# Navy ship collisions thread from 2017



## Ooh-Rah (Jun 17, 2017)

Jesus, the more I read about this the more mysterious this whole thing is.  How the hell can a destroyers this advanced permit a cargo ship to get this close without detecting them?

Home | Daily Mail Online

Navy destroyer USS Fitzgerald collided with a Philippines merchant vessel off the coast of Japan Saturday
US defense official said there are seven sailors unaccounted for and three injured, including the commander
Rescuers are searching for seamen thought to be lost at sea or trapped inside the damaged naval vessel
The Navy says damage occurred to the starboard side, above and below the Fitzgerald's waterline 
Bryce Benson was appointed Executive Officer of the Fitzgerald in 2015, took over as Commander last month
Benson is reportedly in stable condition after being airlifted to the U.S. Naval Hospital in Yokosuka


----------



## Red Flag 1 (Jun 17, 2017)

It


----------



## Gunz (Jun 17, 2017)

...the fuck. Look at the size of the freakin container ship that hit it. Prayers out, indeed. Lucky they're not on the bottom.


----------



## Red Flag 1 (Jun 17, 2017)

T


----------



## SpitfireV (Jun 17, 2017)

It's not proven yet that it was intentional. I would doubt it anyway because those are professional seamen and they wouldn't do something like that deliberately- you'd have to have multiple members of the crew agree to it.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Jun 17, 2017)

another angle of ACX Crystal damage


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Jun 17, 2017)

Nothing new released that I have been able to find.  I'm not keen on buying that the ship was hit intentionally; if it was....well...it will be interesting to learn how the bridge crew could permit a tortoise to catch the hare.
The USS Fitzgerald is an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer. Here's a demonstration of how fast they can turn:


----------



## BloodStripe (Jun 17, 2017)

There is still a lot of unknown left.  The first question I would have is was there no radio com between the two ship's? You can easily see mast lighting roughly 20nm out at night when it's clear, not to mention the radarmen had to of seen the Philipino container ship. What were the CO's standing orders for when he was sleeping? Whenever a CO retires for the night, some officer signs off on what to do in a situation such as this.


----------



## DA SWO (Jun 17, 2017)

SpitfireV said:


> It's not proven yet that it was intentional. I would doubt it anyway because those are professional seamen and they wouldn't do something like that deliberately- you'd have to have multiple members of the crew agree to it.


Then why sail away if they are so professional, how many on the bridge at 0230?  I bet only one or two on the civilian ship.


----------



## BloodStripe (Jun 17, 2017)

DA SWO said:


> Then why sail away if they are so professional, how many on the bridge at 0230?  I bet only one or two on the civilian ship.



That's the problem with the cargo ship's, they only have one or two in the bridge at anytime. It's quite dangerous. They are designed to go in straight lines, and that's it.


----------



## SpitfireV (Jun 17, 2017)

DA SWO said:


> Then why sail away if they are so professional, how many on the bridge at 0230?  I bet only one or two on the civilian ship.



It hasn't been proven they tried to sail away as far as I've seen. What I'm actually saying is let's wait until there's an actual investigation and not just media heresay.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Jun 17, 2017)

Very sad to read the seven sailors have been found deceased.

This is a link to a Japanese news site, there is a short video of DDG62 (shot from a helo ?) and gives a good view of the damage.

Video is only 20 sec long

コンテナ船と米海軍イージス駆逐艦が衝突か 静岡 石廊崎沖 | NHKニュース


----------



## TheSiatonist (Jun 17, 2017)

I'm no sailor but aren't there any general alarm that goes off when a ship gets too close to the destroyer?  I mean, all that high-tech radar... ?


----------



## BloodStripe (Jun 17, 2017)

Seven missing Fitzgerald sailors discovered dead

All 7 sailors found in a flooded compartment on the ship. 

Blue skies.


----------



## Grunt (Jun 17, 2017)

Truly sad! Rest In Peace, Sailors!


----------



## policemedic (Jun 18, 2017)

Red Flag 1 said:


> This was intentional. The ramming vessel made a U-turn to come back and ram the Fitz. After the ramming, another u-turn was made to depart the area without rendering aid.
> 
> USS Fitzgerald crash: Seven navy crew missing off Japan



If that's the case they should have sunk the bastard.


----------



## Teufel (Jun 18, 2017)

TheSiatonist said:


> I'm no sailor but aren't there any general alarm that goes off when a ship gets too close to the destroyer?  I mean, all that high-tech radar... ?



I think it's safe to say there were multiple points of failure on both sides. The Navy is going to fire more officers than Stalin after this. The CO will be done even before the investigation begins. The rest will fall as they analyze every action and every second of these event.


----------



## Kraut783 (Jun 18, 2017)

What a horrible way to go, I hope it was a quick death.

Rest in Peace Sailors.


----------



## AWP (Jun 18, 2017)

A co-worker is a retired sailor with a fair amount of time at sea on different ships including some time on one of Burke DDG's. His theory, and I welcome any opposing views, is they were incapacitated by the attack and didn't make it out before Condition Zebra was set or being asleep when the collision occurred, it and flooding were so catastrophic they had no chance at all. Regardless, the whole thing is simply horrific. The investigation will be interesting.

What a tragedy. Blue Skies.


----------



## CDG (Jun 18, 2017)

TheSiatonist said:


> I'm no sailor but aren't there any general alarm that goes off when a ship gets too close to the destroyer?  I mean, all that high-tech radar... ?



Someone has to actually sound that alarm, it's not automatic.  The Officer of the Deck (OOD) is the one in charge of the ship at the time.  What *should* have happened, and maybe certain steps did, is that there are SOPs in place for getting within certain distances.  So you might try and establish radio contact at a certain distance, maybe flash signals, maybe the CO gets brought up to the bridge to monitor, etc.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Jun 18, 2017)

Pretty solid article by WSJ - 

I know not everyone has subscription, so please forgive for lengthy post, here is transcript of article:

*Deadly Collision Crushed Captain’s Cabin of USS Fitzgerald *

YOKOSUKA, Japan—As most of its crew slept on Friday night, the USS Fitzgerald passed through one of Japan’s busiest shipping lanes just south of Tokyo, a watch crew assigned to guide its passage.

In a period of seconds, a 29,000 ton cargo ship loaded with containers plowed into its right side, crushing a large section of the destroyer’s main structure, including the captain’s cabin and sleeping quarters for 116 sailors below the waterline. Seawater flooded in through a large gash.

As the crew scrambled to save themselves and the ship, seven sailors didn’t make it out of the berthing area. Their bodies were recovered by divers a er the ship crawled to the port of Yokosuka.

“The water inflow was tremendous,” Vice Adm. Joseph Aucoin, head of the U.S. Seventh Fleet, said in a press briefing on Sunday. “There wasn’t a lot of time” for sailors to react.Badly injured, the captain, Bryce Benson, escaped from his cabin. He was airlifted to a nearby hospital where he was receiving emergency treatment on Sunday before being questioned.

“He’s lucky to be alive,” Vice Adm. Aucoin said.

The question of why a U.S. destroyer was rammed by a cargo ship over three times its size, one of the worst incidents in recent U.S. Navy history, has no immediate answers.

Some former military and commercial shipping captains speculate that the Fitzgerald may have failed to follow international regulations that require ships to give way to other vessels to their starboard, or right side.

“Unless the destroyer lost steering control, which is unlikely, it should have given right of way to the container ship,” said Yiannis Sgouras, a retired captain of tankers and cargo ships who worked in the world’s busiest trade route from Asia to Europe.

Others caution that there are potentially many other contributing factors to the collision. Tracking data sent by the cargo ship, the ACX Crystal, showed it reversed course around 2:05 a.m. local time, shortly before the time of the collision given by the U.S. Navy of approximately 2:20 a.m.

