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.

 

Are Merchant Ships Being Intentionally Weaponized in Deliberate Attacks Against US Navy?

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 10:12 AM
link   
There have been four collisions involving US navy vessels in the last year, and now the commander of the 7th fleet has been relieved of duty to fix it all.

There's been a lot of talk about incompetence in leadership, GPS spoofing, hacking of navigation systems, etc., but there is one topic that I have not seen much - if any - discussion on.

Is it possible that what we're seeing is not a result of incompetent leadership (though leadership failures may play into it), nor simple failures or hacking of navigation systems or GPS spoofing, but an actual intentional, planned and coordinated attack on the US military, using merchant vessels as weapons of destruction against mobile, floating US military installations?

One of the articles linked below has this quote:



"It is truly extraordinary, not only that it should happen, and not only that it should happen to the U.S. Navy, but that it should happen repeatedly within weeks in the same geographic area," said John Blaxland, head of the Strategic and Defence Studies Center at the Australian National University in Sydney. (Emphasis added.


It's not my intention to dismiss failures in the chain of command, but why is nobody talking about the possibility that there is something more nefarious at work than just bad seamanship? Perhaps some of our friends here who are more informed in matters military can elucidate this topic.

Here are a couple of links, in case you've been living under a rock:

4 accidents, 2 deadly, raise questions about Navy operations
from ABC News.

americanmil... itarynews.com/2017/08/us-navys-7th-fleet-commander-dismissed-due-to-loss-of-confidence-marred-by-collisions/ from Anerican Military News.
edit on 2017 8 23 by incoserv because: I could




posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 10:15 AM
link   
a reply to: incoserv

There were three collisions. The fourth incident was a grounding where the Antietam hit her screws and damaged them and the hull. One of the collisions was with a fishing boat. Navy ships have always had problems with small boats coming up close around them, and occasionally hitting them.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 10:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: incoserv

There were three collisions. The fourth incident was a grounding where the Antietam hit her screws and damaged them and the hull. One of the collisions was with a fishing boat. Navy ships have always had problems with small boats coming up close around them, and occasionally hitting them.


Right, just two collisions with large merchant vessels. Should have caught that. That lends to the idea of command failures.

Still, two large collisions...
edit on 2017 8 23 by incoserv because: I could.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 10:24 AM
link   
a reply to: incoserv

Doubtful - look up 'VTS' and then look up The International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea 1972 (COLREGs), then look up 300,000 ton tanker maneuverability characteristics, then look up Vessel Data Recorder.

Then put it all together.

Sorry, but the US and other military navies spend very little time teaching and training their deck officers in those things - its all about targets and distance to targets and weapons.

About 98% of ocean traffic is fishing and trade - poor stats for the US navy to be involved in so many incidents, irrespective of geographical location.

BUT one thing is a stand-out - the US navy (and other navies) are #in useless in close-quarters situations where high traffic volumes are present - like Singapore approaches for instance. No enemies present, just fishermen and seafarers who navigate such waters for a living.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 10:34 AM
link   
Being ex navy I could see how one could be of neglected duty but two is pushing it. The navy runs by strict regulations that are hammered into us.

I hope I don't get in trouble for this.

For all ships. There's a port and starboard watch. There's always someone at the helm with either a high enlisted like a chief or an officer telling the helms man directions. You also have one of three big guys CO, XO or a department head who should be awake on the chair. For all the above to fail in their duties is very questionable. For it to happen twice is astonishing. It just hard to believe unless these are attacks. Then the probability of this is high with that in mind.

Running a ground is rare but I don't blame anyone for that mess up and I hope no one really lost their job with that.

It's something we should keep a very close eye on.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 10:35 AM
link   
a reply to: incoserv

Somehow I remembered "The African Queen" movie with your post....



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 10:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
a reply to: incoserv

Doubtful - look up 'VTS' and then look up The International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea 1972 (COLREGs), then look up 300,000 ton tanker maneuverability characteristics, then look up Vessel Data Recorder.

Then put it all together...


Thanks. That's helpful and elucidating. Kind of what I suspected, but my mind being what it is...

Brings to mind the old joke about the fleet commanding the lighthouse to change course.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 10:35 AM
link   
a reply to: incoserv


"Is it possible that what we're seeing is not a result of incompetent leadership (though leadership failures may play into it), nor simple failures or hacking of navigation systems or GPS spoofing, but an actual intentional, planned and coordinated attack on the US military,"

Yes.

And not just the U.S military. Worldwide.

The God given human "navigation" system which uses an organic computer called a brain is being over run with the reliance of technology instead of people using their own brains and remaining vigilant.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 10:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: ConscienceZombie
Being ex navy I could see how one could be of neglected dut ... It's something we should keep a very close eye on.


Interesting alternate take, more in line with my OP.

That is, also, kind of what I was thiking.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 10:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: WhiteWingedMonolith
a reply to: incoserv


"Is it possible that what we're seeing is not a result of incompetent leadership (though leadership failures may play into it), nor simple failures or hacking of navigation systems or GPS spoofing, but an actual intentional, planned and coordinated attack on the US military,"

Yes.

And not just the U.S military. Worldwide.

The God given human "navigation" system which uses an organic computer called a brain is being over run with the reliance of technology instead of people using their own brains and remaining vigilant.


That very thought crossed my mind, too.

I remember reading an essay a long while back by an old airline pilot who was bemoaning the thought that modern pilots are not taught to fly planes anymore, just to work the computers that do it, and how that leads to problems when the information systems go down.

