Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 62

Thread: USS John S McCain Collision

  1. #16
    Regular
    Join Date
    12 Sep 13
    Location
    Long Beach, CA
    Posts
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by blidgepump
    Just what qualifies as a "collision in USN slang".... NPR radio quoted 4 collisions this year in the Pacific?
    I believe the 4th "collision" would be USS Antietam, that ran aground in Tokyo Bay back in January.

  2. #17
    Military Professional JCT's Avatar
    Join Date
    07 Apr 05
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    268
    Quote Originally Posted by Pacfanweb View Post
    Maybe they are in the flooded compartments?
    Yes, they are most likely trapped in the flooded compartments or washed out to sea. Truly tragic. This happened in the early morning and many of them would have been asleep in their berths (again....) Heck of a thing if you do not see a merchie soon enough to sound the collision alarm and wake everyone up, giving them half a chance. It sounds like they released at least a partial reason behind the FITZ collision, much like everyone speculated, loss of situational awareness, lack of communication, and a breakdown in leadership. Unfortunately probably the same story here.

  3. #18
    Regular PeeCoffee's Avatar
    Join Date
    28 Jan 16
    Location
    Isaan
    Posts
    129
    At least they were hit portside which will probably not release the Captain or OOD from responsibility. Unfortunately this wasn't a sanctioned sailboat race which usually provides the starboard-side vessel the "right of way".

    RIP to all the sailors that are lost at sea and condolences to their families.
    Real eyes realize real lies.

  4. #19
    Senior Contributor blidgepump's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Jul 09
    Posts
    2,479

    Seamanship and rules of the sea...

    [QUOTE=PeeCoffee;1029323]At least they were hit portside which will probably not release the Captain or OOD from responsibility. Unfortunately this wasn't a sanctioned sailboat race which usually provides the starboard-side vessel the "right of way".


    Situational awareness?

    The International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea 1972 (COLREGs) are published by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and set out, among other things, as the "rules of the road" to be followed by ships and other vessels at sea to prevent collisions between two or more vessels.

    Unless there is an "emergency brake" the 100% safe answer is to get out of the way.
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  5. #20
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 08
    Posts
    1,798
    Fun fact: my dad was in our cod fishing fleet, back in the 1950s, and he says that they'd used to have multiple trawlers sailing 40-50 meters away from each other, often in fog, using nothing but shots and eyeball mk1. Never a single colision...

  6. #21
    Senior Contributor SteveDaPirate's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Aug 13
    Location
    Kansas City, United States
    Posts
    1,246
    I averaged 3 hours of sleep a night on my DDG and CG. Sometimes I'd go days, 48-36 hours, depending on scheduling, before I could catch more than a 90 minute nap over lunch in my shop.

    Quarters is at 07. Work goes until 1700, give or take until 2000 if there's a big project going on.

    Watch was port and starboard, so, 0600-1200, and then six hours off, and then 1800-2400. After three months we got someone qualified and we jumped to three section, which was worse: five hours of watch followed by ten hours off, followed by five hours of watch. Keep in mind that work, PT, your current qualifications, and meals must all fit into this schedule.

    Then, I was on flight quarters. We pretty much ran helo ops from 2000-04, maybe 0500 every night.

    Break this down for you, this is what my day looked like.

    0600-1200, watch.
    12-1230, lunch
    1230-1600 work.
    1600-1800, dinner/quals/gym.
    1800-0000, watch. If we were at flight quarters, I'd get relieved by another watchstander and I'd go man up the flight deck.

    Flight quarters would go until 0400. I'd be lucky to catch two hours of sleep before assuming the watch again at 0600. I often showered and would nap in my shop.

    If we were in five-and-dimes, my day would look like this:

    0600--Breakfast. Which I wouldn't get up for, because that's an extra hour of sleep.
    0700--quarters, work until 0800 when I would assume the watch.
    0800-1200, watch.
    1200-1230, lunch.
    1230-1600, work.
    1600-1800, dinner/gym/quals/personal time to decompress.

    IF we we had a huge project, I'd be back at work from 1800-2000.

    Flight quarters would man up....give or take their schedule was usually at 2000, sometimes earlier, sometimes later.
    Watch again at 2200-0300. Again, if at flight quarters, someone else had to fill that in. If not, I'd get to go back to sleep until the next day.
    Same schedule, but this time my next watch would be 12-17 and 02-08.

    (watch blocks on five and dime look like 07-12, 12-17, 17-22, 22-02, 02-07.....watch for five, off for ten hours. Repeat. It's awful. Even if you don't have flight quarters and you get broken sleep with that rotating schedule, what ends up happening is you have a sleep deficiency of hours, it eventually adds up to you being so tired that you're hallucinating. NPC did a sleep study and found that after a week on a rotating watch schedule you basically are operating as if you'd been two beers (or more) deep. Here's the solution the Navy developed, but nobody wants to implement, in order to fix this problem: https://my.nps.edu/web/crewendurance/index

    So. I don't know what the other guy is saying about "being run ragged" is an exaggeration, but I have personally gone without sleep for so long that I have seen and heard things that weren't there. I've witnessed accidents that could have been avoided because the person was so tired they had no right to be operating heavy machinery, including an incident in which someone got descalped and someone else almost losing a finger. I've been off sea duty for about six months and my sleep schedule is so fucked I can't go more than about four hours without jolting awake and having to basically go through a relaxation process to get myself to go fall back asleep. Past experience has shown it'll take me another 6 months to a year to get out of the just enough sleep to function" phase and then I'll be up for sea duty again, anyway.

