Another Navy ship collision. 10 "missing" - Page 2 - SailNet Community
 83Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #11 of 110 Old 08-21-2017
Captain Obvious
 
Sal Paradise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: New York
Posts: 2,159
Thanks: 25
Thanked 89 Times in 88 Posts
Rep Power: 7
 
Re: Another Navy ship collision. 10 "missing"

The author got flamed a couple of months ago, but it is relevant -

The USS Fitzgerald Is At Fault. This Is Why. ? gCaptain

Sal Paradise - Armchair Circumnavigator

Senior Researcher - Dunning Kruger
Sal Paradise is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #12 of 110 Old 08-21-2017
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Narragansett Bay
Posts: 19,245
Thanks: 82
Thanked 541 Times in 518 Posts
Rep Power: 11
   
Re: Another Navy ship collision. 10 "missing"

As the gCaptain article says, both ships will be found to blame. It's curious that the destroyer was hit on the port aft side. Without further knowledge of maneuvering, this suggests the destroyer was stand-on, as they approached each other. Still, you have to get that last few hundred feet out of the way, if the giveway isn't giving way.

In the end, I don't believe in coincidences. Something is up.
Quillpig likes this.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Jeanneau 54DS

In the harsh marine environment, something is always in need of repair. Margaritas fix everything.
Minnewaska is offline  
post #13 of 110 Old 08-21-2017
Senior Member
 
RichH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 5,021
Thanks: 54
Thanked 326 Times in 310 Posts
Rep Power: 20
   
Re: Another Navy ship collision. 10 "missing"

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkofSeaLife View Post
Rich, have you sailed Singapore Straits and Malacca Straits? (or the English Channel that I did for the first time a few weeks ago).

They are too busy for old fashioned hairy eyeballs. These navy ships have disruptive radar signatures built into their topsides design, let alone their electronic disrupters. Plus not tx'ing the AIS position... And the other shipping is flat out reading the host of other clear signatures how the hell can they divert?

When I crossed the English channel a few weeks ago, at night, I had to select one break in the traffic and hammer it to do the 5 miles at right angles. At the end of that hour I could see I would have 5 (Five) ships abreast bearing down on me. But they could "SEE" me... And divert if I screwed up.

No one can see Navy ships if they refuse to transmit AIS is busy areas. (or a virtual radar signal)

When a navy ship is on patrol up North Korea way its fine to be full tactical... But the busy shipping lanes off Japan and Singapore has shown twice the folly of this insanity.

No man can do these areas just by being old fashioned. They must use electronics nowadays
I understand completely what you're stating. Ive had similar episodes of
'dark' ships in the quite busy Florida Straights.
On one recent night crossing the Gulf Stream, I had to heave-to and wait for well over an hour and a half before I had a safe enough 'hole' to pass through the constant line of ships - in 2 directions. Interestingly, I put out several securité calls to let everyone know exactly where I was .... not one acknowledgement. Two of the ships had no AIS and minimal marker/nav lights. When hove-to I finally turned on every damn light on the boat so maybe someone would see me and not feel me.

And this isn't restricted to just surface ships as Ive had second person testimony of a boat having its bottom ripped out one night (1988-89) .... and it probably wasn't a sunken shipping container as the person supposedly claimed that a noticeable 'lifting' wave immediately proceeded the 'hit'. Boat sank in less than 1-2 minutes well off the area east of Jacksonville/Fernandina Florida - the location of 2 nuclear submarine installations.
RichH is offline  
 
post #14 of 110 Old 08-21-2017
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 2,261
Thanks: 10
Thanked 55 Times in 52 Posts
Rep Power: 14
 
Re: Another Navy ship collision. 10 "missing"

Is there a bit of a knee-jerk reaction to slam-dunk the Navy here? All the electronics in the world won't help you if (for example) someone turns to port in front of you.

https://twitter.com/overseasweekly

This is very preliminary, but looks like outbound (McCain) and inbound (Alnic), reciprocal courses. More than that I don't know, but let's say it went wrong and McCain went hard starboard but still got drilled. They may have done everything right, who knows? We don't. Not yet, anyway.

Just sayin'. Ease up on joking about "naval intelligence" 'til we know more.


And prayers for the missing and families.

