|
|
Post by johnc on Aug 21, 2017 7:54:33 GMT
For the second time in about a year, a state of the art warship with every detection system available has been rammed accidentally by an unseen ship:
www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-40995829
What is going on? If there are any enemies currently considering hostile action it looks as though they can ditch all the high tech stuff and just go for an old school collision. Something needs to change in either the training or observation of the crew or the high tech stuff is so advanced it is now missing the blatantly obvious! |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on Aug 21, 2017 8:33:43 GMT
Fourth collision this year. It's the North Koreans interfering with the GPS guidance signal.
Either that or the US Navy hasn't updated their Tom Toms.
|
|
|
|
Post by ChrisM on Aug 21, 2017 12:26:30 GMT
Does our good old RN still insist that there is someone on lookout all the time?
Maybe the Americans have dispensed with that vital requirement? How long before one of their warships hits an iceberg?
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on Aug 21, 2017 13:09:14 GMT
All RN warships have a crow's nest with cabin boy up top.
|
|
|
|
Post by grampa on Aug 21, 2017 13:21:57 GMT
Does our good old RN still insist that there is someone on lookout all the time? Maybe the Americans have dispensed with that vital requirement? How long before one of their warships hits an iceberg? Keeping a look out at all times is a basic requirement of the International Regulations for the Prevention of Collisions at Sea, which apply to all vessels from a rowing boat to a warship. Damage on the starboard side also suggests it was the American ship at fault (the boat with the other vessel on her starboard side is the one that has to give way). Perhaps, being American, the warship was guilty of this kind of arrogance: |
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Aug 21, 2017 13:23:33 GMT
I was amazed they managed to allow this to happen, it's not as if what hit them was a dinghy. It was an oil tanker which, last time I saw one, was pretty conspicuous!
|
|
|
|
Post by grampa on Aug 21, 2017 13:26:01 GMT
I would think the tanker owners will be going after them for the damage to their ship too.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Aug 21, 2017 13:50:08 GMT
I would think the tanker owners will be going after them for the damage to their ship too.
The warship got hit on the left (Port, see I know my terminology  ) . Aren't you meant to give way to the right, i.e. the tanker was at fault?
As for the RN, they have nothing to worry about, all their modern ships are in dock with engine problems 
|
|
|
|
Post by grampa on Aug 21, 2017 14:15:15 GMT
I would think the tanker owners will be going after them for the damage to their ship too.
The warship got hit on the left (Port, see I know my terminology ) . Aren't you meant to give way to the right, i.e. the tanker was at fault?
As for the RN, they have nothing to worry about, all their modern ships are in dock with engine problems
Ah - I saw a previous photo where the damage appeared to be on the starboard side (I guess one or the other photo must have been reversed), but yes you give way to the vessel on your starboard side, so if the damage was to the port side, then yes, it appears the tanker captain would be the one at fault. |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on Aug 21, 2017 14:46:27 GMT
You wouldn't want to be the Captain reporting to your superiors that you've just lost your NCD on a guided missile destroyer.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ben on Aug 21, 2017 14:58:03 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Aug 21, 2017 15:53:02 GMT
The warship got hit on the left (Port, see I know my terminology ) . Aren't you meant to give way to the right, i.e. the tanker was at fault?
As for the RN, they have nothing to worry about, all their modern ships are in dock with engine problems
Ah - I saw a previous photo where the damage appeared to be on the starboard side (I guess one or the other photo must have been reversed), but yes you give way to the vessel on your starboard side, so if the damage was to the port side, then yes, it appears the tanker captain would be the one at fault.
That may be the previous one, it WAS hit on the starboard side (but not by Klingons, Jim ).
|
|
|
|
Post by Big Blue on Aug 21, 2017 19:01:18 GMT
USN craft are well known for thinking everything will get out of their way. OK so the tanker came in on the cruiser but the collision would have been visible a mile or more away so seeing the tanker not altering course (something tankers are notoriously slow at doing) the warship should have done a little more to avoid collision.
As to avoidance software and systems I believe the term coined specifically for the US military is "all the gear and no idea", something which applies to my hugely expansive power tool set.
|
|
|
|
Post by LandieMark on Aug 21, 2017 19:05:07 GMT
It reminds me of the urban legend about the US warship and a Canadian lighthouse. 😂
|
|
|
|
Post by grampa on Aug 22, 2017 8:12:55 GMT
It reminds me of the urban legend about the US warship and a Canadian lighthouse. 😂 See the video in post no 5 in this thread - the doubt whether it was an Irish or Canadian lighthouse seems to suggest more myth than fact! |
|
) .
