The US has a system called Link 22 which is communications relay system via GPS, they also have the most advanced 3D Radar system on the planet and arguably the most maneuverable Frigate, Cutter and Destroyer class ships on the Ocean...
With that said, they are a poorly trained group comparatively to some Navy's around the world such as the Danish, Canadian, Spanish, French and British Fleets..
That said, there is a Maritime navigation rule that Vessels will yield the right of way to any Military Vessel. But that of course has to be taken with a little less rigidity than simply saying " We are military and we aint movin"... Vessels under wind then gain the right of way over Vessels under power... Now we don't know what was going on on the bridge of the other Vessels... The sad reality is that most Commercial Vessels are even more poorly trained than most Military crews but think they have the right of way and many times I have seen a crossing situation with another Vessel at 150 Nautical Miles away and with winds, currents and Stubbornness, close calls result from those situations..
I would be curious to know what the response to hails to the Commercial Vessel were, if any..
The right move would have been for the US Vessel to stand off and to avoid any crossing situation in the event of zero comms. But who knows..
When it comes to parties being relieved. Anytime there is a Ship to Ship incident, the entire Bridge Watch Keeper team (BWK's) and usually the old man (CO) are relieved of duty for investigative purposes.
Let me tell ya though... I was on HMCS Protecteur when we were hit by Algonquin and my counter part who was on watch was actually sitting at the Nav Radar (Thank god it was my off watch), You can see these things happening but by the time they start to look obvious, its too late.
God Bless those Sailors who lost their lives.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to IgiTang For This Useful Post:
No doubt the f'up is multi factorial and includes human error.
What if the computer was appearing to accept commands and displaying "the correct" path, but without actually doing it? That's essentially what happened with the Stuxnet attack on the Iranian nuclear reactor.
No doubt the f'up is multi factorial and includes human error.
What if the computer was appearing to accept commands and displaying "the correct" path, but without actually doing it? That's essentially what happened with the Stuxnet attack on the Iranian nuclear reactor.
Its an enormous ship that hit another enormous vessel.
Its like two blimps running into each other. Albeit less funny. Thats more like two dudes in sumo-suits but thats neither here nor there.
__________________ The Beatings Shall Continue Until Morale Improves!
This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.
If you are flammable and have legs, you are never blocking a Fire Exit. - Mitch Hedberg
Sailors in the Navy will tell you that, once you are under way, the first 20 hours of the work day aren't so bad; it's the next 20 hours of the day that really start to drag.
__________________
"If you do not know what you are doing, neither does your enemy."
- - Joe Tzu
The Following User Says Thank You to Baron von Kriterium For This Useful Post:
The Japanese Coast Guard has ruled the collision to be negligent homicide, and is recommending criminal charges in Japan against both the Officer of the Deck of the Fitzgerald and the second in command of the ACX Crystal.
I think the US Navy also is going after the Commanding Officer the XO and about a dozen ratings, it sounds like the entire watch list at the time of the collission.
Also the boat took more damage while being transported to its repair facility.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Yeah, I would imagine the CO was done no matter what. His boat, his responsibility. Even if he was asleep at the time.
The American Navy's command responsibility is more then defined, its traditional. I'm going off of memory but I would have to find this story.
But back I think when the American's were fighting the British, an American ship was in the battle. During the battle, the Captain was wounded, and the Ships surgeon who was a Lieutenant took him below to treat him. While the doctor was below deck, the 2nd in Command was killed and the battle was lost, however the Doctor was the third ranked officer on the ship, and in command during the loss even though he didn't know it. He was ultimately held responsible for the loss of the ship.
Naval tradition has defined the role and responsibility of Command, and American's and the British and French, the countries with long standing naval traditions are very historically motivated. If you look into things like "Fight the Ship" and John Paul Jones and his command tenure of the Ranger. The reasons for the establishment of the naval academy. It all leads the the simple tenant that no matter what the Commanding officer is ultimately responsible for his command and his crew and his mission and things like "I was asleep at the time", or "I didn't know that was happening" are irrelevant.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
The Following User Says Thank You to CaptainCrunch For This Useful Post:
The American Navy's command responsibility is more then defined, its traditional. I'm going off of memory but I would have to find this story.
But back I think when the American's were fighting the British, an American ship was in the battle. During the battle, the Captain was wounded, and the Ships surgeon who was a Lieutenant took him below to treat him. While the doctor was below deck, the 2nd in Command was killed and the battle was lost, however the Doctor was the third ranked officer on the ship, and in command during the loss even though he didn't know it. He was ultimately held responsible for the loss of the ship.
