US Navy destroyer collision

[Randy]

Originally Posted by Pelagic

That angle seems to support more of an almost T-bone collision where the tear in the CS bow bow lines up with the crushed structural weather deck of the Fitzgerald.
The bow flare crushed in the CO's quarters where he was sleeping and the ratings below the waterline got hit and flooded by the bulbous bow.

Such a tragedy to die that way.

We really need to know the speed, direction and aspect of the Fitzgerald to understand how this could have happened to such a sophisticated and defensively manned warship

The loss of life is tragic.

I don't really agree that details of angle of collision and speed are required to understand how this could have happened. It's easy to surmise a number of scenarios which point the bulk of the blame for either the cargo ship or warship.
Regarding the warship with all its sophistication, those tools just weren't being used nor even the stbd lookout who was trained in observing the meaning of relative motion, ships navigation lights and certainly CBDR. How it all failed will be discovered. I have my feelings that Navy policy does not properly prioritize the importance of basic seamanship.
It gets lost in the burden for Jr officers​ to become thoroughly competent on extremely complex weapon systems, damage control, combat environment defensive measures including chemical, biological and nuclear warfare.

[hpeer]

Washington Post article says there is extensive underwater damage from the bulbulous bow.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...=.b536d0fe1b1d

[Snowpetrel]

One thing that is interesting is the lack of information about the exact time, courses etc of each vessel. The US Navy and the container ship both have all the relevant information. The fact that the US navy haven't publicised any of it make me wonder what they have to hide.

It would seem to me a likely reason for this is that the warship is heavily at fault, otherwise they would be much more likely to "leak" detailed information showing the containership at fault.

I wonder if the Philipino seamen will get a fair go of it, or will the final report be classified and the civilian Philipino crew be made a scapegoat?

It is going to be pretty politically charged since lives have been lost. Who is going to investigate this, and will they be impartial? Particularly given the united states current president and his apparent paranoia and insecurity.

[taxwizz]

Originally Posted by Saleen411

Like this? :big grin:

This is the transcript of a radio conversation of a US naval ship with Canadian authorities off the coast of Newfoundland in October, 1995. Radio conversation released by the Chief of Naval Operations 10-10-95.

Americans: Please divert your course 15 degrees to the North to avoid a Collision.
Canadians: Recommend you divert YOUR course 15 degrees to the South to avoid a collision.
Americans: This is the Captain of a US Navy ship. I say again, divert YOUR course.
Canadians: No. I say again, you divert YOUR course.
Americans: This is the aircraft carrier USS Lincoln, the second largest ship in the United States' Atlantic fleet. We are accompanied by three destroyers, three cruisers and numerous support vessels. I demand that YOU change your course 15 degrees north, that's one five degrees north, or countermeasures will be undertaken to ensure the safety of this ship.
Canadians: This is a lighthouse. Your call.

An old joke, but a good one.
And very fitting in this case.

[taxwizz]

I wonder why they would have been in Stealth mode in peacetime, but apparently they likely were.
If they are sailing around at night, and are invisible, the onus is on the destroyer to be UBER alert.

[Delancey]

This incident comes to mind. Sorry for the LRAD noise, might want to turn the volume down. As you can see from it's prop wash/wake, the Ady Gil (cargo ship) is making way as it is being overtaken by the whaler (naval vessel).

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xLdUISE3e8c

If you examine this attached photo closely you will see that the damage to the starboard side of the naval vessel shows wreckage torn BACKWARDS, towards the stern of the boat which suggests the naval vessel was OVERTAKING the cargo vessel when the collision occurred with it's port side.

If the cargo vessel had been overtaking the naval vessel the damage to the naval vessel would have been much more severe and the wreckage would have been pushed forward and/or the damage would have included a V-shaped dent where the bow of the cargo ship would have pushed into the hull of the naval vessel.

[CSY Man]

Originally Posted by taxwizz

I wonder why they would have been in Stealth mode in peacetime, but apparently they likely were.
If they are sailing around at night, and are invisible, the onus is on the destroyer to be UBER alert.

Stealth Mode at night in busy shipping lanes?
Please say it ain't so..?

[Sandero]

incompetence... court marshal the captain.... this should not have happened... no reason for these vessels to be on a collision course EVER...

I thought recreational sailors were lax about rules of the road and being sensible... this takes the cake.

Both skippers are guilty as I see it.

[hpeer]

Ah, just ships passing in the night!

What gives me the willies are tugs with long tows.

[Delancey]

Another view of the Uss Fitzgerald which alllows you to see what the undamaged port side looks like.

Also a view of the ACX Crystal showing wreckage and scrapes torn FORWARD which again suggests the Fitzgerald was overtaking the Crystal at the time of the collision.

[estarzinger]

Navy captain in his cabin, probably (but not confirmed) in his bunk. His first command. Only 3 weeks on the job. Makes it less probable (not impossible but less likely) they were runnng some sort of computer off simulated drill (or similar).

Vessel, and bridge, reported as fully manned; with no significant equipment failures noted.

Give the crew and XO praise for executing emergency procedure well. Sounds like they could have lost the vessel otherwise.

I think it is pretty clear that navy vessel was give way, but that is almost irrelevant, because a navy destroyer should never let itself get hit. That is not about colregs and seamanship, but about basic defensive posture. After the Cole you simply do not allow unknown vessels to get close, ever, period.

Regarding the damage . . . My sense now is that most of the initial impact was below the water line, and the superstructure damage we see is confused because some happened as the vessels separated (with both vessels moving, and rotating) rather than on the impact.

I'm still puzzled how it happened. But I am guessing we will never get the full straight story.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by Delancey

...which suggests the naval vessel was OVERTAKING the cargo vessel when the collision occurred with it's port side...

This only suggests the relative movement between the vessels at impact - it does not give insight into what last ditch manoeuvring either vessel might have taken, nor into the interaction which brought them into close quarters. I see little evidence that either was overtaking the other - it seems more likely a CROSSING situation.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by estarzinger

Navy captain in his cabin, probably (but not confirmed) in his bunk. His first command. Only 3 weeks on the job. Makes it less probable (not impossible but less likely) they were runnng some sort of computer off simulated drill (or similar).

You've never been in the navy. Not certain that the USN does it this way, but many of their allies typically carry out "work-ups" after a significant change in the command/fighting team. Engineering drills(particularly those that cause a blackout) are also typically done in the night-time hours, to minimize the disruption to the ship's "administrative" activities.

[Delancey]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

This only suggests the relative movement between the vessels at impact - it does not give insight into what last ditch manoeuvring either vessel might have taken, nor into the interaction which brought them into close quarters. I see little evidence that either was overtaking the other - it seems more likely a CROSSING situation.

While I agree the damage does nothing to provide insight into last minute manoevering, it does suggest the Fitzgerald was traveling at a greater speed and was therefore overtaking the other.

As far as crossing, hard to say other than that the intercept angle was fairly acute at the moment of collision rather than closer to perpendicular.

Many possible scenarios. Presumably both vessels turned away from each other prior to impact. Maybe they weren't crossing and instead traveling on parallel courses when the Crystal radically altered course to port.....

[DeborahLee]

All the technology and the most important piece of equipment is missing. The look outs.