However, Nippon Yusen K.K., the Japanese shipping company that operates the 728- foot-long ACX Crystal, has stated that the collision occurred around 1:30 a.m. That discrepancy hasn’t been resolved.“She did not reverse the course before the collision. She did a er the collision,” a Nippon Yusen company spokesman said.

Both Japan and the U.S. are launching investigations, and each side declined to speculate about possible blame. The 20 Filipino crew members of the ACX Crystal, all of whom were unharmed, have been questioned, a spokesman for the Japan Coast Guard said.Around 400 vessels pass through the region where the collision took place, around 56 nautical miles southwest of Yokosuka, each day, according to the Japanese Coast Guard. O cial records show three accidents have been reported in the same area in the last five years.

Collisions at sea for the U.S. Navy are extremely uncommon, said Bryan McGrath, a former destroyer captain, who said they occur only once or twice a decade, if that. He said he couldn’t remember a recent collision that was this consequential.“There are 275 ships in the Navy and 100 are under way all over the world,” navigating “millions and millions of miles” every year, said Mr. McGrath, who retired in 2008 and is now a consultant. “This is very, very rare.”Yoji Koda, a retired vice admiral and former commander in chief of Japan’s navy, said that when U.S. Navy vessels are in the vicinity of Japan their alert level is the same as civilian vessels. He said one possibility was that either or both of the ships in the latest collision were using an autopilot system for guidance.

“Although they have watchmen, their responses tend to be delayed,” he said.

Vice Adm. Aucoin said all questions about the cause of the incident would require the results of the investigation, adding that the U.S. would work “hand-in-hand” with Japan.

Navy officials said they were working to inform family members of those killed, and had taken over 500 calls to a hotline for relatives to obtain information about the incident. One senior Navy o cial said all the crew of the ship were grieving.

Vice Adm. Aucoin said that despite the extensive damage to the Fitzgerald, a ship equipped with an advanced Aegis ballistic missile defense system, it would be restored to the U.S. 7th Fleet. That process could take up to a year, he said.

The repair process could cost around the same as the $250 million spent over 14 months on restoring the USS Cole, a similar ship to the Fitzgerald, which was heavily damaged by a terrorist bombing in Yemen in 2000.


----------



## Gunz (Jun 18, 2017)

I've written before about being on the USS Shreveport LPD-12 when it collided with its sister-ship, USS Nashville LPD-13 somewhere in the Bermuda Triangle. Not much damage, more of a sideswipe and a tremendous BANG in the wee hours...but vessels back then had pretty damn good radar, too.

I know speculation is pointless but at that time in the morning, not everybody is as sharp as they should be. I wouldn't be surprised if human error--not faulty technology--were to blame.

Radar and other sophisticated systems are only as good as the people operating or monitoring them.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Jun 19, 2017)

Temporarily deleting pic, possible photoshop.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Jun 21, 2017)

Finally I am seeing more than just DailyMail pick up on this story.

It would appear that one of the 7 deceased, Fire Controlman 1st Class Gary Rehm Jr had ample time to escape and save himself, instead he continued to go back for his shipmates and may have saved up to 20 before he was ultimately trapped when fellow sailors were forced to contain the water before he was able to return for the final time.

Assuming these reports turn out to be accurate, my God, what a courageous young man.  I would hope that ultimately the Navy finds a way to permanently honor him in some way.

Navy sailor sacrificed himself to save 20 lives after the USS Fitzgerald collision

_One of the 7 sailors who died aboard the USS Fitzgerald saved more than a dozen of his fellow shipmates before he ultimately lost his own life, The Daily Beast reported.

The USS Fitzgerald collided with a Philippine-flagged merchant vessel about 56 miles off the coast of Japan on Saturday.

Seven sailors were later found dead in flooded compartments on the ship.

When the Fitzgerald collided with the merchant ship, 37-year-old Fire Controlman 1st Class Gary Leo Rehm Jr., "leapt into action," according to The Daily Beast.

The Fitzgerald was struck below the waterline, and Rehm Jr.'s family was told by the Navy that he went under and saved at least 20 sailors, according to WBNS-10TV in Columbus, Ohio.

But when he went back down to get the other six sailors, the ship began to take on too much water, and the hatch was closed, WBNS-10TV said.

"That was Gary to a T,” Rehm Jr.'s friend Christopher Garguilo, told NBC4i in Columbus, Ohio. “He never thought about himself.”_


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Jun 22, 2017)

Interesting....

Investigators Believe USS Fitzgerald Crew Fought Flooding For An Hour Before Distress Call Reached Help

The crew of the guided-missile destroyer that was struck by a merchant ship on Friday off the coast of Japan fought to save the ship for an hour before the first calls went out for help, Japanese investigators now believe.

According to the current operational theory of Japanese investigators, the deadly collision between USS _Fitzgerald_ (DDG-62) and the Philippine-flagged merchant ship ACX _Crystal_ knocked out the destroyer’s communications for an hour, while the four-times-larger merchant ship was unaware of what it hit until it doubled back and found the damaged warship, two sources familiar with the ongoing Japanese investigation told USNI News on Wednesday.

Investigators now think _Crystal_ was transiting to Tokyo on autopilot with an inattentive or asleep crew when the merchant vessel struck a glancing blow on the destroyer’s starboard side at about 1:30 AM local time on Friday. When the crew of _Crystal _realized they had hit something, the ship performed a U-turn in the shipping lane and sped back to the initial site of the collision at 18 knots, discovered _Fitzgerald,_ and radioed a distress call to authorities at about 2:30 AM. U.S. Navy officials initially said the collision occurred at around the time of the distress call at 2:30 AM.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Jun 22, 2017)

Based on this Washington Post article, the closing of the hatch is an investigation of of its own. 

- were there still survivors when the hatch was closed?
- was a sailor making repeated trips to the survivors and back?
- who gave the order to close the hatch?  
- was it necessary to save the ship?

Navy sailors made tough call to seal flooding ship compartments, unclear if survivors were inside


----------



## AWP (Jun 22, 2017)

Ooh-Rah said:


> Based on this Washington Post article, the closing of the hatch is an investigation of of its own.
> 
> - were there still survivors when the hatch was closed?
> - was a sailor making repeated trips to the survivors and back?
> ...



Sailors (current or former), what little I know of the Navy's damage control protocols or whatever, if Condition Zebra is set, doesn't every sailor on the ship have a requirement to dog the hatches? Can the OOD call for it or is that exclusive purview of the Capain or the XO if the Captain is disabled (as in this case)? How does that all work?


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Jun 24, 2017)

CNN update - 

Navy is working the theory that 5 of the 7 may have become 'incapacitated' as soon as the collision happened.

It may never be known if anyone was still alive when the hatch was shut.

I thought these paragraphs were worth noting:

The official also noted the Navy is trying to corroborate accounts which suggest that the two sailors who weren’t almost instantly “incapacitated” attempted to help the other five escape the incoming water.

“But at some point the ship somehow lost communication,” with the two sailors and they also perished, according to the official. All seven were found dead in the flooded area.

The official emphasized that the Navy will wait for all the investigations to be completed before coming to any conclusions about the actions of the crew and decisions over citations for heroism or potential disciplinary action.

The official also strongly emphasized that no judgments are being made about the timing of the decision to shut the watertight hatch. It is also not clear if those on the bridge called the commanding officer as the crisis unfolded.

New details emerge in investigation of USS Fitzgerald collision that killed Oakville sailor


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Jun 28, 2017)

USS Fitzgerald Memorial Service

These are excerpts from the June 27, 2017 Yokosuka, Japan memorial service for seven sailors who died aboard USS Fitzgerald on June 17, 2017. Speaking are Adm. Scott Swift, commander U.S. Pacific Fleet and Vice Adm. Joseph Aucoin, commander U.S. 7th Fleet.






