User Panel
Quoted:
Having come from the aviation side of the Navy, that sounds like a terribly designed failure mode and instrument control placement. A switch like that on an airplane would have some kind of flip up cover on it. On F-18 rudders, stabilators and ailerons would feather if hydraulics were lost. Flaps and slats would stick though because they were rotary driven. View Quote Given the seemingly unnecessary rudder limiter, it is shocking that a warship would not have a similar feature on such a critical system. On second thought, maybe its not shocking since when I was a functional test flight pilot the Air Force test procedure for that rudder limiter was to go faster than 1.5 mach, and push on the rudder until you feel the peg stop it God bless those who lost their lives and their families. I hope they get to the bottom of this asap. |
|
Quoted:
I guess the admiral has no clue. 1st it was a steering gear issue, then it was an electronic problem, now its hacking possibility. http://i.imgur.com/3jAlm99.png http://i.imgur.com/5tcwSAD.png http://i.imgur.com/FMOznoF.png View Quote I read his response as more acknowledging the media has been bringing the issue up, and clarifying it will be one of the potential factors considered while making it clear he doesn't consider it likely. |
|
|
So we are now learning there was a steering failure just before the collision?
I made several posts requesting people refrain from speculation for this exact reason. Is everyone who immediately blamed the crew going to come back in this thread and apologize? |
|
Quoted:
With variable pitch twin screws I wouldn't think a steering casualty would ever be much of an event? I'll defer to the surface guys to correct my ignorance if need be. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
New reports are saying the McCain had a "steering casualty" prior to the collision. It certainly was an inopportune time to have one! |
|
Is Mueller going to investigate possible hacking? There seems to be equal evidence for that as with Trump and Russia.
None, but what stopped him before? Prayers for the sailors and families. |
|
So it was a malfunction?
Prayers to the sailors and their families. I'm not up on all the gear a modern DDG has but does it have some sort of collision detection or avoidance system? |
|
My wife said the cargo ships are running into US Naval vessels on purpose.
|
|
Quoted:
My wife said the cargo ships are running into US Naval vessels on purpose. View Quote |
|
Quoted:
So we are now learning there was a steering failure just before the collision? I made several posts requesting people refrain from speculation for this exact reason. Is everyone who immediately blamed the crew going to come back in this thread and apologize? View Quote |
|
There was some statistic about commercial ships being sunk, but what about collisions? Are they fairly common? Are they usually of a nature such that there is minor damage and little chance of personal injury?
|
|
Clearly either China or Russia have a secret weapon than not only jams our radar, but also jams our weapon guidance system.
We are in deep shit if this is the case, all our battle groups are vulnerable. Terrorist ran planes into buildings, now they are running frigates into naval ships |
|
Quoted:
I know a lot of SWOs who want to be at sea. I don't know many who consider themselves tactical experts outside Aegis core tactics / Air Warfare - maybe TLAM, not because they don't want to do that, but because they don't have time to do that. The surface community has gutted its accession training over the past 15 years. They sacrificed SWOS in Newport and replaced it with computer-based training to be completed on one's first ship. The community ignored lessons learned 40 years before when it became clear that the increasing pace of technology made training only by OJT ineffective. The surface community junior officers (and department heads and XOs) spend way too much time on material readiness - fighting the 'battle of Norfolk' - and not enough on seamanship and tactics. Material condition matters a lot, but senior enlisted should be running that program, training their JOs how to spot check and inspect. In the late 90s and early 00s, the Navy made a big deal about ships getting underway with all-enlisted bridge and CIC watch teams, cool for those who got to qualify, but a fundamental mis-prioritization of resources IMO, because at the same time the Navy pushed the micromanagement of the battle of Norfolk further into the officer ranks. Advanced tactical training? Sure, the Navy stood up SMWDC back in 2014 and it's stil not fully staffed. The quality of instruction is uneven across mission areas, but at least it's headed somewhere...until we cannibalize the manpower for some other emergent initiative. Finally, the surface community's career path has an unofficial mantra of "At Sea or DC", where hot running mid-grade officers are shuttled into lower risk command tours with an eye towards getting them back onto the OPNAV staff as junior O6s as quickly as possible. Tactical proficiency is not valued at any level and a command tour is something you survive in order to do 'greater things' on a major staff somewhere. It's sad. View Quote For this civilian's education, what does "battle of Norfolk" mean? Is it increasing demands from higher headquarters being levied at the expense of basic skills? In any case, God bless the lost sailors, their families and their shipmates. |
|
|
Quoted:
