Ships Nostalgia banner

USS FITZGERALD/ACX CRYSTAL collision (merged threads)

42K views 300 replies 61 participants last post by  kewl dude 
#1 ·
#2 ·
Seven Missing, Three Injured After U.S. Navy destroyer Collides With Containership Of

By Idrees Ali and Tim Kelly (Reuters) Seven sailors are missing and three injured after a U.S. Navy destroyer collided early on Saturday morning with a Philippine-flagged container ship south of Tokyo Bay in Japan, the U.S. Navy said.
The Japanese Coast Guard said the destroyer was experiencing some flooding but was not in danger of sinking, while the merchant vessel was able to sail under its own power.
Related Book: The Cruel Sea by Nicholas Monsarrat
The U.S. Navy said in a statement the USS Fitzgerald, an Aegis guided missile destroyer, collided with a merchant vessel at about 2:30 a.m. local time (1730 GMT), some 56 nautical miles southwest of Yokosuka, a rare incident on a busy waterway.
Three aboard the destroyer had been medically evacuated, including the ship’s commanding officer, Cmdr. Bryce Benson, who was reportedly in stable condition after being airlifted to the U.S. Naval Hospital on the Yokosuka base, the Navy said.
The other two injured were transferred to the hospital to treat lacerations and bruises, it said. The Fitzgerald, the Japanese Coast Guard and Maritime Self-Defense Force were searching for the seven missing sailors.
Benson took command of the Fitzgerald on May 13. He had previously commanded a minesweeper based in Sasebo in western Japan.
 

Attachments

#3 ·
"Images of the container ship following the collision show damage on the port bow, suggesting the destroyer was attempting to give way to the merchant ship ahead of the impact."

Mm-m-m. Maybe, maybe not.
 
#4 · (Edited)
US Destroyer hits Container ship

How does that happen.
A Naval ship that is top heavy with radar and a GM problem with all the bods on the bridge, how do you hit a darn great container ship. All those steel containers on deck in all colours a good radar signature and very visible.
Presumably the container ship did not have a good British complement of Officers and crew, but maybe a dog on watch and they didn't hear him bark, too much Ouzo.

But then the Old man of (was it ) HMS Edinburgh off the coast of Australia hit that rock, that was on the chart.
The excuse was they were taking on a helicopter at the time, so obviously nobody was minding the shop and they nearly sunk it.
Had it not been for the Engineer officers shoring up bulkheads and reducing the flooding it would have sunk. The Engineer Officer got the MBE for his effort and double promotion.
The old man obviously go the DCM 'Don't Come Monday' and a bar to his CDM "Cadbury's Dairy Milk".

The Mark 1 Eyeball is still not redundant despite all these electronic gizmos. Electronic assisted collisions?

Just reminds me of the U tube clip of the US warship arguing with a lighthouse keeper.
 
#10 ·
This image capture from Marine Traffic shows that the container ship has done some form of U Turn. We don't know what the warship was up to as that is not tracked. To me as a layman I would have thought that a fast and highly manoeuvrable warship could perhaps have got itself out of the way as the track shows the container vessel made the turn and carried on for a while before the collision.
 

Attachments

#13 ·
Yes, a pity the US vessel did not have their AIS 'working'.

I think the 'U' turns were done after the collision and came back to render assistance. Just before that the CRYSTAL seems to have made a small alteration to port. Perhaps the USS was overtaking and did not see the CRYSTAL make the alteration.

One of the problems with overtaking is that you see a single sternlight and that ship ahead can be turned port or starboard and nothing to indicate direction... especially container ship. The accommodation block is hidden by the aft end containers. Perhaps ships should have stern 'sidelights'.... say blue and yellow or even flashing lights to left or right than the sternlight to indicate turning. Something new to make the rules 'difficult'!
 
#11 ·
Quote. However, the USS Fitzgerald is one of the most advanced warships in the world - with highly sophisticated radars systems.
It doesn't matter how many toys they have to play with, if they cannot use them to avoid things like this and have somebody to make the correct decision having seen all the screens.

What happened to Mark 1 EYEBALL and rules of the road at sea.

Later will come the investigation into how one of the world's most sophisticated warships failed to avoid colliding with a 30,000-tonne cargo ship on a calm, clear night.

You will note they didn't show the track of the US ship. I wonder why.
It also said they didn't know where it was going and neither did their old man if it hit a containership.

