It would sound so much better if the ship hit the Fitzgerald before making the U turn.
Both countries would be in a better position and the fault blamed on personnel on both ships.
I would look for this to be the favorable conclusion.

 

You honestly and literally disgust me. This is what you are worried about? And you claim to be a veteran? Bullshit. Do you even know how those seven sailors died you disgusting pathological liar?

 

Very easily, at two in the morning in poor visibility. That is the point. It has been established that the freighter was attempting evasive maneuvers. But they were too close, and they couldn't correctly gauge rate of convergence of the ships. It would vary, depending on whether the destroyer was steaming toward them, perpendicular, or away.

The destroyer was not evading, and apparently did not even respond to the proximity alarms, because for whatever reason (perhaps a botched shift change) people were asleep at the switch. So the operators of the freighter could do nothing but guess.

But we're splitting hairs.

As I said, this is the US Navy captain's responsibility. From the Navy's perspective, it doesn't matter which ship was "at fault." The US captain takes the blame. Simple as that.

 

They died a horrible death.

And I confess I don't know if the death toll is higher. Last I heard, it was seven. And those alive on the ship fought heroically to prevent it from sinking.

 

There is one situation , that has not been discussed here ,
that would change a lot of what has been discussed ,
and which may be the case ,
and may explain some things.

IF the Crystal was overtaking the Fitzgerald , then they have no right of way.
As an overtaking vessel , it is/would be incumbent on them to avoid and stay clear of the vessel they were passing.

That applies in all situations where a vessel is approaching from abaft abeam . (aft of abeam midships)

It is not possible to establish that without the track of the Fitzgerald , or equivalent positions , time , and course.

If that was the situation , it would put the Fitzgerald in a much better light ,
and may explain how they got caught out ,
though they'd not be excused the duty to be aware and take effective avoiding action in good time.

Of course it would also be incumbent on the vessel being passed , to stand on course , and communicate and signal any need to alter course.

A faster traveling vessel could certainly cause mayhem very quickly though.

If information I've seen is correct , the Fitzgerald was only doing about
3 knots ? ?
a mile in 20 minutes
The Crystal ,
about 18 knots or 18+
a mile in about 3 minutes

3 minutes is not long to observe , recognise and react ,
specially if only doing 3 knots.

But was anyone even on watch on the Crystal ?

So.
Lots of questions
Few answers
and many answers need to come from the US Navy

 

Lots of factors accounted for this accident and unfortunately 7 sailors lost their lives.

The Navy Captain will probably not have a command ever again. Maybe even forced retirement.
Sad day for both crews.

 

Slutwolf, you say there was good visibility. At two in the morning.

I don't know what you're arguing about. Maybe in Australia (isn't that where you're from, or is it NZ), shit flows downhill.

But in the United States Navy, it is the Captain's ship. It is his responsibility and his fault. As naughtyGuy just posted, he will lose his command, at the very least.

I'm American. It pains me to say the US Navy is at fault here. But fuck. A state of the art destroyer was T-boned by a goddamned freighter. I don't care if the freighter's crew were all below-decks sauced out of their minds blowing each other. Our US Navy fucked up by allowing that destroyer to be struck, and at least seven sailors are dead as a result. The Navy Captain is at fault. Period.

 

Exclusive: U.S. warship stayed on deadly collision course despite warning - container ship captain

TOKYO (Reuters) - A U.S. warship struck by a container vessel in Japanese waters failed to respond to warning signals or take evasive action before a collision that killed seven of its crew, according to a report of the incident by the Philippine cargo ship's captain.

Multiple U.S. and Japanese investigations are under way into how the guided missile destroyer USS Fitzgerald and the much larger ACX Crystal container ship collided in clear weather south of Tokyo Bay in the early hours of June 17.

In the first detailed account from one of those directly involved, the cargo ship's captain said the ACX Crystal had signaled with flashing lights after the Fitzgerald "suddenly" steamed on to a course to cross its path.

The container ship steered hard to starboard (right) to avoid the warship, but hit the Fitzgerald 10 minutes later at 1:30 a.m., according to a copy of Captain Ronald Advincula's report to Japanese ship owner Dainichi Investment Corporation that was seen by Reuters.

The U.S. Navy declined to comment and Reuters was not able to independently verify the account.

 

Terrible, just terrible. The USS Fitzgerald's Captain, I believe, will lose his career -- and he should -- unless it can be proven the entire fault lies with the cargo container (which I doubt based on data to date). What I say now is not meant as a joke. Why was the late President Kennedy a hero when his PT Boat was cut in half by an enemy ship? Surely, he should have been able to outmaneuver a war ship with his PT Boat.

 

As always, you delight in your own dazzle.

I'm as interested in the facts as anyone. The circumstances are fascinating. No doubt this incident will become part of the US Navy's training manual. And from the FACTS of this case, future US Navy captains in future incidents might successfully avoid fuckups like this one.

But it's all secondary. In THIS incident, THIS U.S. Navy captain allowed his ship to be hit. It is his fault. It is that simple, to the US Navy.

