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 ship collides with oil tanker in Strait of Hormuz

page: 3
18
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by binkman
 

Shooting the tanker and the fire from the hole in the tanker would close shipping in the strait for a while. The Iranian government would be delighted.




posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
On the behalf of the americans, those ships take miles to stop, they also have many blind spots. Its possible they did not see the ship or the other ship was not supposed to be there.


Not even an carrier requires a mile to come to full emergency stop.

The damage is on the stbd side of the Navy vessel which IMPLIES there was a crossing situation where the tanker was off the stbd bow of the Navy vessel. If that were true, the tanker is the stand-on vessel and the Navy vessel is the give-way vessel.

If, however, if a "shouldering technique" was being engaged in attempting to stop the tanker, all responsibility lies with the Navy vessel as to the results.



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 05:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by CALGARIAN
US ships have Radar and Sonar and can detect even one man swimming underwater up to the boat...

How do they hit an Oil Tanker?


The US Ship pilot was texting.



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 05:40 PM
link   
My best guess is that it was fog and some moron decided to repair the Aegis radar at that time. Looks like the Destroyer tried to cut right in-front of the tanker. That's a hell of a way to dump more tax payers money down the tubes. The Navy will have this Captain by the short hairs till they ask him to retire. This is like saying a Bus and Corvette collided in a empty parking lot.



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 06:30 PM
link   
Not good for relations.



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 07:06 PM
link   
They shoot a guy out of the water in a motorboat that got close but can't figure out an oil tanker is on a collision course?

??????? !!!!!!!



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 07:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Sublimecraft
 


That's going to leave a mark. I wonder if the captains of either vessels feel like an ass? I know i would if i was responsible for damaging a vessel worth millions of dollars. Imagine the insurance company that has to pay for that destroyer's repairs, and the embarassment alone would be enough to force me into early retirement.



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 08:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by lifttheveil

Originally posted by Signals
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 


Maybe they warned it, but then realized they couldn't shoot at it, for fear of huge explosion....


Latest reports indicate the US ship did actually fire on it numerous times killing at least one, also the ship had no ties to Iran,

worldnews.nbcnews.com...


Wait, something is seriously amiss here. Is the video embedded in the story the same incident as in the OP?

If so, the video goes on to call it "boat," NOT a ship. BIG difference. A tanker is not a "boat." Furthermore, a tanker doesn't just "menacingly approach"...anything. It's not a fast boat, it's freakin' cargo ship.

So either, there are two different incidences, the initial report was false, or the updated report is trying to stir junk up and create a false image of what actually happened. Either are possible (and not surprising), but it really concerns me, at least, the way this is being played by the MSM, and how they are tying in the active troop movement to the area, and mentioning Iran regarding this incident and building tensions, all with the "menacing boat" moving toward the destroyer.

If it truly is a tanker, the only thing menacing is its size, so it's unlike a slug (tanker) is going to try to pull something against a Navy destroyer....So, something is going on here....

Looks like someone is manipulating the situation and the story for the best of certain groups within the US, and passing it off to the public in an untrue and skewed fashion.

Getting fishier.



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 08:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
On the behalf of the americans, those ships take miles to stop, they also have many blind spots. Its possible they did not see the ship or the other ship was not supposed to be there.


yeeeah....

with a sailor always on watch night & day, fore and aft.....plus the most sophisticated radar tech in the world for naval defense/offense ship to track subs & surface ships with missiles...

there's NO WAY they could have been allow to collide with this ship.. NO WAY... and the tin can can out run the tanker .. because their designed to do that.

something else hit the destroyer...........mark my word or there was a stand down command to do so.



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 


As per the poster below your last comment - My instincts tell me we are not being told the full and true story here. Given the military build-up in the area plus previous comments coming out that Iran was going to close the strait -
I am suspect of the "offical story" here - very suspect.

All collusion investigations are eventually published for public consumption via IMO bodies - I'll await the final report on this one.



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 09:18 PM
link   
lol professional you beat me to it
was going to post a thread about it

this is really weird .. how does that happen
it could have created a real big explosion with many deads
this could be a deliberated accident
or the captain was really to drunk to see where he was going



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 09:27 PM
link   
Divert your course.

This is the actual radio conversation of a US naval ship with the Canadian authorities off the coast of Newfoundland in October 1995.
Radio conversation released by the chief of naval operations, 10-10-95.

Canadians: Please divert your course 15 degrees to the south to avoid collision.
Americans: Recommend you divert your course 15 degrees to the north to avoid collision.
Canadians: Negative. You will have to divert your course 15 degrees to the south to avoid collision.
Americans: This is the captain of a US naval ship. I say again divert your course.
Canadians: No, i say again, divert your course.
Americans: This is the aircraft carrier US Lincoln, the second largest fleet in the United States Atlantic Fleet. We are accompanied by three destroyers, three cruisers and numerous support vessals. I demand that you divert your course 15 degrees to the north. I say again, that is one five degrees north or counter-measures will be undertaken to insure the safety of this ship.
Canadians: this is a lighthouse, your call.

i dont know whether this was a real conversation, i dont even remember where i found it but it seems to be applicable to this thread so enjoy.



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 09:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Ben81
 


Thanks hehe. This just goes to show that no matter how much superpower the USA has, in order for everything to work fine, 100s of systems have to come together in perfect harmony, miss one step and a US Navy ship is sunk.



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 09:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by CALGARIAN
US ships have Radar and Sonar and can detect even one man swimming underwater up to the boat...

How do they hit an Oil Tanker?


you make sure that the destroyer is in the path of the oil tanker
big tanker are extremely hard to turn compare to all other ships
remind me a scene from the movie "Speed 2" with the cruise ship and the tanker



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 09:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Ben81
 



this could be a deliberated accident or the captain was really to drunk to see where he was going


You can rule out alcohol - almost, if not all tankers are dry ships. US Navy in Strait of Hormuz - in this political climate - I dont think the skipper would be drinking?

Deliberate accident - now you are on to something, imo. The extent of damage is consistent with a "scrape" alongside (see my picture on page 1) - not a full blown unintentional ramming.

However - it could very well turn out to simply be a maritime collusion - albeit in a hostile and tense environment.



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 09:48 PM
link   
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 


I always get nervous reading about stuff like this. My brother-in-law is over there on one of those ships and I never know which one because my sister is not allowed to disclose. So I frantically send e-mails waiting for her to respond and tell me her husband is okay.



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 10:11 PM
link   
reply to post by thesmokingman
 


That's a bit of damage
here





posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 10:51 PM
link   
So, all we know is that a tanker and destroyer have somehow "collided" and considering that the destroyer presumably has THE most advanced and sophisticated radar detection and collision avoidance technology onboard, somehow I get the feeling we're once again being treated like mushrooms by the the media ... i.e. kept in the dark and fed sh*t.

We're told that the tanker is Japanese owned but besides that tidbit of info, we don't even have the tankers name to allow verification that it exists and was even in the area at the time of the "incident" with the destroyer.
And where are the pics of the damage to the tanker ?
edit on 12/8/12 by tauristercus because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 11:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by Signals
 


I don't think it would have been that big of an explosion if it was shot at range, I would take my chances rather than be hit by a tanker. Either way it gives the local strategists more ideas to think of scenarios...
edit on 103131p://8America/ChicagoSun, 12 Aug 2012 10:26:17 -0500 by THE_PROFESSIONAL because: (no reason given)


Are you insane? Shooting an oil tanker is seriously bad for the environment!



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 11:15 PM
link   




top topics



 
18
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join