It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Breaking: US Navy destroyer takes on water after collision off Japanese coast

page: 20
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 20 2017 @ 09:36 AM
a reply to: roadgravel

No, I mean like 0230L vs. 0130L

posted on Jun, 20 2017 @ 09:42 AM
I was pointing out there has been two different times near 2:30. (20 & 30)

The actions seems to fit the earlier time but I suppose this could be a case where Occam's Razor is wrong.

posted on Jun, 20 2017 @ 09:49 AM
Yeah, I'm with Armap on this one. As he says, the data has been pointing to this from as soon as it became known.

What I want to know is why in the hell did the ACX Crystal wait an hour before calling in the report; I mean even on 'auto-pilot' there would have been at least one person awake, no?

I'm still hoping for some follow up to this.

posted on Jun, 20 2017 @ 09:57 AM
Here's how I perceive it:

- Collision at 1:30

- Crystal sails onward east

- Crystal realizes it looks bad not stopping in area

- Crystal sails back west

- Crystal decides "lost of command" might be a CYA


- Crystal just sailing around instead of going to port on schedule (lost of command part of it?)

- ends up in collision or decides to rams US Navy ship

- Navy time of collision shows no deviation in track for Crystal

posted on Jun, 20 2017 @ 01:29 PM

As Sailors’ Bodies Are Flown to U.S., Fitzgerald Inquiries Intensify

Japanese officials said on Monday that the accident had occurred nearly an hour earlier than previously believed, and on Tuesday the United States Navy appeared to accept the revised timeline. “We’re not disputing what the Japanese Coast Guard is saying” about the timing of the collision, said Cmdr. Bill Clinton, a spokesman for the Seventh Fleet at the American base in Yokosuka, Japan, south of Tokyo.

The U.S. Navy is not disputing the Japanese Coast Guard's claim about the time of the collision, according to the article.

And if you can't trust Bill Clinton, who can you trust?

posted on Jun, 20 2017 @ 03:41 PM
a reply to: Majic

That poor man!

posted on Jun, 20 2017 @ 04:23 PM

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
If the Navy says the collision happened at 0230L, then I'm going with the notion the collision happened at 0230L.

Did they specifically say that the collision happened at 02:30?

PS: if a system that is used by thousands of ships every day points to 01:30 I will believe that before believing any human.

posted on Jun, 20 2017 @ 04:40 PM
Ars Technica has an article on this today:

“Internet of Ships” tells tale of USS Fitzgerald tragedy—or half of it

Part of the initial suspicion about the data was caused by the reported time of the accident: the collision was widely reported to have occurred at 2:30am local time. But the Japanese Coast Guard reported that the report came long after the actual collision; the Fitzgerald's primary radio room was apparently taken out (though some communications were intact, and the ship was able to respond to communications later), and the Crystal did not report the collision to the Japanese Coast Guard until a full hour after the actual collision at 1:30am. In fact, after initially steering away from the collision, the Crystal did not turn around to render aid to the Fitzgerald for a full half hour, based on track data. (That's not necessarily out of the norm for such a large ship, as it could take miles to slow and turn around.) The US Navy reported the incident as having happened at about 2:20, however.

The Jiji Press news agency reported that the captain of the Crystal said his ship was "sailing in the same direction as the US destroyer and then collided." The collision occurred after the Crystal made an adjustment of course to port (left), steering toward the Fitzgerald's track. Under normal conditions, the crew of the ship showing its starboard side in a meeting situation is supposed to give the right-of-way. The other ship is required by the international "rules of the road" for shipping to maintain a predictable speed and course.

Nothing conclusive, but another perspective on the incident.

posted on Jun, 21 2017 @ 01:12 AM
Since this is at sea, and the ships are sailing along, the time differences could possibly be because they had their clocks set to a neighboring time zone.

Setting the appropriate time zone may have been something that was done every morning or every noon.

There may be a little differences in what the 'Local" time was.


posted on Jun, 21 2017 @ 08:02 AM
a reply to: pheonix358

That's why the military uses UTC, to avoid those confusions.

posted on Jun, 21 2017 @ 09:34 AM
As does most shipping use UTC for these same reasons, they sail across so many time zones it would be difficult to use anything else.

In fact, it's kind of curious this whole incident isn't being described in UTC times. I guess that wouldn't make for as sensational of a story because UTC time would make it appear (to the untrained) like it happened something like 9 hours earlier.

posted on Jun, 21 2017 @ 09:38 AM
This whole imbroglio does seem to make a strong case for sticking with UTC.

posted on Jun, 21 2017 @ 11:05 AM

Zone Time (ZT)

Zone time is by far the more precise of the several local times. It is the one that commercial ships and navies use when crossing an ocean—or we all use when sitting at the USCG office taking a license exam! Zone time is determined entirely by the longitude of your vessel at the time you record it. It will differ from UTC by a whole number of hours called the zone description (ZD).

