Someone questioned earlier, the ships awards missing from the starboard bridgewing and I replied it was of no consequence or indicative of anything other than routine ... and it isn't.

However, referencing the collision pictures and out of curiosity, I wonder what those two containers(?) mounted outboard of the starboard bridgewing (haze gray with deck gray stripes) might be? Must be something recently added. I've been retired 11 years but don't recall seeing anything like that. Just curious. Haven't seen them in any other pics of the Fitzgerald.

quote:

Originally posted by OKCGene:
The only comment I can make is something I learned years ago in the transportation industry.

It's one thing to be at found at fault and responsible, or found legally innocent and not at fault.

We held our drivers to a higher standard. Even if you weren't actually at fault legally, the accident might very well be a "Preventable" accident and thus you were responsible for not avoiding it.

I'll wait for the official Navy release of facts and conclusion, but I'd say the Destroyer crew is guilty of a Preventable.

Right now, we have no facts about the actions or inactions of the Fitzgerald crew, any maneuvering that may have been ordered, the courses and speeds, nothing.

It may be that there is an explanation that will absolve them of blame and demonstrate that the crew acted perfectly in the situation, even heroically to avoid the collision, but I can't imagine what it might be.

Among other things, I still think about the Captain in his cabin. Night orders should require that he be notified. As the ships get closer, he will get out of the rack and be on the bridge, even if he is in his skivvies and bathrobe, even if he is entertaining Nanette the Yeoman.

I can't imagine how this large container ship gets within 1,000 yards or so without all sorts of commotion on the destroyer.

Quick question. Since yall feel it is almost impossible for the Navy ship not to see the freighter. Then is it possible they saw it and miscalculated the intercept and thought they would pass before or after it, thus no need to change course/speed. But upon realizing they were in fact going to hit Crystal they went hard to port to try and miss it.

If there a speed change to Crystal prior to impact like 10 minutes earlier that everyone missed.

An angle I have not seen mentioned is about the sonar. Depending on the angle of approach, this could have been a zero-bearing rate contact, which should have raised alarms in the sonar shack. Of course, if the ACX Crystal was approaching from too far aft, it would have been a difficult contact to detect. I would think that in addition to the usual bridge complement being potentially at fault, sonar may be culpable as well. Unfortunately, my sonar experience was not on surface ships, so I don't know details about their capabilities.

Do any of you destroyer types know about destroyer sonar capabilities, or if this class of destroyer utilizes a towed array?

quote:

However, referencing the collision pictures and out of curiosity, I wonder what those two containers(?) mounted outboard of the starboard bridgewing (haze gray with deck gray stripes) might be? Must be something recently added.

I "assumed" they were a new style of lifeboat since all the other surfaces on these newer destroyers are angled at odd angles to reduce RCS, but I'm not sure. The more I look, the less I buy it as there are other more standard looking units on the ship

quote:

Originally posted by stoic-one:
I "assumed" they were a new style of lifeboat since all the other surfaces on these newer destroyers are angled at odd angles to reduce RCS, but I'm not sure. The more I look, the less I buy it as there are other more standard looking units on the ship

There's been a mishap, but they don't look mishapped and they are of slightly different shape one from the other, apparently by design. Looks like cable ways beneath each. Not something with high RF, not continuously anyway, or they wouldn't be there. Something passive?

quote:

Originally posted by Hobbs:
Someone questioned earlier, the ships awards missing from the starboard bridgewing and I replied it was of no consequence or indicative of anything other than routine ... [/b]and it isn't.[/b]

However, referencing the collision pictures and out of curiosity, I wonder what those two containers(?) mounted outboard of the starboard bridgewing (haze gray with deck gray stripes) might be? Must be something recently added. I've been retired 11 years but don't recall seeing anything like that. Just curious. Haven't seen them in any other pics of the Fitzgerald.

Maybe it is indicative of something serious and is of significance and is something not routine...like the current crew NOT earning their E awards...and maybe this is the culmination of a poorly-trained and poor-performing crew.

Hey, my speculation is as valid as the next guy's...

Edited my last post to include a cropped picture so I could do a google image search ...

"Best guess for this image: naval architecture"

... makes sense. Nevermind

quote:

Originally posted by Hobbs:
Edited my last post to include a cropped picture so I could go a google image search ...

Best guess for this image: naval architecture

... makes sense. Nevermind

Maybe we're not supposed to know...or say.

the damage to FITZGERALD does not look like she was making speed, but like she was hit while loitering - doing doughnuts, like when you're ahead of PIM (projected intended movement), you loiter to get back on schedule. happens all the time when pulling into port.

i keep coming back to a three star admiral confused about the time of the incident / collision, like they aren't sure about the timing of when the real truth will come out. and three stars are never confused. like the collision occured after the acx turned around and came back.

quote:

Originally posted by f2:

i keep coming back to a three star admiral confused about the time of the incident / collision, like they aren't sure whether the real truth will come out. and three stars are never confused. like the collision occured after the acx turned around and came back.

Correction, he was a 2 star at retirement. May have held a three star billet which I can't find any reference to.


but.........

Although promoted to Rear Admiral Lower Half, Mr. Kirby spent almost his entire career as a Public Affairs Officer. His only actual at sea tour driving boats was when he was a first tour JO, LT/O-3 to ADM/0-8 as a mouthpiece for various commands. AKA, he got promoted and paid to tell the version of events that someone wanted him to tell.

YMMV

quote:

Originally posted by bcereuss:
...like the current crew NOT earning their E awards...

