It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com 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: 22
57
<< 19  20  21    23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 23 2017 @ 06:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: flatbush71
They are saying now it was a malfunctioning auto pilot.

That does explain the eradicate course changes, but it still stinks.

freebeacon.com...


Long thread. Did the Cargo ship try to give warning to the Navy vessel that a collision was fairly imminent?




posted on Jun, 23 2017 @ 06:40 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

It's thought there was no one on the bridge of the cargo ship at the time. That's pretty common with these ships apparently.



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 02:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

so - what was the fitzgeralds speed at time of collision ?



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 02:19 PM
link   
a reply to: ignorant_ape

They haven't said that I've seen. Most likely 5-7 knots or so, for station keeping overnight.



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 02:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

why would a USN vessel be " station keeping " in blue water ?????????????????

PS - this claim falisfies the " submarine delusion "



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 02:32 PM
link   
a reply to: ignorant_ape

From what I've heard from former Navy types, when operating alone, they've been known to pick a block of water, usually a box, and spend the overnight hours slowly cruising around inside the box. Gives the crew downtime overnight.

The people that were talking about it called them night boxes.
edit on 6/24/2017 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 02:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

in the real world - vessel plot a course to thier destination



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 02:38 PM
link   
a reply to: ignorant_ape

And in the real world, Navy destroyers don't go straight from Point A to Point B. They have patrol areas that can cover hundreds of thousands of square miles quite easily.



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 02:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

lets see what the 2 vessels were doing - when everyone releases alll data



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 03:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

They where likely in their box doing circles. This is pretty common. Either with issues going pier side (many reasons) or in cases where training, often run drills all day and it makes no sense too pull into port late just to be back to drills in the morn especially if ship is not broken or needs stores. In this instance they where conducting training/drills with other ships, including the Japanese Navy and the Afloat training group was on board (11 year vet and have a friend who is part of ATG that was on Fitz at the time of the collision). No I don't have inside info, I did talk to him briefly last night night though and confirmed he and ATG was on board conducting drills. And no it's not likely at all to conduct drills at night especially not that late. But the Fitz being off the coast doing circles is pretty likely. I don't know how they set up or designate the "box" (I was an engineer) but that's the term and they do, do it often.
edit on 24-6-2017 by swimmer15 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 03:11 PM
link   
a reply to: swimmer15

That's what I understood from talking to these guys. I'm nowhere near as up to speed on surface ships as I am aviation. The ships themselves, I know quite a bit about, but procedures like that, not as much. Thanks for the confirmation on that.



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 03:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

No problem! I'm curious to see what the inquiry brings. I won't speculate, I know from multiple deployments it doesn't take much to go from no sweat to "O" #. I was on the Princeton and we came real close to colliding with the Carl Vinson, we where fine until we weren't, once we got into their wake the gap closed quick and we where panicking, ship played hell getting out of there and it took both ships maneuvers to avoid collision. Any list on either ship the flight deck would have taken out the superstructure.
edit on 24-6-2017 by swimmer15 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 03:45 PM
link   
a reply to: swimmer15

Sounds like the time an AWACS cockpit crew wanted to shake the hand of the boom operator on the tanker they were moving to hook up to. They went into a pilot induced oscillation condition, which resulted in the boom operator yanking the boom up and screaming at his pilot. The wash off the nose of the AWACS pushed the tail of the tanker up, which is about the distance they missed colliding by. You can almost see the AWACS flight crew capping their flight suits in the video.



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 05:47 PM
link   
a reply to: swimmer15




They where likely in their box doing circles.


In a shipping lane?



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 05:59 PM
link   
a reply to: jaws1975

No, but there could be an explanation for it, .. they where something like 60nm out, the Crystal may have been significantly off course. I'm not 100% but I'm pretty sure the "box" is not set by the ships captain, it comes from higher ups like the fleet/type commander, port authority or something, .. maybe someone can elaborate or clarify this... so an error could have been made in designating the area, or Fitz may not have been in the designated area.. the "box" would have been identified before they even began operating in the area doing drills.
edit on 24-6-2017 by swimmer15 because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-6-2017 by swimmer15 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 10:41 PM
link   
a reply to: jaws1975

I confirmed with two OOD qualified officer friends that the fleet commander and above designate ops boxes. When I said likely I didn't mean certainly, there is leeway given to ships when operating in open ocean and of course restrictions when in shipping lanes, they very well may not have been operating in an ops box. Original reports said it's a busy shipping lane but nothing official yet. The CO/crew of the Fitz will no doubt be held responsible.. the basic 3,2,1 rule should have prevented the collision, no ships within 3 nautical miles of bow, 2 abreast and one astern standing orders say wake the CO if so. That is basic and clearly was not followed.



posted on Jun, 25 2017 @ 05:01 PM
link   
I hope we can be more quick in future and hope that everyone is saved



posted on Jun, 25 2017 @ 05:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: atifaslam
I hope we can be more quick in future and hope that everyone is saved


If only it where a perfect world! Not sure who you want to be quicker. From what I've read the bridge of the crystal was likely unmanned and the Fitz somehow didn't see it. I'm not an expert on navigation stuff but casualty control stuff, I am a lot closer than most. 11 year vet, with Two Engineering officer of the watch letters, Engineering duty officer, repair 5 Damage control training team and locker leader, basic engineering common core instructor and gas turbine Mechanical hot plant and C school instructor, and search and rescue swimmer and I can say with confidence from what I know, initial collision aside, the crew did exactly what they are supposed to do in response. Based on the damage the hour and the flooding below decks, it's a miracle it was only seven.



posted on Jun, 26 2017 @ 09:51 AM
link   
The latest news is that that the ACX captain warned the Fitz of collision course, and the warning was ignored.




A U.S. warship struck by a container vessel in Japanese waters failed to respond to warning signals or take evasive action before a collision that killed seven of its crew, according to a report of the incident by the Philippine cargo ship's captain.




In the first detailed account from one of those directly involved, the cargo ship's captain said the ACX Crystal had signalled with flashing lights after the Fitzgerald "suddenly" steamed on to a course to cross its path.




link



posted on Jun, 26 2017 @ 10:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: jaws1975
The latest news is that that the ACX captain warned the Fitz of collision course, and the warning was ignored.




A U.S. warship struck by a container vessel in Japanese waters failed to respond to warning signals or take evasive action before a collision that killed seven of its crew, according to a report of the incident by the Philippine cargo ship's captain.




In the first detailed account from one of those directly involved, the cargo ship's captain said the ACX Crystal had signalled with flashing lights after the Fitzgerald "suddenly" steamed on to a course to cross its path.




link


Maybe a container ship captain is spinning a sea story. The board of inquiry and the Fitz ships log will help. A "box" in a shipping lane seems like someone further up the chain needs to be relieved and suddenly retired.




top topics



 
57
<< 19  20  21    23  24 >>

log in

join