Maybe it's just that. Maybe it's making it easy for attacks to be carried out.
edit on 2017 8 23 by incoserv because: I could.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 10:42 AM
link   
a reply to: ConscienceZombie

The Navy is running into the same problem we're seeing in the aviation industry. The automation is getting to the point where the crew relies on automation, instead of their skills and knowledge. That leads to accidents, because the crew thinks the automation is going to handle everything and someone sees something, but doesn't say anything because they believe someone else will see it, or the automatic systems will sound an alarm.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 10:57 AM
link   
The more military equipment you have swimming around, the more accidents can happen.
But indeed,

"It is truly extraordinary, not only that it should happen, and not only that it should happen to the U.S. Navy, but that it should happen repeatedly within weeks in the same geographic area."

Somehow this reminds me to the Tonkin incident...

edit on 23 8 2017 by DerBeobachter because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 11:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: ConscienceZombie

The Navy is running into the same problem we're seeing in the aviation industry. The automation is getting to the point where the crew relies on automation, instead of their skills and knowledge. That leads to accidents, because the crew thinks the automation is going to handle everything and someone sees something, but doesn't say anything because they believe someone else will see it, or the automatic systems will sound an alarm.


I think you hit the nail on the head with this statement. All of this technology is a tool, it can't think.

The last accident seems to be a misjudgement on the part of someone who altered the orders of another person in charge. I read a transcript of what was said this appears to be a problem with the second officer who came onto the bridge and changed the orders. That happens. The accident a few months ago was the fault of the merchant ship, this was a misjudgement of the ships officer it appears. I do not know the full story, I just read an article that had a copy of the audio. I wouldn't think releasing that audio would be legal. I wonder how they got it.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 11:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: rickymouse

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: ConscienceZombie

The Navy is running into the same problem we're seeing in the aviation industry. The automation is getting to the point where the crew relies on automation, instead of their skills and knowledge. That leads to accidents, because the crew thinks the automation is going to handle everything and someone sees something, but doesn't say anything because they believe someone else will see it, or the automatic systems will sound an alarm.


I think you hit the nail on the head with this statement. All of this technology is a tool, it can't think.

The last accident seems to be a misjudgement on the part of someone who altered the orders of another person in charge. I read a transcript of what was said this appears to be a problem with the second officer who came onto the bridge and changed the orders. That happens. The accident a few months ago was the fault of the merchant ship, this was a misjudgement of the ships officer it appears. I do not know the full story, I just read an article that had a copy of the audio. I wouldn't think releasing that audio would be legal. I wonder how they got it.


I was working at a shop in Texas. The manager's airhead daughter came in and was all excited because she had a new SUV. The SUV had a back-up camera and she was yammering on about how the technological enhancement made the SUV so much safer, wouldn't shut the hell up about. You'd have thought she'd won the lottery.

I kid you not, she backed into another car leaving the parking lot.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 11:17 AM
link   
a reply to: incoserv

The Asiana 777 crash in San Francisco was because the crew didn't understand the autopilot system. They set the Flight Level Change setting on the autopilot, but didn't realize that while it would change the altitude of the aircraft, it wouldn't adjust the throttles to maintain their speed setting. Their speed dropped so low that they couldn't maintain altitude, and by the time they realized it, it was too late.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 11:27 AM
link   
I listened to the recording of the mccain collision. It was 100 percent incompetence from the navy captain. Even his crew were trying to warn him. No conspiracy other than the navy keeps promoting officers whether they merit it or not. Years ago an admiral had command of 100 ships or so. Now there are so many admirals that one commands 4 to 5 ships. The navy runs often tines especially with their officers like a bureaucracy and incompetent officers are promoted to captain.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 11:31 AM
link   
a reply to: incoserv

Safer..lol, I bet her face was red, reminds me of the story where someone put their motorhome on cruise control and hopped into the back to make a drink..didn't end well, a bit of natural selection going on too.
In general we are all being "dumbed down" by technology.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 12:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: vonclod
a reply to: incoserv

Safer..lol, I bet her face was red, reminds me of the story where someone put their motorhome on cruise control and hopped into the back to make a drink..didn't end well, a bit of natural selection going on too.
In general we are all being "dumbed down" by technology.


If they succeed in getting us totally dependent on technology then we are helpless to fend for ourselves. I know so many people now that have no clue how to use a map, if it doesn't involve electronics they do not know how to use it. They set their directions to go to places they have been before, it is like they did not make a memory of how to get there.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 12:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: ConscienceZombie

The Navy is running into the same problem we're seeing in the aviation industry. The automation is getting to the point where the crew relies on automation, instead of their skills and knowledge. That leads to accidents, because the crew thinks the automation is going to handle everything and someone sees something, but doesn't say anything because they believe someone else will see it, or the automatic systems will sound an alarm.


But would automatization not normally mean that FEWER accidents were to be expected?

As with aviation most accidents are caused by human doing things they should not or not doing things they should - relative to that systematic errors occurs seldomly. Everything else being equal, the less human intervention that is needed, the lower the rate of accidents should be.

(that said, I am not convinced accidents ARE on the rise - it could easily just be a rise in media coverage)



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 01:13 PM
link   
a reply to: incoserv

I have thought the same thing. Mainly about the last two crashes near Korea and Japan. I remember seeing that North Korea has threatened people that they would kill their family if they didnt provide informatiin or actions. If it is true it could also be China. I know tge last ship flew a Libyan flag and im not sute about the first boat. However the recent accident was in the busiest port in the world. I still do t see how radar and spotters wouldnt see this coming. Maybe i just dont understand how things work on Navy vessels.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join