Now I'm no Nelson....
Discussion
TurboHatchback said:
I really do wonder how this happens, one of presumably the most maneouvreable ships on the sea with a large crew of supposedly the best trained officers and men around and with some of the most advanced navigation electronics in the world getting rammed by a tanker. It's not like tankers are even capable of sudden changes in direction or speed, I wouldn't expect top level seamanship from them but surely a destroyer should be able to avoid them?
My bet is that the CO of the destroyer tried to assert their right as stand on vessel under the international COLREGs and failed to take into account that the watch officer aboard the tanker was asleep/hammered/gone for a piss.
My bet is that the CO of the destroyer tried to assert their right as stand on vessel under the international COLREGs and failed to take into account that the watch officer aboard the tanker was asleep/hammered/gone for a piss.
Technically under the COLREGS the stand on vessel doesn't have an absolute right to stand on, and should be able to take appropriate action, should the give way vessel fail to do so
Gander101 said:
TurboHatchback said:
I really do wonder how this happens, one of presumably the most maneouvreable ships on the sea with a large crew of supposedly the best trained officers and men around and with some of the most advanced navigation electronics in the world getting rammed by a tanker. It's not like tankers are even capable of sudden changes in direction or speed, I wouldn't expect top level seamanship from them but surely a destroyer should be able to avoid them?
My bet is that the CO of the destroyer tried to assert their right as stand on vessel under the international COLREGs and failed to take into account that the watch officer aboard the tanker was asleep/hammered/gone for a piss.
My bet is that the CO of the destroyer tried to assert their right as stand on vessel under the international COLREGs and failed to take into account that the watch officer aboard the tanker was asleep/hammered/gone for a piss.
Technically under the COLREGS the stand on vessel doesn't have an absolute right to stand on, and should be able to take appropriate action, should the give way vessel fail to do so
The USN officers in the first collision were report at fault by court martial a few days ago.
This says third incident since June this year.
http://www.janes.com/article/73228/usn-destroyer-c...
This says third incident since June this year.
http://www.janes.com/article/73228/usn-destroyer-c...
It's a basic failure to keep a proper watch. Fundamental stuff.
Even assuming there was some reason to not be able to see a large tanker approaching by eye (like running dark at night) surely they would be monitoring with a surface surveillance radar as a minimum?
Regardless of whether there were deliberate actions on the part of the tanker this should never be able to happen.
Even assuming there was some reason to not be able to see a large tanker approaching by eye (like running dark at night) surely they would be monitoring with a surface surveillance radar as a minimum?
Regardless of whether there were deliberate actions on the part of the tanker this should never be able to happen.
Merchant ships are often undercrewed, with language difficulties, officers of the watch very tired after loadings. Which could explain errors by the tanker crew.
How a fully manned destroyer can get itself rammed is much harder to understand but recklessness is not impossible. to quote my own post on the earlier incident:
"....., officer on the bridge of the warship may have had a macho moment- anyone remember the RN skipper who drove a frigate into London Bridge trying to leave a berth alongside HMS Belfast in a high speed turn rather than using tugs? Some sort of Clarkson moment. POWER!! POWER!!!"
How a fully manned destroyer can get itself rammed is much harder to understand but recklessness is not impossible. to quote my own post on the earlier incident:
"....., officer on the bridge of the warship may have had a macho moment- anyone remember the RN skipper who drove a frigate into London Bridge trying to leave a berth alongside HMS Belfast in a high speed turn rather than using tugs? Some sort of Clarkson moment. POWER!! POWER!!!"
I've just come back from a sailing trip in the Med, we went from Malta to Menorca and through some rather busy shipping lanes. All of the larger boats including us had collision avoidance systems. You could touch a boat on the radar at it would display its name, destination, speed and bearing. If another ship was on a collision course an alarm would go off. I believe the system is called ALS or some such. I can't see how you could have a collision if even one of the ships had a similar system.
Biggles delivers the goods said:
I've just come back from a sailing trip in the Med, we went from Malta to Menorca and through some rather busy shipping lanes. All of the larger boats including us had collision avoidance systems. You could touch a boat on the radar at it would display its name, destination, speed and bearing. If another ship was on a collision course an alarm would go off. I believe the system is called ALS or some such. I can't see how you could have a collision if even one of the ships had a similar system.
What was the back up system for when that system fails?Biggles delivers the goods said:
I've just come back from a sailing trip in the Med, we went from Malta to Menorca and through some rather busy shipping lanes. All of the larger boats including us had collision avoidance systems. You could touch a boat on the radar at it would display its name, destination, speed and bearing. If another ship was on a collision course an alarm would go off. I believe the system is called ALS or some such. I can't see how you could have a collision if even one of the ships had a similar system.
The system is called AIS. Warships often don't transmit their whereabouts via AIS though. For obvious reasons. If the warship isn't transmitting, then AIS won't flag a potential collision. That said, the warship would show up on a radar screen.We'll have to wait for the report to find out what happened here though.
gooner1 said:
....but can any of you nautical coves, explain how the below happened.
Pretty sure the Cargo ship would have the bare minimum crew possible but
the American ship, one of the most up to date warships afloat?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-40310563
Captain of the destroyer said 'watch this'.Pretty sure the Cargo ship would have the bare minimum crew possible but
the American ship, one of the most up to date warships afloat?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-40310563
Unbelievable that it happened again, and so soon after.
Court martial for the captain and OOW as a minimum. There is something very wrong in the US navy.
When I helmed a racing yacht at night, I was massively conscious that the crew asleep down below had entrusted me with their safety. That the officers entrusted to look after hundreds of crew could be so careless defies belief.
RIP sailors.
Court martial for the captain and OOW as a minimum. There is something very wrong in the US navy.
When I helmed a racing yacht at night, I was massively conscious that the crew asleep down below had entrusted me with their safety. That the officers entrusted to look after hundreds of crew could be so careless defies belief.
RIP sailors.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff