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: 8
56
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 17 2017 @ 06:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Caver78

Probably about as legit as it gets. I hadn't seen that.

Hmmmm....interesting. I wonder if someone / something went overboard on the ACX Crystal(?) Maybe the Fitzgerald was attempting to render some kind of aid as well.

Thanks!

ETA...there's definitely more to this story. I find it hard to believe a US Naval vessel of that size could just 'accidentally' get in the way of a giant cargo ship like this. I mean, I guess it's possible, but it seems very unlikely without some other contributing factor.


edit on 6/17/2017 by Flyingclaydisk because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 17 2017 @ 06:57 AM
link   
After all the dust settles, ultimately I think we forget that shipping is still a high risk deal. Despite all the best practices and tech we use to prevent disasters marine jobs are still hazardous as all heck. We only hear about the accidents, never about all the "near fatalities" and close calls so our perceptions are a little warped into thinking it's safer than it is.

At first I had the same reaction as everyone else but once the time of the collision was mentioned, in a crowded shipping channel, well Naval ship or not accidents happen. It's unfortunate and tragic for the seven men still missing.



posted on Jun, 17 2017 @ 07:01 AM
link   
Is there a minimum range for radar contact?
Just wondering if once a ship is too close, maybe radar is not reliable, as the ship may be 'under' the beam of the radar, if the radar array or dish is mounted high on a mast?
ETA:
I just did a little digging and found that it all depends on the vertical beamwidth of the radar being used, the height of the radar set above the water level and there is mention of a blind spot that does exist.
edit on b000000302017-06-17T07:15:10-05:0007America/ChicagoSat, 17 Jun 2017 07:15:10 -0500700000017 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2017 @ 07:16 AM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy

I suspect both ships were very aware of each other's presence, but you make a good point in that judging distance and closing speeds up close like this, and then actually having the time for the ship to react, is a big challenge. Further, I would think maneuvering in tight quarters like that relies more on visual observations over electronic ones.

While a destroyer may be a 'sportscar' of ships, it ain't a "sportscar" in the literal sense.



posted on Jun, 17 2017 @ 07:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: Power_Semi

Source?

I have not seen this information anywhere.

I found this on marinetraffic.com:





The first image appears (to me) to show the time of the collision, but with exactly one hour difference between the stated time of the collision (02:30 AM local time). Then it turned back to the place of the collision before heading to port.
edit on 17/6/2017 by ArMaP because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2017 @ 08:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: peck420

Maybe the USS Fitzgerald just saved a port a massive disaster?


There was recently a "dirty bomb" scare at another port. Perhaps the "anonymous source" was right, just got the wrong port.

Though, even if true, I'm sure there must be better ways of stopping the ship than using your destroyer as a roadblock...



posted on Jun, 17 2017 @ 08:30 AM
link   
Just read this on ABC news. I know some of you asked about the crew of the boat and it list there nationality in the last paragraph. I also find it odd that according to the article the ACX didn't call in the incident until 2:20am...

The Japanese coast guard said it received an emergency call from the container ship, the ACX Crystal, reporting the collision at around 2:20 a.m. (1720 GMT Friday). It was questioning crew members of the ACX Crystal, which is operated by the Japanese shipping company Nippon Yusen K.K., and was treating the incident as a case of possible professional negligence, said Masayuki Obara, a regional coast guard official.
The ACX Crystal weighs 29,060 tons and is 222 meters (730 feet) long, the coast guard said, much larger than the 8,315-ton Navy destroyer. The container ship's left bow was dented and scraped, but it did not appear to have sustained any major structural damage.
Nippon Yusen said all of the ACX Crystal's 20-member Filipino crew members were safe.



posted on Jun, 17 2017 @ 08:35 AM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

Lol are we at war with Japan now?



posted on Jun, 17 2017 @ 09:18 AM
link   
She made it to port in Yokusuka. They still have to pump out the flooded spaces, and the search is still on for the missing sailors.



posted on Jun, 17 2017 @ 09:19 AM
link   
Russia must have technology to make the ships radar not correct, either that or North Korea. It obviously has to be blamed on Russia.



posted on Jun, 17 2017 @ 09:42 AM
link   
a reply to: bally001

They might Port Royal her if the keel is bent. The USS Port Royal came out of Pearl Harbor back in 2009, turned towards Honolulu and went to flank speed, and promptly slammed into a sand bar so hard it took a week to get her floated.

She damaged her hull so badly she's made like one deployment since. She mostly stays in Hawaii doing tests for the MDA, working on the Aegis BMD system.
edit on 6/17/2017 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2017 @ 10:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: 772STi
Just read this on ABC news. I know some of you asked about the crew of the boat and it list there nationality in the last paragraph. I also find it odd that according to the article the ACX didn't call in the incident until 2:20am...

Most references point to the collision happening around 2:30am, so why do you find it odd?



posted on Jun, 17 2017 @ 10:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: 772STi
Just read this on ABC news. I know some of you asked about the crew of the boat and it list there nationality in the last paragraph. I also find it odd that according to the article the ACX didn't call in the incident until 2:20am...

Most references point to the collision happening around 2:30am, so why do you find it odd?


I thought the original reports where showing the incident happened around 1:30.

ETA- I reread the op, you are correct it does show around 2:30. Thank you for clarifying
edit on 6/17/2017 by 772STi because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2017 @ 10:46 AM
link   
Was this one with Nimitz and Shoup?



posted on Jun, 17 2017 @ 10:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Fitzgerald is forward deployed with Reagan. She had been off Korea but returned to Japan after Vinson left.



posted on Jun, 17 2017 @ 11:49 AM
link   
a reply to: peck420
yeah if lets say there was intel that cargo ship had a nuke and only way we could stop her with out setting off nuke was to ram her nah that destroyer could have sunk the cargo ship or disabled her from over the horizon she is fitted with anti ship missiles, tomahawks, a 5 inch cannon , unless i am mistaken torpedoes , a helicopter with anti ship capabilities yeah this was probably just a fubar incident and co,xo,and bridge crew all going to lose commissions probably, cargo ship crew captain oh well ship happens.



posted on Jun, 17 2017 @ 12:01 PM
link   
According to the captain of the container ship, they were traveling the same direction at the time of the collision. According toJapanese sources he's cooperating fully with the investigators. There were no injuries to the crew of the container ship.

m.philstar.com...

According to the latest Navy updates, in addition to the spaces that flooded, the radio room was also flooded.


edit on 6/17/2017 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)

edit on 6/17/2017 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2017 @ 12:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Power_Semi
The cargo ship did an unexpected u-turn and started travelling back in the direction it had come from before colliding with your ship, then carrying on with it's original journey.Sounds odd.


I believe it did the u turn AFTER colliding, then returned to Japan. In that context, it's not odd at all.



posted on Jun, 17 2017 @ 12:13 PM
link   
a reply to: TheShippingForecast
because you would never get thatclose to a carrier at sea they travel with a strike group usually made up of ships and subs designed to keep the carrier safe only time i can think of a carrier would have to worry about incident like this is entering or exiting a harbor or a narrow strait i.e. a bottle neck.




posted on Jun, 17 2017 @ 12:27 PM
link   
a reply to: eriktheawful
this reminds me of a story i heard years ago a navy destroyer picked up a large surface contact in its path and radioed it to move out of its path the object replied no you divert your path . the captain heard this and got p.o.ed and said this is the captain of us navy destroyer followed by ship name change course or we will fire on you. surface contact replied this is the lighthouse on something rock change course or run aground.




top topics



 
56
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join