Comments on: Flag Day

By: Bryan

Bryan — Fri, 23 Jun 2017 01:50:08 +0000

Could be sleep, or they turned it off because it was constantly alarming in Tokyo Harbor because of all the traffic.

By: Badtux

Badtux — Thu, 22 Jun 2017 23:31:28 +0000

If a DDG can’t detect a container ship, which isn’t exactly small (SNRK!), how it is supposed to detect fast-flying approaching enemy fighter jets? (Cue eyerolls). Sounds like some folks were asleep at their posts…

By: Bryan

Bryan — Tue, 20 Jun 2017 03:58:28 +0000

It was a destroyer, which are designed to be fast and nimble. Hard aport, full speed ahead! should have been sufficient to avoid the collision. The damage sounds like the destroyer was crossing the freighter’s path. I’m having a hard time figuring out how the freighter could have overtaken the destroyer if the crew had been semi-alert.

By: Kryten42

Kryten42 — Mon, 19 Jun 2017 09:57:35 +0000

It’s confirmed that the Fitzgerald is an Arleigh Burke DDG that has a collision avoidance system that should have been operational in such a heavily trafficked area & that the bridge crew should have been on alert. If they were quite close to each other (they shouldn’t have been that close), it could have been a navigation error on the part of the cargo ship, which sounded the collision alarm on the DDG & the helmsman over reacted causing the DDG to swing too hard away (or the wrong way), forcing an error on the part of the DDG.

Collisions at sea are not rare. They happen daily, but most are minor.

I suppose we’ll have to wait for the final report to know.

By: Bryan

Bryan — Mon, 19 Jun 2017 03:35:39 +0000

With 7 dead, there is going to be a lot of blame to spread around, but, yeah, the guy(s) on the starboard watch are definitely in kimchi.

By: Badtux

Badtux — Mon, 19 Jun 2017 02:07:22 +0000

Sounds like my Navy buddy might be right, then :).

By: Bryan

Bryan — Mon, 19 Jun 2017 00:02:47 +0000

The preliminary damage assessment of the Japanese Coast Guard seems to indicate that the container ship came at the destroyer from the right rear and pushed it out of the way.. It would have been the starboard watch who should have noticed the container ship, as the bridge couldn’t really see it

By: Badtux

Badtux — Sun, 18 Jun 2017 22:00:26 +0000

A former Navy buddy of mine is convinced that they’ll blame it on a deck ape:

“The Official Navy inquiry has determined that Seaman Recruit Cletus Pitts, formerly of Buttfuck, Alabama, was in control of the wheel house when the incident occurred. The Officer of the Day was cleared of all charges after he claimed the sun was in his eyes.”

At 1AM in the morning.

Heh.

By: Bryan

Bryan — Sun, 18 Jun 2017 16:30:44 +0000

Your example would be classed as “an act of God”, i.e. an actual accident, Badtux, with no liability assessed as neither vessel would have the capability of avoiding the accident. Outside of races, sailing vessels tend to avoid the company of other vessels except when docking, and they normally shift to an auxiliary motor for that procedure.

The destroyer was at fault, Kryten, no doubt about that. Now it is a matter of how many people waded into deep kimchi. The captain obviously, and probably most of the bridge crew and lookouts. A lot of people had to have screwed up for this to happen.

By: Kryten42

Kryten42 — Sun, 18 Jun 2017 12:59:03 +0000

Given the Destroyer has High Res radar, SONAR, collision detection, night-vision equipment, etc. & knew it was a busy area, there is really not much of an excuse. Unless everyone on the bridge was playing poker, which isn’t an excuse anyway. On a clear night, even old MK-1 eyeballs would have seen the huge ship & it’s running lights.

And Badtux, would you please stop using that tr*** word! Really sick of it. Not only has POTUS destroyed the English language with his inane tweeting & TV interviews, his name ruins what was a useful word. Hmmph! 😉 😆