Facebook
Google
GitHub
Linkedin
USS Fitzgerald
- Thread starter nsaspook
- Start date
OK Thanks to you three. First time I hear that expression. Wondering what the "flank" part comes from.
In freighters you signal that with the telegraph going twice from "stop" to "full ahead" in rapid sucesion.
Never had to resort to it in a real emergency but used it twice or thrice in the same morning to change courses in heavy weather when leaving San Bernardino strait. Just in case, the engineer on duty was properly warned in advance.
That time, with much much more than 24 hours in the bridge, thus not sleeping, something Up There told me not to drink coffee (sole vice I retained after quitting smooking) but tea instead which, coming from Sri Lanka (former Ceylan), was excelent.
Upon reaching San Antonio - Chile, the list of damages was hard to believe. ¡Oh sí!
In freighters you signal that with the telegraph going twice from "stop" to "full ahead" in rapid sucesion.
Never had to resort to it in a real emergency but used it twice or thrice in the same morning to change courses in heavy weather when leaving San Bernardino strait. Just in case, the engineer on duty was properly warned in advance.
That time, with much much more than 24 hours in the bridge, thus not sleeping, something Up There told me not to drink coffee (sole vice I retained after quitting smooking) but tea instead which, coming from Sri Lanka (former Ceylan), was excelent.
Upon reaching San Antonio - Chile, the list of damages was hard to believe. ¡Oh sí!
It's like a car on a flat road. A fossil powered car will have a speed...~45-65 MPH.......where the car will travel the max distance on a tank of gas. Let's say your car's best speed is 50 MPH for max distance. This will give you 300 miles. 50 MPH would be Full Speed.
Now floor the accelerator(flank speed). Your car can go 105 MPH........but only for 180 miles. Then you need a fill up.
Nucs can go flank speed all the time. If the rest of fleet can keep up. Maybe re-fuel every 9 yrs instead of 10.
The word flank...is a military term....meaning to encircle....it must be done in haste.
Now floor the accelerator(flank speed). Your car can go 105 MPH........but only for 180 miles. Then you need a fill up.
Nucs can go flank speed all the time. If the rest of fleet can keep up. Maybe re-fuel every 9 yrs instead of 10.
The word flank...is a military term....meaning to encircle....it must be done in haste.
I'm wondering how they did at FTG Pearl.
https://gcaptain.com/tag/uss-mccain/ has a series of articles about the potential causes. He had a series of articles on the USS fitzgearld as well.
Maritime tradition holds the Master of the vessel as the sole responsible party. Exxon Valdez, the master was held accountable. The commanding officer is responsible.
I'm sure the final reports should address all the circumstances that led to these accidents. If they don't, well, the real faults won't be discovered.
Command climate, a term that covers a multitude of issues, has been a factor in RFC in recent years. The common commander of these ships would be responsible for that type of influence.
I'm wondering if the CO was on the bridge during any of these accidents. It's been my understanding over the years that the CO or OIC would be on the bridge during certain navigational situations ... Like crowded areas. Cute terms like pause and reset only amplifies the question how they are trained with respect to the rules of the road ...
My heart sorrows over the loss of life.
https://gcaptain.com/tag/uss-mccain/ has a series of articles about the potential causes. He had a series of articles on the USS fitzgearld as well.
Maritime tradition holds the Master of the vessel as the sole responsible party. Exxon Valdez, the master was held accountable. The commanding officer is responsible.
I'm sure the final reports should address all the circumstances that led to these accidents. If they don't, well, the real faults won't be discovered.
Command climate, a term that covers a multitude of issues, has been a factor in RFC in recent years. The common commander of these ships would be responsible for that type of influence.
I'm wondering if the CO was on the bridge during any of these accidents. It's been my understanding over the years that the CO or OIC would be on the bridge during certain navigational situations ... Like crowded areas. Cute terms like pause and reset only amplifies the question how they are trained with respect to the rules of the road ...
My heart sorrows over the loss of life.
https://www.wired.com/story/uss-john-mccains-crash-fitzgerald/
You can get hit because another ship f's up in very tight quarters and/or you have a steering problem.
You must care about right of way because those are the rules that prevent accidents. Radar is just not all powerful for very close traffic. You might see 50 contacts in 15,000 yards, some moving at 5-10 knots loaded with others 15-20 unloaded with other ships crossing into and out of the channels in that part of the world.
If you look at the damage on the McCain it's different from the Fritz, the other side. So what you might ask but look at the typical channel traffic in the Straits.
Look at the geometry of the collision. What happened for them, in this instance to get hit on that side is what's really important.
Guided-missile destroyer USS John S. McCain (DDG 56)
I suggest that small US warships be equipped with diapers. Defensible Inflatable Plastic Envelope Repulsive System.
Like a blimp on the water. A barrier a few ft above the water, extending out a few hundred yards. A plastic bumper.
