It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
(OP)
In the same way that the previously discussed Tesla 'autopilot' accident was seen here as an "Engineering Disaster", it's starting to look like the USS Fitzgerald collision with that container ship may have been one as well:
Freighter Was On Autopilot When It Hit U.S. Destroyer
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/freighter-...
Freighter Was On Autopilot When It Hit U.S. Destroyer
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/freighter-...
John R. Baker, P.E. (ret)
EX-Product 'Evangelist'
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
The secret of life is not finding someone to live with
It's finding someone you can't live without





RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
How did one of the modern technological marvels of the world fail to avoid a large lumbering cargo ship on a constant course? That's the engineering disaster.
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
I am fairly sure that all of the equipment was working correctly, if it wasn't there would have been twice as many sailors on watch.
And ships do have lights on them, and there were sailors on watch, and I am sure that their eyes were working.
Careers are over for both the Captain and OOD.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
P.E. Metallurgy, Plymouth Tube
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Added: Didn't realise the length of the Fitzgerald was 505' v. 730' for the Crystal... the destroyer was bigger than I thought and the container ship was one of the smaller ones... The article indicates how many containers it could carry, not the load at the time of the collision.
The problem, however, is that the AIS data tells only half, or less, of the story. That's because the Fitzgerald had its AIS system turned off, and it was not broadcasting its position and course. That means there's no current public record of the Fitzgerald's actions prior to the collision, and the crew of the Crystal would not have received a collision alarm from the system on their bridge.
Dik
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
--
JHG
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
There is just no excuse for this.
Mike McCann, PE, SE (WA)
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Another issue is how relatively minor damage completely took out the Fitzgerald's comm systems. THAT is an engineering problem.
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
As far as I can tell the Fitzgerald was on a parallel course at some distance, maybe? 2000ft from the Crystal and the Crystal made a small course change which the Fitzgerald didn't notice. I figure the Fitzgerald crew thought the Crystal would never change course and just stopped looking.
I agree with it being a management problem. The Fitzgerald is not autonomous and sailing is not a new task. Ships have been at see for tens of centuries. Errors are made and careers are ended.
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
It would be understandable that a military ship would not broadcast its AIS signal, but they should always be receiving AIS data from other ships and integrating the data into their tactical picture.
The military ship would also have to be extremely aware that it is not broadcasting AIS, and take responsibility to avoid other marine traffic. In any case, the Fitzgerald is hardly 'Stealth', so it should have been a blip on the freighter's radar.
So, It takes two to tango, I think. Plenty of blame to go around.
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Dik
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
I don't think so. US naval ships are supposed to tolerate battle damage; this is equivalent to a single round that completely disabled the ship's comm.
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
It's been reported that the USS Fitzgerald suffered extensive below-the-waterline damage (remember seven sailors died when they were trapped in a flooded compartment) and I suspect that the damage was caused by what they call a "Bulbous Bow", as shown in the photo below. If the container ship's bow looked anything like this, that would certainly explain how the damage to the destroyer could be both extensive and severe.
John R. Baker, P.E. (ret)
EX-Product 'Evangelist'
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
The secret of life is not finding someone to live with
It's finding someone you can't live without
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Looked at that issue back in 1986-87.
In EVERY destroyer-cruiser sized Naval ship in EVERY Navy worldwide sine WWII, one actual hit on every destroyer/frigate/cruiser by a live weapon, dud weapon or single explosion (mine or small boat suicide bomber) knocked one or more of the following: Command, control, conn (ship's control hydraulics or the rudder itself), communication (as here - and many other times), combat (loss of radar, CIC (computer fire control), guns, missiles, missile loading, or gun loading), power (electric general power, electrical 400 Hz fire control power, or both) and propulsion. If you cannot fight, flee, or float, you are dead, are you not?
One hit knocks out every navy's surface ships nowdays. (A near-miss? No, those are survivable. But the first hit, even by a Napoleonic era iron cannonball, knocks out the ship to be vulnerable for the second missile or bomb or dud. And several of the British surface ships in the Falklands sunk by dud hits.
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
it would appear that rules 5, 8 , and 15 were violated , and in view of the fact that the damage was to the starboard side of the vessel, unless there was some very fancy maneuvering done at the time, the destroyer appears to be the give way vessel.
B.E.
You are judged not by what you know, but by what you can do.
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
In shipping lanes this busy I would guess that everyone runs with lights, this is a very heavily trafficked lane.
My hunch is that the Fitz saw the Crystal, platted a course, and didn't see a conflict.
