US Navy suffers third ship collision this year The accident-prone US Navy has suspended all of its warship operations around the world following its third collision at sea this year. The latest incident took place between general-purpose destroyer USS John S McCain and a Liberian-flagged oil tanker, the Alnic MC, off the coast of Singapore, where the American warship was …
This post has been deleted by its author
Um, think it's the US Navy getting in the way of others. The last two collisions the US boats were hit in the side. Of course they may have learnt how to do handbrake turns with a destroyer to scam Lloyd's List.
Seems that the Mark One Eyeball and a pair of binoculars are no longer a part of the "watch" requirement.
"Um, think it's the US Navy getting in the way of others. The last two collisions the US boats were hit in the side."
All three of the collisions (Lake Champlain, Fitzgerald, John S McCain) were because something hit the US ship. Lake Champlain was hit by a South Korean fishing boat; the bridge crew on Lake Champlain saw the fishing boat coming and screamed at it on radio, but it didn't have a radio, and no-one on the boat noticed a 10,000 ton guided missile cruiser right in front of them. (insert joke about Asians and glasses here.) Fitzgerald was turning away, too late, from the containership when the collision occurred. No-one on the bridge thought to wake the captain, or perhaps the containership wasn't seen in time. In any case, the captain was asleep in his cabin and found out when part of said cabin landed on him, injuring him. The captain, the executive officer, and the senior petty officer ('boatswain', in the RN) are all on the beach now. I suspect that others will follow. John S McCain was hit aft, and seems to have almost made it out of the way. There also seems to have been a problem with the steering mechanisms, which are part of the systems controlled by... Windows for Warships. No, I don't know if there was a bluescreen, but if there was...
The last incident was when Antietam, a sister ship to Lake Champlain, ran aground in Tokyo harbor, in an incident remarkably similar to HMS Indomitable running aground while coming into Kingston, Jamaica, harbor in November 1941.
While it is true that other ships hit the USN ships on some of these occasions they were hit in the starboard side. It is standard maritime practice to give way to vessels approaching from your starboard side, rather than remaining ignorant of them until they hit you.
SOLAS might say that if you're "on the right, you're in the right" (McCain was hit on the port side, so was in the right), it's not relevant if one vessel is constrained by draft or manoeuvrability. Also, avoiding collisions is the most important rule.
If the destroyer had steering issues then it suggests a very unfortunately timed accident (for it happen ahead of a large vessel).
It was suggested that Fitzgerald was under EMCON when she was hit, so it's possible McCain was in a similar situation. I also wonder if the US navy isn't keen on informing general traffic that they're having technical issues - it's a bit embarrassing to admit that to the Chinese, North Koreans, etc.
no they weren't the latest incident the USS John S McCain was hit on her port side so rule 15 of the rules of the road applies
15. Crossing situations
When two power-driven vessels are crossing, the vessel which has the other on the starboard side must give way and avoid crossing ahead of her.[11][page needed] The saying is "If to starboard red appear, 'tis your duty to keep clear".[18] "...Act as judgement says is proper: port or starboard, back or stop her."
Now in maritime law blame gets apportioned and its very rare for 100% blame to be given to just one party, but on the face of it the Tanker was more at fault.
*Past life before getting in to IT I worked in the shipping industry and did Maritime law at Uni
With the Fitzgerald, the container ship was deliberately trying to ram them. Check the traces of the two ships movements - they passed, the container ship did a big loop and adjusted course several times before striking the USN ship... I can't see how that could be anything other than deliberate and as such, it's unlikely anything short of a missile would've prevented the collision.
"the container ship was deliberately trying to ram them. Check the traces of the two ships movements". There was this confusion at first as Fitzgerald, for some odd reason, reported the wrong time for the collision, a later time. What the container ship did was to turn around after the collision to offer assistance, as they should. This has all been cleared up.
