Posted on 06/19/2017 4:55:31 PM PDT by The Klingon
Per the USNavy's 7th Fleet public affairs office; USS Fitzgerald (DDG 62) was involved in a collision with a merchant vessel at approximately 2:30 a.m. local time, June 17, while operating about 56 nautical miles southwest of Yokosuka, Japan.
The merchant vessel was the Filipino-flagged ACX Crystal container-ship (IMO:9360611) and she did have her AIS transponder on at the time of the incident.
From the news footage below you'll notice an area of severe damage which looks to me to be from an impact at a perpendicular angle, and not a grazing strike, since there is no scraping or dragging down the length of the USS Fitzgerald. I'm not suggesting the impact was deliberate, only that the vessels would have deflected if they had hit with a glancing strike, where to me it looks like the bow of the Crystal embedded itself for a short period in the USS Fitzgerald. I originally thought the USS Fitzgerald was stationary before the impact, but I've since changed my mind, since I've been told that there would be no operational reason to be stationary near an area of high traffic, on a moonless night. Valid point. Then if she wasn't stationary, why was she crossing the path of the shipping lane and how didn't they notice the 30,000 Ton ship on a collision course with them?
(Excerpt) Read more at vesselofinterest.com ...
My uncle was on the mighty Mo during the second storm.
Said nobody ate a GD thing for two days. Said you could tell the screws came out of the water at times. They thought the ship would split in the middle because he said there were things breaking off the hull during it.
After, said that a lot of the doors would not close.
They was some scared SOBs. And my uncle was in the navy for 16 years at the time. Even the salty old chiefs like him were crapping their drawers.
In the post 9/11 world...it is hard not to hear zebras.
And...just because you might not hear them, it doesn’t mean they aren’t there.
No kidding...can you imagine being on a destroyer? Great book: “Halsey’s Typhoon”.
Frightening.
And my uncle said that, that storm they went through was NOTHING like to first one Halsey went through. He was on the way on the Missouri (somewhere around the east Pacific) when that task force went through that first storm.
The boys on the destroyers were at the mercy of the seas.
I believe they are there, but not in this case. Any jihadi worth his koran would have finished the job. Was a sitting duck.
USS Missouri
Clarence Gehling
Present at Surrender
Years: 1945 to 1945
Rate: CX
Explain the rate CX.
USS Fitzgerald has the best navigation technology on earth. How was it possible? Was the watch captain out having a joint on the starboard side and didn’t notice the Philippine cargo ship? Or, did this cargo ship ram the Fitzgerald on purpose?
I recall reading that an official inquiry of a serious collision at sea (I think it was The Empress of Ireland and the Storstad) once began with “If all parties on both vessels are to be believed, then we must conclude that the collision occurred while they were ten miles apart and stopped.”
You navigation map does not show the USS Fitzgerald’s course at point B. For a collision point it has to show both ships at the same point.
Actually, I'd say the collision happened at "low relative speed".
My analogy would be driving on an interstate highway and being tagged by a semi -- going slightly faster than you -- that swings over into your lane...
LOL
...and scaled more to your liking... '-)
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Plotting the course arrow with each point is instructive. The container ship was doing 18+ knots on an easterly course, then -- 10 minutes before the collision -- apparently, the autopilot made a programmed 20-degree course change to port (to 70 degrees) and maintained 18+ knots. Presumably, that change was toward the Fitzgerald.
At 16:30Z, immediately post-collision, the ACX Crystal lost 1.2 knots in speed, and was deflected 18 degrees to starboard. To me, that is not inconsistent with a glancing collision on the port bow.
It's been widely reported (or speculated) that the ACX Crystal was on autopilot. Reduced speed, plus a 90-degree collision-avoidance turn to starboard -- with the vessel quickly brought back to its 70-degree pre-collision course and speed -- would, to this landlubber, appear to be expected autopilot behavior.
It's also been widely reported or speculated that the entire crew was asleep. If so, it's reasonable to speculate that the collision woke the crew, someone was sent forward to check for collision damage, and when it was reported back, the u-turn was made that placed the vessel back in the collision vicinity (at dead-slow speed [red dots]) almost an hour after the collision.
Reportedly, it was at that time, some 50 minutes after the collision, that ACX Crystal radioed in the report of the incident. (Cause of the confusion in times?)
~~~~~~~~~~
That raises a BIG question: Did the USS Fitzgerald radio in a report of the collision? If so, at what time was that report made?
I disagree. Based on the damage to the two vessels, I estimate they were on almost parallel (but converging) courses, with the cargo carrier having a slightly higher speed (overtaking).
Also, for a 17:29Z collision, the orange circle should be centered between the "n" and the "o" in "knots", in the dark blue label above...
The reports say the ACX Crystal suffered from an impact on the left or port side of its bow. From what I see of the USS Fitzgerald, the ACX was travailing at a perpendicular angle into its starboard side. The destroyer might have been like someone trying to get across a busy street, thinking it could get out of the way of the oncoming cars in time — in this case, a miscalculation.
If the contact was perpendicular, why wasn't damage distributed on both sides of the ACX Crystal's bow?
For that matter, Why wasn't the bow, itself, damaged?
I'm not even going to attempt to discuss evidence of vertical-motion damage with you ...
I hadn’t seen that image of the ACX Chrystall’s bow section. Good find. The strike was not perpendicular. I am not good at finding such images. Does it suggest a turn to port (left turn) by the USS Fitzgerald to avoid the collision?
an old Navy euphemism, among Naval Officers, for a formal investigation. Being at the end of the long green table without the ashtray means you are the one who’s conduct/actions is being investigated.
First heard the term when I was in Navy OCS during the late 60s.
That scenario makes sense. The first plots were just what the heck. Is there a chance that a freshly minted Ensign “had the con”?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.