quote:

Originally posted by Ronin1069:
Nothing would make me happier than having somebody respond telling me “here’s why you’re wrong…: But I don’t think that I am.

The nature of warfare (and Naval Warfare) has changed.

WW2 ships were built around big Navy vs Navy battles. Battleship v Battleship, as was the conventional tactics of the day. Of course WW2 saw the advent and supremacy of the Aircraft Carrier, which could destroy ships well before they could get into gunnery range.

Now add in long distance anti-ship missiles launched by submarines, ships, aircraft from even longer distances. China touts ICBM anti-ship missiles. The amount of destructive power is such that no ship can survive, regardless if it was made in WW2 or yesterday - the tactic is to avoid these to survive so countermeasures, agility, and information is how you do that. Touchscreens, computer systems, data networking is all part of that.

What's missing is simply the trade of "seamanship", or being able to drive ships. The Navy has done away with initial Surface Warfare officer training and done a horrible job of standardizing systems on similar ships. Add less underway time, zero tolerance for any mistakes, and COs aren't training their junior officers well .

Rhino

Thanks very much for that explanation and answer.

quote:

Originally posted by Ronin1069:
Touchscreens, they scare the shit out of me. I think of all of the WW2 movies ......

Things happen very quickly today. Depending on the missile a ships combat systems may have only seconds to respond to it. This requires instantaneous visual information and input in order to make snap decisions and timely engagements.

As far as driving the ship there is some redundancy. Most ships, civilian and military have an aft steering station where course corrections are relayed by sound powered or internal phone.

quote:

Originally posted by Ronin1069:
Rhino
Thanks very much for that explanation and answer.

Happy to help.

One good takeaway from these two accidents are that Navy Damage Control training is legit. Both of these ships could have easily sank after colliding - very similar to the mine incidents in the Gulf over the years with Iran & Iraq, and the bombing of the Cole in Yemen. All of the ships received severe damage but in all cases the crews were able to keep them from sinking.

quote:

What's missing is simply the trade of "seamanship", or being able to drive ships.

Ding! We have a winner!

quote:

Originally posted by parallel:

quote:

What's missing is simply the trade of "seamanship", or being able to drive ships.

Ding! We have a winner!

And this is the major problem. 3 Navy destroyers completely taken out of service, by hitting portly civilan ships or running aground.

I agree that the Navy did do an excellent job at damage control once the hull was breached.

As for the electronic screens. Technology is what it is and has advanced very deep into everything. I run a lot of different yachts and do a lot of miles at sea every year. The electronics are very good at detecting something wrong with say the engine, sometimes limiting power, before it becomes a major catastrophe. Also keeping the engine within safe parameters while burning cleaner and making more power than their predescessors. However, I've also seen something like a bad #14 wire, disable an entire yactht…..or a breaker or fuse......So there is good and bad.....

quote:

Originally posted by RHINOWSO:


One good takeaway from these two accidents are that Navy Damage Control training is legit.

Navy damage control is second to none. Those boys definitely know how to handle an emergency at sea.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
Navy damage control is second to none. Those boys definitely know how to handle an emergency at sea.

Seems like everyday there are drills, if not multiple drills. As an aviator we slept through them all, or tried to.

I left the canoe club without ever seeing a bridge with a touch screen. I *did* see the people who would have to use such a device. I'd recommend keeping the system damned simple.

The surface fleet didn't get the pick of the litter for people, and deck department was sucking hind teat on what was available. Not every Boatswain's Mate in the navy was dumb, but line them up against the Electronics Technicians or Fire Controlmen and you'd see the aggregate difference. The people rotating into the helm/lee helm watchstations were usually non-rated seamen with little technical expertise and frequently lesser mental aptitude.

I'd recommend a simple wheel and aircraft-style throttles like Perrys or Spruances. KISS.

That addresses the physical end of the system.

The biggest problem was the leadership and training end, particularly the officers on watch. If they hadn't pissed away all their time and sea-room it wouldn't have mattered as much, but in at least one case the helmsman quite simply didn't know what to physically do to turn the damned ship.

Get that bastards name off of that vessel.