They then ignored it and were busy looking at the next 10-20 potential conflicts, and they didn't keep track of the Crystal.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
P.E. Metallurgy, Plymouth Tube
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Read the Wikipedia page on the RMS Empress of Ireland. They claim that one reaction to the ramming was to phase out straight stems on ships. A slanted stem such as the one in your photo do not punch holes below the waterline, unless there is a bulbous bow.
--
JHG
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
I suppose it's possible that the Fitzgerald was for whatever reason trying to communicate with the Crystal, and since no body was at home to answer the phone went for a closer look.
Speculation is fun.
Eventually there will be an investigation report.
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
It's pretty hard to argue that the destroyer shouldn't have given way from what we know, more likely both crews were oblivious.
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
IRStuff, I think the crushed area just below the bridge, where the one radar panel was damaged, is responsible for cutting the radio communications. The crew quarters and an engineering space are areas affected by the bulb. I looked at gCaptain to see if there is anything that is more precise. This is a link to the main gCaptain forum thread on the topic:
http://forum.gcaptain.com/t/uss-fitzgerald-collide...
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Dik
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
That's really not a fair representation of what the COLREGS say. Unless the larger vessel was constrained by her draught (which seems unlikely, though I haven't been able to find a decent chart of that part of the ocean), by her activities (unlikely for a box ship) or Not Under Command, then size and manoeuvrability don't really come into the equation.
You can never really tell what happened in a collision just by looking what side of a ship the hole is on. It's always possible that one ship simply wasn't keeping an adequate lookout (still happens too often), but the human factors are often far more interesting than that. Causes common to lots of collision reports are:
- Give Way vessel assessed that adequate clearance existed and no action was required - but failed to appreciate that the Stand On vessel was manoeuvring (lesson: keep watching and assessing)
- Situation was on the borderline between Overtaking and Crossing and both vessels assumed they were the Stand On vessel
- The Stand On vessel started taking avoiding action and manoeuvred into the space the Give Way vessel was giving way into - this sometimes happens when the Stand On vessel finds themselves having to give way to some third party)
- The ships were talking to each other (or thought it was each other they were talking to), thought they'd agreed something mutually convenient, then cocked it up.
Be interesting to see if anything like that was involved this time.A.
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Dik
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
A.
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Exactly where did you learn that the Fitzgerald's AIS system was "turned off"?
The original article that I referenced only stated, and I quote, "The Fitzgerald's AIS data was not available so its track was not reported publicly."
It does NOT say that the AIS system was OFF, only that the data was not available at the time that the article was written.
John R. Baker, P.E. (ret)
EX-Product 'Evangelist'
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
The secret of life is not finding someone to live with
It's finding someone you can't live without
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
I'll dig up the news article... but, apparently it was turned off.
Added: Found it, from ARSTechnica:
"The problem, however, is that the AIS data tells only half, or less, of the story. That's because the Fitzgerald had its AIS system turned off, and it was not broadcasting its position and course. That means there's no current public record of the Fitzgerald's actions prior to the collision, and the crew of the Crystal would not have received a collision alarm from the system on their bridge."
Dik
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
I generally use the following for a definition of negligence and is consistent with the opinion of the courts, "Negligence arises when one person owes to another a duty of care and breaches that duty, and reasonably foreseeable harm arises as a result of that breach."
It has nothing to do 'without good reason'. The military not wanting to divulge the location of the Fitz, in an active shipping lane is their prerogative and disregards the safety of ships in the area... but, it comes at a price.
Dik
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
IMO Resolution A.917 offers these thoughts:
CAUTION
Not all ships carry AIS.
The officer of the watch (OOW) should always be aware that other ships and, in particular, leisure craft, fishing boats and warships, and some coastal shore stations including Vessel Traffic Service (VTS) centres, might not be fitted with AIS.
The OOW should always be aware that AIS fitted on other ships as a mandatory carriage requirement, might, under certain circumstances, be switched off on the master's professional judgement.
3.) The internationally-adopted shipborne carriage requirements for AIS are contained in SOLAS regulation V/19. The SOLAS Convention requires AIS to be fitted on certain ships through a phased implementation period spanning from 1st July 2002 to 1st July 2008. In addition, specific vessel types (e.g. warships, naval auxiliaries and ships owned/operated by governments) are not required to be fitted with AIS. Also, small vessels (e.g. leisure craft, fishing boats) and certain other ships are exempt from carrying AIS. Moreover, ships fitted with AIS might have the equipment switched off. Users are therefore cautioned to always bear in mind that information provided by AIS may not be giving a complete or correct ‘picture’ of shipping traffic in their vicinity. Guidance in this document on the inherent limitations of AIS and their use in collision avoidance situations (see paragraphs 39 to 43) should, therefore, be heeded.
