Cruisers Forum
 


Join CruisersForum Today

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 25-08-2017, 09:00   #106
cat herder, extreme blacksheep
 
zeehag's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: furycame alley , tropics, mexico for now
Boat: 1976 FORMOSA yankee clipper 41
Posts: 17,706
Images: 56
Send a message via Yahoo to zeehag Send a message via Skype™ to zeehag
Re: I Don't Mean to Sound Uncharitable, But...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lake-Effect View Post
I may have missed the sarcasm tag, or other clues that you are actually kidding.

Or are you seriously saying that smaller, faster, better equipped USN vessels cannot keep out of the way of bigger, slower, less manoeverable cargo ships, even in the unproven instance that such ships were deliberately aimed at the navy vessels?

I can't think of a peacetime circumstance where I'd want my navy vessels at sea within one nm of any other ship period, let alone on a collision course, except as part of a planned interdiction, rescue, etc.

what i am saying is the conventional and usual methods of attack have changed.
it is time usa woke up and learned this. usa aint the be all and end all in electronix. as it stands now, russia has a system of interrupting and messing with gps causing 20 ships to be recorded erroneously in different places than actuality. they used this in black sea. .
fun, eh??? so who's to say that perhaps china hasnt perfected a way to make a cargo ship a tool of destruction. even without the conscious cooperation of the cargo ship captain. can be done remotely without affecting the navy ships nav systems.
the islands china recently created have uses we donot know as yet.
4 times, now, fast maneuverable navy destroyers have been hit midships in communications and sleeping areas doesnot raise a red flag with anyone else?? are all of you totally sleeping?? usa is unloved and a target. yes usa has enemies. usa has boots on ground in 138 nations what makes you all think todo bien?? hahahahaha destroyers are maneuverable and fast but hitting another ship with your vulnerable midships is not part of maneuvers that have actually worked. how does one move a navy destroyer sideways to accomplish this feat. answer--ye donot.
this is not a matter of colregs or who is stand on vessel as the issue is nonspecific and undefined. is act of aggression against usa. so fire more admirals. that should fix the issue. blame navy for the issue and avoid thought of it. it wont go away.
practice has made the tool more accurate. yet the arrogance of usa navy is such they cannot see the assault on the destroyers as such.
4 times is no coincidence. nor is 3 or 2. 1 yes. 2 practice. 3 pattern. 4 tool is perfected .
coles was nothing. that was a dinghy assault.
this is rendering the impossible as a perfected tool.
why not--is totally unexpected.
__________________

zeehag is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-08-2017, 09:27   #107
Senior Cruiser
 
newhaul's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: puget sound washington
Boat: 1968 Islander bahama 24 hull 182, 1963 columbia 29 defender. hull # 60
Posts: 3,711
Re: I Don't Mean to Sound Uncharitable, But...

Zee even if what you say is a possibility there is still an issue on the navy ships. 1)lack of proper use of the mark I eyeball . 2) failure to maintain an adiquate security cordon . Guaranteed you will not see any vessel get closer than a mile from a carrier without being blocked/ challenged with the possibility/ probability of use of lethal force.
__________________

__________________
Non illigitamus carborundum
newhaul is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 25-08-2017, 11:16   #108
cat herder, extreme blacksheep
 
zeehag's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: furycame alley , tropics, mexico for now
Boat: 1976 FORMOSA yankee clipper 41
Posts: 17,706
Images: 56
Send a message via Yahoo to zeehag Send a message via Skype™ to zeehag
Re: I Don't Mean to Sound Uncharitable, But...

Quote:
Originally Posted by newhaul View Post
Zee even if what you say is a possibility there is still an issue on the navy ships. 1)lack of proper use of the mark I eyeball . 2) failure to maintain an adiquate security cordon . Guaranteed you will not see any vessel get closer than a mile from a carrier without being blocked/ challenged with the possibility/ probability of use of lethal force.
seems they only practice this in the safe harbor of san diego when privately owned dinghies pass by the carrier basin.......
zeehag is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-08-2017, 13:17   #109
Registered User
 
Cadence's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: SC
Boat: None,build the one shown of glass, had many from 6' to 48'.
Posts: 6,007
Re: I Don't Mean to Sound Uncharitable, But...

