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: 4
18
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 11:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Sublimecraft
 


Have to agree, maritime is very strict on rules and regulations, if restricted by draft she would have had to display the correct light signals



Crossing situation When two power driven vessels are crossing, the vessel with the other on her own starboard side is the give way vessel and must keep clear of the other.

Looks like that one was missed

also the radar should have given a warning of the approach of a vessel, the radar even on civilian vessels can pick up a small boat at distance even in rain.
Probably the watchman had fallen asleep and will now claim a malfunction of equipment, still wont get him off the hook however, must maintain a lookout by eye sight and not just rely on technology. falls back on the captain

Or was it misidentified with the hope it was Iranian

edit on 12-8-2012 by munkey66 because: added content




posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 11:36 PM
link   
When I was in the USN my ship was hit by an oil tanker too.... it must be a conspiracy!!!!!!!!

Actually, no. They had a casualty to their steering gear and lost control of it's rudder.In restricted waters sometimes you just don't have time and or space to avoid a sudden course change with large ships.



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 11:45 PM
link   
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 


This is why I say I have no faith in any government being to be able to protect us from incoming from space....can't even spot an oil tanker?



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 12:00 AM
link   
reply to post by munkey66
 


I've been in these high traffic close quarters situations plenty of times - I ship out of Singapore, we encounter their Naval fleet on a regular basis and they are sometimes "all over the place" to put it mildly giving little opportunity to acquire their real intentions but.......they always get out of the way in plenty of time and appear to be fully aware of their surroundings. From a Merchant Navy perspective we have "deadman" alarms on the bridge - these go off every 8+mins and need to be acknowledged - if not acknowledged then the general alarm sounds and everybody is alerted.

Also there is the VHF radios which are always used in these situations. The tanker, if she was the stand-on vessel and in doubt as to the warships intentions, would have radioed the warship using VHF Ch16. If no response then the Tanker must take action to avoid collusion - even though she is stand-on. And you are to avoid an alteration of course to port for a vessel on your own port side. Any action by the Tanker would have to be taken very early (say 8-12nm from collusion point) because usually the Captains Standing Orders are to maintain a minimum 1nm CPA (Closest point of approach) at all times.

Whatever the findings it will be an interesting read - I'm betting the US Navy will be found at fault but nothing will happen to the Captain...........

edit on 13-8-2012 by Sublimecraft because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 12:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
worldnews.nbcnews.com...



An oil tanker collided with a U.S. Navy destroyer near the Strait of Hormuz on Sunday but no one was hurt and shipping traffic in the waterway, through which 40 percent of the world's seaborne oil exports pass, was not affected, officials said.


What in the world just happened..

IN such volatile region a US navy ship just got hit by an oil tanker? The US Navy would never allow any vessel to get this close in such a complex zone... This is the stuff ATS is made fo. Looks like those Iranian fast boats and high speed missiles will have no problem in the event of war.
edit o
n 103131p://8America/ChicagoSun, 12 Aug 2012 10:17:34 -0500 by THE_PROFESSIONAL because: (no reason given)
*sigh...A U.S.destroyer WOULD NOT fire on a tanker UNLESS 100% certain they were attacking.Obviously the Iranian mouthpiece op showing his hopeless ignorance yet again by mistaking good judgement for incompetence.And if we fired in mistake this latest piece of crap post of yours would have read something like..blood thirsty U.S.attack friendly,unarmed ship.Your posts should go straight to hoax,rant or more deservedly,the garbage.



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 02:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Liquesence
It wouldn't surprise me if the US demanded the tanker to deviate its course out of the US ship's course, but the tanker, having a hella hard time doing such a thing what with its massive size, couldn't, and the arrogance of the US decided to continue on.

Just one scenario.

And/or it thought it could clear in tight quarters...

Probably the latter. Difficult to maneuver such large vessels in small spaces.


According to a navy collegue, thats a real possibility!



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 02:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL

What in the world just happened..



Sorry, you must be an American ... reason I say that, is that you're totally clueless.

An oiltanker has RIGHT OF WAY. An oiltanker is a huge ship, carrying a heavy load ... and it is incapable of maneuvers. It basically sails straight ahead, period. And anyone who has any notion of maritime law, knows this ... except Americans, who see this as another "did you just run into my fist there, man", episode.

