A Question for Sailors

   / A Question for Sailors #1  

smstonypoint

Super Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2009
Messages
5,351
Location
SC (Upstate) & NC (Piedmont)
Tractor
NH TN 55, Kubota B2320 & RTV 900, Bad Boy Outlaw ZTR
I have been reading about the collision of the USS Fitzgerald and a container ship off the coast of Japan: Freighter Was On Autopilot When It Hit US Destroyer.


I served in the USCG from 1965-69, and was a quartermaster aboard a 180' buoy tender from 1966-67. The buoy tender was equipped with Loran, radar, and RDF as navigation aids. When underway, the bridge was manned by the officer of the deck, a quartermaster, the helmsman, and at least two seamen serving as lookouts. The officer of the deck or the quartermaster monitored the radar. I would think a modern destroyer would have multiple radar and sonar personnel on watch while at sea.

I am having a hard time figuring how this this collision could have happened.

It is not clear which ship had the right-of-way. The container ship (Chrystal) was apparently on autopilot, but even if the destroyer had the right-of-way, it would make sense for the destroyer to take evasive action before the risk of a collision.

"The Fitzgerald is equipped with the AN/SPS-64 advanced military navigation radar, and also uses a commercial radar system to enhance the shipping traffic picture of ships in its vicinity.

Navy ships operate radar systems to detect approaching ships or submarines. Lookouts posted on the bridge are responsible for detecting ships that pose a risk of collision.

Additionally, all commercial ships over 300 tons are required under international rules to operate AIS location data. AIS information from Crystal should have been monitored by sailors on the bridge of the Fitzgerald."

Your thoughts?

Steve
 
Last edited:
   / A Question for Sailors #4  
From a UK source, but should be a worldwide rule:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/281965/msn1781.pdf

"This notice incorporates amendments to the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972, up to and including those annexed to IMO Resolution A.910(22). In accordance with the Convention, the latest amendments come into force internationally on 29 November 2003."

Rule 15
Crossing situation
When two power-driven vessels are crossing so as to involve risk of collision, the vessel which has the other on her own starboard side shall keep out of the way and shall, if the circumstances of the case admit, avoid crossing ahead of the other vessel.


If both were on a sustained course and not maneuvering or evading a third vessel, it looks like the Fitzgerald violated Rule 15.

Bruce
 
   / A Question for Sailors
  • Thread Starter
#5  
From a UK source, but should be a worldwide rule:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/281965/msn1781.pdf

"This notice incorporates amendments to the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972, up to and including those annexed to IMO Resolution A.910(22). In accordance with the Convention, the latest amendments come into force internationally on 29 November 2003."

Rule 15
Crossing situation
When two power-driven vessels are crossing so as to involve risk of collision, the vessel which has the other on her own starboard side shall keep out of the way and shall, if the circumstances of the case admit, avoid crossing ahead of the other vessel.


If both were on a sustained course and not maneuvering or evading a third vessel, it looks like the Fitzgerald violated Rule 15.

Bruce

That's a basic (and universal) right-of-way rule . It's not clear to me that the Chrystal had the right-of-way.

Steve
 
   / A Question for Sailors #6  
Talk about asleep at the switch!!! Bob
 
   / A Question for Sailors #7  
So after the collision, the merchant ship firewalled the throttle and was turned 90 degrees, and when it finally got the annoying destroyer off of its bow, it returned to base course? They said it must have been an autopilot maneuver, and no one was on the bridge because no one would do such a thing? So in merchant ships of this size, they all just go to bed and let the autopilot run the whole dang ship? Holy cow!. And the sailors on the bridge of the Destroyer were just doing what? Were there any females on board? What the sam hill were they doing,? and radar proximity alarms? Heck even my chevy has a back up alarm that chimes when you are about to hit something.

OK, so no-one on watch on the Merchantman, and everybody on the destroyer was in the head? I don't get it either.
 
   / A Question for Sailors #8  
OK, ok, I got it figured out. There was no one on the bridge of the merchantman, and Gilligan was on duty on the destroyer! Got it. I have no other explanation.
 
   / A Question for Sailors
  • Thread Starter
#9  
OK, ok, I got it figured out. There was no one on the bridge of the merchantman, and Gilligan was on duty on the destroyer! Got it. I have no other explanation.

Or Ensign Parker.

parker.jpg


Steve
 
   / A Question for Sailors #10  
So after the collision, the merchant ship firewalled the throttle and was turned 90 degrees, and when it finally got the annoying destroyer off of its bow, it returned to base course? They said it must have been an autopilot maneuver, and no one was on the bridge because no one would do such a thing? So in merchant ships of this size, they all just go to bed and let the autopilot run the whole dang ship? Holy cow!. And the sailors on the bridge of the Destroyer were just doing what? Were there any females on board? What the sam hill were they doing,? and radar proximity alarms? Heck even my chevy has a back up alarm that chimes when you are about to hit something.

OK, so no-one on watch on the Merchantman, and everybody on the destroyer was in the head? I don't get it either.

That's going to look good on the Captains resume! Talk about a dereliction of duty...
 
 
Top