I guess the Chief of Naval Operations US Admiral John Richardson has no clue. 1st it was a steering gear issue, then it was an electronic problem, now its hacking possibility. http://i.imgur.com/3jAlm99.png http://i.imgur.com/5tcwSAD.png http://i.imgur.com/FMOznoF.png View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Idiotic article by someone who has no fucking clue about anything. 1st it was a steering gear issue, then it was an electronic problem, now its hacking possibility. http://i.imgur.com/3jAlm99.png http://i.imgur.com/5tcwSAD.png http://i.imgur.com/FMOznoF.png |
|
Quoted:
@H46Driver For this civilian's education, what does "battle of Norfolk" mean? Is it increasing demands from higher headquarters being levied at the expense of basic skills? In any case, God bless the lost sailors, their families and their shipmates. View Quote While that concept applies to equipment operated by all of the services, the magnitude of that impact is far greater on ships than planes, trucks, etc because 1) they are constantly immersed in a highly corrosive environmet and 2) people live on them 24-7-365. You don't just get to turn them off, put them in the hangar, and go to work on them for a few days/weeks. |
|
Quoted:
A hacked GPS isn't going to change the radar picture, and besides GPS failures/inaccuracy are not unusual as well as things every good mariner needs to be prepared for. I read his response as more acknowledging the media has been bringing the issue up, and clarifying it will be one of the potential factors considered while making it clear he doesn't consider it likely. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
I guess the admiral has no clue. 1st it was a steering gear issue, then it was an electronic problem, now its hacking possibility. http://i.imgur.com/3jAlm99.png http://i.imgur.com/5tcwSAD.png http://i.imgur.com/FMOznoF.png I read his response as more acknowledging the media has been bringing the issue up, and clarifying it will be one of the potential factors considered while making it clear he doesn't consider it likely. |
|
Quoted:
There was some statistic about commercial ships being sunk, but what about collisions? Are they fairly common? Are they usually of a nature such that there is minor damage and little chance of personal injury? View Quote With warships, you are much more likely to have fatalities and serious injuries because of the amount of people on board and where they live/work compared to a commercial ship that is mostly cargo space with very small crews. Your average 500ft commercial vessel will have anywhere from 15-30 people, most of them in the superstructure. Your average 500ft warship will have 260+ spread throughout the ships. Berthing areas tend to be low in the ship as well. ETA: fishing boats get smoked by deep drafts almost constantly. Collisions between large vessels happen less than that, but they do happen. |
|
Quoted:
There was some statistic about commercial ships being sunk, but what about collisions? Are they fairly common? Are they usually of a nature such that there is minor damage and little chance of personal injury? View Quote Bulk Carrier and Cargo Ship Collide in the Straits of Singapore |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
So we are now learning there was a steering failure just before the collision? I made several posts requesting people refrain from speculation for this exact reason. Is everyone who immediately blamed the crew going to come back in this thread and apologize? It's still possible to draw the short stick and have a failure occur at the worst possible time, leaving no options to avoid a collision, but prudent seamanship means that you take action to minimize your time in scenarios where you have no options if something fails, whenever possible. FWIW, ships have had steering casualties while UNREPing and avoided collision. Maybe the JSM experienced some sort of cascading or massive, multiple, simultaneous equipment failure previously unseen. The investigation will tell us if that is the case or if procedural error and failure to execute emergency procedures was the problem. |
|
Quoted:
Here, same area, almost the same strike too. This is why you don't cross in front of ships. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmDybTIxrJc View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
There was some statistic about commercial ships being sunk, but what about collisions? Are they fairly common? Are they usually of a nature such that there is minor damage and little chance of personal injury? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmDybTIxrJc I'm not saying the large black ship is at fault, just wondering if they had the ability to avoid the collision. That video is short, and only starts monents before impact, which is great for those of us with short attention spans, but not useful in analyzing this incident. |
|
Quoted:
Here, same area, almost the same strike too. This is why you don't cross in front of ships. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmDybTIxrJc View Quote IIRC, the Beks Halil was overtaking the other ship, got way too close, and the water being displaced by the Beks Halil forced the stern of the smaller ship to starboard (which would push the bow to port) The Beks Halil can't turn to port, they are in a head on situation with another ship. The smaller ship can't turn too hard to starboard, thier stern can get sucked in to the Beks Halil. Ultimately they decided to do (almost) nothing and they took the hit. The smaller ship could have tried a very (very) shallow turn to starboard, but that could put them in front of the ship the video is being taken from. |
|
Quoted:
