[Closed] US Warship crash

[img] [/img]

If he hasn't got a dashcam it'll go 50:50 and he'll lose his no claims...

On the right, in the right. Damage to the starboard side doesn't look good for the warship

On the port side of the bow for the cargo ship too. Trying to cut across?

[img] [/img]

On the port side of the bow for the cargo ship too

I think the shape above the waterline of the warship played quite a part in how it 'marked' the cargo ship.

Being hit amidships on the starboard side is never going to go well for the officer of the watch.

Terrorism?

Oops...

One's a relatively slow vessel that'll take several ships length to stop or turn, the other one twice as fast and designed to do the same on a (comparative) dime.

I suspect a trip to hospital is the least of the Commander's worries.

How did this manage to happen?

It appears to be crewed by children.
[img] [/img]

Too many variables to say for sure. Rule 15 would have the warship as the give way vsl. I'd imagine the cargo ship has altered to stbd as the warship has not taken sufficient action (R17). Hence damage to the cargo ships port bow. If it is the case the cargo ship will take some blame for not taking sufficient action when it became clear the warship was not altering.

However, the warship may have been NUC, RAM etc which would throw R15 out of the window. We simply don't know!

The cargo ships U turn is very odd.

Cancelled trousers order.

Cancelled trousers order.

How did this manage to happen?

Left hand down a bit....

[img] [/img]

Apparently that destroyer had a $21mill refit a couple of months ago. Maybe there's a manufacturer crash replacement scheme or... no, probably not.

It's surprising so many sailors were injured/killed - surely it's easy enough to see it coming and get out of the way?

First in with the "That'll T cut out" or "I've MOT'd worse" gags??

It's surprising so many sailors were injured/killed - surely it's easy enough to see it coming and get out of the way?

0230 local time. It might well be the missing were in internal spaces that have been crushed. They are not big on portholes and sun decks on warships! I have a horrible feeling the missing might be found 'inside' the folded wreckage.

Wiki states the current skipper has only had the job a month and a few days. Will not have built up much of a no claims bonus.

Drac - Moderator

The cargo ships U turn is very odd.

Cancelled trousers order.

Hacked account? Or is it time to go and look at the Trousergate thread again for an update?

Was the cargo ship a lighthouse?

EDIT - Wasn't aware there might be fatalities.

Keep coming, you're alright...
.
.
keep coming....
.
.
.
you're alright, keep coming....
.
.
.
.
Keep coming......
.
.
.
.
CRUNCH.
.
.
.
Ok, stop.

29,000 tonnes at nearly 30kph, that's gonna leave a dent in anything!

Sadly crew are missing, which has to be the focus, but, how did a 222 metre 30000 tonne tanker get that close to a destroyer?

It's not like the Destroyer will have advanced radar on it........oh hang on, wait a minute....

So to wipe out the worlds most powerful Navy, you sneak up on them at night with your 30000 tonne container ship and ram them. Bet the Chinese are factoring that into their Pacific War Plan.

Destroyer may well be borked completely as the wave breaker of the container ship will have smashed the hull to pieces under the water line. That and the US Navy's bizarre habit of decommissioning perfectly good working ships (according to the Navy Blogger I follow (Navy-Matters)).

Nothing beats looking out the window.

Container would have been transmitting AIS signal, navy ship wouldn't so they probably didn't even know it was there.

navy ship wouldn't so they probably didn't even know it was there.

Apart from a bloody massive unidentified blob on their radar.

Container ships looks like it was the right of way vessel but they must surely have had the capacity to both see what was about to happen.

I see a Court Martial for the Navy warship commander / officer of the watch. Those big container ships don't do "swerving". Agreed with RoW comments above.

Thoughts with the missing and their loved ones

For the ignorant, how is right of way and so on determined on water/in boats etc.?

quick summary - unless there are special considerations (vessel with restricted ability to manoeuvre, under sail and a bunch more) when two vessels are approaching one another the one that has the other on their Starboard(right) hand side (i.e. you look out over your bow and the other boat is to the right of your bow) has the responsibility to alter course. The other should maintain a constant course unless there is an emergency situation and the first vessel does not alter course or cannot do so sufficiently in the time/distance available.

This is why I volunteered for submarine service, diving now! Diving now!

it appears to be crewed by children

That's a woman.

[img] [/img]

Hope everyone will be OK

Google Colregs. Quite simple at first sight but when you really dig into them it's a real minefield. From experience an awful lot tend to have a serious missunderstanding of them too. Ironically I've been called up twice by US warships claiming to have RoW despite clearly being the give way vessel. Once you ask where in the Colregs a warship was any special privelage they soon follow them correctly.