_In Washington, D.C., acting Navy Secretary Sean Stackley issued instructions for the U.S. flag for “the National Ensign of the United States shall be flown at half-staff from sunrise until sunset on 27 June 2017. As the Fleet strives to work through these trying times, we come together to honor the heroic efforts of our brave Sailors and international partners and support those currently standing the watch,” read a statement from the service._


----------



## Teufel (Jun 29, 2017)

It's going to be a hot minute before we figure out what happened. There will be a lot of conjecture until then by people who weren't there.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Jun 29, 2017)

Teufel said:


> It's going to be a hot minute before we figure out what happened. There will be a lot of conjecture until then by people who weren't there.



Sir, in your opinion do you see a conclusion to this investigation, and then report issued before year's end?


----------



## Teufel (Jun 29, 2017)

Ooh-Rah said:


> Sir, in your opinion do you see a conclusion to this investigation, and then report issued before year's end?


I would imagine so. No one wants to drag this out. The Navy will fire everyone involved, then investigate every possible angle to this scenario. Then fire anyone they missed.


----------



## racing_kitty (Jun 29, 2017)

They'd fire the whole damned boat if they could.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Jul 13, 2017)

Pics of the Fitzgerald in drydock.  

New photos show damage to the USS Fitzgerald | Daily Mail Online


----------



## Red Flag 1 (Jul 14, 2017)

[Q8


----------



## SpitfireV (Jul 14, 2017)

You mean they knew in advance a warship was coming and managed to move a 700ft ship accurately onto such a target? No, this is negligence.


----------



## TLDR20 (Jul 14, 2017)

Red Flag 1 said:


> Great photos.
> 
> In my head, this was not accidental.



What?


----------



## Gunz (Jul 14, 2017)

@Red Flag 1 ... I gotta agree with @SpitfireV  on this one, J. 

What merchant Captain in his right mind would jeopardize his ship and especially his career pulling a stunt like that? 

(But it's always refreshing to see a contrary and sinister interpretation of events)


----------



## AWP (Jul 18, 2017)

Erratic boat-handling, leaves the scene, returns much later before calling authorities....anyone leaked the merchant crew's toxicology reports? Boating while intoxicated.


----------



## Gunz (Jul 18, 2017)

AWP said:


> Erratic boat-handling, leaves the scene, returns much later before calling authorities....anyone leaked the merchant crew's toxicology reports? Boating while intoxicated.



It is rumored the Japanese captain graduated from the Chappaquiddick Merchant Marine Academy.


----------



## AWP (Jul 18, 2017)

Ocoka said:


> It is rumored the Japanese captain graduated from the Chappaquiddick Merchant Marine Academy.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Jul 21, 2017)

CNN reporting input from "two defense officials". Nothing we didn't expect

Initial investigation blames Navy for USS Fitzgerald collision - CNNPolitics.com

Preliminary findings in the investigation into the collision between the USS Fitzgerald and a Philippine cargo ship off the coast of Japan in June suggest the accident was caused by multiple errors by the Fitzgerald's crew and a failure to take action in the minutes leading to the collision, according to two defense officials.

_"They did nothing until the last second,"

"A slew of things went wrong."

the crash "will wind up being our (the US Navy's) fault."_

The initial findings are just the first stage in what is expected to be a lengthy inquiry. Both officials said the initial investigation found that the Fitzgerald crew failed to understand and acknowledge the cargo ship was approaching and failed to take any action necessary to avoid the collision. It's also not clear if the crew ever called the commanding officer to come to the bridge.


*Pic shows a good side view of the relation of the above water line / below water line damage...
*


----------



## BloodStripe (Aug 17, 2017)

The CO has just been relieved.

From USA TODAY

Navy: Fitzgerald commander lost "awareness"

Commander of stricken destroyer Fitzgerald relieved after Navy report cites failures

WASHINGTON &mdash; The head of the Navy's 7th Fleet has relieved the skipper of the USS Fitzgerald and two other officers for losing "situational awareness" in the hours leading up to a fatal June collision that left seven sailors dead, the service's deputy chief said Thursday.Adm. Bill Moran, the deputy chief of naval operations, said that Vice Adm. Joseph Aucoin relieved Cmdr. Bryce Benson for cause after a report detailing the June 17 collision between the Fitzgerald and the freighter ACX Crystal was released by the Navy.The ship's entire leadership, Moran said, will be relieved, and about a dozen sailors face punishment, including all of the destroyer's watch.


----------



## AWP (Aug 17, 2017)

A more detailed account of the aftermath along with pictures. Damn...

Navy Releases Harrowing Report On Fitzgerald Collision, Begins Punishing Sailors


----------



## Red Flag 1 (Aug 18, 2017)

[QUO


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Aug 20, 2017)

What the fuck, over?

USS John S. McCain collides with merchant ship in Pacific

The guided-missile destroyer USS John S. McCain was involved in a collision with a merchant vessel east of Singapore and the Strait of Malacca, the 7th Fleet announced in a tweet.

Daily Mail info so far:

USS John McCain collides with merchant ship | Daily Mail Online


----------



## DA SWO (Aug 20, 2017)

0624 local time, so it's shouldn't have been dark as fuck.

You think after the last collision/firings that the surviving skippers would ratchet things up a bit.

10 missing, 2 berthing areas.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Aug 20, 2017)

DA SWO said:


> 10 missing, 2 berthing areas.



Fucking fuck. 

All these freeking electronics, maybe it's time to start opening up a port hole and taking a look out the window again.


----------



## Gunz (Aug 20, 2017)

Unfuckingbelievable.

Heads will roll and higher up the chain.


----------



## CDG (Aug 20, 2017)

I got a NYT breaking news alert on this, and it legit took me a minute to process that this just happened again. Unreal.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Aug 20, 2017)

CDG said:


> I got a NYT breaking news alert on this, and it legit took me a minute to process that this just happened again. Unreal.



Agree. I was shocked and saddened last time; now I am angered and left questioning.  A lot.

To add - knowing nothing about ships, other than they are one of the Marine Corp's primary transportation devices, what should I be left questioning?

And was my comment about stopping the reliance on electronics and starting to look with human eyes again actually something we should be doing?

Signed,

Frustrated and embarrassed.


----------



## CDG (Aug 20, 2017)

Ooh-Rah said:


> Agree. I was shocked and sadden last time; now I am angered and left questioning.  A lot.
> 
> To add - knowing nothing about ships, other than they are one of the Marine Corp's primary transportation devices, what should I be left questioning?
> 
> ...



When I was on a destroyer, there used to be watches with binos out unless it was bad weather. The Navy is incredibly reliant on technology, and my experiences did not instill a lot of confidence in the Naval officer ranks. The junior O's were frat boys more concerned about getting drunk and looking cool than anything else, while the senior O's were more concerned about cementing their status and treating the enlisted with condescending disdain. Chiefs were akin to 40 year old frat boys who only cared about shirking any work or responsibility in order to hang out in the Chiefs mess drinking coffee all day. I got out of the Navy for a lot of reasons, not the least of which was the lack of quality leadership.


----------



## Kraut783 (Aug 20, 2017)

Isn't not hitting another ship Navy 101?


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Aug 20, 2017)

@CDG - Hate cause, I feel you are right in everything you said.


----------



## CDG (Aug 20, 2017)

Ooh-Rah said:


> @CDG - Hate cause, I feel you are right in everything you said.


 Yeah brother. I thought for a minute before posting that, because it could easily come off as shit talking. I was in the Navy from 2004-2008, so I've had years of other experience to put those 4 years in context. As a JTAC, I've worked with O's and senior enlisted from all the branches, several foreign countries, and equivalent GS guys from other agencies. I say that to say this, the Navy is still the most poignant example of toxic systemic leadership that I have personally experienced.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Aug 21, 2017)

An old mentor of mine tells about being on the Joint Staff in Italy all of the Naval Officers went to the front of the chow line while the Army and Marine Officers went to the back.  