I guess the Chief of Naval Operations US Admiral John Richardson has no clue. 1st it was a steering gear issue, then it was an electronic problem, now its hacking possibility. http://i.imgur.com/3jAlm99.png http://i.imgur.com/5tcwSAD.png http://i.imgur.com/FMOznoF.png View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Idiotic article by someone who has no fucking clue about anything. 1st it was a steering gear issue, then it was an electronic problem, now its hacking possibility. http://i.imgur.com/3jAlm99.png http://i.imgur.com/5tcwSAD.png http://i.imgur.com/FMOznoF.png Occam's Razor and all that....... |
|
|
|
|
Quoted:
Battle of Norfolk = the process of keeping ship's material condition satisfactory to go to sea. Paint/corrosion, electrical equipment, preventative/planned maintenance, casualty maintenance repair, etc. It's a huge burden, magnified by the practice of 'optimal manning' i.e. do the same work with fewer people, only as the ship gets older, it's not the same work; it's more work. While that concept applies to equipment operated by all of the services, the magnitude of that impact is far greater on ships than planes, trucks, etc because 1) they are constantly immersed in a highly corrosive environment and 2) people live on them 24-7-365. You don't just get to turn them off, put them in the hangar, and go to work on them for a few days/weeks. View Quote |
|
Quoted:
Out of curiosity, could the larger black ship have avoided impact had they began to slow down much sooner? I have no idea how long it takes for a ship that large to begin slowing down, just wondering. I'm not saying the large black ship is at fault, just wondering if they had the ability to avoid the collision. That video is short, and only starts monents before impact, which is great for those of us with short attention spans, but not useful in analyzing this incident. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
There was some statistic about commercial ships being sunk, but what about collisions? Are they fairly common? Are they usually of a nature such that there is minor damage and little chance of personal injury? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmDybTIxrJc I'm not saying the large black ship is at fault, just wondering if they had the ability to avoid the collision. That video is short, and only starts monents before impact, which is great for those of us with short attention spans, but not useful in analyzing this incident. |
|
Quoted:
Having come from the aviation side of the Navy, that sounds like a terribly designed failure mode and instrument control placement. A switch like that on an airplane would have some kind of flip up cover on it. On F-18 rudders, stabilators and ailerons would feather if hydraulics were lost. Flaps and slats would stick though because they were rotary driven. View Quote Regarding our hard over loss of steering. That was a system with 3 sumps, one for port and starboard pumps, and a center reservoir. They were separated by baffles. Hydraulic fluid could migrate from sump to sump. We were running on a single turbine at the time so the torque was heeling us over a LOT. 18,000 hp from a FT4A (J75) will do that. The bridge had selected the opposite side steering pump because we run odd numbered machinery on odd days and even on even. In a perfect storm of events, we continually rolled to one side, and the hydraulic fluid migrated sumps away from the steering pump that was online. It ran dry, and being an axial piston pump decided that was a good reason to commit suicide. Upon loss of all hydraulic pressure on either side of the pump (swash plate controlled steering commands) the rudders were free to flop over hard 35. And they did. For the Lulz. I had just finished bolting a 500 pound filter housing in place when it happened. I hit the bulkhead. The filter housing would have gone through the bulk head. In a situation like that it's possible that switching pumps would have corrected the situation. But at the same time it could've been caused by a system not being in tact. If the throttleman and boatswain mate of the watch Ran to aft steering to engage the trick wheel while the damaged pump was still selected, they would not have been able to regain steering. Only switching to the other pump would have regained steering. If there was a "system not intact" and we had lost all hydraulic fluid then even switching to the trick wheel or manual local steering would have had no effect and the ship would have been dead in the water until we could refill the steering system from the engine room's hydraulic fluid reservoir... with 5 gallon buckets. Like I said before, I have never set foot on a DDG so I don't know the plant configuration. But a lot of people are asking how this could happen to a turbine powered ship with 2 steering pumps. I'll tell you. Run a set of BECCE's or go through TSTA and you'll find out how close you are to not coming home. |
|
Quoted:
At speed steering by twin screwing is almost completely ineffective. I'm not familiar with those particular ships but the props may actually turn in the same direction as compared to a traditional set up which would be counter rotating. That would make maneuvering by use of the engines even less effective. Plus if the rudder was stuck at an angle more than just a few degrees it would be pretty useless if the ship was traveling at more than a couple of knots. View Quote |
|
I appreciate the statement, but unlike the Fitzgerald, it seems that some sailors were lost out to sea. At least with the Fitz, they were all still onboard and Navy divers made quick recovery of their remains to lay them to rest. Hope the remaining missing are found soon.