All of the second guessing is just that. Lets all sit back in our arm chairs. I doubt we will ever hear the whole story, but hopefully something will be learned to prevent a reoccurrence,
__________________
Cadence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-08-2017, 13:52   #110
Registered User

Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: New Zealand
Boat: Moana 33
Posts: 667
Re: I Don't Mean to Sound Uncharitable, But...

Quote:
Originally Posted by zeehag View Post
i love how a cargo ship can hard right into a navy ship and it is navy fault. ...
But charts show tanker did "hard left"???

Scenario seems clear enough: McCain overtakes tanker (ALNIC) close to port and another merchant ship (GUANG ZHOU) close to stbd. GUANG ZOU doesn't like close proximity of this overtaking naval vessel so alters course to stbd. ALNIC holds her course as another ship (HYUNDAI GLOBAL) is to port and already in the separation lane. TEAM OSLO is dead ahead so McCain angles to port to clear her stern and clips ALNIC, spinning ALNIC to port as the tanker's bulbous bow locks in to the huge cavity created in McCain's hull aft of midships.

I don't see any need for cyber warfare in this simple scenario. Even if my reading is wrong there were just too many ships in too close proximity on this motorway to attempt an overtaking manoeuvre. Sorry don't know how to attach those charts.

(If the tanker was used as a weapon, then how many of those thousands and thousands of merchant ships had to be similarly weaponised, ready, and waiting for a dumb US warship to cross her bow?)
__________________
NevisDog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-08-2017, 15:58   #111
Senior Cruiser
 
StuM's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Port Moresby,Papua New Guinea
Boat: FP Belize Maestro 43
Posts: 6,624
Re: I Don't Mean to Sound Uncharitable, But...

Quote:
Originally Posted by zeehag View Post
i love how a cargo ship can hard right into a navy ship and it is navy fault. awesome rationalizing.
4 times is a definite pattern.
There have been a lot of speculation and incorrect statements in just about every one of your posts to date on this subject.

Hard right in maybe two occasions, not four.

Hard right is in accordance with COLREGs. If the navy ship is overtaking on port and then cuts across your bow, it's your only viable course of action.

Do you have ANY evidence that the sudden turns were towards the naval vessels BEFORE the collisions? Or any evidence of what the naval vessels where doing prior to the collisions? If so please quote your sources.

Classic conspiracy theorist selective choice of "facts".
__________________
StuM is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 25-08-2017, 16:00   #112
Senior Cruiser
 
StuM's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Port Moresby,Papua New Guinea
Boat: FP Belize Maestro 43
Posts: 6,624
Re: I Don't Mean to Sound Uncharitable, But...

Quote:
Originally Posted by zeehag View Post
4 times, now, fast maneuverable navy destroyers have been hit midships in communications and sleeping areas doesnot raise a red flag with anyone else??
I think you've hit the record for the number of false "facts: in a single sentence
__________________
StuM is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 25-08-2017, 20:16   #113
Registered User
 
AKA-None's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Lake City MN
Boat: C&C 27 Mk III
Posts: 151
Re: I Don't Mean to Sound Uncharitable, But...

Having worked on the development of mil spec shipboard systems I can speculate that most people posting here are a bit confused as to what generation electronics actually are delivered in a "new" ship.
__________________
Special knowledge can be a terrible disadvantage if it leads you too far along a path that you cannot explain anymore.
Frank Herbert 'Dune'
AKA-None is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-08-2017, 20:47   #114
Registered User

Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: New Zealand
Boat: Moana 33
Posts: 667
Re: I Don't Mean to Sound Uncharitable, But...

Quote:
Originally Posted by AKA-None View Post
Having worked on the development of mil spec shipboard systems ...
Okay, so ... do tell us what we need to know - I'm all ears.
__________________
NevisDog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-08-2017, 21:44   #115
Registered User

Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 928
Re: I Don't Mean to Sound Uncharitable, But...

Quote:
Originally Posted by NevisDog View Post
Okay, so ... do tell us what we need to know - I'm all ears.
AKA-None if you could add some comments and maybe anything you are comfortable to share around how the shipboard situational picture is different from the AIS picture on a recreational boat that might help close some of the jaws hanging on the floor here on the forum.

Folks are genuinely struggling to understand how someone watching a Class A AIS picture could get into this jam.
__________________
SecondBase is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-08-2017, 18:00   #116
Registered User
 
AKA-None's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Lake City MN
Boat: C&C 27 Mk III
Posts: 151
Re: I Don't Mean to Sound Uncharitable, But...