Now, in regards to this I'm guessing the Squadron and possibly fleet commander could face sanction.


----------



## AWP (Aug 21, 2017)

This may come across as callous, but bear with me.

Aviation incidents are on the rise lately and while troubling, flying is an inherently dangerous business. You expect to lose planes, the services even build loss rates into purchases and yearly budgets, but ships? The recent loss of so many aircraft is bad, but to have two collisions like this in such a short order? According to CNN it is 3 with a fourth incident this year?

10 US Navy sailors missing after destroyer collides with merchant ship - CNN

C'mon man...

I want to believe there was a system failure or alien event or...something other than the thoughts I'm not typing. On the plus side we have...really good damage control experts now?

Blue Skies.


----------



## Devildoc (Aug 21, 2017)

I read an article last week in _Proceedings_, written by a retired captain, former CO of destroyers.  His thought was 'but there for the grace of God go I,' said that the straits is the busiest sea lanes in the world, many ships don't navigate under the 'rules,' those that do change course with enough frequency to question right-of-way, there is an over-reliance on technology, etc.  he said that almost every Navy CO that has gone through more than once probably had a near-miss.  Think of three times the air traffic over NYC with no ATC.

Not excusing what happened, but hopefully providing some context.

Fair winds, Shipmates.


----------



## DA SWO (Aug 21, 2017)

@SkrewzLoose would be a good data source.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Aug 21, 2017)




----------



## ThunderHorse (Aug 21, 2017)

They tried to beat the freighter!


----------



## Gunz (Aug 21, 2017)

Both the _Franklin_ and the _McCain_ are part of the same formation, Destroyer Squadron 15...and there are only eight ships in that squadron. Unless this was just a weird coincidence and unquestionably the fault of the merchant ship, this, to me, suggests squadron-level or higher command deficiencies. Something ain't right.


----------



## Dame (Aug 22, 2017)

Yet again. Little strange or just more incompetence?


> A top U.S. Navy admiral on Monday called for a swift and thorough investigation into Monday's collision of the USS John S. McCain into an oil tanker near Singapore-- marking the second deadly mishap that occurred in the Pacific in the past three months. ...
> Jeff Stutzman, an ex-information warfare specialist in the Navy who works at a cyber threat intelligence company, told McClatchy that “there’s something more than just human error going on."


Is someone hacking our 7th Fleet? Navy to investigate after USS John S McCain collision


----------



## Devildoc (Aug 22, 2017)

Dame said:


> Yet again. Little strange or just more incompetence?
> 
> Is someone hacking our 7th Fleet? Navy to investigate after USS John S McCain collision



On the news this morning they alluded to some of the ship's systems being offline just prior to the collision.  Now, I am no conspiracy theorist....


----------



## R.Caerbannog (Aug 22, 2017)

I blame China. When you don't have the same naval capabilities as your enemy, but you have an advanced cyber warfare arm, it makes sense to target your enemies over reliance on technology. I'm a tin foil hatter when it comes to China and the pacific, or china and the midde east, or china anything.

edit for grammar and punctuation


----------



## BloodStripe (Aug 22, 2017)

I don't believe that the systems were hacked by the Chinese, or any other sovereign nation.


----------



## policemedic (Aug 22, 2017)

NavyBuyer said:


> I don't believe that the systems were hacked by the Chinese, or any other sovereign nation.



Not sure if that's good or bad.


----------



## BloodStripe (Aug 22, 2017)

policemedic said:


> Not sure if that's good or bad.



Good on our systems, bad on our sailors up on the bridge, but while it is their fault, big Navy is ultimately responsible for failing to adequately train their sailors. Civilian mariners spend upwards of four (4) years going through school to learn all the systems in the bridge and yet the military side throws up lower enlisted with minimal training, little sleep, and with a greater fear of transgender training schedules than operational duties in the bridge.


----------



## Grunt (Aug 22, 2017)

I think that much of our military has simply forgotten their true mission -- winning wars. Training in social agendas has taken precedence over training in vital areas like locating, closing with, and destroying the enemy....


----------



## Kaldak (Aug 22, 2017)

Agoge said:


> I think that much of our military has simply forgotten their true mission -- winning wars. Training in social agendas has taken precedence over training in vital areas like locating, closing with, and destroying the enemy....



They seem to have remembered how to locate, close with, and get damaged by civilian vessels.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Aug 22, 2017)

Saw this coming .....

U.S. Navy to Relieve Admiral of Command After Collisions

U.S. Navy to Relieve Admiral of Command After Collisions


----------



## BloodStripe (Aug 22, 2017)

I doubt career wise he cares. He's a few weeks from retirement. Less stress on his plate.


----------



## AWP (Aug 22, 2017)

NavyBuyer said:


> I doubt career wise he cares. He's a few weeks from retirement. Less stress on his plate.



A sacrificial lamb. Window dressing and nothing more. "See? We fired someone!"


----------



## DA SWO (Aug 23, 2017)

AWP said:


> A sacrificial lamb. Window dressing and nothing more. "See? We fired someone!"


He's a good argument for not letting aviators command ships.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Aug 23, 2017)

AWP said:


> A sacrificial lamb. Window dressing and nothing more. "See? We fired someone!"



Easy out for the Navy. Will the commander of DESRON15 and CSG5 also be held accountable?

After all, three of those affected ships were under their commands as well.


----------



## RackMaster (Aug 23, 2017)

NavyBuyer said:


> I don't believe that the systems were hacked by the Chinese, or any other sovereign nation.



It's a plausible explanation, considering they now own the company that provides technology for many of both US and Canadian satellites.

Canada under fire for approving Norsat sale to China's Hytera Communications - SpaceNews.com


----------



## Devildoc (Aug 23, 2017)

NavyBuyer said:


> Good on our systems, bad on our sailors up on the bridge, but while it is their fault, big Navy is ultimately responsible for failing to adequately train their sailors. Civilian mariners spend upwards of four (4) years going through school to learn all the systems in the bridge and yet the military side throws up lower enlisted with minimal training, little sleep, and with a greater fear of transgender training schedules than operational duties in the bridge.



That's a part of it.  Used to be a new-to-the-fleet Div "O" would go to Newport for 16 weeks of SWO school; apparently now they get OJT and most courses remote from CDs and internet studies.

Also those ships used to have three watches 24/7, now it's one.

There are glaring deficiencies throughout, and it's a shit sandwich of a big enough size that many, many people will get to take a bite.


----------



## SpitfireV (Aug 23, 2017)

China isn't hacking ships. Come on guys. Do you think they'd do it for shits and giggles when they could keep that capability secret and use it when they actually need it? Providing they can, of course. 

It's not the China, it's not ISIS and it's not some conspiracy theory I've not thought of yet. It's the US Navy and some bad luck.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Aug 23, 2017)

Ain't fooling none of us.


----------



## policemedic (Aug 23, 2017)

SpitfireV said:


> China isn't hacking ships. Come on guys. Do you think they'd do it for shits and giggles when they could keep that capability secret and use it when they actually need it? Providing they can, of course.
> 
> It's not the China, it's not ISIS and it's not some conspiracy theory I've not thought of yet. It's the US Navy and some bad luck.



Of course it isn't China.  It's this fucker.


----------



## AWP (Aug 23, 2017)

The tech exists, but is a nation dumb enough to telegraph that capability on a foreign warship, or any ship? You might as well debut your stealth fighter by flying to a foreign air force base.


