US Navy destroyer collision

[SouthernPride]

Since the tanker sunk the destroyer do they get to paint a destroyer they sunk on the side as a confirmed kill ?

[requiem]

Originally Posted by TrentePieds

First mate of LNG Tanker “Pioneer Knutsen” of about 1700 tons gross, one Per Jørgensen, who passed by the Ingstad now grounded about half an hour after the collision, has said in the Norwegian Press: “Where was Fedje?....Why were they so passive?... They are usually on the ball...I listened to both the channels (Fedje) use(s), Channel 16 and 80, and I heard very little from them. They should have told the pilot on Sola TS that a frigatte was coming at them at high speed, but I heard nothing like that. I heard very little from (Fedje).... I wondered about that. (Fedje) was very quiet!”

My own guess is that the VTS was either distracted or relying on AIS for tracking, and thus never bothered to do any plotting. This would also explain the uncertainty when asked by Sola who the unidentified radar contact was, as they would have had to scramble to figure out which ships weren't otherwise accounted for.

Explaining what might have happened aboard the Ingstad is harder. Is it possible that AIS and ARPA features were switched off as part of training whilst the bridge crew practiced their plots? Assuming the three other northbound vessels were the only contacts they identified before Sola got underway, it might explain why Ingstad thought they were talking to one of them. Of course, there was still the critical failure to identify a new, incoming radar contact.

[hellosailor]

On the bright side, I suppose this means some Norwegian (i.e., allies) sailors will be removed from command and as such, they will present no future potential hazard in time of REAL combat situations. Better to lose the ship now, than in a shooting war when there's more riding on it. (sigh)

[TrentePieds]

Let me be a devil's advocate and, for the moment, take a cynical view, but as I do so, please bear in mind that as an FDP I have a great affinity for Norway and her people. We are, as you know, first cousins :-)

At 0240 Ingstad reported in to Fedje according to SOPs, sez Kystvernet, the Norwegian Coast Guard. She was southbound at 17 knots, which happens to be her economical cruising speed. She was bound for the naval base at Haakonsvern about 30NM south of the point of collision. The VTSO at Fedje could NOT have been ignorant of that destination, nor that Ingstad was returning from a NATO “exercise”. No course is given for Ingstad at this point, but it would reasonable to assume that she was on 170º, the reciprocal of the course Sola took as she, sometime later, settled in on 350º to port of the three ships proceeding north from Bergen. At 17 knots Ingstad would at this time have been approximately 25NM distant from the Sture terminal, and she would now be leaving a track on Fedje's radar even if she were “running dark”. Even if Ingstad was so thoroughly asleep that her navigator didn't know his distance off to starboard, Fedje could have told him what it was at any time during the hour-and-a-half's run from Fedjeosen to Sture.

At 0345 when Ingstad would have been about 4 NM distant from Stureterminalen, Sola was departing the terminal on something like 170º and beginning a port turn to come to 350º. The tugs would have been turning her to that course, so her turning radius is irrelevant. At this point, IMO, a competent VTSO would have realized that danger was building, for he would have been able to see all ships on his radar. He would also know that the distance for a Nansen class frigate, according to KNM, to come to an emergency stop from cruising speed is about three lengths, say 1,200 feet or 1/5 NM whereas a laden tanker of Sola's size might require several miles to come dead in the water, and also that at 7 knots, Sola probably had no more than bare steerage way.

So the big question is why was Fedje – contrary to her normal practice- so passive and so SILENT? Why was she failing in her advisory rôle? Could it be because no lowly VSTO of a puny NATO ally was prepared to suggest to the Hossifer Commanding US Task Force Harry Truman, to which Ingstad reported, that he was all wet in having ordered Ingstad to “run dark” and Fedje to remain silent regarding Ingstad? I know the “exercise” was over, according to OFFICIAL reports, but was it? Remember that Ingstad was an ASW vessel and she was taking part in an “exercise” designed to impress on the Ruskies that their nuclear subs based at Kola, which has been expanded enormously in the last decade or so, haven't a snowball's hope in Hell of getting out into the Norwegian Sea. Ingstad's rôle in the “exercise”, was, essentially, to protect American “assets” engaged in putting the wind up the Ruskies. Let's not forget the growing personal animosity between the respective Commanders-in-Chief of the protagonists, nor that the punier nations of Europe really have no choice but to say “Yes Sir, how high Sir?” when the Great Panjandrums speak :-)

TP

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by TrentePieds

and she would now be leaving a track on Fedje's radar even if she were “running dark”.

Why do you keep suggesting Ingstad was "running dark"? The report clearly states her nav-lights were on and she was using radar. It was also stated that Ingstad had called into VTS and this was logged.

[tankersteve]

TP, it is also a bit of a leap to hypothesize that maybe the exercise wasn't over. One shouldn't look for conspiracy when incompetence is so often prevalent.

Tankersteve

[TrentePieds]

Lodesman: I used the verb "to be" in the subjunctive present tense meaning that "even if she had been, though I know that she was not". As we follow events further down Ingstad's track until the moment of collision I think that becomes important.

Tankersteve: Hardly conspiracy, but certainly a real possibility that seamanship, which you and I now appear to agree was wanting in an astonishing degree, may have been impeded by something or someone that IMO will never be brought out in the report because the reflection on KNM and Kystvernet are so egregious.

What do we make of the report that there was a "stranger" on the bridge? A stranger on the bridge of a man-o-war? A man-o-war coming in from the biggest NATO exercise thrown in the face of the Ruskies for many a year? Surely such a stranger could only have been there as an observer? Or as an umpire? Could he have been an officer tasked or seconded from TF "Harry Truman"?

