US Navy destroyer collision

[TrentePieds]

Quote: "Not sure what the Norwegian equivalents to the NTSB is called."

Well here you are then - a little history thrown in for context :-):

In days of yore, Norway was, as you may know, an integral part of Denmark. That had been the case since the Viking age, but came to an end in 1814 when as a result of the turmoil engendered by the Napoleonic Wars, Denmark had, effectively, to cede her to Sweden. In 1905 an amicable separation twixt Sweden and Norway took place, and she became a Constitutional Monarchy in her own right. The Norwegians had to go shopping for a King and found one in the person of Prince Karl of Denmark. He agreed to serve only after being accepted by The People in a national plebiscite :-)

Prior to the Napoleonic Wars, Denmark and Sweden had been naval powers of considerable strength, but as you know, the surest way to ruin a nation is for her to "give a war" - or get drawn into OPWs (Other Peoples' Wars) :-)

A lot of socio/political arrangements from Scowegia's Glory Days were carried forward into modern times, and when I was still a DP (a Danish Person) the agency that dealt with "havari" (maritime accidents) was, in Norway, Sjøforklaringsinstituttet - literally translated "The Institute for Determination of Causes of Maritime Accidents".

Norway - and Denmark - came late to that glorious party that was the Industrial Revolution, and therefore antiquated organs of investigation persisted, but with the coming of railways, road transport and aviation to Scowegia, permanent commissions for investigation of accidents in each sector began to replace the ad hoc commissions that used to be established to investigate each accident. Nowadays there is only one commission: Statens havarikommission for transport, but the mandating of that commission, known in English to accommodate globalism as The Accident Investigation Board Norway or AIBN as the agency responsible for investigating maritime accidents is as recent as the 1990s, as far as I know.

This will be the organization that will establish the causes of F313's misfortune. One imagines that the State of Norway is "selfinsured" so, as you say, the apportioning of blame is somewhat moot. But that it is moot does not mean that it won't happen :-)

Numerous Norwegian Twitter messages indicate that all of Norway is shaking it's collective head in disbelief. Given that "half her (F313's) starboard side" is torn open and that it was Sola's starboard hawse that appears to have done the damage, no-one is blind to the fact that Ingstad crossed the bows of Sola and that "that vessel who has the other on her own starboard side" is burdened. Somebody is going to have to take the blame. Scrub the career of one Norwegian Lieutenant Commander, apparently one Preben Ottesen, whoever he may be!

Quote "I doubt if even New age Norwegian unionized navy ships are run by committees."

I agree with that. I didn't mean that F313 was run by committee. My implication is rather more portentous than that, given that the maritime component of exercise Trident Junction 18 was run, if that is the word, by USN Carrier Task Force Harry Truman.

TP

[boatman61]

Explains everything..

[TrentePieds]

Alright, Group - I've made a promise to my fellow moderators that I'll extract all messages regarding this collision to a separate thread. It'll happen tomorrow, hopefully. Is there a life outside C&SF :-)?

Meanwhile I think we can justify carrying on here, s'long as we behave :-)!

TP

[CaptTom]

Originally Posted by TrentePieds

Alright, Group - I've made a promise to my fellow moderators that I'll extract all messages regarding this collision to a separate thread. It'll happen tomorrow, hopefully. Is there a life outside C&SF :-)?

Meanwhile I think we can justify carrying on here, s'long as we behave :-)!

TP

Thank you!! I think it's very possible to keep the politics out of it - for those who bother to try. As to the rest, feel free to delete or block as you moderators see fit.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by CaptTom

Thank you!! I think it's very possible to keep the politics out of it - for those who bother to try. As to the rest, feel free to delete or block as you moderators see fit.

Easy to keep politics out of it..
Just concentrate on the idiots in uniform and ignore the conspiracy theorists BS..

[TrentePieds]

I have started a new thread in the "Navigation" forum called "KNM Helge Ingstad and the COLREGS"

All posts from this present thread relating to the Ingstad collision will be transferred to the new thread as opportunity affords during the day. If you wish to make a contribution to the Ingstad discussion, please make it here, in THIS thread, until advised otherwise. It will then, by and by, be transferred to the new thread so that all posts will stay in sequence.