By the time a ship is commissioned the systems are, shall we say, not current. It takes an amazing amount of time to develop mil spec systems and commercial electronics are multiple generations ahead. Amazing how often discrete semiconductors are used in mil spec systems. Does that help???
__________________
Special knowledge can be a terrible disadvantage if it leads you too far along a path that you cannot explain anymore.
Frank Herbert 'Dune'
AKA-None is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-08-2017, 19:09   #117
Registered User

Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 44
Re: I Don't Mean to Sound Uncharitable, But...

Quote:
Originally Posted by AKA-None View Post
By the time a ship is commissioned the systems are, shall we say, not current. It takes an amazing amount of time to develop mil spec systems and commercial electronics are multiple generations ahead. Amazing how often discrete semiconductors are used in mil spec systems. Does that help???
And from what I've seen once implemented, they stay around for decades before being upgraded.
__________________
FlyingScot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-08-2017, 20:08   #118
Registered User

Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: New Zealand
Boat: Moana 33
Posts: 667
Re: I Don't Mean to Sound Uncharitable, But...

Quote:
Originally Posted by SecondBase View Post
AKA-None if you could add some comments ... around how the shipboard situational picture is different from the AIS picture on a recreational boat ...
Sorry but the above comments don't help the technologically challenged like me. Does outdated electronics make it easier or harder for someone to 'hack', for example? Does this mean there are no modern 'Chinese' parts involved? Is it much more difficult to navigate in close quarters situations than with AIS, or still much superior even though outdated? All in words of one syllable please.
__________________
NevisDog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2017, 11:20   #119
Registered User

Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Southport, NC
Boat: Pearson 367 cutter, 36'
Posts: 175
Re: I Don't Mean to Sound Uncharitable, But...

Returning to the thread after some time, it appears that the Navy now has the same disease that the Army has - the belief that sleep is unnecessary. It appears that sailors are being asked to function on three to four hours of sleep a day, and I know from experience how that goes - I averaged less than three hours for weeks at Ranger School, and after a while you literally fall asleep on your feet, which is what some Naval officers are saying (anonymously) happens sometimes on the bridge . My bet is that several people on the bridge that night (Fitzgerald and McCain) were effectively dozing because they were exhausted. Also it appears that recently the Navy has scrimped on training in favor of getting officers out to sea with the idea that they'll get OJT. Will be interested to see the results of the Navy review.
__________________
AJ_n_Audrey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2017, 13:44   #120
Registered User
 
buzzstar's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: ashore in So Calif.
Boat: No more boat (my medical, not the boat's)
Posts: 1,258
Re: I Don't Mean to Sound Uncharitable, But...

Quote:
Originally Posted by AJ_n_Audrey View Post
Returning to the thread after some time, it appears that the Navy now has the same disease that the Army has - the belief that sleep is unnecessary. It appears that sailors are being asked to function on three to four hours of sleep a day, and I know from experience how that goes - I averaged less than three hours for weeks at Ranger School, and after a while you literally fall asleep on your feet, which is what some Naval officers are saying (anonymously) happens sometimes on the bridge . My bet is that several people on the bridge that night (Fitzgerald and McCain) were effectively dozing because they were exhausted. Also it appears that recently the Navy has scrimped on training in favor of getting officers out to sea with the idea that they'll get OJT. Will be interested to see the results of the Navy review.
All without the "benefit" of amphetamines as used by the Army Air Force and I believe the separate Air force back in a time. It can be done, but not without eventual high cost -just like multi-day sail races without enough crew.
__________________

__________________
"Old California"
buzzstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Liveaboard don't ask don't tell purepleaaure Liveaboard's Forum 56 12-01-2017 06:40
A couple of basic questions - we don't know what we don't know. JohnEasley Powered Boats 15 20-05-2016 05:21
But I Don't WANT to Go Up There ! BareFtGrl Construction, Maintenance & Refit 51 04-09-2011 20:21
This May Sound Crazy, but . . . kavasake Meets & Greets 5 18-07-2011 16:39
Don't Know Where to Start - But Would Love to Cruise Subguy Training, Licensing & Certification 22 13-03-2009 19:19



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:52.


Google+
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Social Knowledge Networks
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

ShowCase vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.