However, in support of your apparent preference for laying the collision at the door of mere incompetence: The language in use was Norwegian. I would think, but I do not know, that in NATO ships, going NATO's errand, the language would be English, since the minor members of NATO do not, necessarily, comprehend each other's languages. Euphonic as Norwegian is, few, except Scowegians, can cope with it :-) Certainly with an officer from TFHT on Ingstad's bridge, English would have had to be in use.

What do we make of the fact that the published recording of the radio traffic evidences a total lack of normal radio protocol? I can accept that after an incident as serious as this, people may "freak out" and forget the protocol, but before? While things are apparently totally routine? Ingstad's bridge team were not Sunday sailors, and certainly the OOW was a commissioned officer with all that that means. The young lady at NTNU (Norwegian University of Technology and Science) who is head of the department that trains seafaring men, most particularly in Navigation and Seamanship, and who has herself commanded ships, has stressed in the Norwegian press that what happened on Ingstad's bridge lies very, very far from what she teaches her students.

A wise man said: Any fool can learn from his own mistakes. It takes a wise man to learn from the mistakes of others"

I think there is plenty of learning to be garnered from this incident. Even for Sunday sailors :-)!.

TP

[Pelagic]

"Stranger on the bridge" does imply that the crew may have been distracted.
Norskies do like to party!

My favourite explanation from one of the Masters who attended the Exon Valdez grounding was that the watch keeper was alone on the bridge with his girlfriend crew member

When interviewed at the closed door hearing, she blushed a lot when asked to describe in detail her actions.

The concensus from the inquiry, was that she was prepared to go down "for" the ship!

[TrentePieds]

All together now: "All the girls love a sailor..." :-0)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7X2sdXD_8I

Now go check out the Report on the sinking of "Queen of the North", a ship in the fleet of the B.C. Ferry corporation :-)

TP

[Trond123]

Originally Posted by TrentePieds

I would think, but I do not know, that in NATO ships, going NATO's errand, the language would be English, since the minor members of NATO do not, necessarily, comprehend each other's languages. Euphonic as Norwegian is, few, except Scowegians, can cope with it :-) Certainly with an officer from TFHT on Ingstad's bridge, English would have had to be in use.

This would be the right way to do it.
But the Navy has confirmed that the standard routine, is to use the Norwegian language throughout the ship, including the bridge, even when foreigners are present.

Someone mentioned in an earlier post, that a "securite" should have been issued by Sola TS when leaving the dock.
Could have been a good thing and a heads up for anyone in the area, butI have never heard VTS nor any tanker doing that in this area, and I always monitor both VTS and ch16 when onboard my boat.

By the way, the Norwegian coast guard is military, but the Kystverket is a civilian government agency, responsible for navigation aids, pilots, VTS, to mention a few of their tasks.

[anacapaisland42]

Written cynically.
COME ON ....be fair.....they were "making out" and if that isn't a good excuse for crashing a big boat head on into an island, then I don't know what is. Tough that people died.


BUT mentioning ferries, we very frequently take the Glenora Ferry on the way to our boat at Waupoos. A 15 minute RORO ferry ride carrying some 40 vehicles ....(which I reckon makes our ferry skippers probably the most experienced captains in the world at docking in all kinds of conditions ..including near hurricane winds.....anyway...back to my story.


One lovely warm windy day this summer the ferry was on it's route just as a sailing boat flying spinnaker came screaming up the Reach (as it's called), on a collision course.

The Ferry Captain radioed the sailboat and said "Sailboat, this is the Glenora Ferry, maintain your course and spinnaker run, we will circle and avoid you"
We have good ferry skippers.
Bill




Now go check out the Report on the sinking of "Queen of the North", a ship in the fleet of the B.C. Ferry corporation :-)

TP[/QUOTE]

[hpeer]

Think of this from a Fathers perspective. Your kid has just totaled your Mustang.

Facts (multiply all speeds by 5 to make it relevant)

4 lane highway, no divider.
Westbound curb lane has 3 sedans doing 65.
Westbound fast lane has a transport doing 30.
There are a few tow trucks milling around flashing lights (AIS).
There is a well lite gas station on the Eastbound side.

Junior is heading East in the Mustang at 85, the transport blares it’s horn (radio calls), and Sparky turns LEFT to cut ahead of the transport.

NOTHING could have been made worse simply by slowing down.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by TrentePieds

Lodesman: I used the verb "to be" in the subjunctive present tense meaning that "even if she had been, though I know that she was not". As we follow events further down Ingstad's track until the moment of collision I think that becomes important.

Huh? What? How does it become important?

[Pelagic]

Originally Posted by Trond123

Someone mentioned in an earlier post, that a "securite" should have been issued by Sola TS when leaving the dock.
Could have been a good thing and a heads up for anyone in the area, butI have never heard VTS nor any tanker doing that in this area, and I always monitor both VTS and ch16 when onboard my boat.

Yes, I mentioned that.
It is SOP in many areas where there can be pinch points for large vessels to announce their departure via a Securité announcement on both VTS and 16 vhf.

Very helpful in the fog!

[Auspicious]

Originally Posted by Pelagic

It {securite calls} is SOP in many areas where there can be pinch points for large vessels to announce their departure via a Securité announcement on both VTS and 16 vhf.

For sure in Baltimore, Norfolk, Charleston, Wilmington, Port Everglades, New York, and most other big ports I frequent.