Whiskers perhaps.
It's either the technology or the training. I hope it ain't the training. In my opinion.....proper training would have already revealed this short coming.......that's one of the reasons to train.
Close calls might not be logged or documented. Let alone studied. But we need to know......at the very least for future training.
Like a blimp on the water. A barrier a few ft above the water, extending out a few hundred yards. A plastic bumper.
Whiskers perhaps.
It's either the technology or the training. I hope it ain't the training. In my opinion.....proper training would have already revealed this short coming.......that's one of the reasons to train.
Close calls might not be logged or documented. Let alone studied. But we need to know......at the very least for future training.
Glenn Holland
- Joined Dec 26, 2014
- 703
I'm not familiar with the operation of ships or boats, however there is a phenomenon called the Bernoulli Effect when two vessels are moving parallel to each other (or the shoreline) with minimal separation. The higher velocity of the water between the vessels lowers the pressure and forces them together. Were these two navy vessels involved in a side swipe or hit at an angle?https://www.wired.com/story/uss-john-mccains-crash-fitzgerald/
You can get hit because another ship f's up in very tight quarters and/or you have a steering problem.
You must care about right of way because those are the rules that prevent accidents. Radar is just not all powerful for very close traffic. You might see 50 contacts in 15,000 yards, some moving at 5-10 knots loaded with others 15-20 unloaded with other ships crossing into and out of the channels in that part of the world.
If you look at the damage on the McCain it's different from the Fritz, the other side. So what you might ask but look at the typical channel traffic in the Straits.
Look at the geometry of the collision. What happened for them, in this instance to get hit on that side is what's really important.
Look where the McCain was hit vs the starboard side of the Fitzgerald.
Guided-missile destroyer USS John S. McCain (DDG 56)
Naval ship Captains are not picked because they are the best navigators. Command line officers are picked for performance in Naval combat using the crew as part of a fighting machine so they sometimes take it to the limit even when it might be prudent to run a little slower and farther away from that line of oil tankers. I've no idea what happened here but we often would run combat exercises while in transit in places like this to keep the operations crew on the razor edge in very busy conditions. The guilty will be punished.
Let the new guy who was just waiting in line review and recommend any actions. Sounds OK.
Last edited:
Outrun the tanker and hit something else while trying to steer with differential thrust and a possible stuck rudder? Maybe that's what got them into such a strange position to be struck on that side. The ship tracks at the time of the collision show them to be in a bad spot for trashing around.
Along my years at sea, in merchant vessels, while on duty at the bridge, I run across of warships of varied nationalities, navigating as part of an operational scheme, obviously only known to them. What they were actually doing, better do not ask nor try to understand.
By Interco code (flags), Aldis, signal lamp, topmast light or VHF, the prevalent messages we received, were more or less in line with "stay away", "give room", "alter your course", "and the like. IIRC, it happened mostly in restricted waters but also in what I can call open sea. Thanks God never inside of a traffic separation scheme.
Every time I heard of these incidents I wonder if both actors, the merchant and the warship were not actually living different "realities" at the same time in the same place. A different mindset in sum.
Hell's bells....that was out in open water......not in a closely confined strait. I believe the idea of a hack or mechanical malfunction is just thrown out to deflect bad PR. Although I would feel a lot better if it were mechanical.
The theory about combat captains is very distressing. In my opinion combat at sea........IS navigation. Guts is no good unless you can get to where they're needed. This is the second top of the line warship out of action and tying up more resources. And it appears to be incompetence. And with NK.....we need them on patrol.
And as for the admiral......I see the navy's class system is still intact. It was always the most snobby of the services.
The theory about combat captains is very distressing. In my opinion combat at sea........IS navigation. Guts is no good unless you can get to where they're needed. This is the second top of the line warship out of action and tying up more resources. And it appears to be incompetence. And with NK.....we need them on patrol.
And as for the admiral......I see the navy's class system is still intact. It was always the most snobby of the services.
Exactly.
I've spent a small amount of time on merchant ships (USNS) when they were acting as transports for the Military. It is a different reality. The 'work' for a Military vessel is at sea operations not the port destination usually. Lookouts see contacts as possible targets, the guy on the radar repeater see contacts as possible targets, the officers on the bridge see contacts as possible targets because things like this happen.
My old ship didn't get military awards for transporting fuel to the other ships in our squadron.
http://www.wikiwand.com/en/USS_Okinawa_(LPH-3)#/Awards.2C_citations.2C_and_campaign_ribbons
There is a very defined traffic channel funnel for entering and leaving the strait, it's not open water. Combat at sea is tactics with navigation (the officers and crew responsible) being an important part of it. It might be incompetence or it just might be 'Murphy' at it again.
You image shows each boat giving way to each other by steering to the right... I wonder if the brits don't get confused at times and have more close calls than other nationalities.
