Page 3 of 5

Re: USS Fitzgerald collision

Unread postPosted: Wed 21 Jun 2017, 12:02:54
by Outcast_Searcher
vtsnowedin wrote:
Cog wrote:Ships have been running into each other since we built the first one.
The first collision could not possibly have happened until after they built the second one. Just saying. :roll:

OTOH, accidents / mishaps don't just involve ship to ship collisions. In the data on the '45 to '88 mishap list I pointed to above, you have things like groundings. The first ship could have certainly grounded itself, run over swimmers, crashed into or ruined a dock or two, been sunk because of quality issues, etc.

Humans have lots and lots of creative ways (and some not so creative) to screw up. 8)

Re: USS Fitzgerald collision

Unread postPosted: Wed 21 Jun 2017, 14:45:32
by Newfie
The Navy has done most of that in the recent past including surfacing under a civilian vessel. It was a hot dog maneuver to impress some congressman onboard. They grounded on a well marked reef in the Philippians (I think) a couple of years ago.

Re: USS Fitzgerald collision

Unread postPosted: Sat 24 Jun 2017, 07:04:51
by Newfie
I think I posted this first link before.

http://gcaptain.com/uss-fitzgerald-fault/

Because of the response to the first article was very strong they have published this second article.

http://gcaptain.com/uss-fitzgerald-faul ... ain.com%29

It appears a third article will be published soon.

Finally I want to note that there was a similar accident on a sister ship a few years ago. The Navy never released its investigation. However the bridge recordings did get out somehow. I didn't listen to them but found a transcript, in that case the Captain just flat screwed up bad. But worse, it's evident that they were just doing eyeball navigation at night. The simple equipment i and many other civilians carry, which THEY carry, would have avoided this mess. Also they were breaking all sorts of navigation rules. Sort of like trying to cross the Eastbound lands of an interstate highway from the Westbound lanes. Stupid. Three weeks later the Captain was transferred from command.

Re: USS Fitzgerald collision

Unread postPosted: Sun 25 Jun 2017, 10:36:26
by Newfie
Fairly decent article from the Daily Mail, has some small amount of additional info.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... erald.html

Re: USS Fitzgerald collision

Unread postPosted: Tue 27 Jun 2017, 04:41:00
by Newfie
More info has come out, a report from the Crystals captain has surfaced.

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/BigSt ... SKBN19H13C

This version of the story is pretty damning of the Crystals Captain and is being used to share w he is a liar because the AIS does not indicate any such turn.

However, on another board at folks with access to the original Reuters Japan artical. Both have provided roughly similar translations. I've taken the liberty to copy one post in total below. A totally different story from what is reported in US press.

................................

Here's a link to the Japanese-language article on the Reuters Japan website:

https://jp.reuters.com/article/fitzgerald-idJPKBN19H12U

And here's my own (entirely unauthorized) quick translation of it. I make my living as a translator from Japanese, but I give no guarantees as to absence of errors, and in any case, there are always any number of ways a given Japanese sentence can be rendered in English. Here I tried to be as literal as possible, though. The article also (as is often the case in Japanese) does not clearly differentiate between quotations and the rest of the article. The first paragraph is basically a summary, and the second and third paragraphs are descriptions of the content of the report. From "In this collision" onwards, it's back to Reuters' journalistic writing.
----------
Container ship tried to warn U.S. vessel Fitzgerald by light signals

[Tokyo, June 26, Reuters] The content of a report submitted by the captain of the container ship that collided with an Aegis class destroyer of the U.S. Navy off the Izu peninsula to the owners of the container ship has come to light. The container ship spotted the Aegis vessel on its port side and tried to attract its attention by means of flashing a light, but the U.S. ship maintained its course. The container vessel then tried to turn to the right to avoid a collision, but there was not enough time.

According to the report, the Philippine-flagged container ship ACX Crystal was heading towards Tokyo Bay at a speed of 18 knots (about 33 km/h). At 01:15 a.m. on June 17, two lookouts spotted the Aegis class vessel Fitzgerald at 40 degrees off the port side at a distance of 3 nm (about 5.6 km).

About 5 minutes later, the Aegis vessel "suddenly" moved [from the Japanese it is not clear whether this was a move from a stationary condition or a change in movement, i.e. a course change]. Because a collision seemed likely on this course, the container ship, while manually steering, tried to attract the attention of the other ship by flashing a light. However, the American vessel seemed to maintain its course. The container ship therefore turned the rudder hard to starboard, but at 01:30 a.m. the two ships collided.

In this collision, seven members of the crew of the Aegis vessel lost their lives, making it the worst tragedy for a U.S. navy vessel since the bomb attack on an Aegis class vessel in Yemen in 2000. The captain of the Fitzgerald was wounded in his own quarters, which suggests the possibility that no warning was sounded prior to the collision.