----------



## R.Caerbannog (Aug 24, 2017)

It could be possible that this could be a dry run on tech that the Chinese have stolen/redeveloped, or maybe a warning to not mess around with their assets in the Pacific. I just get the feeling that stolen digitally based technologies can easily and cheaply be repurposed by another faction. With stolen digital technologies you don't have to manufacture physical parts that you may or may not have the tooling for, kinda like those stolen aircraft plans (Snowy Owl), it would just be a matter of copying or altering the source program to your needs or specifications.

I dunno, I just find it skeevy that the PRC has accessed and repurposed so much tech and that this is the second time that an incident like this has happened.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Aug 24, 2017)

Maybe someone was just reliving their earlier days in the bathtub playing bumper boat's?

How did you get fired Skipper?

Well see, what happens was, in all of the fucking ocean I ran my boat up into another boat.


For fuck sake.


----------



## Devildoc (Aug 24, 2017)

Diamondback 2/2 said:


> Well see, what happens was, in all of the fucking ocean I ran my boat up into another boat.



In that strait, it really is not that difficult.  It is one of the most congested sea lanes in the world.


----------



## Devildoc (Aug 24, 2017)

Just read this.  This should be required reading if you want to discuss boats colliding in the ocean blue:

Collisions: Part I—What Are the Root Causes?- By Captain Kevin Eyer, U.S. Navy (Retired) | U.S. Naval Institute


----------



## ThunderHorse (Sep 6, 2017)

This no good methinks: U.S. Navy Says Most Seventh Fleet Warships Lacked Proper Certification


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Sep 6, 2017)

I know not everyone has subscription to WSJ, so here are the first four paragraphs from that article.

----------

WASHINGTON—The majority of ships operating in the U.S. Navy’s Seventh Fleet, where two destroyers have been involved in fatal collisions since June, weren’t certified to conduct basic operations at sea related to war-fighting, according to U.S. Navy records.

As of late June, eight of the 11 cruisers and destroyers in the Seventh Fleet, and their crew members, weren’t certified by the U.S. Navy to conduct “mobility seamanship,” or basic steering of the ship, accord-ing to U.S. Navy records provided to two House Armed Services subcommit-tees. The Navy also said that seven of those ships had expired training certifi-cation in the areas of cruise missile defense and surface warfare, which test a crew’s ability to defend a ship or to conduct attacks.

The USS Fitzgerald col-lided with a Philippine-flagged vessel on June 17, killing seven crew members. The USS John McCain collided with a Liberian-flagged vessel Aug. 21, killing 10 sailors. Neither the Fitzgerald nor the McCain were certified for the majority of the mission operation requirements that the Navy periodically evaluates.

The Seventh Fleet’s destroy-ers and cruisers generally met certification in other areas such as maintenance, communications, naviga-tion, explosive safely and search and rescue.


----------



## DA SWO (Sep 6, 2017)

Ooh-Rah said:


> I know not everyone has subscription to WSJ, so here are the first four paragraphs from that article.
> 
> ----------
> 
> ...


But they had green dot, and all the transgender shit done.


----------



## Teufel (Sep 7, 2017)

SpitfireV said:


> China isn't hacking ships. Come on guys. Do you think they'd do it for shits and giggles when they could keep that capability secret and use it when they actually need it? Providing they can, of course.
> 
> It's not the China, it's not ISIS and it's not some conspiracy theory I've not thought of yet. It's the US Navy and some bad luck.



It is possible that they did it inadvertently and their cyber exploitation attempt became a cyber attack. The investigation will be an interesting read.


----------



## SpitfireV (Sep 7, 2017)

Teufel said:


> It is possible that they did it inadvertently and their cyber exploitation attempt became a cyber attack. The investigation will be an interesting read.



Anything is *possible* I agree but it seems *unlikely* if we use Occam's Razor. Either way, even the unclass report will be interesting.


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 7, 2017)

DA SWO said:


> *But they had green dot*, ...


 ^this.  There is literally too much to do, if you do everything required and do it to standard.  And sometimes the standards are so ridiculous that they seem merely to be there to use against people when something bad finally happens.  See also the "Lying To Ourselves" study.


----------



## Il Duce (Sep 7, 2017)

Marauder06 said:


> ^this.  There is literally too much to do, if you do everything required and do it to standard.  And sometimes the standards are so ridiculous that they seem merely to be there to use against people when something bad finally happens.  See also the "Lying To Ourselves" study.



If only there were someone responsible for everything that happens or fails to happen in these types of organizations.  Someone who could weigh risks, make decisions, bear the responsibility for consequences, and communicate clear truth to the powers that send down these orders and requirements.  What would we even call such a person...


----------



## racing_kitty (Sep 7, 2017)

Il Duce said:


> If only there were someone responsible for everything that happens or fails to happen in these types of organizations.  Someone who could weigh risks, make decisions, bear the responsibility for consequences, and communicate clear truth to the powers that send down these orders and requirements.  What would we even call such a person...



We used to call them "General," "Admiral," or "Colonel/Captain," but that kind of leadership has been bred out of the flag ranks in favor of the ability to fellate politicians and spout talking points simultaneously.


----------



## Il Duce (Sep 7, 2017)

racing_kitty said:


> We used to call them "General," "Admiral," or "Colonel/Captain," but that kind of leadership has been bred out of the flag ranks in favor of the ability to fellate politicians and spout talking points simultaneously.



I would have just accepted 'commander' - at any level.  The way my first company commander, @Marauder06, explained it to me as a LT 'officer' is another correct answer for those people.

I will say this for the Navy - at least they relieve people who fuck up operations.  Better late than never, I think the Army could take a lesson.


----------



## Teufel (Sep 7, 2017)

SpitfireV said:


> Anything is *possible* I agree but it seems *unlikely* if we use Occam's Razor. Either way, even the unclass report will be interesting.


The McCain lost both primary and back up steering controls in a crowded strait. That seems fishy to me.


----------



## Frank S. (Sep 7, 2017)

Marauder06 said:


> ^this.  There is literally too much to do, if you do everything required and do it to standard.  And sometimes the standards are so ridiculous that they seem merely to be there to use against people when something bad finally happens.  See also the "Lying To Ourselves" study.



That seems to be an underlying theme in several threads.


----------



## SpitfireV (Sep 7, 2017)

Teufel said:


> The McCain lost both primary and back up steering controls in a crowded strait. That seems fishy to me.



I haven't read that but I have read that the McCain had right of way and ships with the right of way aren't supposed to be the ones to make evasion.


----------



## Teufel (Sep 7, 2017)

SpitfireV said:


> I haven't read that but I have read that the McCain had right of way and ships with the right of way aren't supposed to be the ones to make evasion.



With the USS McCain collision, even Navy tech can’t overcome human shortcomings

"Initial reports from the organization suggest that a "steering casualty"—a loss of control over steering from the bridge—contributed to the _McCain_'s fatal collision. That, and the nature of the ship's steering and navigation system, has led to speculation that the _McCain_ was "hacked" and that perhaps some sort of malicious electronic attack was also involved in the _Fitzgerald_'s collision."

You're right but the McCain may have still avoided collision if she didn't have a steering casualty.


----------



## SpitfireV (Sep 7, 2017)

Teufel said:


> With the USS McCain collision, even Navy tech can’t overcome human shortcomings
> 
> "Initial reports from the organization suggest that a "steering casualty"—a loss of control over steering from the bridge—contributed to the _McCain_'s fatal collision. That, and the nature of the ship's steering and navigation system, has led to speculation that the _McCain_ was "hacked" and that perhaps some sort of malicious electronic attack was also involved in the _Fitzgerald_'s collision."
> 
> You're right but the McCain may have still avoided collision if she didn't have a steering casualty.



I guess we'll find out in a few months/a year/when the President tweets it.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Sep 7, 2017)

Do we not have manual backups for steerage?


