 |
|
17-06-2017, 09:20
|
#32
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 600
|
Re: US Navy destroyer collision
Quote:
Originally Posted by anacapaisland42
Just heard a report that the tanker took a sharp turn before the collision, this could be deliberate.
Speaking as a Canuck I find it somewhat unbelievable that this was the destroyers fault
Bill
|
my understanding of the Rules to prevent collision at sea,
its the destroyers task to stay clear, no matter what
__________________
'give what you get, then get gone'
|
|
|
17-06-2017, 09:48
|
#34
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Jersey
Boat: Bristol 35.5
Posts: 492
|
Re: US Navy destroyer collision
Quote:
Originally Posted by Three Sisters
Other reports indicate crewmembers of the Fitzgerald unaccounted for and three compartments flooded. Our prayers are going out for everyone's safety.
|
|
|
|
17-06-2017, 09:51
|
#35
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,048
|
Re: US Navy destroyer collision
It is hard to tell from the ships AIS track where the collision occurred but there appears to be a sharp turn to port prior to the collision. Certainly the naval ship should have been aware of the zig zagging commercial ship and I wonder if the navy ship had slowed to let the container ship pass ahead.
It is also possible that the navy ship turned to port to avoid the collision or to pass farther away from the commercial ship based on it's original course but then the ship made the sudden turn to port.
The real damage to the navy ship is below the water line due to to the container ship's bulbous bow.
We will just have to wait for the investigation to complete to know what really happened.
Later,
Dan
|
|
|
17-06-2017, 09:54
|
#36
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 280
|
Re: UsSS Fitzgerald get hit by Japanese cargo ship
Quote:
Originally Posted by mynameismud
|
First of all, it was a Philippine-registered ship, not a Japanese Ship. Secondly, why be careful in this area specifically? Is there other areas of the ocean that don't require care when traversing?
|
|
|
17-06-2017, 10:04
|
#37
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: New Jersey
Boat: Aquarius 23' and a 17' Kit bass boat
Posts: 53
|
Re: UsSS Fitzgerald get hit by Japanese cargo ship
I'm sorry. Yes Phillipines registered. There is still a search in the area. And well sorry to upset you to. I'll be careful and more quiet now.
|
|
|
17-06-2017, 10:05
|
#38
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Jersey
Boat: Bristol 35.5
Posts: 492
|
Re: US Navy destroyer collision
Quote:
Originally Posted by dannc
It is hard to tell from the ships AIS track where the collision occurred but there appears to be a sharp turn to port prior to the collision. Certainly the naval ship should have been aware of the zig zagging commercial ship and I wonder if the navy ship had slowed to let the container ship pass ahead.
It is also possible that the navy ship turned to port to avoid the collision or to pass farther away from the commercial ship based on it's original course but then the ship made the sudden turn to port.
The real damage to the navy ship is below the water line due to to the container ship's bulbous bow.
We will just have to wait for the investigation to complete to know what really happened.
Later,
Dan
|
I know most think like this as well but the real damage is the mia's
|
|
|
17-06-2017, 10:07
|
#39
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 523
|
Re: US Navy destroyer collision
I bet theres a big round hole below the water line on the destroyer where the container ships bulbous stabilizer rammed it. How else are 3 compartments going to get flooded. Maybe not a good idea to creep around shipping lanes with no lights on.
|
|
|
17-06-2017, 10:27
|
#40
|
Senior Cruiser

Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,033
|
Re: US Navy destroyer collision
Quote:
Originally Posted by anacapaisland42
Just heard a report that the tanker took a sharp turn before the collision, this could be deliberate.
|
My understanding is that the collision happened at the red X (that is where it's speed dropped off suddenly), and that the ship made its 180 turn 18nm before the collision. I dont know what the commercial ship was doing, perhaps just killing time for a dock in schedule, but in any case they seem to have given the Navy quite sufficient time to move.
Even if that is somehow not the case - these Navy vessels HAVE to be prepared to evade another USS Cole - they can't simply let any target, much less a 700' one, slam into them no matter what sort of turns are made.
|
|
|
17-06-2017, 10:31
|
#41
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,048
|
Re: US Navy destroyer collision
Quote:
Originally Posted by powsmias
I know most think like this as well but the real damage is the mia's
|
Yes but that kinda goes without saying. I would assume that the missing were in the berthing spaces where the bulbous bow entered the destroyer. They did not have much of a chance down there.
One of my professions has people dealing with deadly forces situations, and now a days, the incidents can be filmed. These incidents are often very good training but the cost is that one or more people may have died to teach the lesson. The cost has been paid so one might as well learn something from the situation and hopefully avoid repeating the incident.
Later,
Dan
|
|
|
17-06-2017, 10:32
|
#42
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Aground in the Yorkshire Dales, awaiting a very high tide.
Posts: 794
|
Re: UsSS Fitzgerald get hit by Japanese cargo ship
The report I read indicates that the cargo ship's bow impacted the Fitzgerald's starboard side? In the absence of any restricting factors, this would indicate that the cargo vessel was 'the stand-on vessel'? Therefore a more accurate thread-title might be: cargo ship gets hit by the USS Fitzgerald.
|
|
|
17-06-2017, 10:37
|
#43
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,048
|
Re: US Navy destroyer collision
Quote:
Originally Posted by estarzinger
My understanding is that the collision happened at the red X (that is where it's speed dropped off suddenly), and that the ship made its 180 turn 18nm before the collision. I dont know what the commercial ship was doing, perhaps just killing time for a dock in schedule, but in any case they seem to have given the Navy quite sufficient time to move.
Attachment 150045...
|
That is a better chart than what I saw which seemed to indicated the collision was at a different point. It is a head scratcher if collision happened at X which is what the chart seems to indicate.
Later,
Dan
|
|
|
17-06-2017, 10:43
|
#44
|
Senior Cruiser

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: puget sound washington
Boat: 1968 Islander bahama 24 hull 182, 1963 columbia 29 defender. hull # 60
Posts: 13,102
|
Re: UsSS Fitzgerald get hit by Japanese cargo ship
From what I have read and have heard on the news concerning this incident the cargo vessel was apparently acting erratic. which may have led to confusion as to stand on or give way vessel. As retired navy my prayers go out to the men and families that have been affected by this unfortunate incident.
__________________
Non illigitamus carborundum
|
|
|
17-06-2017, 10:46
|
#45
|
Senior Cruiser

Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,033
|
Re: UsSS Fitzgerald get hit by Japanese cargo ship
|
|
|
 |
|
Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
Display Modes |
Rate This Thread |
Linear Mode
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
Advertise Here
Recent Discussions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vendor Spotlight |
|
|