Strongly suspect this isn't a straight forward crossing though having had a quick look at the ais tracking. But without more precise info it's impossible to tell what really happened. Especially if you get into the realm of overtaking Vs crossing, stand on vsl maintaining course & speed Vs taking action due to the give way vsl not doing so etc...

Thanks. Bit like driving in France in the olden days then!

sharkbait - Member

The cargo ships U turn is very odd.

Well I did place a massive aliexpress order at about that time...

Have i been watching too many movies when i find my self thinking:

Container ship making unexplanied maneuvers late at night + naval vessel on intercepting course late at night + missing persons = probably a trafficking intercept misjudged, missing naval personnel probably on deck ordering stop or in a launch (ir whatever they're called) off the side ready to board the vessel? Only thing which doesn't stack with that for me is us warship and Japanese waters but both governments cooperate significantly in defence/security matters.

First impression has to be that the warship should have turned away to port if they were on converging courses, which the damage seems to indicate.
Officers of the watch would appear to be negligent, the warships more so, big container ships allegedly have a less than stellar record when it comes to efficient crew.

Container ship making unexplanied maneuvers late at night + naval vessel on intercepting course late at night + missing persons = probably a trafficking intercept misjudged, missing naval personnel probably on deck ordering stop or in a launch (ir whatever they're called) off the side ready to board the vessel?

it would be good to see the track of the warship overlaid on this...[img] [/img]

For balance, HMS Southampton after a minor bump with an oil tanker in '88:

[img] [/img]

scotroutes - Member

it would be good to see the track of the warship overlaid on this...

Running away like a benny hill sketch. "The warshop was all over the place, I had to swerve several times before I hit him

Surely a warship has enough radar and protection to mean that the entire crew could be asleep blindfolded and the place would light up like a fairground as soon as anything came within a couple of miles.

I'd assumed that they would be able to detect incoming missiles heading for them at silly speeds.. Let alone a container craft going about 20 mph. Obviously I overestimate the defensive capabilities of military ships!

Hence the suggestion that they knew fine well where the tanker was and something else was going on.

On the facts available, seems more like a massive blunder after yet to be explained U-turn manoeuvre. If there was any serious shit going down (attempted intercept and ramming), then the tanker would have been intercepted by other naval boats before it's nearby destination in Tokyo harbour (maybe it was, but not yet reported).

Guys,
As said above, the missing are probably not missing but were rather trapped and or crushed as their sleeping quarters flooded and they were either unable or incapacitated in their ability to escape their possibly water filled compartment.
I would say the same respect would be called for here as for the Grenfell fire, so please try to lose the tongue in cheek comments
( trying to inform not preach-just asking not to make a funny online that would seem out of place)

Reports are of Search and Rescue in the sea at the moment, sound like they are currently focus on at least some possible overboards TBH. Although, ultimately you might be right that they are all lost onboard.

Terrible news re the missing crew so sad. Very strange for an incident like this to happen, all officers of the watch would be well versed in collision regs, and even basic yachts radar will go crazy with a vessel getting close let alone a military vessel with multiple systems monitoring what's going on.

Thoughts with the families of those missing and injured and the crew.

That's the boating equivalent of a Boeing Dreamliner colliding mid air with a USAF AWACS... Bizarre in the extreme considering the tech capabilities.

The cargo ships U turn was twenty minutes before the collision. That's a long time for the OOW on the warship to take appropriate action.

Advanced radar? Well maybe, but the aegis system may not have been running so as to provide a comprehensive surface picture, being primarily an air search sensor. The OOW obviously wasnt doing their job, basically a very well qualified lookout.

The ColRegs are written in such a way that if you have a crunch, both ships are to blame, regardless of who should have given way. Basically, if you're the ship that has right of way, you have to make best efforts to avoid a collision as soon as it become apparent that the other ship is not manoeuvring in accordance with the rules.

All said, this is a very busy piece of water, and the tracks of the other ships n the area may be a factor also. I've certainly had to make a few departures from the rules myself when other vessels have been ignorant of their responsibilities. Making a departure from the rules is, ironically, one of the rules...

I would say the same respect would be called for here as for the Grenfell fire, so please try to lose the tongue in cheek comments

The victims in the Grenfell fire were helpless civilians who died because their homes were turned into a firetrap to save some money. The warship was crewed by highly trained professional sailors operating some of the most advanced technology on the planet. Yes, sad for the families of the dead, but FFS, if the US Navy can't steer a ship around a 30 000 tonne cargo ship, they deserve some ridicule.

So off-duty seamen sleeping between shifts are to blame for their ship colliding with another? That's a pretty ducked up view, hols2.

So off-duty seamen sleeping between shifts are to blame for their ship colliding with another?

No, whoever was on duty is to blame. Whoever trained them and put them on duty deserve some ridicule.