The owners of the ACX Crystal, Dainichi-Invest Corporation (based in Kobe, Hyogo Pref.) declined to respond to inquiries by Reuters, saying that they could not provide any comment in relation to an ongoing investigation. The U.S. Navy, the U.S. Coast Guard, and the Japan Coast Guard which are investigating the accident also declined to comment.
----------

Re: USS Fitzgerald collision

Unread postPosted: Tue 27 Jun 2017, 07:41:46
by sparky
.
This is to confirm your take
From Reuters (in English)
http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-usa-na ... KKBN19H12Y

I use a Korean automated translator to mail friends there , it's usually a complete shamble

Re: USS Fitzgerald collision

Unread postPosted: Fri 30 Jun 2017, 07:29:08
by Newfie
In contravention to previous promise of full cooperation the Navy will not allow Japanese investigators to interview the Fitz crew. Instead the USCG will interview and provide summaries.

TRUST ME.

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN19L0T8

Re: USS Fitzgerald collision

Unread postPosted: Fri 21 Jul 2017, 09:55:36
by Newfie
Initial Navy report finds Fitzgerald at fault.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/21/politics/ ... index.html

Re: USS Fitzgerald collision

Unread postPosted: Mon 24 Jul 2017, 04:44:19
by vtsnowedin
Newfie wrote:Initial Navy report finds Fitzgerald at fault.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/21/politics/ ... index.html
As I expected. :cry:

Re: USS Fitzgerald collision

Unread postPosted: Tue 08 Aug 2017, 11:07:01
by vox_mundi
Image

Re: USS Fitzgerald collision

Unread postPosted: Tue 08 Aug 2017, 21:41:04
by Tanada
I first heard that story 30 years ago, except it was a USA carrier Admiral and a lowly Lighthouse Ensign in World War II in the version I heard.

Re: USS Fitzgerald collision

Unread postPosted: Thu 17 Aug 2017, 23:40:11
by EdwinSm
This short on details of what happened, by the US Navy is starting to indirectly lay the blame on the crew of the USS Fitzgerald.

The US Navy has announced that about a dozen sailors are to be disciplined after seven crew on the USS Fitzgerald were killed in a collision.

The destroyer collided with a Philippines container ship in Japanese waters in June.

The deputy chief of naval operations, Admiral Bill Moran, said the commanding officer and two other senior crew would no longer serve aboard the ship.

He said the Navy had lost trust and confidence in their ability to lead.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40970860

Re: USS Fitzgerald collision

Unread postPosted: Mon 21 Aug 2017, 10:37:45
by Newfie
They need to fire UPstream, this is a systemic problem.

Re: USS Fitzgerald collision

Unread postPosted: Tue 19 Sep 2017, 13:16:52
by Newfie
2 additional senior commanders fired.

http://gcaptain.com/u-s-navy-fires-two- ... accidents/

Re: USS Fitzgerald collision

Unread postPosted: Wed 20 Sep 2017, 05:50:22
by Newfie
Navy now says it will use AIS in congested waters.

https://news.usni.org/2017/09/19/deadly ... ffic-areas

Navy competence

Unread postPosted: Wed 01 Nov 2017, 12:52:24
by Newfie
Well I can’t find the other threads so I’m starting this one. We can merge if anyone can find it.

Navy just released the reports on the Fitzgerald and McCain incidents. I’ve only read up to where contact was made. Not pretty. Worse than expected if that’s possible.

Reading this must make Rockets Mans heart sing.

When I first saw this I was able to download the report. Looks like they changed it to read only

https://news.usni.org/2017/11/01/uss-fi ... ion-report

Re: Navy competence

Unread postPosted: Wed 01 Nov 2017, 15:14:49
by Cog
With the Fitzgerald a whole combination of bad seamanship. No active plots of ships and traffic lanes, lookouts on one side of the ship only, no use of the ADS system, CIC not tracking contacts, etc. The list goes on and on. With the McCain a slightly different story. They got confused with a steering problem and completely lost situational awareness. Aft steering not manned and ready. Sea and anchor detail not manned and ready.

I do not blame the enlisted men here. They will do as they are told if they are properly led by competent officers. The officers are directly to blame for the loss of life here and I hope they burn them by court-martial. If ships can not be navigated safely in peace-time than how the hell are they going to handle the chaos of combat?

Re: Navy competence

Unread postPosted: Wed 01 Nov 2017, 17:31:49
by Newfie

Re: USS Fitzgerald collision

Unread postPosted: Tue 05 Dec 2017, 18:26:28
by Newfie