----------



## Teufel (Sep 8, 2017)

ThunderHorse said:


> Do we not have manual backups for steerage?


I believe you can do it from aft steering but not from the bridge.


----------



## Gunz (Sep 8, 2017)

edit


----------



## Florida173 (Sep 8, 2017)

There's Danger in Garcia's Message | U.S. Naval Institute



> The root problem is that the “Message to Garcia Mentality” is so deeply embedded in Navy culture that we are blind to it at the most dangerous levels of the Navy’s leadership



Regarding the findings of the USS Fitzgerald on the toxicity of Message to Garcia within Naval leadership. 

I didn't realize it was such a staple and my experience with the essay from my SOF leadership had nothing to do with taking risks, but more to do with initiative in completing tasks. 

Seems like deflection to me, but maybe I'm misunderstanding the intent.


----------



## Red Flag 1 (Sep 8, 2017)

[QUO


----------



## DA SWO (Sep 8, 2017)

Red Flag 1 said:


> This is not directed at the OP.
> 
> Is the US Navy being lead or managed? How could decide if the USN or any branch is being managed or lead? Which is better, management or leadership?
> 
> ...


Slight disagree/
IMO it started with those that survived the VN era purges became risk averse.
Bush 41, Clinton, Bush 43, Obama continued the cut while we fight mentality.


----------



## Red Flag 1 (Sep 8, 2017)

.


----------



## DA SWO (Sep 8, 2017)

Red Flag 1 said:


> Yeah, there were changes when Carter was in. Controlled OER's began, and pilots began leaving in droves. I was at Andrews at the time and the Squadron that flew AF One even started leaving. Things seemed to settle back down again under President Reagan. I got out while Bush 41 was in, and the change to management was in very solidly by then.


Forgot about Carter, his they can leave if they don't like it quote opened a floodgate.


----------



## Teufel (Sep 8, 2017)

Florida173 said:


> There's Danger in Garcia's Message | U.S. Naval Institute
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The author is missing the mark. A message to Garcia encourages perseverance, creative problem solving, and mission accomplishment in the face of adverse circumstances. I would argue that the Navy may talk a lot about "message to Garcia" but in reality they promote a zero defect mentality that strongly discourages action and initiative at any level. Especially in the surface warfare officer corps.


----------



## RackMaster (Sep 8, 2017)

This is pretty telling.

New Report Finds Navy Crews Are Undermanned, Overworked, And Lack Training


----------



## BloodStripe (Sep 9, 2017)

RackMaster said:


> This is pretty telling.
> 
> New Report Finds Navy Crews Are Undermanned, Overworked, And Lack Training



And in other news, the sky is blue and the grass is greenish.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Sep 9, 2017)

NavyBuyer said:


> And in other news, the sky is blue and the grass is greenish.


Where are you?  Grass is brown here


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 11, 2017)

ThunderHorse said:


> Where are you?  Grass is brown here



better than the grass being under 6" to 6' of ocean ;)


----------



## ThunderHorse (Oct 11, 2017)

The Navy has fired the command team: Navy fires John S. McCain leadership, calls fatal August collision ‘preventable’


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Nov 1, 2017)

*- UPDATE -*

In both cases....who the hell was in charge of the freeking bridge?

Full Report

Navy Releases Collision Report for USS Fitzgerald and USS John S McCain Collisions

WASHINGTON (NNS) -- The Navy released Nov. 1, a report detailing the events and actions that led to the collision of USS Fitzgerald (DDG 62) and ACX Crystal off the coast of Japan June 17, and the collision of USS John S. McCain (DDG 56) and merchant vessel Alnic MC Aug. 21.

"Both of these accidents were preventable and the respective investigations found multiple failures by watch standers that contributed to the incidents, said Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) Adm. John Richardson. "We must do better."

*USS FITZGERALD*
The collision between Fitzgerald and Crystal was avoidable and resulted from an accumulation of smaller errors over time, ultimately resulting in a lack of adherence to sound navigational practices. Specifically, Fitzgerald's watch teams disregarded established norms of basic contact management and, more importantly, leadership failed to adhere to well-established protocols put in place to prevent collisions. In addition, the ship's triad was absent during an evolution where their experience, guidance and example would have greatly benefited the ship.

*USS JOHN S. MCCAIN*
The collision between John S. McCain and Alnic MC was also avoidable and resulted primarily from complacency, over-confidence and lack of procedural compliance. A major contributing factor to the collision was sub-standard level of knowledge regarding the operation of the ship control console. In particular, McCain's commanding officer disregarded recommendations from his executive officer, navigator and senior watch officer to set sea and anchor watch teams in a timely fashion to ensure the safe and effective operation of the ship. With regard to procedures, no one on the Bridge watch team, to include the commanding officer and executive officer, were properly trained on how to correctly operate the ship control console during a steering casualty.


----------



## racing_kitty (Nov 1, 2017)

Holy shit.


----------



## x SF med (Nov 2, 2017)

racing_kitty said:


> Holy shit.



Agreed...  what both of those synopses say is...  "The bridge crews didn't know how to drive their ship or lead those who did."


----------



## medicchick (Nov 27, 2017)

And the hits keep coming.

USS Fitzgerald returns to Yokosuka after suffering damage during loading process



> The guided-missile destroyer was sent back to repair two new punctures in the ship’s hull, the Navy announced Monday afternoon. The punctures were caused by the heavy lift vessel MV Transshelf’s steel support structure while the Fitzgerald was being loaded.


----------



## medicchick (Jan 16, 2018)

Navy to file charges against ship commanders for collisions that killed 17

The charges include negligent homicide, dereliction of duty and hazarding a vessel.   This is for both the USS John McCain and the USS Fitzgerald.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Jan 16, 2018)

medicchick said:


> Same article about charges being filed as in the other thread, not sure people follow both so I'll just link the other thread...
> 
> 7 sailors missing after destroyer collides with cargo ship



Good point.  These thread's have both become pretty similar; I've merged them.


----------



## medicchick (Jan 16, 2018)

Ooh-Rah said:


> Good point.  These thread's have both become pretty similar; I've merged them.


Feel free to deleate one of my posts if you like to clean up a bit.


----------



## medicchick (May 9, 2018)

Officer of the deck during fatal Fitzgerald collision pleads guilty at court-martial



> Lt. j.g. Sarah Coppock received a punitive letter and will forfeit half a month’s pay for three months as part of her sentence, according to a Navy statement.



Seems like a light punishment to me although I understand it hasn't been decided what will happen to her in regards to remaining in uniform.


----------



## DA SWO (May 9, 2018)

medicchick said:


> Officer of the deck during fatal Fitzgerald collision pleads guilty at court-martial
> 
> 
> 
> Seems like a light punishment to me although I understand it hasn't been decided what will happen to her in regards to remaining in uniform.


She's toast.  Doubtful she gets promoted to O-3, so I would expect a resignation to follow, but I could be wrong.


----------



## CQB (May 10, 2018)

Terrible tragedy, I’ll leave it to the enquiry for answers. I’m just thinking watching the ship turning in the vid, the sailors on the starboard side must have shit themselves.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (May 24, 2018)

Roh Roh!

I’ll bet Big Navy was not banking on this....has it happened before where a relieved officer has come back and publicly calls out the Navy?

Bryce Benson, commander of USS Fitzgerald in crash, faults Navy

The Navy commander facing court-martial for a deadly collision last year in the Pacific that sparked major questions about the Navy’s leadership and readiness of the fleet is not going down without a fight.

The defense team for Cmdr. Bryce Benson, who commanded the USS Fitzgerald when it collided with Philippine-flagged shipping vessel off Japan last June, killing seven sailors, is digging in against charges of negligent homicide and other violations of military law and is accusing the Navy of prejudicing the case against its client.