There might yet be a lot to say about other duties placed on both bridge teams and I think that the likelihood that either party will be (or will deserve to be) completely exonerated is vanishingly small - but I think that among the discussions about negligence, those surrounding AIS will be the least clear-cut.
A.
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
In terms of broadcasting, complete invisibility isn't the only option available. A full AIS data message says who you are, where you are, how fast you're going in what direction, where you're bound, what class of vessel you are, what you're up to and information about your length, beam and draft. In Western European waters, it's not unusual to see warships providing a limited subset of that information. In some cases, all that is withheld is the destination. Sometimes, all you get is "Warship - Military Ops" and basic instantaneous location, course and speed information. Sometimes you get nothing. In the light of this accident, I imagine the guidance on when it's appropriate to adopt which of these postures will get a bit of a scrub.
A.
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
I can't help wondering how and why a warship with millions of dollars worth of threat detection and avoidance systems could neither detect nor avoid a incoming container ship.
Communications out? Too bad that the Captain did not have a sat-phone under his pillow.
Bill
--------------------
"Why not the best?"
Jimmy Carter
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
http://www.navy.mil/navydata/nav_legacy.asp?id=174
Richard Feynman's Problem Solving Algorithm
1. Write down the problem.
2. Think very hard.
3. Write down the answer.
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
"Not all ships carry AIS."
The regulation requires AIS to be fitted aboard all ships of 300 gross tonnage and upwards engaged on international voyages, cargo ships of 500 gross tonnage and upwards not engaged on international voyages and all passenger ships irrespective of size. The requirement became effective for all ships by 31 December 2004.
AIS transmitted information offers information to other ships equipped with AIS of location and pending collision alerts.
Dik
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
This was 60-odd miles off Japan. Not exactly a piracy hotspot.
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Beware that on-line maps (Marine AIS, Aircraft ADSB) can be visually deceiving. At scales wide enough to be interesting, the vehicles are typically displayed as VASTLY oversized symbols. One can then be left with the false impression that the area is far more congested than it really is.
A useful exercise is to look at an on-line map of air traffic over your region. Then go outside, look up, and compare the apparent congestion.
It's just something to be aware of.
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
SOLAS (like most international legislation) is utterly horrible to interpret. If you look at Chapter V Regulation 19 in isolation, you can quickly get to the conclusion you laid out above. When read in the context of Chapter V Regulation 1, the story is different.
My personal opinion is that the interplay between Regulations 1 and 19 isn't completely unambiguous and that, if you set your mind to it, you could interpret it as not exempting warships from those particular requirements - but that doesn't seem to be the way the Flag/Port State Authorities (or the IMO) read it.
A.
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
https://www.steamshipmutual.com/Posters/COLREGSRul...
B.E.
You are judged not by what you know, but by what you can do.
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Either way, there's still a couple of universal gotchas in Rule 17:
soon as it becomes apparent to her that the vessel required to keep out of the way is not
taking appropriate action in compliance with these Rules.
(b) When, from any cause, the vessel required to keep her course and speed finds herself so close that
collision cannot be avoided by the action of the give-way vessel alone, she shall take such action
as will best aid to avoid collision.
It's always at least partly your own fault.
A.
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
"To help determine what happened, investigators will download radar data from the ship's Aegis weapons system, which records routine details on position, course, speed and any nearby ships or aircraft. Navigation and radar data will also be gathered from the cargo ship.
"Another factor being examined is the impact of the destruction of the Fitzgerald's communications gear on the ability of the crew to call back to shore to inform commanders they needed help.
"Preliminary analysis indicates the collision occurred where the ship's communication nodes are housed and the official said the crew had to resort to using satellite based cell phones to communicate both on board and back to shore."
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
1. Unless expressly provided otherwise, this chapter shall apply to all ships on all voyages, except: 1.1 warships
The rest of the chapter, including regulations 14 and 19 makes no reference to warships...
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index2320.htm
John R. Baker, P.E. (ret)
EX-Product 'Evangelist'
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
The secret of life is not finding someone to live with
It's finding someone you can't live without
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
John R. Baker, P.E. (ret)
EX-Product 'Evangelist'
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
The secret of life is not finding someone to live with
It's finding someone you can't live without
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Richard Feynman's Problem Solving Algorithm
1. Write down the problem.
2. Think very hard.
3. Write down the answer.
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Multiple U.S. and Japanese investigations are under way into how the guided missile destroyer USS Fitzgerald and the much larger ACX Crystal container ship collided in clear weather south of Tokyo Bay in the early hours of June 17.