Naval tradition has defined the role and responsibility of Command, and American's and the British and French, the countries with long standing naval traditions are very historically motivated. If you look into things like "Fight the Ship" and John Paul Jones and his command tenure of the Ranger. The reasons for the establishment of the naval academy. It all leads the the simple tenant that no matter what the Commanding officer is ultimately responsible for his command and his crew and his mission and things like "I was asleep at the time", or "I didn't know that was happening" are irrelevant.
Yep, that's why they go down with their ship, its a better fate than what would happen to them when they get home without the ship.
Yep, that's why they go down with their ship, its a better fate than what would happen to them when they get home without the ship.
"Come back with you're shield or on it" - Plutarch the departing cries of Greek Mothers to their sons as they left for battle.
"Molon Labe" - Greek translated to "Come and take them" when Xerxes 1 demanded that Leonidis and his men surrender their weapons.
"I have not yet begun to fight" John Paul Jones to the Captain of the HMS Serapis when he was asked for his surrender.
"I regret that I have but one life to lose for my country" Nathan Hale on the morning of his hanging.
Semper Fidalis - "Always Faithful" the Motto of the Marine Corp.
"Damn the Torpedeos, full speed ahead" David Farragot Admiral US Navy
"The Captain goes down with his ship" Often the most misunderstood quote of all the military quotes.
the above officers weren't afraid of what would happen to them personally if they failed. All of these quotes are about not giving up in a bad tactical situation and in the face of certain death, because they saw no other avenue and retreating would have resulted in worse for their men, for their commands and for their nation.
John Paul Jones wasn't thinking about a court marshal if he failed to spike the British Guns. Nathan Hale wasn't thinking of self preservation when he agreed to spy on the enemy in the face of death when captured.
Leonidis had the opportunity to surrender. But he didn't not because he feared returning home a coward and a failure, but because there was a great chance that he would have no home to return to.
"The Captain goes down with his ship" isn't about a heroic gesture of defiance as its been portrayed in movies and books, The Captain is ultimately responsible for his men and his ship, so he will save them or die trying. However if there's no chance of saving the ship and he's saved the men he can, a Captain will not go down with his ship.
With your shield or on it. In otherwords don't surrender and if you die you will be bought home. That was the nature of warfare. It was brutal and unforgiving and you would most likely die horribly, but how do you choose to die?
All of these things are at the backbone of armies and navies and even those wimps in the airforce. these sacrifices aren't about self preservation and what happens when I get home, its about what's going to happen to your men and your home that drives them.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to CaptainCrunch For This Useful Post:
Is it bad that use use some of these sayings as punchlines when I am talking at parties and whatnot?
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch
"Come back with you're shield or on it" - Plutarch the departing cries of Greek Mothers to their sons as they left for battle.
"Molon Labe" - Greek translated to "Come and take them" when Xerxes 1 demanded that Leonidis and his men surrender their weapons.
"I have not yet begun to fight" John Paul Jones to the Captain of the HMS Serapis when he was asked for his surrender.
"I regret that I have but one life to lose for my country" Nathan Hale on the morning of his hanging.
Semper Fidalis - "Always Faithful" the Motto of the Marine Corp.
"Damn the Torpedeos, full speed ahead" David Farragot Admiral US Navy
"The Captain goes down with his ship" Often the most misunderstood quote of all the military quotes.
the above officers weren't afraid of what would happen to them personally if they failed. All of these quotes are about not giving up in a bad tactical situation and in the face of certain death, because they saw no other avenue and retreating would have resulted in worse for their men, for their commands and for their nation.
John Paul Jones wasn't thinking about a court marshal if he failed to spike the British Guns. Nathan Hale wasn't thinking of self preservation when he agreed to spy on the enemy in the face of death when captured.
Leonidis had the opportunity to surrender. But he didn't not because he feared returning home a coward and a failure, but because there was a great chance that he would have no home to return to.
"The Captain goes down with his ship" isn't about a heroic gesture of defiance as its been portrayed in movies and books, The Captain is ultimately responsible for his men and his ship, so he will save them or die trying. However if there's no chance of saving the ship and he's saved the men he can, a Captain will not go down with his ship.
With your shield or on it. In otherwords don't surrender and if you die you will be bought home. That was the nature of warfare. It was brutal and unforgiving and you would most likely die horribly, but how do you choose to die?
All of these things are at the backbone of armies and navies and even those wimps in the airforce. these sacrifices aren't about self preservation and what happens when I get home, its about what's going to happen to your men and your home that drives them.
__________________
If I do not come back avenge my death
The Following User Says Thank You to Northendzone For This Useful Post:
