Navy Ship Collision Report Findings

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

sleddriver

Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
4,836
Location
Central Texas
I haven't read the report, just this article. However, if accurate it doesn't paint a nice picture.
Quote:
WASHINGTON — Two accidents that claimed the lives of 17 sailors and wounded dozens more resulted from complete breakdowns in standard Navy procedures and poor decision-making by officers and sailors on the bridge of the two warships, according to a Navy report obtained by Defense News. The report reveals that both collisions came after critical failures of officers and sailors on the bridge and raises troubling questions about the basic proficiency of the Japan-based 7th Fleet and the surface Navy as a whole. In both incidents, sailors on the bridge failed to sound a ship-wide alarm notifying the crew of danger, which is a standard Navy procedure. Ships at sea must sound five short blasts of the ship’s whistle to alert the crew and the other ship of a coming collision. That did not occur in either collision. Neither the crew members below deck nor the other ships involved had any warning from the Navy that their ships were headed for disaster, the reports found. Also, neither bridge’s watch standers sought to make bridge-to-bridge radio communication with the approaching ship, which is also a standard Navy procedure.
Quote:
The June 17 collision between the Fitzgerald and the motor vessel ACX Crystal off the coast of Japan was the result of a complete failure of safeguards put in place to prevent at-sea accidents, as well as clear violations of standing orders to inform the commanding officer when approaching ships pose a safety risk. The McCain’s Aug. 21 collision with the oil and chemical tanker Alnic MC near the Strait of Malacca appeared to be the result of a series of mistakes by the ship’s bridge watch-standers and heavy risks assumed by the commanding officer in a busy shipping lane.
Navy Crews at Fault In Fatal Collisions Read the whole thing....
 
I still find it hard to believe that these collisions are totally unrelated to the tankers that have been reporting implausible GPS readings off the coast of Russia. I think a rogue state is spoofing GPS. shrug
 
Even if they could hack GPS I have to imagine they have numerous other methods of navigation and if they don't jive that should put them on high alert real fast.
 
Originally Posted By: Ethan1
I think a rogue state is spoofing GPS. shrug
Yes but the Navy doesn't want to admit to it. Right now they are quietly trying to make the GPS system spoof-proof. This whole thing reminds me of the movie "Die Hard" where the terrorists rigged the planes altimeters to read higher than they actually were. If you remember, a couple of planes slammed into the runway because the pilots thought they were higher than they were.
 
The services ranks were being decimated in the last several years forcing a fast track to get officers into rank to take commands or responsibilities they were unprepared for. Anyone here with military contacts will know the massive RIF (reduction in force) that took place. I believe this is the major reason for these accidents. I’m trying not to be political here but some administrations in the past pushed for the “peace dividend”. Military numbers should be reduced at a slow rate so as not to create the imbalance of less senior personnel against those with rank and experience. I served in the USCG from 1976-1980. President Carter got his peace dividend then which caused drastic reduction in training. Fuel was rationed as well. Many vessels just stayed tied up at their piers. Fortunately this is being stopped and reversed as of now but it’s too late for those who lost their lives or were injured. The officers and crew charged with UCMJ will never get their reputations back or have been drummed out when they were put into positions and situations they should have never been in. I do agree that there is more to this whole story. GPS spoofing should not be discounted out.
 
Originally Posted By: eljefino
Even if they could hack GPS I have to imagine they have numerous other methods of navigation and if they don't jive that should put them on high alert real fast.
Yep, and collision avoidance aids , thermal imaging, radar, emergency flares, state of the art navigation, etc.... If you're in very busy shipping lanes you need multiple heads on a swivel (enlisted and officer) looking for any ships in the area that can crash in your Navy ship.
 
Originally Posted By: Ethan1
I still find it hard to believe that these collisions are totally unrelated to the tankers that have been reporting implausible GPS readings off the coast of Russia. I think a rogue state is spoofing GPS. shrug
What does that have to do with failure of multiple levels of lookouts to not see a giant tanker?? As someone said how about looking out the window. I am sure their "Root Cause Analysis" was painful.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: BrocLuno
Yeah, but the radar watch alone should have seen the vector and alerted the whole bridge ...
That radar information, along with other sources, could have been sent to the bridge....and might not have been improperly utilized. From reading those accounts it doesn't appear that either ship thought they were in extreme danger until a collision was unavoidable (not even sounding ship wide collision alarms or 5 short blasts on the ship's whistle to alert all vessels within ear shot). Fitzgerald's top side lookouts weren't on the side of the ship where the highest risk of collision was coming from. Sad to hear that ...in the Fitzgerald’s combat information center, which displays inputs from the ship’s weapons systems and radars, the watch standers there failed to “tune and adjust their radars to maintain an accurate picture of other ships in the area,” the report found. That means CIC failed to track the multiple ships exiting the channel. Fitzgerald’s lookouts failed as well, with the investigation indicating the sailor or sailors assigned to look out for hazards were literally looking the other way the whole time. “Watch-standers performing lookout duties did so only on Fitzgerald’s port side, not on the starboard side where the three ships were present with the risk of collision,” the report reads. I think the "fleet up" program for the CO's and XO's will get a serious look after these incidents. And I agree that the OpTempo these days is excessive. It's 30-40% higher than when I was doing runs back in the 1980's. Where is the time to get quality candidates, properly train them, and then retain them?
 
Quote:
"The thing that stood out to me was in both situations they had minimal situational awareness,” said Hoffman. “In the case of Fitzgerald, nearly criminal negligence on the part of the bridge watch team. And in neither case did the ship sound five short blasts or raise the general alarm to let anyone know they were in danger."
Officers in charge need to be court martialed for Dereliction of Duty, put in jail, once sentence is served..... take these idiots out to the exact location of crash (deaths of 17 sailors) and forced to walk the plank. Where is the leadership, accountability and professionalism from these officers overseeing their ship when it's out at sea ?
 
“Where is the leadership, accountability and professionalism from these officers overseeing their ship when it's out at sea ?” The fast track process spurred on by a shortage of command officers takes these young officers and shoots them up the ranks quickly with no time to gain experience. I’ve heard that some officers were made XO 6-8 months earlier and then transferred to command a ship. It used to be years of experience was had before these men and women achieved that rank and responsibility. But with that said, multiple failures at CIC and on the bridge make me wonder what kind of training these sailors get now. This is a much different military than when I served 37 years ago. Some things should not change such as lookouts reporting any traffic or obstacles. The Navy needs to get back to basics.
 
Quote:
As the Fitzgerald sailed into the busy waters near Japan it cut through a channel with specific rules for navigation known as a a traffic separation scheme. The ship did not have the navigation patterns on its charts and repeatedly drove across the bow of ships exiting the channel. The Fitzgerald’s commanding officer was in his cabin prior to the collision, which took place at 1:30 a.m. The report documents numerous mistakes made by the officer of the deck, who is the main officer in charge of safe navigation while on watch. At one point, the Fitz crossed the bow of an oncoming merchant ship at a range of less than 650 yards — fewer than four ship-lengths — but the officer of the deck never informed the captain, a violation of standing orders that requires the skipper to be summoned to help oversee hazardous conditions.
 
Originally Posted By: Mr Nice
Quote:
As the Fitzgerald sailed into the busy waters near Japan it cut through a channel with specific rules for navigation known as a a traffic separation scheme. The ship did not have the navigation patterns on its charts and repeatedly drove across the bow of ships exiting the channel. The Fitzgerald’s commanding officer was in his cabin prior to the collision, which took place at 1:30 a.m. The report documents numerous mistakes made by the officer of the deck, who is the main officer in charge of safe navigation while on watch.
In the "old" days the Operations/Navigations Officer would have these charts prepared well ahead of time and then shown to the CO for final approval. They'd both have to see them. You don't go tooling around the ocean on unapproved charts. Maybe it's done on computer screens today and there is no step for reviews...as all charts are in a data base and "automatically" approved?
 
Wow.
Quote:
Navy filing homicide charges against 2 ship commanders Associated Press ROBERT BURNS and LOLITA C. BALDOR,Associated Press 1 hour 30 minutes ago WASHINGTON (AP) — Five officers involved in two Navy ship collisions last year that killed a total of 17 sailors are being charged with negligent homicide, the Navy said Tuesday. A Navy spokesman, Capt. Greg Hicks, said the charges, which also include dereliction of duty and endangering a ship, will be presented to what the military calls an Article 32 hearing to determine whether the accused are taken to trial in a court-martial. The disciplinary actions were decided by Adm. Frank Caldwell and are the latest in a series of moves the Navy has made in the aftermath of the deadly collisions, which investigators concluded were avoidable. It fired several top leaders, including the commander of the 7th Fleet, Vice Adm. Joseph Aucoin, and several other senior commanders in the Pacific. ...
https://www.yahoo.com/news/navy-filing-h...--politics.html
 
Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
Good thing there was no Akbar Al-Salami to take advantage of that whole situation .
Nope just incompetent WASP's.....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
F9F vs MiG-15s
Replies
7
Views
1K
supton
GON
Passenger-cargo ship SS Warrimoo- really nice read
Replies
10
Views
622
svtrit
wemay
  • Locked
China boasts world’s largest navy: US DoD report
2 3
Replies
54
Views
3K
PandaBear
GON
Navy Memorial WDC
Replies
3
Views
455
Astro14
Oro_O
Pick from the menu, Christmas dinner 1917, Navy style
2
Replies
21
Views
2K
Oro_O
Top