In the first detailed account from one of those directly involved, the cargo ship's captain said the ACX Crystal had signaled with flashing lights after the Fitzgerald "suddenly" steamed on to a course to cross its path.
The container ship steered hard to starboard (right) to avoid the warship, but hit the Fitzgerald 10 minutes later at 1:30 a.m., according to a copy of Captain Ronald Advincula's report to Japanese ship owner Dainichi Investment Corporation that was seen by Reuters."
Dik
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
A.
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Keith Cress
kcress - http://www.flaminsystems.com
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
The switch could be set to either ON or OFF, as circumstances or whims dictate.
Finding examples of Military Ships with their AIS Out either ON and OFF is expected.
Finding examples of AIS Out OFF over the Internet wouldn't be as straightforward.
It might require a newsworthy collision to make it apparent; as in this case.
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
"SOLAS basically says that warships are exempt, but are encouraged to be compliant. Moreover, most warships that are ostensibly compliant might delay AIS information sufficiently to ensure that no tactical disadvantage is incurred."
I could find no reference to this; can you provide a citation? or, is it perhaps optional at the discretion of the OOD?
Dik
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
https://mcanet.mcga.gov.uk/public/c4/solas/solas_v.... Regulation 1 exempts military ships from everything in Chapter 5. Regulation 19 governs installation of AIS.
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Added: I notice under MCA Guidance, the following: "Although naval vessels, auxiliaries and government service vessels are exempt, the Regulation encourages them to comply as closely as possible with the provisions of SOLAS V. It is UK policy, spelt out in a letter of understanding between the MOD and MCA, that UK naval auxiliary ships comply as closely as possible with the requirements of SOLAS. All other UK-flagged ships on Government service are required to comply fully with SOLAS."
Dik
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
John R. Baker, P.E. (ret)
EX-Product 'Evangelist'
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
The secret of life is not finding someone to live with
It's finding someone you can't live without
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Not authoritative... just informational... I generally do not consider news sources as authoritative, and only because my <Ctrl><C> and <Ctrl><V> only works for one item at a time...
Added: The above text copy&paste came from the link provided by IRS
Dik
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
I agree that it's a minor annoyance to copy and paste the quote, and then have to go back to fetch the URL as another copy and paste operation. Given Google, it's not such a big sin to let those interested look it up for themselves. Besides, the most
useful web resources are often the least authoritative, and vice versa. So refs sometimes aren't as useful as they once were.
Edit: remove hard CR/LFs.
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Dik
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Which is even more important that you post the link(s) so that the rest of us can make our own judgements.
By only including bits and pieces which you think are relevant, while at the same time claiming that there might have been less than reliable info in the original item, you are potentially skewing the conversation toward what in your opinion was relevant while leaving the rest of us to guess as to what the other stuff was saying. And yes, I know I can do a "highlight and search" operation but why should I have to? Whenever I personally mention anything from a source, I post the links. In fact, I generally don't even 'Cut & Paste' quotes from items, instead I often simply make some sort of comment based on my personal opinion or understanding of the subject matter, and then provide a link so that if anyone is interested, they can dig deeper, but at least I've made it easy for them and have not done anything to obscure what it was that I was basing my positions/views/comments on.
If you think that's being picky, well I'm sorry...
John R. Baker, P.E. (ret)
EX-Product 'Evangelist'
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
The secret of life is not finding someone to live with
It's finding someone you can't live without
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Dik
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Bill
--------------------
"Why not the best?"
Jimmy Carter
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
"The captain of a U.S. navy warship that lost seven sailors in a collision with a commercial container ship in June will be relieved of command and nearly a dozen others face punishment, the navy's second-ranking admiral said Thursday."
Link: http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/u-s-ship-captain-seve...
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
U.S. Warship Collides With Merchant Vessel East Of Singapore
This is the second accident involving U.S. Navy destroyers in Asian waters in little more than two months.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/john-mccain-us...
John R. Baker, P.E. (ret)
EX-Product 'Evangelist'
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
The secret of life is not finding someone to live with
It's finding someone you can't live without
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Dik
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
B.E.
You are judged not by what you know, but by what you can do.
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Keith Cress
kcress - http://www.flaminsystems.com
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Having an important system like the AIS off (or unavailable, amounts to the same thing) means the watch is more important. And maybe they got fatigued/nonchalant ? But also I guess it is hard to see a small change in course that creates a glancing collision. But I'd've thought they could have determined that the distance to the other ship was closing (ranging binoculars ?).