It's a typical American attitude, to sit on a warship look at the world (an oiltanker) and say ... "get out of my way, you big fat donkey" (Use Al-Bundy's voice when immitating).


edit on 13/8/2012 by bjarneorn because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 03:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
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.


Insurance! On a US warship! It's called taxes. I mean no offense here, I just found that image to be funny; trying to insure something, with that price tag, that was pretty much built to be shot at.
edit on 13-8-2012 by xFiDgetx because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 03:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by bjarneorn

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL

What in the world just happened..



Sorry, you must be an American ... reason I say that, is that you're totally clueless.

An oiltanker has RIGHT OF WAY. An oiltanker is a huge ship, carrying a heavy load ... and it is incapable of maneuvers. It basically sails straight ahead, period. And anyone who has any notion of maritime law, knows this ... except Americans, who see this as another "did you just run into my fist there, man", episode.

It's a typical American attitude, to sit on a warship look at the world (an oiltanker) and say ... "get out of my way, you big fat donkey" (Use Al-Bundy's voice when immitating).


edit on 13/8/2012 by bjarneorn because: (no reason given)


The colregs clearly state that there is no such thing as absolute right of way on the water. There are guidelines on which vessel is to give-way, but none that say an oil-tanker automatically has the right of way.

And how can someone possibly be clueless for asking a simple question? And you have the nerve to label Americans on the whole as such. Amazing.



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 04:20 AM
link   
Did the tanker have the transponder online?



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 04:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ben81

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


hmmmm...

so .. it blocked a Japanese oil tanker ? Something ain't right here... definately off.. the colision alarm s/h gone off on the tin can and the oil tanker.. the radar equiptment on both ships, at least on the tin can, is state of the art......especially on the tin can and on high alert ..(assuming the area) not the mention the day/night watches ..



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 06:20 AM
link   
As I understand it, Hormuz is fairly narrow. Accidents can happen. So far it sounds like something minor, thankfully. No one needs more drama in that region right now.

And now my off subject rant.....

So sick of the ATS "community" bashing Americans. Not the American Government. Not American Foreign Policy. Those are fair game. I'm talking about the American people. Cheap shots all the time based on nothing. I swear I could read a thread about the sun rising and someone ( or a lot of someones ) would be hanging around making cracks about " Idiot arrogant Americans probably think the sun only rises for them ". Why all the hostility? I never did a thing to you. I'd wager no other American has, either. Why all the name calling? Would it be ok if I just ran into random threads and started spouting off about the smelly, cheese eating French? Or the lazy, overly entitled Greeks? What about the condescending, boorish Brits? No, I think someone would be crying foul and rightly so. A message board is supposed to be a community. I like to think of it as a cafe where people come in and listen, and join in to conversations that are interesting to them. You behave in the same manner you would if you were sitting at the table talking. Rudeness adds nothing to the conversation and results in people being defensive. Conversations that could be enjoyable and enlightening become flame wars. That's not community. It's off putting and ultimately leads people to stop participating.

Here's a thought to keep in mind. You may be the only person from your nation one has ever encountered. You have thusly become an ambassador for your entire nation. If the people I have encountered here are truly representitive, it's a wonder the world isn't in more conflict than it is.



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Komodo

Originally posted by Ben81

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


hmmmm...

so .. it blocked a Japanese oil tanker ? Something ain't right here... definately off.. the colision alarm s/h gone off on the tin can and the oil tanker.. the radar equiptment on both ships, at least on the tin can, is state of the art......especially on the tin can and on high alert ..(assuming the area) not the mention the day/night watches ..




The bells and whistles going off in my head are how Turkey was buying oil with gold, to get around the sanctions, and now we have a japanese tanker...Japan doing the same thing?



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 09:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Komodo

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.



Question is, what can do that kind of damage but not rip a hole in the hull? Doubtful and RPG could do that.. So a possible terrorist attack on the destroyer or a ship to ship battle? The dent the sailor in that picture was standing in looked like it was made by a huge baseball in terms of the crater it left.



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 01:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by xFiDgetx

The colregs clearly state that there is no such thing as absolute right of way on the water. There are guidelines on which vessel is to give-way, but none that say an oil-tanker automatically has the right of way.



Titanic vs. a motor boat. It's a common fools notion, that the motor boat is in the right because he's on the ships starboard.