Further news: say bye-bye to the commander of US 7th Fleet as a direct result of theses incidents. http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/22/politics/uss-mccain-7th-fleet-commander-dismissal/index.html
And it does seem that something was seriously broken with McCain's steering. Not in the article, but notable, is that there was recently a huge scandal about shipyard kickbacks and bribes in that region https://www.stripes.com/news/us/another-navy-officer-pleads-guilty-to-taking-bribes-from-fat-leonard-1.483576 and there were concerns about how far up the problems went, and about the effect on operations. If McCain was one of the ships involved, and the reason for the steering problem was that inadequate or improper repairs or maintenance was carried out, then there's going to be a lot of senior officers getting a lot of serious prison time.
"they may have learnt how to do handbrake turns with a destroyer to scam Lloyd's List."
back full port, ahead full starboard. similar idea to a handbrake turn.
If the ship has multiple screws, even if the rudder is immobilized due to a mechanical problem, you can still attempt to steer it with the engines [though the effect isn't quite as good].
Methinks they need to run more drills on operation casualties *like* loss of steeering, work out the bugs, and get some kinds of procedures in place to avoid situations like that one.
Normally a collision is due to a mistake on the part of the officer of the deck. But with "that much information" in play in a busy channel, maybe it's just not humanly possible for one person to keep track of it all...
(holy @#$% it's a big fat tanker, how the hell did we NOT see that coming?)
Tere's the story about the South African yachtsman, Bruce Dalling, sailing single-handed a little wooden 25' Vertue from Hong Kong to South Africa. He was asleep and woke to the noise of engines, to find himself surrounded by ships and being buzzed by helicopters. He switched on the radio to found his boat had sailed right into a US Indian Ocean fleet (or vice versa). He was told somewhat arrogantly "Identify yourself" on the radio, and famously replied "Vertue Carina, single handed skipper onboard, bound for Durban. Will not attack unless severely provoked."
Other apocryphal naval story:
UK and US navy doing joint manoeuvres somewhere, after the exercise finished, the ships sailed away in opposing directions. The semaphore office on the USA ship messaged "Thanks for that guys, oh, by the way, how does it feel to be the second biggest naval contingent in the world"?
The British replied "Yes, thank you for the training exercises and it feels fine, but tell us, how does it feel to be second best"?
Badum Tish.
If you want an idea of how easy it is to end up in a near collision situation with another ship:
http://taskandpurpose.com/fitzgeralds-watch-team-mine/amp/
I've been in a similar situation where after first spotting a small cabin cruiser at around 5NM we ended up stopped in the water with someone leaning over the bow asking if they'd decided which way they were going yet.
To be honest, if there isn't an actual collision there's not a lot of comeback. Theoretically the country the vessel is flagged to could take action, or the country who's waters they were in if they were within 12nm of land, but I've never heard of anything happening.
Obviously if there is a collision it's a whole different story.
"I've been in a similar situation..."
Yeah, so have I. Just off Harwich, in the shipping lanes. A container vessel would have rammed my 24 foot yacht and turned it into matchwood if we hadn't gybed. We were the stand-on vessel. Either the officer on watch was in the head or he was asleep on the deck because at two in the morning my 1000 lumen spotlight lit up their unmanned bridge like daylight.
IRPCS Rule 5:
"Every vessel shall at all times..."
Is that not covered by the most important navigational rule of all for yachts:
"Plastic (or wood) gives way to steel"...?
Something along those lines.
Or in other words "Leisure gives way to Business".
The old "power gives way to sail" in Southampton Water will simply land you in hot water when you get back to land (assuming you haven't been run over in the cold water). Interfere in commercial port operations at your peril.
I've likewise been on the back of a Research Boat - we were on station near shore, instruments in the water, displaying the correct flags when a regatta came ploughing around us. A couple of the dinghies apparently did not see us, or assumed that the powered vessel would move for them, not understanding that a working vessel on station with £120k worth of instrumentation hanging off the back does not care about such things. There were some angry shouts when they bumped into us, but the skipper's tannoy was louder as he delivered a lecture on flag signals.
You're in the shipping lanes at night in a 24 footer near a busy port, and expect that you are somehow the stand-on vessel to a container ship - and you continued to believe this to the point where you had to gybe out of the way? The laws of physics trump COLREGs. Just stay out of the damn way, you'll live longer.