But you remember the clip on Youtube (years back) about some US Navy ship taking on an Irish lighthouse ?
Question, if the AIS system is not functioning, how would they identify the other ship (to hail it) ?
another day in paradise, or is paradise one day closer ?
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
nor was anyone looking at any radar. The McCain is a measly 500 feet long with
a 100,000 shaft horsepower and can exceed 30 knots, it's a nimble ship! It
should be proactively staying 1000 feet from any other shipping.
I'm starting to think they should be putting bridge video loggers in these one
point eight billion dollar machines.
Keith Cress
kcress - http://www.flaminsystems.com
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Well, $500,000 by the time procurement gets it on board.
Bill
--------------------
"Why not the best?"
Jimmy Carter
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
To paraphrase Oscar Wilde:
“To collide with one ship may be regarded as a misfortune; to collide with two looks like carelessness.”
As EdStainless said in the third post in this thread - there is clearly an underlying management problem here.
http://julianh72.blogspot.com
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
I'd start to be more concerned that a foreign adversary has managed to hack into our ships' control/navigation systems and is somehow disabling or otherwise causing them to malfunction at inopportune times.
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Keith Cress
kcress - http://www.flaminsystems.com
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
B.E.
You are judged not by what you know, but by what you can do.
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Dik
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
In both cases, the non-Navy ships were complicit with their own errors, but both collisions would have been completely avoidable had the Navy crews been doing things even remotely correctly.
https://s3.amazonaws.com/CHINFO/USS+Fitzgerald+and...
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
A.
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Pretty sobering narrative.. I can't imagine being a member of one of those bridge watches and what it would be like to have to face the families of the sailors lost.
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
A large number of wrecks in Lake Superior were caused by the Royal Mail Ship. The captain's opinion was that the Queen's (or King's) mail must get through- and everyone else better get out of the way
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
I loved to kick around in the Upper Peninsula when I lived in Michigan. During one such trip I wandered into an old graveyard in the middle of nowhere where I stumbled upon a small area surrounded by a low fence. A plaque indicated that it held the remains of eight sailors of the steamer Myron that has washed up in a block of ice in the spring of 1920 following the loss of the ship in Nov. 1919.
Later that day or the next I found myself at the museum which featured a display related to this event. Turns out that when the Myron went down in a gale, the crew abandoned ship only to find themselves smashed amongst the logs they had been hauling. They all perished. The captain went down with the ship and was found clinging to the pilothouse nearly frozen to death several hours later. He survived.
I digress. But for history buffs, it's a fascinating place.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Myron
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Below are a couple of images from Whitefish Point taken in August, 2008:
John R. Baker, P.E. (ret)
EX-Product 'Evangelist'
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
The secret of life is not finding someone to live with
It's finding someone you can't live without
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
----------------------------------------
The Help for this program was created in Windows Help format, which depends on a feature that isn't included in this version of Windows.
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Two years later, the barge Miztec that was involved in the Myron sinking was again caught in a storm in the same location with Captain Neal (of the Myron) as the mate of the vessel that was towing it. Cut free once again, this time the Miztec met the same fate as the Myron.
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
control systems of both ships. The poor sailors would likely have never been on the McCain were it not for the grounding of the Antietam.
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Read every word of those reports. Fascinating. Incredibly poor training. Makes me wonder if other "required"
training fills so much time that fundamental training like 'control transfer' gets shorted or was it just blown off.
Can you imagine, with a functional loss of steering control, the horror that was building in that McCain collision
evolution? Wow.
I'm also amazed at the seamen that were able to escape those flooded berths.
Keith Cress
kcress - http://www.flaminsystems.com
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
The report details on the crew members escaping the berthings is impressive. The damage control efforts were impressive as well. The crews certainly stepped-up to the challenges presented after the collisions.
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Dik
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Dan - Owner
http://www.Hi-TecDesigns.com
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Was he flying them in combat, or was he ferrying them?
--
JHG
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
There's a memorial to it in Newfoundland, somewhere, and it has an additional airman that my dad didn't recall.
Dik
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
B.E.
You are judged not by what you know, but by what you can do.
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
The sudden turn was due to “a series of missteps” that took place at the control of the John S. McCain that unintentionally increased the rate of the vessel’s turn, the report by the Transport Safety Investigation Bureau said."
Dik
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
Dan - Owner
http://www.Hi-TecDesigns.com
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...
As is often the case, the failure was between the display and the control.
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: It appears that the USS Fitzgerald collision may have been an "Engineering Disaster"...