US Navy Destroyer Collision Again!!!

[SecondBase]

Originally Posted by estarzinger

That will of course not solve the fundamental DDG 'problem' (which entails poor process flow, s**t hardware layout, and bridge/CiC crew shortcomings), but might help enable a more honest and deep look at the situation.

Very well said. That fundamental DDG hairball is definitely part of this.

I push for NTSB would provide add an outside perspective to the Navy investigation and it'll be a real LEADER who invites the NTSB onto the team.

[estarzinger]

AiS video

[David M]

Add some Unlimited Masters with many years of sea time from the US maritime industry as well. Many of these wet behind the ears a few years out of the Naval Academy naval officers and whoever the NTSB uses do not have that amount of practical experience. Get some true professionals involved in the investigation.

[SecondBase]

Originally Posted by David M

Add some Unlimited Masters with many years of sea time from the US maritime industry as well. Many of these wet behind the ears a few years out of the Naval Academy naval officers and whoever the NTSB uses do not have that amount of practical experience. Get some true professionals involved in the investigation.

Excellent suggestion to add some Unlimited Masters. That is perhaps an even stronger point than NTSB.

My thesis is that aviation safety practice & accident investigation has advanced significantly over decades and so NTSB would also be useful - for example I'm not aware of maritime academies teaching CRM but I could be wrong.

[JPA Cate]

Hoping those 10 men have been rescued.....

Last night, it occurred to me why the USN ships may run dark all the time, just when we might think they should be using their AIS, etc. (and not saying they weren't, on receive), but, in their shoes, would you want everyone who has the weaponry to do so to be able to target them efficiently when they are in the vicinity of a base? Which harbors also have a lot of commercial traffic? No, although it is a nuisance for us little guys, I do think it is understandable.

I sure hope some good comes out of this. It seems there is some sort of endemic problem (as others have said), and one hopes the Navy will sort it.

Ann

PS. I sure wish my tax dollars had been and would be spent better.

[El Pinguino]

Originally Posted by estarzinger

Intersting... at 51 seconds you can see that Ghuan Zhou Wan has altered to starboard for 'something'...

I don't know what the normal sea speed is for those american warships is but I am thinking it's substantially more than 10 or 12 knots so what on earth was she doing on the 'slow side' of the west bound lane?

The more I look at this the less sense it makes......

[Alan Mighty]

Originally Posted by Alan Mighty

Now Malaysia is insisting that it (and not Singapore) is leading the search & rescue operations.

Dems is Malaysian waters. Tain't nobody else's, especially not dat place wot divorced itself from what was a 4-party thing called Malaysia (originally made up of Malaya, Singapore, North Borneo, and Sarawak).

See: Malaysia insists leading SAR for missing US sailors - Nation | The Star Online

For Singapore's counter claim of an accident in "Singaporean waters" and Singapore's detailing of its SAR efforts, see:

US destroyer collision: Singapore launches search-and-rescue efforts minutes after receiving alert, Singapore News & Top Stories - The Straits Times

Note that neither of these media companies are independent corporations. So what you read has been heavily influenced by a government.

The Star is majority owned and controlled by the Malaysian Chinese Association, one of the political parties in the coalition that has always ruled in Malaysia.

The ownership of the Straits Times is usually only described with weasel words about "close ties to the Singapore government" and the newspaper itself has been described as the "mouthpiece of the ruling party." Weasel words are used because the Singapore govt and its ruling party have been very prone to use the courts to punish anyone who does not toe their line - ask The Economist for their experience.

For that matter, the economy of each of the two polities is dominated by government-linked and/or political party-linked corporations.

Just as Malaysia has had no change of the political coalition in power, so Singapore has had no change of the political party in power. Both fail the simplest test of democracy, that of having had at least one rotation of the elites in power.

[estarzinger]

Originally Posted by El Pinguino

Intersting... at 51 seconds you can see that Ghuan Zhou Wan has altered to starboard for 'something'...