Cheers

TrentePieds

[psk125]

An initial report has been issued, following interviews with the crews of the two vessels. It appears that the Helga Ingstad thought the tanker was part of the oil terminal. They couldn't see running lights with all the tanker's deck lights on. (That ever happen to any of us? Is that a good reason to check your radar screens and perhaps AIS? Maybe listen to commercial radio traffic to hear what's going on?) The report hints that the Helga Ingstad may have thought they were communicating with one of the three other northbound vessels in the fjord.

IMO this may be why they gave such a dismissive initial response, since there was plenty of room for the Helga Ingstad to get by the three other vessels. The suggestion for the destroyer to "turn right" would have made no sense to them - it would head them towards the oil terminal for no reason. Then, too late, they found out that the "oil terminal" was moving...

https://www.aibn.no/Marine/Investiga...e&attach=1

[Pelagic]

I think that is some very clever legal coaching!

[El Pinguino]

The tanker may have had the lights on on the focsle ( two or three down lights) while the crew secured ship for sea...

Lame excuse... the terminal was several points on their starboard bow.....

[requiem]

Originally Posted by psk125

An initial report has been issued, following interviews with the crews of the two vessels. It appears that the Helga Ingstad thought the tanker was part of the oil terminal. They couldn't see running lights with all the tanker's deck lights on. (That ever happen to any of us? Is that a good reason to check your radar screens and perhaps AIS? Maybe listen to commercial radio traffic to hear what's going on?)

An interesting read. The collision happened at 0400, over four hours before either the sun or the moon would rise. That, and Rule 7, are both very good reasons to be checking radar. Not realizing there's a ship the size of an aircraft carrier maneuvering nearby is a bit embarrassing, but it certainly seems the frigate was both literally and figuratively in the dark.

Key takeaways include, as usual, the importance of recognizing risk of collision as early as possible, and effective radio communications. Consider the radio contact between the two ships: "er det du som kommer her nå? / Ja, det stemmer"; that's how television sitcoms set up comedic misunderstandings.

[Trond123]

The initial report can indicate that the frigate was navigating "old school"/ visually. Even though the report states that the radar was operational (in use) and AIS in "receive only" mode.
If Helge Ingstad had used the AIS, they would most likely have seen the Sola TS was moving.
It seems strange that Helge Ingstad didn't see Sola TS as a separate radar target, between the 3 other vessels Helge Ingstad already had radar plots for, and the shoreline, given their relative positions the minutes prior to the collision.

As @requiem mentioned, the radio communications were extremely poor:
Sola TS: "is it you coming here now?"
Helge Ingstad: "Yes, it is".

The Norwegian Navy has also confirmed that even though there was a foreign bridge crew member/ trainee preset at the time of collision, the language used on the bridge, and throughout the vessel in general, was Norwegian. This appears to be standard procedure, and not specific for this incident.

[Pete7]

If the original cock-up wasn't bad enough have a read of the Appendix which highlights the problems the crew faced post collision:

"Next, the crew found that water from the aft generator room was running into the gear room via the hollow propeller shafts and that the gear room was filling up fast. From the gear room, the water then ran into and was flooding the aft and fore engine rooms via the stuffing boxes in the bulkheads. This meant that the flooding became substantially more extensive than indicated by the original damage"

[Uricanejack]

Thanks I read the interim report it was interesting and no doubt reviewed by the legal department. They always are.

I think some of you may be jumping to a conclusion which the report didn’t say. Or I missed something.
I did not come to the conclusion the ship was “being Navigated visually”. Or the RADAR was not being used.
I am not concluding it was being used properly or not at all just not enough information.
The report does refer to the tankers deck lights and the tanker being mistaken for the terminal.
The report says no systems problems. So all Bridge equipment must have been working fine.
The report says “human factors” were complex. No doubt they were. How did the human in charge of the watch confuse the tanker with the terminal. why didn’t any of the other humans present notice or say anything?