|
|
Quoted:
I imagine sleeping in DDG berths is unsettling now. View Quote |
|
Quoted:
First of all it's a strait, not a straight. Second, looking at the top speed of a DDG-51 class tells you nothing. Third, being able to do trig and algebra are really not the only skills necessary to pilot a warship. Third "waiving" things around isn't involved in a straits transit -- one we do hundreds of times a year without incident. And finally, no, it's not a conspiracy and nobody spoofed anybody's GPS. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm not trying to look like a conspiracy theorist. But what is putting our ships so close to others? I'm not saying that there are ships out there dead set on ramming them. But what are they actually doing that's putting them in the paths of other vessels? It doesn't seem like they are just traversing the strait as hundreds of ships a day do with pit a problem, but simple why are they maneuvering on a course that is crossing so well defined shipping lanes that were ending up in this situation. Both of these ships seeming to be "responding" to other incidents to turn out of a well defined lane, to put themselves in danger. Both what it seems to be by trying to cross it in one way or another. Are they running anti piracy calls? Are they looking to intercept questionable ships? Are they just assigned a sector and go in circles? Are they just dicking around and trying to see who is the biggest badass? Roughly, it's one 300gt ship every 6 minutes going through the straight. A Burke class destroyer can put 3.5 miles behind her in 6 minutes. Are we just failing so much we can't figure out basic trig and algebra in the most technologically advanced era in human history? Are we just waiving our dick so much we don't care and want to mess with people by stupid games. Or is it something truly hateful that were being lead not to look into? |
|
I suspect our operation systems are being hacked. Two destroyers crippled within a short period of time suggests something f*cky is happening.
|
|
Memorial Day 2020 - U.S. Naval Academy Glee Club - U.S.S. Arizona Memorial |
|
Quoted:
I suspect our operation systems are being hacked. Two destroyers crippled within a short period of time suggests something f*cky is happening. View Quote Incompetence in one, possible steering causality in the other. The USS Antitem ran aground earlier this year off the coast of Japan, the USS Guardian ran aground on a marked reef off the Philippines a few years back and was a total loss, the USS Porter had a collision with a VLCC in the Persian Gulf a few years back as well. It's not something fucky. It's poor training, poor watchkeeping, and poor seamanship. I'm sure exhaustion and a high operating tempo has not helped either. |
|
View Quote As was just mentioned, USS Porter, 2012. Gee, that was only going back 5 years, not 50. |
|
The desire of humans to see conspiracy behind random events is exceeded only by their desire to believe in non-corporeal beings.
|
|
Quoted:
No. Incompetence in one, possible steering causality in the other. The USS Antitem ran aground earlier this year off the coast of Japan, the USS Guardian ran aground on a marked reef off the Philippines a few years back and was a total loss, the USS Porter had a collision with a VLCC in the Persian Gulf a few years back as well. It's not something fucky. It's poor training, poor watchkeeping, and poor seamanship. I'm sure exhaustion and a high operating tempo has not helped either. View Quote |
|
|
Quoted:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/08/22/head-navys-7th-fleet-to-be-relieved-duty-after-second-deadly-mishap-in-pacific.html They're firing admirals now. View Quote |
|
Quoted:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/08/22/head-navys-7th-fleet-to-be-relieved-duty-after-second-deadly-mishap-in-pacific.html They're firing admirals now. View Quote I get it, but it still sucks. |
|
Quoted:
IIRC, the minesweeper was running the required electronic charts, which had the seamount in the wrong location. Epic fuckup, not a conspiracy. View Quote |
|
Quoted:
Sucks. I get it, but it still sucks. View Quote I'm sure the individual involved by every other account has an impeccable record (hence even achieving that rank) but he probably fully accepts that a certain level of accountability to the results of his command knowing that ultimately he is responsible for putting in place the right organization and leadership structure to run the rest of the organization. If this is found to be incompetence, neglect, or even wilful negligence at some lower level, it still is on his shoulders to build a team and culture that calls that out well before things like this happen. |
|
KennyW1983 - I hope you're right. It would be very disturbing if something was f*cking with our ships. We're not at war and the risk of losing lifes is too great. Besides, it's expensive as f*ck to fix ships.
|
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.