Seven US Navy crew missing after collision off Japan

RJM62

RJM62

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Jun 15, 2007
Messages
13,157
Location
Upstate New York
Display Name
Display name:
Geek on the Hill
How on earth does this happen?

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-40310563

I mean, seriously, were all the lookouts on both vessels asleep?

The only explanation I can think of is that the destroyer was attempting to intercept the freighter, and whoever had the conn on the destroyer seriously misjudged the situation. Other than that, it's hard for me to wrap my brain around how this can happen, especially in good weather.

Where's Henning when you need him?

My prayers go out for the wounded and missing.

Rich
 
RJM62 said:
The only explanation I can think of is that the destroyer was attempting to intercept the freighter, and whoever had the conn on the destroyer seriously misjudged the situation.
Click to expand...
Not enough info to really know what happened, but I can say with 100% certainty that what you suggested is not what happened.

IF that was what was going on, the CO would have been on the bridge and not in his cabin.

This is extremely bad in sooooo many ways. Unfortunately those 7 sailors are most likely 'unaccounted for' and not actually missing. Prayers that they are merely trapped somewhere with air to breathe.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Not enough info to really know what happened, but I can say with 100% certainty that what you suggested is not what happened.

IF that was what was going on, the CO would have been on the bridge and not in his cabin.

This is extremely bad in sooooo many ways. Unfortunately those 7 sailors are most likely 'unaccounted for' and not actually missing. Prayers that they are merely trapped somewhere with air to breathe.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that part seemed odd to me too, unless some dopey ensign was OOD and decided to play cowboy without the Captain's knowledge. That would be pretty unlikely.

Also, I doubt too many QMOWs would refrain from getting on the 21MC to get the old man on the bridge if the OOD were putting the ship in danger. All the ones I ever knew were pretty crusty and not easily intimidated by junior officers.

Rich
 
Miscommunication with the commercial vessel ? They agree they would zig and then one of them zagged ? I can't believe that in the age of radar and GPS plotters twho ships would bump into each other.
 
weilke said:
Miscommunication with the commercial vessel ? They agree they would zig and then one of them zagged ? I can't believe that in the age of radar and GPS plotters twho ships would bump into each other.
Click to expand...

The freighter did make a U-turn for some reason, according to the updated article.

_96528145_dddcded5-b01d-49b7-8b2d-29d4ee161034.jpg


It's still strange, though. Unless something's changed in the past 30-odd years, there are plenty of open eyeballs on deck looking out for other vessels, not to mention in the radar room, especially at night.

Rich
 
I don't have first hand knowledge but second hand story is that the locals operate on the theory that the biggest ship has the right of way in Tokyo bay. Dunno if it's true or not.

Or maybe it is United's fault. They can't seem to do much right.
 
RJM62 said:
The freighter did make a U-turn for some reason, according to the updated article.

_96528145_dddcded5-b01d-49b7-8b2d-29d4ee161034.jpg


It's still strange, though. Unless something's changed in the past 30-odd years, there are plenty of open eyeballs on deck looking out for other vessels, not to mention in the radar room, especially at night.

Rich
Click to expand...
They flipped a uee because they missed the first time. A NYC guy aught to know that.
 
RJM62 said:
The freighter did make a U-turn for some reason, according to the updated article.

_96528145_dddcded5-b01d-49b7-8b2d-29d4ee161034.jpg


It's still strange, though. Unless something's changed in the past 30-odd years, there are plenty of open eyeballs on deck looking out for other vessels, not to mention in the radar room, especially at night.

Rich
Click to expand...

I would think that the U-turn was after the collision and that we are victim to some quirk in time reporting on that website.
 
RJM62 said:
Yeah, that part seemed odd to me too, unless some dopey ensign was OOD and decided to play cowboy without the Captain's knowledge. That would be pretty unlikely.

Also, I doubt too many QMOWs would refrain from getting on the 21MC to get the old man on the bridge if the OOD were putting the ship in danger. All the ones I ever knew were pretty crusty and not easily intimidated by junior officers.

Rich
Click to expand...

It's happened before. You can have all the eyes in the world watching, but if the guy that's giving the commands at the time doesn't know what to do (freezes) then bad things happen. It doesn't matter where the captain was at the time, he's going down for this.
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
They need ADS-C (C="sea").
Click to expand...
They've got it already. Went out on a friends largish boat/smallish yacht last year, and all of the big boats had some sort of transponder that sent out the name, position, speed, and heading. His display also gave potential collision alerts. Saw a couple of strange USN ships, the device gave the names so I could look them up on wikipedia afterwards (range support vessels).

The only thing I can think of, offhand, is some sort of exercise that was using the container ship as a target.

Ron Wanttaja
 
Clark1961 said:
Well, a decade anyway. Mandated by 2002 SOLAS.
Click to expand...

As i understand it most commercial vessels had AIS transceivers since the 90s. It's just that IMO made them mandatory in 2002.
 
weilke said:
As i understand it most commercial vessels had AIS transceivers since the 90s. It's just that IMO made them mandatory in 2002.
Click to expand...
It certainly wasn't the early 90s when I was working offshore.
 