It might have been a busy area, but so is the English Channel, which years ago without all the toys they have now as probably busier than now due to the volume of ships trading with the UK and continent. Ships are larger now so fewer ships.
The docks round Britain's coasts used to be packed with ships, unlike now.
 
#16 ·
My sympathies are for the missing and those confirmed dead, their loved ones and friends. RIP. They probably did not even know what happened! Interesting track record of the 'box boat', that slight port course (probably scheduled) alteration obviously just minutes before the s**t hit the fan. However I will await more information if we get it before the enquiry before forming a concrete opinion.
 
#19 ·
Interesting track record of the 'box boat', that slight port course (probably scheduled) alteration obviously just minutes before the s**t hit the fan.


Small alteration of course to pass island of Toshima and head up towards Island of Oshima. The distance between the alteration, about 10 degrees alteration to port, to the collision... about 3.8 miles. At 15 knots, roughly 15 minutes.

Don't know the speed of the FITZGERALD. Don't know the courses either, but from the photos they seem to converging on similar courses.
 
#18 ·
I see the destroyer is being helped by naval tugs.
Why?
It was damaged above the waterline in what looks like the bridge wing, assume the propulsion and rudders are functional, the wheelhouse would have been lower and on the ships centre line, there would always be an after steering position.

I am sure many a RN ship in WW2 fought and continued with the voyage with more damage than we see here.
In the days of Nelson, if it floated, it could be sailed more or less.
I suppose with the bridge damaged aĺl those electronic toys would be out of action, so they wouls actually need to navigate the old fashioned way that perhaps have never done, taking bearing from the bridge wing compass.
What's charts?
 
#20 · (Edited)
Not to make to much light of the situation,but A sailor(Gas turbine technician) went missing from USS SHILOH and after a seven day search and 5,500 nm using several ships he was found alive in the ER aboard the USS SHILOH (300 crew) .Brings back memories of being relieved at midnight by a pisshead 3rd.(should micro-chip them)
 
#22 ·
All,
There will no doubt be a fairly bloody enquiry with accusation and counter accusation being bandied about.
In the distant past I had a whole week on a US destroyer and the bridge manning was well populated and the handovers as to who was in charge were rigorouly observed.
The ROR was strictly obeyed and only one Officer gave the orders.

Yours aye,

slick

"You may open fire now Gridley"
 
#30 ·
Radar display failure modes?

It does appear the warship was not AIS'ing. This prompted me to wonder if, with a display on which both radar and AIS targets are being monitored by an alert watchkeeper (let us not assume otherwise as yet), the 'radar' observer would immediately appreciate the loss of radar targets?

AIS was ever technology looking for an application. If everyone is not obliged to use it perhaps it should be removed. Sperry had a very nasty systems failure where 'illegal' (something like a February 29th in a non-leap year if I remember right) AIS data, when fed to a Visionmaster display caused its processor to halt.

AIS is already so discredited that the regulators refer to it as security enhancement without regard to the chapter in SOLAS in which it is mandated.

I realise the proposal could be dismissed reductio ad absurdum - why not, then remove the radar as well and so leave the watchkeeper with only the Mk 1 eyball - however it may be that the protection that a limited number of reliable and constant instruments can provide can be lost in the 'noise' (possibly grass being a better analogy here) provided by others. KISS Keep it simple, stupid.
 
#31 ·
The BBC (Overseas) reporting from the Admiral of the Pacific Fleet is saying that the seven sailors killed were found in the wreckage of a sleeping compartment.

Admiral says that the container ship was making several U turns BEFORE the collision. The track of the vessel shows these U turns. I assumed that the U turns were AFTER the collision showing the vessel coming back to the assist the FITZGERALD. Unfortunately the AIS fro the destroyer does not show any plot at all. If I had been watching a large vessel approaching me and saw it made several U turns I would get the heck away from it... not standing on and waiting to see what that ship is doing?
 
#32 ·
just been thinking back to my time at sea as OOW that I had to take a 'round turn out of her' twice, once to port in an overtaking / converging situation with the other ship just forward of our starboard beam. The other to starboard when i definitely 'chickened out' early as the other ship was crossing and we were on his starboard bow. I wasn't sure he had even seen us let alone done anything about it nand he just5 steamed straight on. Better safe than sorry!
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top