Last edited by nolatom; 08-21-2017 at 11:06 AM.
nolatom is offline  
post #15 of 110 Old 08-21-2017
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 2,261
Thanks: 10
Thanked 55 Times in 52 Posts
Rep Power: 14
 
Re: Another Navy ship collision. 10 "missing"

Just saw another animation, and heard McCain was heading for Singapore, not away. So it may not have been a meeting situation. Might have been a crossing (from north to south?), or a merge, that did not go well:

We still lack course and speed data for McCain. So let's hold our fire if we can, til we know?
nolatom is offline  
post #16 of 110 Old 08-21-2017
Senior Member
 
RichH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 5,021
Thanks: 54
Thanked 326 Times in 310 Posts
Rep Power: 20
   
Re: Another Navy ship collision. 10 "missing"

If you look at the tracks in nolatom's post carefully and at max. screen zoom, it appears possibly that the ALNIC lost rudder control and then 'hooked' itself bow-to-port and into the McCain --- if in fact the McCain is represented by the purple line.

The McCain (in other media pics) appears to be well damaged below the waterline suggesting that the ALNICs 'bulb' (bow) hit the McCain.
zeehag likes this.
RichH is offline  
post #17 of 110 Old 08-21-2017
Tartan 27' owner
 
CalebD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 5,236
Thanks: 10
Thanked 148 Times in 140 Posts
Rep Power: 12
 
Re: Another Navy ship collision. 10 "missing"

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkofSeaLife View Post
I can't reply or post photos to this thread... Weird...
Well that is obviously because you did not start this thread MarkofSeaLife, Sailingdog did as his post from 2005 or so supersedes your post by years.

"The cure for anything is salt water~ sweat, tears, or the sea." ~Isak Denesen

Everybody has one:

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
CalebD is offline  
post #18 of 110 Old 08-21-2017
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 5
Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 0
 
Re: Another Navy ship collision. 10 "missing"

As an ex-navy person, I think that this is nonsense.
Forget being in stealth mode, so others can't electronically see you. The freighter was obviously not at fault. It's like a huge turtle running over a dysfunctional and totally disabled rabbit.
What about one's command responsibility to see others? Could all of the watch detail (I bet at least 4) been asleep?
What about one's responsibility not to cross the path of others?
Unless the navy has changed more than is imaginable (by me), there had to be people on watch who saw this coming, and alerted the bridge, especially if disabling ones own radars is part of being stealthy. Didn't sonar hear it bearing down/getting closer?
As a conspiracy realist who knew with certainty that the Gulf of Tonkin incident was a false flag operation way back in 1966, I smell a skunk.
Given two deadly incidents in two months, both involving 'modern-day' digital destroyers, I'm guessing a 'hack' occurred, not unlike when our Navy vessels could not respond during 'enemy' fly-overs in the Black Sea and Baltic, even if they wanted to. And if any crew member mentions what actually happened, they'll likely know the Philly brig intimately, and/or lose all bennies forever.
There's a cover-up going on, be there no doubt.
I knew it back in 1966, and left the navy asap.
These dead sailors never had a chance, and unless this is made public, more will follow.
My condolences to all who care.
JoCoSailor likes this.
UglyDuckling is offline  
post #19 of 110 Old 08-21-2017
Senior Member
 
timangiel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 272
Thanks: 72
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Rep Power: 13
 
Re: Another Navy ship collision. 10 "missing"

Quote:
Originally Posted by CalebD View Post
Well that is obviously because you did not start this thread MarkofSeaLife, Sailingdog did as his post from 2005 or so supersedes your post by years.


Did Sailingdog predict this accident years in advance?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
timangiel is online now  
post #20 of 110 Old 08-21-2017
Captain Obvious
 
Sal Paradise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: New York
Posts: 2,159
Thanks: 25
Thanked 89 Times in 88 Posts
Rep Power: 7
 
Re: Another Navy ship collision. 10 "missing"

Quote:
Originally Posted by CalebD View Post
Well that is obviously because you did not start this thread MarkofSeaLife, Sailingdog did as his post from 2005 or so supersedes your post by years.
I am seeing the same weird error at the top of every thread! Salingdog.

Sal Paradise - Armchair Circumnavigator

Senior Researcher - Dunning Kruger
Sal Paradise is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

By choosing to post the reply above you agree to the rules you agreed to when joining Sailnet.
Click Here to view those rules.

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the SailNet Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
Please note: After entering 3 characters a list of Usernames already in use will appear and the list will disappear once a valid Username is entered.


User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Disapointment with Polar Navy Customer "service" tschmidty Electronics 8 06-27-2016 09:41 PM
That's not going to buff out... "collision" mdbee Seamanship & Navigation 6 08-15-2012 07:58 PM
C270 Main Sail "stack Pack", Quick Cover", "lazy Bag" Install randy22556 Catalina 1 02-28-2007 11:53 AM
Quintess Yacht Tragedy - "The Essence" Sinks In Fatal Collision - Helium Report NewsReader News Feeds 0 09-26-2006 01:20 AM
"Discover" Ship Docked at Owensboro (14 WFIE Evansville) NewsReader News Feeds 0 09-07-2006 05:19 PM

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome