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.

 

US Navy collisions stoke cyber threat concerns

page: 1
8
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 08:39 PM
link   
I thought this s/b posted in the WW3 forum because of the impact it could have on the NK/SK/US conflict. Mods, if I'm wrong, please let me know.


The Pentagon won’t yet say how the USS John S. McCain was rammed by an oil tanker near Singapore, but red flags are flying as the Navy’s decades-old reliance on electronic guidance systems increasing looks like another target of cyberattack.

The incident – the fourth involving a Seventh Fleet warship this year – occurred near the Strait of Malacca, a crowded 1.7-mile-wide waterway that connects the Indian Ocean and the South China Sea and accounts for roughly 25 percent of global shipping. “When you are going through the Strait of Malacca, you can’t tell me that a Navy destroyer doesn’t have a full navigation team going with full lookouts on every wing and extra people on radar,” said Jeff Stutzman, chief intelligence officer at Wapack Labs, a New Boston, New Hampshire, cyber intelligence service.

“There’s something more than just human error going on because there would have been a lot of humans to be checks and balances,” said Stutzman, a former information warfare specialist in the Navy.


Source

North Korea is very well known for committing cyber attacks. I don't have proof, but it wouldn't surprise me if Lil' Kim had something to do with this. The timing could't be worse for the U.S.

Imho if NK is behind this, it's an act of war for which our Potus must act accordingly.
edit on 21-8-2017 by dianajune because: typo




posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 08:45 PM
link   
People make mistakes, and collisions aren't really that infrequent. I don't see any reason to believe it was anything other than human error at this point.



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 08:53 PM
link   
Yes, something did go on. They lost steering before the collision according to early reports.



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 09:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
Yes, something did go on. They lost steering before the collision according to early reports.

Ah, hadn't heard that. Interesting.



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 09:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
Yes, something did go on. They lost steering before the collision according to early reports.


At the risk of this sounding like a very stupid question.......do you believe that this was a deliberate act; and if so, how should the U.S. respond?



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 09:06 PM
link   
a reply to: dianajune

No, I don't. If the ship broke, it broke, and there wasn't a lot they could do about getting out of the way.



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 09:06 PM
link   
a reply to: AdmireTheDistance

A Navy spokesperson said it shortly after the accident. They may have lost steering before the collision but were able to get it back at some point, and get themselves into port.



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 09:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
If the ship broke, it broke

My head spins thinking about how frequently this is a problem on a US Naval ship of war.

Great CT!! ... Making this an excellent thread!!



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 09:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Snarl

I knew a guy on subs that had a cruise that they barely came home from, because every time they turned around something broke. They were in the middle of the Atlantic and lost hydraulic control, and couldn't vent ballast, so sat there watching the depth gauge slowly going deeper and deeper while they scrambled to fix the hydraulics. Some cruises, everything breaks.



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 09:37 PM
link   
I was always under the impression that ANYTHING that comes within a certain perimeter of a US warship is treated as a target once it does not comply? Secondly, if the steering did break on the tanker, wouldn't this be broadcast...something like this " US Warship, you're never going to believe this, but we've lost our steering" to which the reply would be an all stations alarm on-board the US ship? Just thinking in a practical nature??



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 09:46 PM
link   
a reply to: CaptainBeno

It wasn't on the tanker, it was on the destroyer. And no, they don't treat them as targets. They're in international waters. They have every right to be in those waters, just as the warship does.



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 10:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58
It's a pretty new ship. Any idea if steering is fly by wire type?



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 10:37 PM
link   
a reply to: whywhynot

The Arleigh Burke uses a gear system for the steering. The gears are supplied by Northrop Grumman.



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 10:47 PM
link   
This is something I can actually speak to and zaphod is 100% correct. I served on much smaller ships than this but the same principles apply and some cruises everything breaks, as zaph said. Ships have a life of their own and occasionally throw tantrums. My first Patrol Boat I was on decided to throw a tantrum when our Engineering Petty Officer left her for a new billet ( it was like she knew the new EPO was a jerk). The A/C went out in the middle of the gulf of mexico, governor on the engine went out, steering pots went hay wire, small boat broke down. 4 days of absolute hell. There's a lot of engineering at play with a boat of any kind and things break.

Speaking directly to the issue, could have been mechanical such as air in the lines or human error. Once, had to set emergency steering as our Boat was coming out of narrow water way. The helm wasn't responding and we were heading straight for the jetties. I was the emergency helmsman in aft steering and was in charge of steering said boat in a situation just as this. The Deck watch officer is screaming at me over the radio to give her full starboard rudder. I'm cranking on this hydraulic pump and not seeing anything change on the rudder indicators. I'm yelling back I've got nothing which is weird cause the system appeared to be intact. Finally, about 50 yards from the jetties, I'm seeing movement on the rudder indicators. There was a pause for about minute. We get the pipe to resume our regular jobs for navigating in a restricted waterway. I get up to the bridge and find out that the boatswains mate had bumped the autopilot button with his coffee mug. Go figure..... All of us engineers were sweating it thinking we had something to do with it, turns out it was an idiot deckie and his coffee mug. go figure.

**IT happens
edit on 21-8-2017 by Jacksonsman1 because: replaced a questionable word

edit on 21-8-2017 by Jacksonsman1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 11:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58


If the ship broke, it broke, and there wasn't a lot they could do about getting out of the way.

A 'state of the art' 'combat capable' ship without multiple redundancy steering systems?
They don't have a reverse on these ships?
Couldn't use asymmetrical engine power to steer?
WTF??... I didnt even have to steer my old 35footer with twin diesels even whilst docking if using power and gearbox correctly.
With my current 32footer with twin diesel jet drives I can perform a frikkin ballet on engine power and reverse deflector control only.
Ya different scale but the concepts the same.
Just sayin.....

edit on C2017vAmerica/ChicagoMon, 21 Aug 2017 23:57:08 -050031PM11America/Chicago8 by CovertAgenda because: updated

edit on C2017vAmerica/ChicagoMon, 21 Aug 2017 23:58:04 -050031PM11America/Chicago8 by CovertAgenda because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 11:52 PM
link   
a reply to: dianajune


Great post, DianaJune. I hadn't thought of that. Kim Jong zapping our fleet's navigation systems. Maybe with the help of IRAN too.



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 11:57 PM
link   
I had a 34 foot cruiser ChrisCraft.....twin gas babies compared to a diesel....yep twin controls right there stickin up

reply to: CovertAgenda


edit on 21-8-2017 by GBP/JPY because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 21 2017 @ 11:57 PM
link   
a reply to: CovertAgenda

It's slightly different steering a 35 foot boat, and an Arleigh Burke destroyer. They have multiple redundancy, but the backups are slower and harder to use than the primary steering. In the middle of a busy shipping lane, you might not have a lot of time to react, pass the orders, and get the ship starting to turn.



posted on Aug, 22 2017 @ 12:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58
For sure mate, not disagreeing.... but there is still a reverse function?
Just sounds too suspect to my jaded cynicism.....



posted on Aug, 22 2017 @ 12:05 AM
link   
a reply to: CovertAgenda

It's not just a matter of popping an engine into reverse and spinning the ship. They were in the middle of an extremely busy shipping lane. There's no telling what was around them, or what was wrong. They might have turned and been hit by something else, or it might have been a problem that would be fixed fairly quickly.




top topics



 
8
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join