In this time system, the world is divided into 24 time zones , each 15º wide, centered at the standard meridians, which are the longitudes that are multiples of 15, ie 0, 15, 30, 45....165, 180. The borders between time zones thus take place at 7º 30' either side of the standard meridians. The only exceptions are the two zones (ZD = ±12) on either side of the International Date Line, which are only 30 minutes wide (7º 30' of longitude).

If you are keeping zone time (ZT), then you can find UTC from:

UTC = ZT + ZD,

where, again, the ZD is determined by your longitude. This formula is the one that determines (or helps you remember) the sign (±) of the ZD. If your location is slow on UTC, ie any west longitude, then the ZD of that location is +. Eastern longitudes have negative ZDs.

To find the zone description of any particular longitude, round the longitude off to the nearest whole degree, divide by 15, and then round the result off to the nearest whole hour.

Zone time never uses daylight saving time. It is used worldwide. Zone time is never used in civilian matters; it is only for ocean navigation. One could argue that official NOAA Tide and Current Tables are given in what is essentially ZT, but we are more likely to use a reproduction of these, which converts the times to standard times.


posted on Jun, 21 2017 @ 07:35 PM

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
In fact, it's kind of curious this whole incident isn't being described in UTC times.

That was the first thing I thought was strange about this case, the use of "local time".

posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 03:01 PM
Japanese investigators believe that the crew was in full damage control mode for an hour before help arrived. They believe that the ACX Crystal was on autopilot at the time of the impact, and the crew didn't realize what they had collided with until they returned to the area and found the Fitzgerald. About the time the ship arrived back, the Fitzgerald was able to get a backup SATCOM system going again. A crew member described the below decks hole as 10' x 10' to 14' x 14', the Navy put it at 12 feet.

Japanese investigators believe the crew of the USS Fitzgerald was in full damage-control mode, stanching the flow of seawater into the destroyer’s compartments, and without reliable communications for as much as an hour after the warship was crippled by its impact with a commercial container ship last week.

That theory of events is still preliminary, the U.S. Naval Institute reports, but Japanese officials believe it explains the movements of both ships in the aftermath of the collision, which killed seven Fitzgerald sailors and wounded three, including the commanding officer, Cdr. Bryce Benson. USNI News explains:

According to the current operational theory of Japanese investigators, the deadly collision between USS Fitzgerald (DDG-62) and the Philippine-flagged merchant ship ACX Crystal knocked out the destroyer’s communications for an hour, while the four-times-larger merchant ship was unaware of what it hit until it doubled back and found the damaged warship, two sources familiar with the ongoing Japanese investigation told USNI News on Wednesday.
edit on 6/22/2017 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 04:43 PM
a reply to: Zaphod58

That's a big f'n hole!!

...and given the size differences, not totally out of the realm of plausible that the crew of the container ship didn't realize they'd hit something.

During WW2 the liner Queen Mary accidentally rammed and sank the HMS Curacao, a WW1 era light cruiser converted to an anti-aircraft cruiser. As it was with the Fitzgerald, the warship came out much worse for it. It sank after being split in two, with large loss of life.

If I recall the story correctly, the troops aboard the Queen Mary didn't even know anything had happened until the boiler aboard Curacao exploded as it sank.

posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 04:44 PM
a reply to: seagull

With a hole that big in the side of the ship, it's a miracle they only lost 7 crew members, and not the entire ship.

posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 04:48 PM
a reply to: Zaphod58

Especially given the relatively light construction of a destroyer...

Kudos to the crew and officers for saving their ship. Too bad their careers are done.

posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 04:56 PM
a reply to: seagull

They said the Captain was found in the wreckage outside his cabin on the side of the ship. After eventually pulling him out, he went to the bridge and was coherent until the decision was made to fly him off the ship.

According his uncle, and stories circulating among the crew Fire Controlman 1st Class Gary Leo Rehm Jr, died after saving 20 other sailors in the berthing area. He went back to try to find the last 6 that were in the compartment, and they had to seal it off to stop the flooding.

posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 05:06 PM
a reply to: Zaphod58

I don't believe any regular military naval crew of a first class ship would, or even could, be derelict enough have this happen.

I recall, I think correctly, an earlier post making reference to US Navy investigators interviewing the ACX Crystals crew. I suspect there will be no recordings of these interviews available for review.

As far as this mystery goes, we will never really know what happend. The lives, and careers, lost should - in my opinion - be considered as lost on 'active service'.

top topics

<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in