If you were in a yacht in a' shipping lane' off Harwich it was your duty to keep clear. Law regarding large vessels navigating in restricted waters (includes designated 'shipping lanes'): the vessel with 'unrestricted' manoeuvrability keeps clear, regardless of port/starboard rules, etc.
Yes, it's worth remembering that when sailing ships where given this "right of way" those ships were often big square rigged ships and tacking them was something totally different than turning the wheel on a ship with a motor. I bet those guys did not think of pleasure yachts under sail at all, then long ago.
My advice and experience under sail is to keep away, if possible, not only to stay safe but also in order not to behave like a dick.
The good, if perhaps unwritten law, is that pleasure ships give way to commercial ships (and the navy).
A fair point but I don't think either of these craft could be described as "cabin cruiser" sized.
And I don't think any of the other ships th USN has bumped into in the last 8 months were either
I've been in a situation crossing the Southampton MTZ. I was clearing well ahead +1NM) when the guard vessel drastically changed course towards me. I was over half way across to Calshot when he got to me and all the pilot did was shout "do you know where you are". My replies were "yes, where do you want me to go?", which he completely ignored. After a minute of being shouted at I did an about turn and he motored off.
He had no interest in giving me instructions, just shouting an incredibly unhelpful question at me. It was left to me to read his mind. All he had to do was shout "reverse your course".
* The Moving Traffic Zone is an area of the Solent where you have to stay clear (1km ahead, 100m abeam) of large vessels. A guard vessel often motors ahead to ensure it's not encroached.
There's billions of sailors* on one of those tubs. The tanker will have had 12 men and a dog. How come tankers don't keep driving into things?
I realise someone must press the big red "Fire" button, but that doesn't seem to taxing. I assume the other 275 spend their time polishing missiles.
*276 I asked wikipedia
Technically, as the tanker hit the side of the McCain, it was the tanker that was doing the driving into. It's worth reading the link I posted above, essentially it boils down to one of the parties involved not doing what's expected in accordance with the rules of the road*. You then have to decide how to avoid the impending collision and rely on the other party not changing their mind. Several times. Possibly because there was no one awake on the bridge when you first gained sight of them. And it all happens in painful slow motion.
For fairness here's an RN example with a link through to the board of inquiry report:
http://www.3peaks.org.uk/Nautical/HMS%20Southampton/HMSSouthamptonpage.htm
* International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea 1972 (COLREGs), the RN makes ship drivers memorise them word for word, the USN less so.
one of the parties involved not doing what's expected in accordance with the rules of the road
The USN don't obey any rules but their own.
They expect every other ship including the Russians, Chinese and Norks to get out of their way sharpish.
Apparently they copied this behaviour from the RN...
> And it all happens in painful slow motion.
Indeed. I have experience both at sea and in the air. With one you get into trouble at 20 knots, with the other at 400 knots, but at least in the air it's all over in a few seconds. At sea, I saw a collision coming a full 30 minutes before contact. With about 10 minutes to go we knew there was bugger all we could do to avoid it (the two of us were restricted manoeuvrability, the other ship's bridge spoke neither English, Polish, Russian, Tagalog, Spanish, Norwegian, or French so coordination was a bit challenging).
Same with going through rough weather (turbulence, big swell). A few minutes of shaking versus days of tumbling...
From the grossly-simplified understanding I have of the laws of maritime navigation say that where there's a danger of collision, isn't it always the vessel that can get out of the way fastest that must change course to avoid the collision?
In that case, wouldn't it be the destroyer that had to move? Tankers aren't known for turning quickly.
'isn't it always the vessel that can get out of the way fastest that must change course to avoid the collision?'
