Given history over the last few decades it appears it is a pretty good system. This just baffles me that so many well designed redundancies could fail.

quote:

Originally posted by Hobbs:
The Navy isn't disputing anything speculative or otherwise in the media or information other maritime agencies promulgate and isn't forthcoming with very much information. In this digital and social media age, ship's crew is putting little if anything out there. With op tempo in that part of the world lately, who knows what the Navy may have been trying to do. Was the ship ordered not to deviate from course, was protecting a sub or something else on the surface (yeah, I'm really reaching here) ... frantically tried to contact Crystal but the bridge was unmanned? It's all very bizarre.

quote:

Originally posted by RHINOWSO:
There is really nothing bizarre about it.

quote:

Originally posted by Hobbs:
Yep, the simple answer is most often the correct one. We simply don't know

quote:

Originally posted by LS1 GTO:

quote:

Originally posted by jimmy123x:

NOW, if any bridge was unmanned, it was the Navy Destroyers. It had all of the advantages of avoiding a collision. Faster, much more maneuverable, smaller, state of the art radar and technology. Some of the best trained radar observers in the world. A USN warship is supposed to be constantly on the lookout for enemy attacks and avoiding any boats/ships within a mile of it or even further......

I also believe the destroyer was most likely dark ship, and they do sometimes hardly reflect a radar signal, and sometimes the signal only shows every 5th sweep of the radar or so. Also given the color, it's quite possible the freighter never even saw the fitzgerald with a person on lookout until a few hundred yards away. I find them very hard to see sometimes, and sometimes if they're doing some sort of secret ops they won't answer the vhf radio until you call them several times.

Also, no matter how poorly tuned your radar is, a freighter that's as long as a city block with containers stacked 3-6 high on the deck always shows up as a HUGE target on your radar. So how did the destroyer not see it and was not keeping an eye out for it. I would say with 99.9% certainty the freighter had it's navigational lights on.

It appears you have never been on a USN ship's bridge at 0100 while underway. The DDG's bridge was manned and her running lights were lit (or at least they were supposed to be once twilight hit). At night, and during a clear day, the haze gray paint scheme doesn't matter at ranges of 6,000 yds, so if the ship were white, gray, or black, only its lights would be seen (at night). Been there on carriers to know. If this was an area of higher ship traffic (I am not familiar with that part of the ocean), additional watches would have/should have been assigned.

Next - the waning moonrise was ~0040 (with 30% to 40% illumination) in that part of the world, about 35 degrees above the horizon (if my memory serves correctly) at 0130 and a bit higher an hour afterwards. Unless local weather was overcast, the ships' watches, if awake and alert, were able to see one another at 2,000 yds (greater for 20 year-old eyes)

In this situation, law of physics states the larger, less maneuverable ship has the right-of-way. The smaller, more agile ship should have avoided collision.

With the USN reassessing time of collision we should consider initial assessments were likely based on when the DDG reported the collision to the fleet.

I fall back to my initial conclusions, the bridge of the DDG was lollygagging around and not standing a proper and disciplined watch which leads to the question - was this just the nature of those individuals on watch which was amplified when the four to six of them were together; was this watch section so familiar with the routine they lost situational awareness; or was this watch section indicative of all the watch sections under this CO's command?

quote:

Originally posted by stoic-one:

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
When you say pushing aft, that implies a head on collision w the 2 ships approaching each other.

W DDG 62 damage on starboard, and Crystal damage on port, it seems like the 2 ships could not have been heading towards each other.

My supposition would be that all of these guesses depend on the angle of impact. Funny things happen depending on the angle and contact points, especially when both objects are under power.

We're not talking about 2 vertical surfaces intersecting at a specific angle.

quote:

Originally posted by jimmy123x:

I agree with everything you're saying except for one thing. The Destroyer was the give way vessel, that much is true in this situation.

quote:

Originally posted by jimmy123x:

quote:

Originally posted by stoic-one:

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
When you say pushing aft, that implies a head on collision w the 2 ships approaching each other.

W DDG 62 damage on starboard, and Crystal damage on port, it seems like the 2 ships could not have been heading towards each other.

My supposition would be that all of these guesses depend on the angle of impact. Funny things happen depending on the angle and contact points, especially when both objects are under power.

We're not talking about 2 vertical surfaces intersecting at a specific angle.

They were going in the same general direction within 90 degrees, otherwise the freighters damage would be on the starboard side. My guess is crystal was going 68 degrees, that much we know and the destroyer was heading around 18-38 degrees......

quote:

b) A vessel shall be deemed to be overtaking when coming up with another vessel from a direction more than 22.5 degrees abaft her beam, that is, in such a position with reference to the vessel she is overtaking, that at night she would be able to see only the sternlight of that vessel but neither of her sidelights.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by jimmy123x:

I agree with everything you're saying except for one thing. The Destroyer was the give way vessel, that much is true in this situation.

No, that much is not clear as of yet. We do not know whether this was a crossing situation or an overtaking situation. If it were an overtaking situation, the Destroyer would not be the "give way" vessel.

quote:

Originally posted by nhracecraft:
I assume I'm not the only one to notice this (maybe the first to mention it here), but based on following two pics, it would appear that the USN Fitzgerald was overtaking the ACX Crystal at the time of the collision.

Note that the damage to the Container Ship appears to occur from the Stern -> Bow, while the damage to the Fitzgerald, appears to have occurred from Bow -> Stern .

I come to this conclusion because everything damaged on the Fitzgerald seems pushed/ripped back, and if you look at the anchor support/chain bushing (Not sure what that's called - I am not a Mariner!), it appears to have been impacted from behind.