US Navy destroyer collision

[Cormorant]

Yeah -- it covers only events AFTER collision. Interesting to see all the detailed photos, but nothing whatsoever about how it might have happened.

[Jim Cate]

Great report on what happened AFTER the collision, and it appears that the sailors performed their duties well.

But NOTHING about what happened before the collision, or what the cause might have been.

And for those who hold to the 56 mile from land view, please note that in the initial description of conditions at the time, "land in sight" is reported. Pretty hard to see land at 56 miles at night!

Jim

[Paul L]

The report states

. By 0130
hours on 17 June 2017, FITZGERALD was
approximately 56 nautical miles to the southwest
of Yokosuka, Japan, near the Izu Peninsula

[Jim Cate]

Originally Posted by Paul L

The report states

Yes, 56 miles from Yokosuko, not 56 miles from land, which was within view, apprently about 10 miles off.

Jim

[estarzinger]

The current scuttlebutt is this . . .
after the Zumwalt class was cancelled (background: it was supposed to be the next generation destroyer class - it had gotten approved and funded, and then after about $10b was committed leaks revealed it could not perform many of its designated mission objectives, and it was eventually cancelled. It takes galactic class failure for an approved funded major weapon system to get flat out cancelled), Navy now wants Congress to approve funding and building a whole bunch more of these last generation Arleigh Burke class. And they seriously don't want the ship design to be identified as flawed in any significant way, because that would both hurt their funding chance and do even more damage to their technical credibility. So (I am told) the mission has been to find a simple set of (multiple) human failures and to not look too far beyond the 'few bad apples'. That at least is the gossip floating around Annapolis - probably some truth to it, but probably not the entire truth.

[Snowpetrel]

The report also says at 0000 the fitzgeralds course was 230 degrees, and she was on her way to Subic Bay.

The report does seem calculated to emphasise the heroic post incident events. I particularly liked the way they put an emotive image of the relative sizes of the vessels and the bulbous bow of the ACX.

But at least they are releasing info.

[estarzinger]

^^ The 230 degrees (True) course is interesting - different than what we expected (probably why JCG would still like/need information from Navy to conclude their investigation) - means they turned to port across the shipping flow.

It does (explicitly) state (which it did not have to if they had been doing some special op) that they were on routine transit, and in routine operation at time of incident. So (probably) no operation who's super secret maneuver might be revealed by releasing their actual track.

[Snowpetrel]

Got to say reading the report, it was a pretty epic damage control job. Amazing the amount of damage the ACX Did, lots of critical systems wiped out, coms, nav, steering etc. I am surprised at the lack of redundancy but I guess they may have thought burying all this stuff deep in the ship was a good idea? Or maybe it was a complete power failure, and emergency batts only run for so long?

The 230 course implies it was close to a head on situation. Certainly no where near overtaking as many initial speculations had it.

[El Pinguino]

Looks like 'an end on or ****nearly**** end on' where the warship .... fine on the starboard bow of the ACX Crystal .... altered to port while the ACX Crystal did what it was supposed to do per the rules and altered to starboard....

I do know of one collision many years ago where, in a very basic crossing situation... ie in simple and approximate terms the give way ship steering 135* , stand on ship steering 000* ... where the give way ship had damage on her port beam and the stand on ship had damage on her starboard bow... riddle me that one if you wish.... its what can happen and one of the reasons that turning to port is rarely a good idea...

[justwaiting]

The US Navy has announced that about a dozen sailors are to be disciplined after seven crew on the USS Fitzgerald were killed in a collision.
The destroyer collided with a Philippines container ship in Japanese waters in June.
The deputy chief of naval operations, Admiral Bill Moran, said the commanding officer and two other senior crew would no longer serve aboard the ship.
He said the Navy had lost trust and confidence in their ability to lead.

USS Fitzgerald: US Navy to discipline dozen sailors - BBC News

But still no statement about the course and positions which is what we want - the disciple is USN business.

[Taichungman]

More on it here
https://sg.yahoo.com/news/commander-...223436836.html

[estarzinger]

^^ based on the numbers being disciplined . . . . one can guess that there was NOT super slim manning levels in bridge and CiC

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by justwaiting

USS Fitzgerald: US Navy to discipline dozen sailors - BBC News

But still no statement about the course and positions which is what we want - the disciple is USN business.

The Fitzgerald 's course was stated as 230°. Position can be asertained by the cs position at time of collision.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by newhaul

The Fitzgerald 's course was stated as 230°. Position can be asertained by the cs position at time of collision.

Why is it so hard to understand that the Fitzgerald's heading, course and position was dynamic in the minutes immediately prior to the collision. This dynamic information is what is being withheld (kept secret) from the investigators.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Wotname

Why is it so hard to understand that the Fitzgerald's heading, course and position was dynamic in the minutes immediately prior to the collision. This dynamic information is what is being withheld (kept secret) from the investigators.

Are you on the investigating team? How do you know they havent been given the information? Just because they haven't made it public. Doesn't mean that the people that need to know don't know.