Cmdr. Benson’s decision to plead not guilty and to sharply contest the charges, amid claims that top service brass are seeking to try the case in the court of public opinion, will likely bring more bad news for the sea service, which is already reeling from the fallout of a string of deadly and embarrassing missteps last year. The looming courtroom fight also may provide fuel for simmering frustrations among the Navy’s rank and file with the direction of the service’s leadership under Adm. John Richardson, chief of naval operations.

In a surprisingly confrontational one-page public statement released last week, Lt. Cmdr. Justin Henderson, the head of Cmdr. Benson’s legal team, said the Navy’s leadership has participated in a public smear campaign against his client.


----------



## Devildoc (May 24, 2018)

Good for him.  I love my Navy (and military at large) as much as the next vet, but everyone knows they will throw people under the bus--er, ship--as fast as anyone; in the Navy, even faster.  Everyone is trying to pin blame on a couple key people when the issues range far and wide and are merely symptoms of very old problems.

Guilty or not guilty, he knows the Navy will play dirty pool, and at least he is trying to level the playing field.


----------



## AWP (May 24, 2018)

If the Navy can bury him it lessens the allegations concerning readiness and leadership above the ship level. However guilty he and his crew are, good on him for fighting back.


----------



## BloodStripe (May 25, 2018)

Navy fires CO of destroyer Hopper, the fourth reported command firing in May

Four senior firings in the month of May. 3 CO's and one CMC. Eeesh


----------



## Gunz (May 25, 2018)

Devildoc said:


> Good for him.  I love my Navy (and military at large) as much as the next vet, but everyone knows they will throw people under the bus--er, ship--as fast as anyone; in the Navy, even faster.  Everyone is trying to pin blame on a couple key people when the issues range far and wide and are merely symptoms of very old problems.
> 
> Guilty or not guilty, he knows the Navy will play dirty pool, and at least he is trying to level the playing field.




Big Navy will make sure he fries, no matter what. Then maybe it should start to address the lack of basic seamanship skills apparently rampant throughout the service. IMV the dependence on tech has contributed to that...there's a good reason the USCG has its officer candidates train on this:


----------



## Gunz (May 25, 2018)

NavyBuyer said:


> Navy fires CO of destroyer Hopper, the fourth reported command firing in May
> 
> Four senior firings in the month of May. 3 CO's and one CMC. Eeesh




Fraternization = Banging the crew.


----------



## DA SWO (May 25, 2018)

Ocoka said:


> Big Navy will make sure he fries, no matter what. Then maybe it should start to address the lack of basic seamanship skills apparently rampant throughout the service. IMV the dependence on tech has contributed to that...there's a good reason the USCG has its officer candidates train on this:
> 
> View attachment 22634


Making the SWO Course a distance learning course didn't help much.  8months to 8 weeks plus reading and classes to do while underway made sense to someone.


----------



## CDG (May 25, 2018)

DA SWO said:


> Making the SWO Course a distance learning course didn't help much.  8months to 8 weeks plus reading and classes to do while underway made sense to someone.


 Numbers game. The Navy was hurting for SWOs. New officers on a ship face a massive amount of pressure to get their SWO quals signed off on so they can start helping out in the watch/bridge rotations.


----------



## Devildoc (May 25, 2018)

Ocoka said:


> Big Navy will make sure he fries, no matter what. Then maybe it should start to address the lack of basic seamanship skills apparently rampant throughout the service. IMV the dependence on tech has contributed to that...there's a good reason the USCG has its officer candidates train on this:
> 
> View attachment 22634



You're right, Big Navy will see that he fries. But hopefully while contesting the court-martial and making it very public it will expose bigger issues with navy decision making.

I'm not sure the coast guard is the best metric by which to measure qualified deck officers at sea.  The Coast Guard is very very good at what they do but they put much fewer officers on Deck then the Navy does.

Eliminating the SWO residence course was a big big mistake, and those chickens are coming home to roost.  We don't see this issue as much with submarine service, because they are qualification course is much more difficult.


----------



## DA SWO (May 25, 2018)

Devildoc said:


> You're right, Big Navy will see that he fries. But hopefully while contesting the court-martial and making it very public it will expose bigger issues with navy decision making.
> 
> I'm not sure the coast guard is the best metric by which to measure qualified deck officers at sea.  The Coast Guard is very very good at what they do but they put much fewer officers on Deck then the Navy does.
> 
> Eliminating the SWO residence course was a big big mistake, and those chickens are coming home to roost.  We don't see this issue as much with submarine service, because they are qualification course is much more difficult.


We may see a jury that's sympathetic when the SWO course standards are brought to light in trial.
I am willing to bet someone wrote a paper or letter saying the erosion of standards would cost lives.
The Admiral who signed off on the revamped course is  the one who should be facing a board of his/her peers.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (May 27, 2018)

Meanwhile....

Former commander of USS John S McCain pleads guilty, retires after deadly collision

A former commander of the USS John S. McCain pleaded guilty Friday to dereliction of duty when the destroyer collided with a commercial tanker, killing 10 sailors and injuring five in the Straits of Singapore last August.

Cmdr. Alfredo Sanchez, who has served in the Navy for more than 20 years, testified during a special court-martial at the Washington Navy Yard, Stars and Stripes reported.

“I am ultimately responsible and stand accountable,” Sanchez said. “I will forever question my decisions that contributed to this tragic event.”


----------



## AWP (Sep 22, 2018)

I saw this and immediately thought of this thread.


----------



## Gunz (Sep 22, 2018)

Navy wants 355 ships. That's a lot of crashing.


----------



## CQB (Sep 24, 2018)

You can't beat HMAS Melbournes' score; 2-0. One Australian, one American.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Jan 15, 2019)

*- UPDATE - *

See also:  No bueno.

https://www.navytimes.com/news/your...doesnt-want-you-to-read/#.XDvrs67r3JI.twitter
A scathing internal Navy probe into the 2017 collision that drowned seven sailors on the guided-missile destroyer Fitzgerald details a far longer list of problems plaguing the vessel, its crew and superior commands than the service has publicly admitted.

Obtained by Navy Times, the “dual-purpose investigation” was overseen by Rear Adm. Brian Fort and submitted 41 days after the June 17, 2017, tragedy.

It was kept secret from the public in part because it was designed to prep the Navy for potential lawsuits in the aftermath of the accident.
Unsparingly, Fort and his team of investigators outlined critical lapses by bridge watchstanders on the night of the collision with the Philippine-flagged container vessel ACX Crystal in a bustling maritime corridor off the coast of Japan.

Their report documents the routine, almost casual, violations of standing orders on a Fitz bridge that often lacked skippers and executive officers, even during potentially dangerous voyages at night through busy waterways.

The probe exposes how personal distrust led the officer of the deck, Lt. j.g. Sarah Coppock, to avoid communicating with the destroyer’s electronic nerve center — the combat information center, or CIC — while the Fitzgerald tried to cross a shipping superhighway.


----------



## DC (Jan 15, 2019)

Ooh-Rah said:


> *- UPDATE - *
> 
> See also:  No bueno.
> 
> ...


Ahhh my Dept. Of the Navy friend. You know as well as every sailor/Marine that the “The Times” is not a reliable info source. Good only for entertainment and emergency shit paper. The truth is out there.


----------



## Devildoc (Jan 15, 2019)

@Ooh-Rah , I read that, and I am outraged, sad, and depressed, all at once.  That ship had shit leadership (in retrospect), no trust, and an ambivalent crew.  I am surprised there weren't incidents prior.


----------



## BloodStripe (Feb 5, 2019)

Two ships collide off the eastern seaboard

Now we are playing bumper boats with our own ships.


----------



## AWP (Feb 6, 2019)

"were able to safely operate after their sterns touched around"

I saw this in _Requiem for a Dream..._


----------



## Gunz (Feb 6, 2019)

This space for rent.


