A Question for Sailors

[k0ua]

If you would like to learn more about eLoran, click on the link. The info is a bit dated, but I believe it to be relevant. For those that are wondering, eLoran will be on the 90Khz to 110Khz frequency range. Not like the older now defunct Loran C in the 160 meter band.

http://www.gps.gov/governance/advisory/meetings/2014-06/narins.pdf

 

[/pine]

There is talk of reviving/updating LORAN and calling it eLORAN...

Cyber Threats Prompt Return of Radio for Ship Navigation gCaptain

And the USN recently returned to teaching Celestial Navigation as a back up to GPS.

Later,
Dan

That is good to hear...I seriously doubt the military will be moving away from inertial systems ( a type of dead reckoning) though...for a back up for GPS...

 

[bindian]

The bigger question is why two huge ship hit two destroyers. The reduced training reason doesn't work for the huge ships. They didn't get squeezed by obama into reducing watches and training. More automation in huge ships ...............that can be hacked, is the obvious reason. Cyper warfare is the only plausible reason 2 ships on two different occasions hit another ship(s). Was every watch stander on every ship involved paid to look the other way?

I installed Loran C in helicopters in the early 80s. At that time, it was great for oil rig flights. But not for the open ocean.
hugs, Brandi

 

[smstonypoint]

Out of curiosity (and probably too much free time on my hands ), I did some research on the history of naval collisions and found https://fas.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/NavalAccidents1945-1988.pdf -- "Naval Accidents 1945 - 1988."

In describing their research, the authors say (p.73):

"This report is based upon a two-year comprehensive search of public information sources, numerous requests for information under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), research into U.S. Navy archives and historical documents, and interviews with naval officials and experts. Even so, the report is incomplete, mainly as a result of government secrecy. Little effort has been made on the part of the navies to inform the public as to the extent of naval accidents, particularly those which occur on the high seas. Nuclear weapons and reactor-related accidents, in addition, are hidden by an even greater veil of secrecy.

Yet in the end, using primary sources, we have been able to identify over 1,200 accidents. The overwhelming majority of these are U.S. accidents. The suspicion is that the Soviet Union has an even greater accident record than the U.S., but specific information was not obtainable. A conservative estimate, however, would put the total of major accidents at over 2,000 since the end of World War II, or about one accident every week in the postwar era."

Between 1945 and 1988, there were 456 documented collisions involving one or more naval vessels -- 1948 saw the lowest number of collisions (1) and 1983 the highest (19) over the sample period. See Table 2, page 79. The average over the sample period was just over 10 collisions/year.

Human error and equipment failure are facts of life.

Steve

 

[Wagtail]

Officer on deck or not, isn't there supposed to be someone on watch looking around the ocean in the immediate vicinity of the ship ?

Mate, we've been over this. Minimum manning of warships has reduced the number of personnel onboard... There are not enough people to stand a lookout with binoculars during regular (deep sea) navigation (particularly during the Dog/First/Middle/Morning watches) = that's what the radar/electronics are for (that's the modern thinking/policy, anyway).

In 'confined' or hazardous (heavy traffic areas or entering/leaving harbour), Special Sea Dutymen (SSD) are 'closed up' (more personnel on watch). This may include physical lookouts.

The McCAIN was not yet in the the heavy traffic sea lanes so SSD either weren't called/closed up or were in the process of being called.

 

[/pine]

unless there is an obvious mechanical reason for either of the recent collisions...it could be a long, long, long time if the public ever actually learns the truth...

 

[Garandman]

Just spoke to an active duty Surface Warfare LT (a graduate of King's Point), on assignment here.

He believes the main issues are inadequate training and sleep deprivation.

 

[RichM752]

Rich,

How about the navigational skills of the Coast Guard?

Steve

I can not speak as to the nav watch personal of USCG vessels.
I know that on a merchant vessel, there are two people on a nav watch, a mate and a seaman. Some union ships allow the seaman to sit in a chair, so unless the seaman is vigilant you can say there is a one man bridge operation. Two operational radars, integrated with AIS, and a proper lookout is all that is required in todays "rules", a.k.a. ISM regs. The USCG has failed numerous times in my experience to enforce proper manning on merchant vessels. I've even had them say to me, "we don't get involved in labor issues". Never mind what the rules say regarding a "proper lookout".
Like I said, If Grey Steer Away, always worked for me. Rarely does the naval vessel answer a radio hail, when they do they will not identify themselves, AIS is non existent, and they rarely follow rules of the road.
These collisions involving Naval vessels are of no surprise to me. I mourn the loss of life.

 

[dmccarty]

For people who think human's could not make stupid mistakes when operating vessels, take a look at this video. The incident was in daylight, with a professional captain and crew yet they still hit the motor boat even though they had plenty of time to avoid a collision. I never read in any of the long discussions of this incident that crew fatigue or environmental conditions played a part in the collision.

The motor boat owner had gone below to go to the bathroom and let the auto pilot hold course. There was no one else on board. I read that eventually the motor boat owner was found 40% at fault and the ferry captain was 60%. In vessel collisions, blame is almost always put on both crews.

Later,
Dan

 

[RoyJackson]

For people who think human's could not make stupid mistakes when operating vessels, take a look at this video. The incident was in daylight, with a professional captain and crew yet they still hit the motor boat even though they had plenty of time to avoid a collision. I never read in any of the long discussions of this incident that crew fatigue or environmental conditions played a part in the collision.

The motor boat owner had gone below to go to the bathroom and let the auto pilot hold course. There was no one else on board. I read that eventually the motor boat owner was found 40% at fault and the ferry captain was 60%. In vessel collisions, blame is almost always put on both crews.

Later,
Dan

That boat owner must have really had the *****!!