Well, they damn sure earned that red one that was there ... and earned it again as far as I'm concerned.

quote:

Originally posted by Sigolicious:

quote:

Originally posted by f2:
i keep coming back to a three star admiral confused about the time of the incident / collision, like they aren't sure whether the real truth will come out. and three stars are never confused. like the collision occured after the acx turned around and came back.

Correction, he was a 2 star at retirement. May have held a three star billet which I can't find any reference to.


but.........

Although promoted to Rear Admiral Lower Half, Mr. Kirby spent almost his entire career as a Public Affairs Officer. His only actual at sea tour driving boats was when he was a first tour JO, LT/O-3 to ADM/0-8 as a mouthpiece for various commands. AKA, he got promoted and paid to tell the version of events that someone wanted him to tell.

YMMV

a rear admiral lower half is a two star. the SEVENTH Fleet Commander is a 3 star, aka vice admiral. no variable mileage to that.

quote:

Originally posted by f2:

quote:

Originally posted by Sigolicious:

quote:

Originally posted by f2:

i keep coming back to a three star admiral confused about the time of the incident / collision, like they aren't sure whether the real truth will come out. and three stars are never confused. like the collision occured after the acx turned around and came back.

Correction, he was a 2 star at retirement. May have held a three star billet which I can't find any reference to.


but.........

Although promoted to Rear Admiral Lower Half, Mr. Kirby spent almost his entire career as a Public Affairs Officer. His only actual at sea tour driving boats was when he was a first tour JO, LT/O-3 to ADM/0-8 as a mouthpiece for various commands. AKA, he got promoted and paid to tell the version of events that someone wanted him to tell.

YMMV

a rear admiral lower half is a two star. the SEVENTH Fleet Commander is a 3 star, aka vice admiral. no variable mileage to that.

I stand corrected.

I thought we were still referencing Mr. Kirby the retired 2 star that mouthpieces bullshit for CNN.

quote:

Originally posted by Sigolicious:

quote:

Originally posted by f2:

quote:

Originally posted by Sigolicious:

quote:

Originally posted by f2:
i keep coming back to a three star admiral confused about the time of the incident / collision, like they aren't sure whether the real truth will come out. and three stars are never confused. like the collision occured after the acx turned around and came back.

Correction, he was a 2 star at retirement. May have held a three star billet which I can't find any reference to.


but.........

Although promoted to Rear Admiral Lower Half, Mr. Kirby spent almost his entire career as a Public Affairs Officer. His only actual at sea tour driving boats was when he was a first tour JO, LT/O-3 to ADM/0-8 as a mouthpiece for various commands. AKA, he got promoted and paid to tell the version of events that someone wanted him to tell.

YMMV

a rear admiral lower half is a two star. the SEVENTH Fleet Commander is a 3 star, aka vice admiral. no variable mileage to that.

I stand corrected.

I thought we were still referencing Mr. Kirby the retired 2 star that mouthpieces bullshit for CNN.

i don't read, listen, or give any credence to what they say, said, or write.

question for Balze,

you wrote

"A vessel shall be deemed to be overtaking when coming up with a another vessel from a direction more than 22.5 degrees abaft her beam"

is this the correct interpretation of "abaft the beam" ?



The area covered by the blue arc is pretty wide.

Even a 45 deg angle between DDG 62 and Crystal would be in that arc

The angle between the red line and the green line is 22 deg

This message has been edited. Last edited by: sdy,

DDG 62 had a 21 million dollar upgrade in February 2017. Don't know the details

quote:

Originally posted by Timdogg6:
Quick question. Since yall feel it is almost impossible for the Navy ship not to see the freighter. Then is it possible they saw it and miscalculated the intercept and thought they would pass before or after it, thus no need to change course/speed. But upon realizing they were in fact going to hit Crystal they went hard to port to try and miss it.

If there a speed change to Crystal prior to impact like 10 minutes earlier that everyone missed.

It's impossible to miss the container ship IF the DDG is utilizing its systems and crew as it should have.

It is completely possible if the crew is not paying attention to ships systems and not keeping a vigilant lookout. Or if the ship had an engineering / systems casualty (like loss of power, engine, etc). But considering the vessel returned to port, under it's own power after getting hit, and the Captain was in his bunk, that kind of situation seems highly unlikely.

It's possible they saw the container ship at distance, checked their own course and decided (at that time) they were not in any danger. But in the minutes after making that decision, something changed (course / speed of the container and or the DDG) which led to the range decreasing, eventually to a CBDR (constant bearing, decreasing range) situation which led to the collision (obviously).

But there are a multitude of things that should have occurred in the interim. Monitoring of a vessel that close, not "oh we aren't gonna hit, lets forget about it".

quote:

Originally posted by Hobbs:

quote:

Originally posted by stoic-one:
I "assumed" they were a new style of lifeboat since all the other surfaces on these newer destroyers are angled at odd angles to reduce RCS, but I'm not sure. The more I look, the less I buy it as there are other more standard looking units on the ship

There's been a mishap, but they don't look mishapped and they are of slightly different shape one from the other, apparently by design. Looks like cable ways beneath each. Not something with high RF, not continuously anyway, or they wouldn't be there. Something passive?

That's where the gimp and gimpette (she's new as of Obama admin) are kept. They're only let out for Wog Day.

Having sailed on the bridges of both of these types of vessels (A CG rather than a DDG but same difference) and as a USMM Master Unlimited subsequent to that, I have some pretty well developed ideas on what happened and how it happened. I will try to post back here soon.
Pretty good analysis here so far, Less technical but just about as far along (and almost entirely in agreement with) the discussion over on gCaptain. (The SigForum of "professional" mariners, just not nearly as good.)