The report so far has not given any direct information about the human factors. Just this is where they are loooking.

It’s clear the human factor problem extended beyon the HI.
VTS humans were remarkably unhelpful. Compared to typical VTS humans. Lots of whys to ask there? The HI had checked in given its intended route and speed. As part of its initial report. AIS or not. Simple time speed and distance question. I think I did those in grade 3. Usually a school bus not a navy ship, but same principle.
No real information just confirmation the HI checked in and gave speed and route.
This was not passed on to the TS
Which must have been significant.

The TS departure and routing were based partially on information from VTS.
The TS was unaware of the HI until after they had left turned around and were heading north.
With 3 other vessels to Starboard.

The humans on both ships and VTS, went on to have a very unclear communication which was obviously not understood by the other humans involved.

Some pure speculation.

The OOW on the HI had just come on duty.
He got a briefing during the handover which was not quite as complete as it could have been. Along with the other humans who came on duty at the same time.

Some of the other members of the team may have seen and perceived what was going on but assumed the OOW was aware of them.

The OOW laked situational awareness of the ships position and speed. particularly projecting this SI ahead of his vessel.

The OOW was not aware of the what his ships heading, ground track should be relative to the oil terminal. Ie where should it have appeared to be. Certainly not right in front.

The OOW was not aware a tanker was leaving the terminal.

He saw what he expected to see and made an ussumtion which he did not verify.

The ship was going faster than the OOW was.

Whoever monitored the radios on the HI ither did not hear or did not pass on the TS pre departure and departure calls.
VTS did not pas on info about the tanker departure or give the tanker info about the HI.

Until to late.

Figuring this out and explaining it will be complex

[Pelagic]

One thing that stuck out at me reading the report was that the Tanker did not issue a Securité
Securité Securité warning before and during the undocking maneuvers.

That is a common practice, often relayed by Traffic management system when a large vessel is getting underway in a channel

Or maybe they did?

[TrentePieds]

First mate of LNG Tanker “Pioneer Knutsen” of about 1700 tons gross, one Per Jørgensen, who passed by the Ingstad now grounded about half an hour after the collision, has said in the Norwegian Press: “Where was Fedje?....Why were they so passive?... They are usually on the ball...I listened to both the channels (Fedje) use(s), Channel 16 and 80, and I heard very little from them. They should have told the pilot on Sola TS that a frigatte was coming at them at high speed, but I heard nothing like that. I heard very little from (Fedje).... I wondered about that. (Fedje) was very quiet!”

Though Danish, the mate has sailed the Norwegian coast for 15 years and more, so I feel vindicated in my first opinion, expressed in my first post on this topic, that Fedje messed up in a serious way, particularly because there had been so much time for the VTSO to evaluate the possible evolution of events and to take action to avoid letting the vessels run into danger.

Among the notable facts is that from the position where the collision took place to the dangerous Fjæresteinene rocks hard against the western shore of Hjeltefjorden is, according to reports, 900 meters or about 1,000 yards. The water is deep right up to the rocks, so it would not, IMO, have been difficult for the VTSO , having Ingstad's position and radar track right under his nose on the monitor on his desk, to make a recommendation to Ingstad that would have enabled her to shape a track taking her precisely halfway between the rocks and SolaTS, in which case she would also have passed clear of the terminal.

Jørgensen is also of the opinion that Ingstad was playing silly-buggers and taking unacceptable chances. “(Ingstad) was running too fast and failed to keep proper separation”, he sez. Ingstad and Sola were in radio contact, he sez , "(but) Ingstad didn't take seriously what they were told. (Ingstad) did not exhibit proper seamanship”.

But the dodging and weaving has begun. It is now claimed in Norwegian TV, by an anonymous source (well, fancy that!), that it wasn't Sola that said: “Ingstad – you must do something. Turn!”, but Fedje! And this, methinks, is the beginning of the “damage control” the Norwegian Government must now engage in to “save the honour” of the KNM and the Norwegian Coast Guard (Kystverket)!

Sad - but there we have it!

TP