 

Of course Admiral Clarise
eye eye ,
of course its the captains fault , just like if he were hit by a torpedo ,
or if he ran into an unknown mine ,
or is hit by a kamikaze flying bomb ,
an Exocet missile ,
and anything else that destroyed his ship ,
it is the captains fault.

Of course because he is a captain , there can be absolutely no reason or circumstance under which he could possible not be entirely at fault.
That would be ludicrous.

And being a Navy captain
well , of course , navy captains are even cleverer ,
and they just automatically must be much better at avoiding trouble.

That's why navy ships never sink or get sunk , or hit , or damaged ,
unless the captain is a complete incompetent.

That is why , when any navy ship gets into trouble of any kind ,
the very first thing we should do ,
is take the captain out and hang him.

Of course he is guilty.

There is absolutely and
unequivocally ,
definitely ,
No Doubt.

 

Now you're comparing nightwatchmen taking a znooze, with getting hit by torpedoes. Yes, you're an expert. A true seaman.

Yessir. You delight in your dazzle.

 

In normal circumstances , a ship being overtaken , is to stand on.
To stand on , means to continue as you are basically.
*
A vessel being overtaken is the stand on vessel.
The stand on vessel must maintain it's course and speed.
That is , that in the first instance , the vessel being overtaken must not alter course or speed.
*
Meanwhile ,
the overtaking vessel must stay clear.
*

Paragraph (d) makes clear that the overtaking vessel cannot (by any action of its own) shift its give-way status to the other vessel. The overtaking vessel remains the give-way vessel until the risk of collision has passed, that is, until the overtaking vessel "is finally past and clear." This requirement is a restatement of the Rule 8 duty of all vessels required to take action to continue their vigilance "until the other vessel is finally past and clear."

Paragraph (d) was included to cover the case of one vessel overtaking on the starboard side of another and then turning left across the other's bow. In an ordinary crossing situation, the vessel on the right would have the right-of-way. If this were also the case of the overtaking vessel crossing the other, the overtaken/stand-on vessel would suddenly become the crossing/give-way vessel and might not have enough maneuvering room.
*

What this effectively means , is that nothing takes away the overtaking vessel's duty to stay clear , and passes that responsibility to the stand on vessel , the vessel being overtaken.

Then , when things go wrong , there are lots of questions.
What was done
Was it timely
What could or should have been done
Was there time
What was not done

There are so many variables and possibilities , that what may look obvious from outside ,
may not be so.

While it is advisable to avoid being run over by a buss ,
being run over by one ,
dose not nescassaraly mean you were in the wrong or negligent.

 

We still do not know for sure which direction either ship was going when they collided.
That should be the first thing we should learn.

 

Washington (AFP) - The commander of a US Navy ship that collided with a Philippine-flagged cargo ship off Japan, killing seven American seamen, will be relieved of duty and several other sailors face punishment, a senior admiral said Thursday.

Among those being disciplined from the crew of the USS Fitzgerald are its commanding officer, executive officer and senior enlisted sailor, who will all be relieved of their duties aboard the ship, said Admiral Bill Moran, the vice chief of naval operations
* *
Vice Admiral Joseph Aucoin, who heads the Navy's 7th Fleet, based in Yokosuka, Japan has notified one sailor of his or her punishment and they are likely be informed by the end of Friday.

About a dozen sailors are expected to be disciplined in total.

"If it's clear to (Aucoin) that some members of that crew should no longer be doing this line of work, it's time to move them on, it's time to take accountability actions," Moran said.

Moran said the sailors could face further punishments later one, depending on the outcome of various ongoing probes.

"I'm not telling they will or they won't. It's just we are not done with the investigation," Moran said
* *

Obviously they've reached some conclusions.
I wonder how much will get published.

 

That soon

hopefully the AXC Crystal investigation will reveal a bit more
sometime

Don't expect much interest here ,
but maritime people need to know.
One thing they need to know , is that they can rely on others following the rules , and that has to include navies ,
and especially at night.

 

Again ?

 

The Navy reported that 10 sailors were missing and five were injured as a search and rescue effort was ongoing.

* *

The merchant vessel involved in the collision is the Alnic MC, which is a Liberian-flagged, 183 meter-long (600 feet) oil or chemical tanker of 50,760 deadweight tonnes, according to shipping data in Thomson Reuters Eikon.

Shipping data showed it last sent a transponder signal at 2258 GMT Sunday and has since come to a halt 10 to 20 kilometers (6-12 miles) off the east coast of the Pengerang Peninsula in Johor, southern Malaysia. The ship data showed it was "ballasting," meaning that it was not loaded full of oil for cargo

About the busiest stretch of water on the planet , with very restricted room for maneuvering
First indication is the McCain was hit on port side , indicating she may have had right of way.
Would have in normal conditions ( but that may not have applied in such restricted waters)

 

.

 

I hope that they find the 10 sailors alive but those are dangerous waters ... they are probably shark food by now.