It is interesting that the destroyer sustained heavy damage, while the freighter just got scraped and a bit of metal bent. They don't build them like they used to. Then again they aren't intended to take hits I guess.
 
Sac Arrow said:
It is interesting that the destroyer sustained heavy damage, while the freighter just got scraped and a bit of metal bent. They don't build them like they used to. Then again they aren't intended to take hits I guess.
Click to expand...
Aluminum superstructure against steel hull I think. The only reason any of them are still floating after taking a hit is because we are willing to spend more on the repair than it cost to build them in the first place. Oh, that and some amazing damage control immediately after the hit.

No I have no hard data, just heard stories.
 
RJM62 said:
Unless something's changed in the past 30-odd years, there are plenty of open eyeballs on deck looking out for other vessels, not to mention in the radar room, especially at night.

Rich
Click to expand...
Nah, nothing's changed in the past 30-odd years.
Except for GPS, satellite communications and women board, nothing else changed except the weaponry and technology.

And millennials at the helm. (I had to get that in there).
 
Sac Arrow said:
It is interesting that the destroyer sustained heavy damage, while the freighter just got scraped and a bit of metal bent. They don't build them like they used to. Then again they aren't intended to take hits I guess.
Click to expand...

Size might have something to do with it.

From Navy Times:

The ACX Crystal that collided with Fitzgerald has a dead weight listed at nearly 40,000 tons, roughly the size of the amphibious assault ship Iwo Jima and more than four-times larger than the 8,900-ton Fitzgerald.
 
Want to see the full story,can't understand how this could happen,unless it was international.
 
NoHeat said:
Size might have something to do with it.

From Navy Times:

The ACX Crystal that collided with Fitzgerald has a dead weight listed at nearly 40,000 tons, roughly the size of the amphibious assault ship Iwo Jima and more than four-times larger than the 8,900-ton Fitzgerald.
Click to expand...
I've read a few reports of small vessels hitting larger vessels offshore. The larger vessel will sustain damage if its structure is weaker than the smaller vessel. Workboats didn't seem bashful about hitting drill ships...
 
NoHeat said:
Size might have something to do with it.

From Navy Times:

The ACX Crystal that collided with Fitzgerald has a dead weight listed at nearly 40,000 tons, roughly the size of the amphibious assault ship Iwo Jima and more than four-times larger than the 8,900-ton Fitzgerald.
Click to expand...

Dad's ship was the original Iwo Jima, LPH-2. It's listed as 11,000 tons light and 18,000 tons heavy. That thing was built like a brick s***house (I've been on it.) I'm quite certain if a commercial cargo ship hit it broadside, it would have won.
 
Sac Arrow said:
It is interesting that the destroyer sustained heavy damage, while the freighter just got scraped and a bit of metal bent. They don't build them like they used to. Then again they aren't intended to take hits I guess.
Click to expand...
Looks like the container ship impact was very close to head on. The destroyer took the impact in a much different location.

I wonder how many of the missing are still in an unaccessible area of the ship?
 
Two dimensional navigation using GPS, radar and a chart-plotter must be harder than it seems at first glance:

we_ll_just_go_right_between_those_two_radar_markers.jpg
 
Last edited:
Matthew said:
Looks like the container ship impact was very close to head on. The destroyer took the impact in a much different location.
Click to expand...

The same mechanism sank the 'SS Andrea Doria' off Nantucket in 1956. The 'Stockholm' that T-boned her looked pretty mangled but made it back to port.
 
Here's a picture of the bow of the ACX Crystal. I wonder how much damage there is below the waterline on both vessels.

img_1.jpg
 
wanttaja said:
They've got it already. Went out on a friends largish boat/smallish yacht last year, and all of the big boats had some sort of transponder that sent out the name, position, speed, and heading. His display also gave potential collision alerts. Saw a couple of strange USN ships, the device gave the names so I could look them up on wikipedia afterwards (range support vessels).

The only thing I can think of, offhand, is some sort of exercise that was using the container ship as a target.

Ron Wanttaja
Click to expand...

It's called Automatic Identification System (AIS). Essentially a maritime transponder that works like ADS-B. Required for any vessel over 300 tons, but warships are exempt from transmitting. The container ship would not have seen the destroyer on AIS, but should have had them on radar if the officer on watch was paying attention.

The FITZGERALD should have seen the merchant on both AIS, surface Nav radar and the surface search and SPY radars.

Another problematic aspect in this accident is that the navigation lights on a DDG are non-standard/not in compliance with the spacing requirements. So the merchant may have seen them but confused them with another vessel or thought they were heading in a different direction.

Still doesn't explain how the DDG allowed themselves to get hit....
 
weilke said:
They already have that for decades.
Click to expand...
I have no clue what you are talking about, but I've been a professional mariner for over 20 years. There were no transponders on ships 20 years ago. The ADS-B like system has only really been around for about 10 years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top