You may be thinking of -steam gives way to sail, sail gives way to rowing boats. But that doesn't help when you've got two powered vessels. Gross gross over-simplification of the rules:
In a crossing situation the vessel with the other on her right is the give way vessel (handily this means the vessel with the right of way sees the other vessels green navigation light)
In an overtaking situation the overtaking vessel is the give way vessel until well past and clear (ie you can't try and turn it into a crossing situation after you get just in front)
When approaching head on alter course to starboard (Our nav instructor said if you ever find yourself thinking of altering course to port to avoid collision, go out on the bridge wing and have a stiff word with yourself)
Notwithstanding all that, and a plethora of other regulations where some vessels do have priority, e.g. carriers operating aircraft, vessels constrained by their draft, there's a general get out saying
'In construing and complying with these rules due regard shall be had to all dangers of navigation and collision and to any special circumstances, including the limitations of the vessels involved, which may make a departure from these rules necessary to avoid immediate danger'
So basically you're dammed if you do and dammed if you don't...
So basically you're dammed if you do and dammed if you don't...
Indeed. But unless there was (as suggested) a mechanical failure, then the rules mean the crew certainly should be damned. Being hit by one of the sea's biggest, slowest vessels, when you're riding one of the world's fastest, most maneuverable, most electronically advanced vessels?
I am 100% certain SkippyBing doesn't need to look, but for the rest of us there's some nice vids on Youtube of an Arleigh Burke vessel doing a high speed turn, and its worth watching to see how quickly these things can go and how fast they can turn (noting as well that the vessel is probably not at full emergency power). Bruce Ordway's comment may have hit the nail on the head, because the USN 7th Fleet appears to be having some severe problems. Also worth noting that the "suspension of operations" couldn't come at a worse time, when the US and Norks are having a face-off.
'Nice vids on Youtube of an Arleigh Burke vessel doing a high speed turn, and its worth watching to see how quickly these things can go and how fast they can turn'
I'm not 100% in the drive system on an Arleigh Burke, it appears to be two gas turbines per shaft, this is similar to the T22 I did some of my training on. Although they were fast all that speed wasn't available straight away, up to around 14-16kts could be achieved with one gas turbine per shaft* but to get up to 30kts+ you'd have to bring the other engines online. This can take a few minutes, and generally because of the higher fuel consumption you wouldn't have them on as a matter of routine. So although they are fast, in a normal cruising state it could take a couple of minutes before you could even start accelerating, although at that point it is quite impressive.
Having said that, generally when you're approaching a more challenging shipping situation, e.g. entering harbour, confined waters, a shipping lane, you'd have every everything up and running** to give the minimum response time if you needed a sudden burst of speed etc. I don't know what the USN routines would be exactly in those situations so it's hard to say how they compare, and I'm not sure how close the McCain was to the actual shipping lane when the collision happened***.
*You could also do a similar speed with two on one shaft, basically most combinations worked, some would have a minimum speed you literally couldn't go below.
**There are also dual hydraulic pumps for steering motors, multiple generators, etc. that normally alternate in use. Everyday is back up test day in the navy.
***I went through the Dover Straights on a T42 which is one of the busier traffic separation schemes, the Captain decided the simplest thing would be to go through at max speed so we were always the overtaking vessel.
' Hence it's cruisers (motorised craft) giving way to rowing boats, and rowing boats giving way to sailboats'
That may be right, I can't actually find a reference to rowing boats in the Rules of the Road apart from concerning lighting but I don't trust the wikipedia entry 100% and I can't find another version on-line at the moment that gets through the work firewall. I mean why you'd try either method of transport eludes me, they just seem to be uncomfortable ways of going slowly.
Link: https://maritime.college/Boating-Rules.php - A rowing boat is considered a powered vessel, but given it has restricted maneuverability compared to a motorboat, it has precedence. A 30 second Google search found this. I'll ignore the downvote...
'A rowing boat is considered a powered vessel, but given it has restricted manoeuvrability compared to a motorboat, it has precedence'
I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, it's just I can't find an authoritative reference that a rowing boat is considered a powered vessel. The link is to a simplified summary of the Rules of the Road so isn't authoritative as such as it's someone's interpretation of the rules. I may be being overly pedantic but having lost a mark on an exam for using 'would' instead of 'should' you get that way...
It may just be that anything that's not a sailing vessel, which is specifically mentioned, is considered powered, it just seems odd they don't make it explicit.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