----------



## Teufel (Feb 6, 2019)

Underway replenishment is extremely difficult. I’m honestly surprised there aren’t more incidents.


----------



## Gunz (Feb 7, 2019)

If you look at ship histories running aground and fender benders are quite common. The skipper is not always relieved.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Feb 10, 2019)

This is so frustrating to read, yet the author is a fantastic writer.  The story reads almost like a work of fiction, sadly that is not the case.

Gave me a much better understanding of what happened.

Investigation finds Navy leaders ignored warnings for years before one of the deadliest crashes in decades — ProPublica

These paragraphs baffles me:

_The review revealed neglect by Navy leadership, serious mistakes by officers — and extraordinary acts of valor and endurance by the crew.

The Fitzgerald’s captain selected an untested team to steer the ship at night. He ordered the crew to speed through shipping lanes filled with cargo ships and fishing vessels to free up time to train his sailors the next day. At the time of the collision, he was asleep in his cabin.

The 26-year-old officer of the deck, who was in charge of the destroyer at the time of the crash, had navigated the route only once before in daylight. In a panic, she ordered the Fitzgerald to turn directly into the path of the Crystal._


This paragraph educated me:

_The speed left Coppock nervous. Steering a massive warship through the ocean at night is an exercise in managed chaos. Imagine driving down a four-lane highway without guardrails, traffic stripes or dividers. It is pitch dark. Other vehicles, ranging in size from mopeds to tractor-trailers, zip around you. None of them have brakes that can stop quickly._


And this one terrified me.

Felderman was going to be submerged in seconds. He took a breath and went under. A battle lantern lit the quarters underwater, but the light was poor, and there was no clear path to escape. And now he was desperate for air.

He thrust himself upward. He burst out into a small pocket of air between two pipes. He found only inches of space between the water level and the top of the compartment.

He smashed his head into the opening so hard that he bruised his face, split his skin and began bleeding.

“I was raving like a wild animal for air, pushing my face as high as I could,” he remembered.

He sucked in what air he could and went under again.


Lt. j.g. Stephany Breau (the ship’s damage control assistant) gave me hope.  It is difficult to believe the ship would not have gone under without her actions.

_She picked up a microphone for the shipwide intercom: “I assume all duties and responsibilities for damage control onboard USS Fitzgerald,” she announced. She sounded the alarm for general quarters, directing sailors to pre-assigned stations designated for emergencies.

She did algebra, scribbling calculations on the back of a notebook. She had to figure out the weight of water in the ship in case she needed to counterflood the Fitzgerald, a technique to deliberately flood other ship compartments to counterbalance areas already filled with water.

One stubborn area remained: Water continued to flood into a lower deck compartment carrying equipment for the Tomahawk missile system. None of the pumps were powerful enough to carry the water out.

Breau’s last trick was a bucket brigade. For 10 hours, about two dozen sailors at a time snaked in a long, tight line from below ship up three ladder wells to the main deck. Sailors rotated in and out, relieving comrades fatigued by the nonstop passing of 10-pound buckets of water._



And this one caused me to roll my eyes....
_The Navy explicitly ruled out problems with any of the ship’s radars._


----------



## AWP (Feb 11, 2019)

Ooh-Rah said:


> And this one caused me to roll my eyes....
> _The Navy explicitly ruled out problems with any of the ship’s radars._



As an electronics guy who works with a former Navy ET (Tico-class boat, NEC's for radar and IFF), why the skepticism?


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Feb 11, 2019)

AWP said:


> As an electronics guy who works with a former Navy ET (Tico-class boat, NEC's for radar and IFF), why the skepticism?


Fair question, and my only electronics qualifications is putting together those really cool box-sets that Radio Shack used to sell.

My skepticism comes from my natural willingness to question anything the Government tells me to be fact; especially the military.  In this case it is also (primarily) based off the information within the story.  The article appears to be incredibly well researched and substantiated by multiple witness accounts.

_*____*_

There were a number of callouts made by the authors that caused me pause:

_- Its radars were in questionable shape, and it’s not clear the crew knew how to operate them.

- The ship’s primary navigation system was run by 17-year-old software.

- The radar was supposed to automatically follow the hooked tracks on the screen. But Fitzgerald sailors had been unable to make the feature work.

- To follow the hooked tracks, Stawecki had to repeatedly press a button that refreshed the display on his screen. The workaround made Stawecki look like he was sending a frantic message in Morse code. He would hit the button more than 1,000 times in an hour to keep the images of nearby ships updated. 

- Just before the collision, Stawecki’s screen showed five ships around the Fitzgerald, none of them close by, none of them threats and none of them requiring reporting to the captain.

- On the Fitzgerald, technicians had covered a button to tune the radar with masking tape because it was broken. From his post, Stawecki could not tune the radar. So the only other thing he saw were false returns —

- A third radar, used for warfare, was slow to acquire targets, but technicians had installed a temporary fix that became permanent. “Problem known since 2012. Declared hopeless,” read notes attached to the repair report.

- Technicians were constantly fixing the SPS-73, the other main navigational radar on the Fitzgerald. Sometimes, the radar would show the destroyer heading the wrong way. 
*____*_

In the spirit of not burying that parts that don't fit my narrative, I acknowledge that 'user error' may have been partially to blame, but....user error caused by lack of training, overwork, and lacking maintenance that caused Sailors to conjure up band aid fixes.  (the sailor who had to hit the button 1000 times per minute really stuck with me).

All that said, it is incredibly difficult for me buy the Navy's statement of:  _The Navy explicitly ruled out problems with any of the ship’s radars._


----------



## Devildoc (Feb 11, 2019)

Ooh-Rah said:


> This is so frustrating to read, yet the author is a fantastic writer.  The story reads almost like a work of fiction, sadly that is not the case.
> 
> Gave me a much better understanding of what happened.
> 
> ...



If it was up to me to have to algebra or you all would go down with the ship, you all would go down with the ship.

As for radar, although I was never 'haze gray and underway' like a 'real' sailor, I nosed around on my floats, and when I asked why with the modern tech that they still had lookouts everywhere all the time, they said that radar often gives an incomplete picture, is not fool-proof, and can show things that aren't there.  Since I put 'radar' in the same category as 'voodoo,' I took the comments at face value.


----------



## AWP (Feb 11, 2019)

Ooh-Rah said:


> Post



Yeah, I get it now. That boat had some major issues for all of that to happen. My bud had the Skipper make a request to have the radar picture piped into the CO's cabin...and these guys couldn't make their stuff run?  The causes behind this are probably numerous, but to think a combat ship's eyes and ears were this faulty? They make AWACS look like Death Star technology...


----------



## ThunderHorse (Apr 11, 2019)

Update to USS Fitzgerald, Charges against the Skipper and Bridge Officer to be dropped: Navy to drop charges against officers in deadly USS Fitzgerald collision


----------



## ThunderHorse (Dec 22, 2019)

Interesting article about the USS John S. McCain...Touch Screen steering sounds like a disaster btw.

The Navy Installed Touch-screen Steering Systems To Save Money. Ten Sailors Paid With Their Lives.


----------



## Devildoc (Dec 22, 2019)

Ooh-Rah said:


> Touchscreens, they scare the shit out of me. I think of all of the WW2 movies I’ve seen and the damage those ships sustained, yet  the crew was still able to keep the ship functional.
> 
> I see videos of today’s navy, with huge monitor screens, touch screens, everything so electronic it looks like the bridge of the Starship Enterprise.
> 
> ...



Is it easier to disable a ship today?  Yes and no.  The threats are different.  But because today's threats are more sophisticated, ships are more survivable.  The tech is both the strength as well as the Achilles heel.


----------