This "starboard" rule, is an old rule that applies ... but only basically. It has it's role in a thousand year old viking history, when the "steer" of a boat, was on the right side of the it (see: longboats). This is where the "steerman" sat, to steer the ship, facing outward. He therefore had "view" of all traffic on that side ... another vessel, crossing on his right side, would have him on his backboard site ... this means, that his back would be facing his front. Therefore the one seeing the other vessel, had to give right of way.

Even though this rule applies, it's only a basic rule ... the rule currently is that a more "maneuverable" vessel, must give way to a bigger, lesser maneuverable ship. And the one first to get the other in his sights, must signat the other ship in case of doubt. There is no actual "steerboard" (starboard) or "backboard" anymore. Therefore, the motor boat must give way to Titanic ... period. Because the motor boat (Navy ship) is better maneuvarable, and has better visability.






edit on 13/8/2012 by bjarneorn because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 01:47 PM
link   
Looking at the damage it is obvious who was to blame. The Navy ship did no yield the right of way, thus damage on the starboard side. We have to stop letting teenagers drive our ships. We, the taxpayers will pay for it and nobody will be reprimanded. The military does not care how much it spends, it is not their money.



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 10:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000

Originally posted by Komodo

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.



Question is, what can do that kind of damage but not rip a hole in the hull? Doubtful and RPG could do that.. So a possible terrorist attack on the destroyer or a ship to ship battle? The dent the sailor in that picture was standing in looked like it was made by a huge baseball in terms of the crater it left.


just looked at the pic again...

the dmg isn't physically consistent with the bow of ANY ship ... the dmg looks like something fell on top of it or .. possibly the tankers anchor caught it .. ??

the dmg looks weird .. if a tanker rammed the ship.. the side would have and should have buckled in .. NOT down ..



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 07:39 AM
link   
Just goes to show that while the US has all the tech, they don't know how to use it properly


I think the US needs to review their training regime...



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 12:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Sublimecraft
 



Being a navigation officer in the merchant Navy, I will be interested to see the specific situation as it transpired.


I'll see what I can answer for you based on what I'm hearing from the crew and keeping within OPSEC.

Been the most excitement around here since the Rappahannock.


High traffic area - all radars and AIS would have been functioning - they would definitely have seen each other.


Normally, yes, both ships would have had these systems operating.

Outages of systems do, however, occur. Though why the vessel with functioning equipment would fail to avoid such a collision is a very, very good question.

The nature of the damage should be pretty indicative of the fact that it was not the Destroyer hitting the tanker - but the tanker hitting the Destroyer (kudos to DDG 78's helmsman if he could get her to slam broadside into the bow of a tanker hard enough to do that) - at considerable speed.


For Example, if risk of collusion is deemed to exist then "The vessel which has the other on her own starboard side shall give way".

The US Navy vessel had damage to her starboard side suggesting she MAY have been the give-way vessel?


That might have been the assumption of the Japanese tanker.

Though it would be a subject of investigation as to whether or not the captain of DDG 78 exhausted all available means to avoid the collision.

reply to post by Montana
 



Actually, no. They had a casualty to their steering gear and lost control of it's rudder.In restricted waters sometimes you just don't have time and or space to avoid a sudden course change with large ships.


I've not seen this mentioned in the news reports, yet - but your sources are not too different from what mine have been saying. Though I'm not entirely sure why the Navy hasn't released much along the lines of an official statement, yet (or if they have - I haven't found it).

reply to post by Sublimecraft
 



Whatever the findings it will be an interesting read - I'm betting the US Navy will be found at fault but nothing will happen to the Captain.


He's done; that command is over for him. The current investigation is essentially whether or not he spends time in jail and who gets to join him.

As well as determining what can be done to prevent this in the future - but the answer to that is likely to cost too much money to make it happen - so it will happen again in another 5 years or so.

reply to post by Komodo
 



the dmg isn't physically consistent with the bow of ANY ship ... the dmg looks like something fell on top of it or .. possibly the tankers anchor caught it .. ??


That tanker is larger than an aircraft carrier.

The bow -would- be "falling down on top of" the Destroyer. Though I'm surprised there wasn't damage below the waterline due to the bulbous protrusion most modern bow designs have. It must have, luckily, been a full tanker riding low enough in the water to keep this from slamming into the underside of the Destroyer.
edit on 14-8-2012 by Aim64C because: Edit for ship title.



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 01:42 PM
link   
all the EX sailors blaming the tanker.
Its the tanker Fault for buying Oil there.
dont do it again or we may sink you next time...

or are you telling us the US navy are total dorks?



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join