Collisions At Sea

[posternutbag]

Originally Posted by Nyghthawk

It doesn't have the capacity to see 360 degrees in all directions, have reverse engines, and radar either. This isn't a matter of brakes. These big ships shouldn't have been within a kilometer of each other!

Your Honda can't go in reverse? That must be problematic.

But sarcasm aside, the other thing a car doesn't have is multiple people involved in its navigation. Although certainly there are redundancies, if one person makes a mistake or a system fails, the entire system of collision avoidance can break down. I have never been in a collision of this magnitude, but I have navigated and helmed a 72' sailboat in close proximity to merchant vessels, and it is difficult and complicated, and there reached a point where detection no longer matters and collision is unavoidable. It is like watching in slow motion. You know you are going to collide, but it is too late to do anything about it. Having to rely on multiple people and computer systems for collision avoidance just makes the system more complicated and increases the chances of someone making a mistake or a system failing.

We (civilians) are never going to know the truth, but I have spent a lot of time with Naval cadets, lots of time with naval officers, with harbor pilots and merchant sailors and captains. These people are competent and extremely well trained. It is suspicious that US Naval collision avoidance has broken down with such frequency. I will not speculate as to why, as I lack the knowledge and the fact patterns, but it is, at the least, very, very odd.

[Nyghthawk]

See my previous post. Relieved of command. Regardless of sarcasm or who has spent how much time with whom, the Navy thought the commander (and multiple other officers) were negligent.

[amyFB]

Originally Posted by Nyghthawk

It doesn't have the capacity to see 360 degrees in all directions, have reverse engines, and radar either. This isn't a matter of brakes. These big ships shouldn't have been within a kilometer of each other!

I remember my first time in a boat out in the shipping lanes of the Chesapeake.

(where we were not supposed to be with our little boat, I know, I know, and we moved quickly back where we belonged)

The takeaway from that experience was how very quickly those big boats can move across water.

That "speck" on the horizon can be within collision distance in 10 minutes from first sighting. I'd bet it is easy to lose ten minutes in conversations like "hey anyone see that speck on the horizon?" , "what? where?" "look on your radar screen", "hang on I'm trying to reach so and so", "anybody seen capn?", "hey how come no one is answering in the engine room?", "anyone driving this boat?"

[Nyghthawk]

Point taken. The only time I have been out on the ocean is on a cruise ship on the inside passage.

[architype]

Seems like when there are problems with Defense...not enough money.
Seems like when there are problems with Education...too much money.

Glad we have our priorities straight.

[posternutbag]

Originally Posted by Nyghthawk

See my previous post. Relieved of command. Regardless of sarcasm or who has spent how much time with whom, the Navy thought the commander (and multiple other officers) were negligent. That carries a great deal more weight than spending time with cadets, eh?

Originally Posted by Nyghthawk

Point taken. The only time I have been out on the ocean is on a cruise ship on the inside passage.

Whatever. I am not going to continue arguing.

[Kerbie]

Let's just drop the back-and-forth exchange and please get back to the subject. Thanks, guys.

[Rockysdad]

Oohhhhhhhhh, I'm biting my tongue, man that hurts !
Politics anyone????

[rlb9682]

I think more than likely it's a change in policies that are needed.

I'm no expert on naval warships, but generally when there are changes in actuality that are not reflected in the policies that's when the stuff hits the fan.

More than likely the policies in a bunch of areas need to be updated to reflect the current day situation of staffing, traffic, training, patrols, etc.

[HHP]

If the ship was unable to maneuver, I can see that. Cargo ships and tankers take miles to slow or change course so if the destroyer couldn't move, impact was inevitable. Just seems a lot of collisions in a big ocean.

[Basalt Beach]

Originally Posted by HHP

If the ship was unable to maneuver, I can see that. Cargo ships and tankers take miles to slow or change course so if the destroyer couldn't move, impact was inevitable. Just seems a lot of collisions in a big ocean.

Agreed, and makes sense, however what makes no sense (at least from initial reports) is that it appears there was no warnings or alerts on the destroyer to warn the crew who were in their bunks (at least the reports stating some sailors slept thru the impact). Very strange the crew was not alerted or made aware of the impending collision, especially if they were aware they had lost the ability to maneuver. In the weeks to come, we will learn more which may provide an explanation.

[Nyghthawk]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/uss-joh...joseph-aucoin/

Admiral relieved of command. It would seem career naval officers agree that these incidents should have been avoidable.

[Cincy2]

I spent ten years in the Navy, five as a Surface Warfare Office on cruisers/destroyers. I've been the Officer of the Deck during transits of restricted maneuvering areas like the Straights of Messina and others in the Pacific. Any Captain who is not on the bridge in his chair helping the OOD during these times deserves to be relieved. There are so many surface contacts, radar is useless. You depend on your lookouts and your own ability to watch the relative motion and range of the closest contacts. When the relative bearing to the contact is constant and the range decreases below 10,000 yards, maneuvering action is required. I don't know what happened in the recent incidents but it's fair to say someone on the Navy ship screwed up, regardless of who had the right of way. There are radio communication channels available to inquire about course, speed and intentions of close-by ships. The firing of the senior officers as a result of these incidents is what separates military from civilian leaders. It's about accountability regardless of which of your subordinates was at fault. No excuses.

Cincy

[unimogbert]

..........

[Dirk Hofman]

I listened to a radio interview with a former destroyer (I think) captain talking about the incident. He understood why people were confused about how a warship could collide with another ship, given all the modern technology and the safety protocols of a military ship. But having done it in busy ports and straits, he said it's a harrowing experience on the best days, with other ships not following the rules and protocols, the sheer number of ships in a confined space, security concerns, etc. He said it could have happened to him any number of times. "There but for the grace of God..." was how he put it.

Interesting perspective.