I don't know what the normal sea speed is for those american warships is but I am thinking it's substantially more than 10 or 12 knots so what on earth was she doing on the 'slow side' of the west bound lane?

The more I look at this the less sense it makes......

Port side, pretty square hit on McCain - seems like McCain either was trying to cross the TSS there (not sure why they would because Navy says they were going into port - and would have been much better to go further and pass outside the TSS), or they made a hard port avoidance turn as stand-on in the slow side of the lane. Neither makes much sense.

The traffic flow where the collision happened was decently orderly, and McCain should have been able to slot in easily with her ability to match speed with either the slow or fast sides.

I agree that Ghuan Zou makes a maneuver to avoid the general area where Alnic MC (doing 9kts) then has the collision. Ghuan's manouver did then box Alnic (and apparently McCain) in, as she then had Ghuan coming up starboard side, Hyundi coming up on Port side. McCain needed to turn starboard and go at the flow speed and would (apparently) have been ok.

[David M]

My gut feeling and I do not know for sure is that the Navy might be using merchant vessels as practice for making radical maneuvers in close proximity as drills for various situations they might encounter against an enemy vessel in real life were a war to break out. It would not be something that the Navy would want to discuss publicly because it might be considered classified.

[Snowpetrel]

Does anyone know what the light configuration for the Arleigh Burke class is? Specifically does it have fore and aft masthead lights?

Looks like there is only one major mast, unless the have a fwd masthead light on the little flagpole right on the stem.

If there is only one MH light you have a ship with no AIS, only one MH light and a low radar return that probably appears as a small wooden coaster or patrol boat to an OOW at night around those waters.

I also suspect the seas have got more dangerous for any vessel without AIS as your typical Big ship OOW starts to use AIS more and ARPA and the good old fashioned MK 1 eyeball less.

Did the incident happen in darkness or twilight? And what sort of weather conditions?

[estarzinger]

Originally Posted by David M

My gut feeling and I do not know for sure is that the Navy might be using merchant vessels as practice for making radical maneuvers in close proximity as drills for various situations they might encounter against an enemy vessel in real life were a war to break out. It would not be something that the Navy would want to discuss publicly because it might be considered classified.

mmmm . . . I hope not.

Given the bridge tape I would say that was not going on with Porter. They were just clueless.

Given pretty much zero senior officer on bridge of Fitz, I would guess not also in that case.

And with McCain, I really hope they were not playing chicken with tankers in the Singapore TSS.

I would vote for 'incompetence' over 'conspiracy'.

[JPA Cate]

05:20, approximately. Lat. 02, iirc.

A.

[estarzinger]

Originally Posted by Snowpetrel

Does anyone know what the light configuration for the Arleigh Burke class is? Specifically does it have fore and aft masthead lights?

Did the incident happen in darkness or twilight? And what sort of weather conditions?

5:24 a.m. local time, before dawn broke - 7:03 am sunrise (according to the NYT) in good weather.

I do not know their light configuration (but would guess they have the colreg appropriate forward and aft lights). But I agree given the reduced radar profile and no AiS, they could easily be mistaken for a fishing vessel or large work boat in the dark

[Wotname]

Just heard on the local Aussie news (ABC radio) that the entire USN fleet has been grounded for a "short time".

Presumably not completely correct but it sounds like someone in the USN is taking notice of something...

[David M]

Originally Posted by estarzinger

mmmm . . . I hope not.

Given the bridge tape I would say that was not going on with Porter. They were just clueless.

Given pretty much zero senior officer on bridge of Fitz, I would guess not also in that case.

And with McCain, I really hope they were not playing chicken with tankers in the Singapore TSS.

I would vote for 'incompetence' over 'conspiracy'.

I'm not saying it is a conspiracy at all. We all know the Navy conducts drills at sea. That is part of being prepared for war. I was speculating as well. I have no idea if they conducting radical maneuvers in close proximity to merchant ships or not. I was just presenting the possibility.