    I'm not bitching about my underway work schedule, I'm stating it as a fact: It's fucked, and I'm not happy about it.
    https://np.reddit.com/r/navy/comment..._ship/dlx2esb/

    Other people replying to the thread confirmed the awful sleep schedule aboard DDGs and stated that they regularly heard or saw things that weren't actually there, hallucinations and nodding off on duty are apparently rampant. I see this as a cultural issue that needs to be fixed or future accidents are all but unavoidable.
    Last edited by SteveDaPirate; 22 Aug 17, at 14:13.

  7. #22
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    5,832
    Making more sense now.

  8. #23
    New Member
    Join Date
    22 Aug 17
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2
    What about the geopolitical implications of a sign of weakness from the US Navy - i.e. how will China seek to exploit the situation?

    https://quillorcapture.com/2017/08/2...n-for-us-navy/

  9. #24
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    5,832
    Quote Originally Posted by watcher123 View Post
    What about the geopolitical implications of a sign of weakness from the US Navy - i.e. how will China seek to exploit the situation?

    https://quillorcapture.com/2017/08/2...n-for-us-navy/
    No way to exploit, best to keep their distance. If on a collision course, move out of the way : D

    If this is what happens to innocents then imagine what the USN will do to potential adversaries. These people are completely nuts !!

    And so the FON patrols continued and the Chinese learnt to accept them

  10. #25
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Aug 08
    Location
    UK/Europe
    Posts
    4,119
    I think it was Ian Flemming (the James Bond guy) who said something like "If it happens once it is chance. If it happens twice it can be coincidence. If it happens three times it is enemy action". For myself the third occurence is not proof of 'enemy action' and the distances in these events are (one in the Black Sea and the latest in the Malacca Straits) is mitigating evidence of not a single source of enemy action but I do not believe the possibility can any longer be overlooked. How do lookouts not see these other vessels? Do not tell me they were sleeping on duty - all of them - in every event... it is not feasible. Command failures in all these events? Really? Don't believe that myself either. How was the visability in these events? Not the same it seems. I think there must be more to this than meets the eye.

    See https://www.newscientist.com/article...n-cyberweapon/
    Last edited by snapper; 22 Aug 17, at 18:58.

  11. #26
    New Member
    Join Date
    22 Aug 17
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    No way to exploit, best to keep their distance. If on a collision course, move out of the way : D

    If this is what happens to innocents then imagine what the USN will do to potential adversaries. These people are completely nuts !!

    And so the FON patrols continued and the Chinese learnt to accept them
    Don't you think this part of a broader narrative change though? It opens up an opportunity which if seized upon could be another step in changing the established concept of US Naval predominance.

  12. #27
    Defense ProfessionalSenior Contributor tbm3fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Nov 09
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Posts
    3,083
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    No way to exploit, best to keep their distance. If on a collision course, move out of the way : D

    If this is what happens to innocents then imagine what the USN will do to potential adversaries. These people are completely nuts !!

    And so the FON patrols continued and the Chinese learnt to accept them
    Well, apparently the Chinese press has a few things to say about the dangerous US Navy.

    Criticism in Chinese press


    An opinion piece in the state-run China Daily newspaper criticized the wave of accidents, saying the US Navy was becoming "a hazard in Asian waters."


    "It may be hard for people to understand why US warships are unable to avoid other vessels since they are equipped with the world's most sophisticated radar and electronic tracking systems, and aided by crew members on constant watch," said the unbylined piece published in the English-language daily.


    Calling the Navy a "dangerous obstacle" and an "increasing hindrance to ships sailing in Asian waters," it said there was "no denying the fact that the increased activities by US warships in Asia-Pacific since Washington initiated its rebalancing to the region are making them a growing risk to commercial shipping."


    It added that investigations into the cause of the Fitzgerald collision in June "shed some light on the way US warships tend to sail without observing maritime traffic rules and the sloppiness of their crews."
    China Daily but won't link as my security programs picked up a malicious threat. Link in above quote if you care.


    The US Navy, which likes to claim its presence can help safeguard "freedom of navigation" in the South China Sea, is proving to be an increasing hindrance to ships sailing in Asian waters.


    Early on Monday, the guided missile destroyer USS John S. McCain collided with an oil and chemical tanker in waters east of the Strait of Malacca, causing significant damage to the hull that resulted in flooding to nearby compartments. Four sailors were airlifted to hospital and 10 are missing, according to a statement released by the navy.


    No members of the crew on the tanker were injured, but the vessel sustained damage near the bow.


    The latest incident occurred just two months after the USS Fitzgerald and a Philippine container ship collided in waters off Japan, killing seven US sailors.


    It may be hard for people to understand why US warships are unable to avoid other vessels since they are equipped with the world’s most sophisticated radar and electronic tracking systems, and aided by crew members on constant watch.


    But investigations into the cause of the USS Fitzgerald collision shed some light on the way US warships tend to sail without observing maritime traffic rules and the sloppiness of their crews. According to the Philippine container ship’s captain, it signaled with flashing lights after the Fitzgerald “suddenly” appeared on a course to cross its path. Yet the US warship did not respond or take evasive action.


    The US Navy concluded the collision was the result of "poor seamanship and flaws in keeping watch" on the part of the warship, which led to its captain and two other senior officers being removed from their posts and administrative actions being taken against members of the watch teams.


    The investigations into the latest collision will take time to reach their conclusions, but there is no denying the fact that the increased activities by US warships in Asia-Pacific since Washington initiated its rebalancing to the region are making them a growing risk to commercial shipping; this is the third collision involving a US naval vessel in the region so far this year. And a US guided missile cruiser ran aground off the coast of Japan.


    While the US Navy is becoming a dangerous obstacle in Asian waters, China has been making joint efforts with the members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations to draw up a Code of Conduct for the South China Sea and it has boosted navigational safety by constructing five lighthouses on its islands.


    Anyone should be able to tell who is to blame for militarizing the waters and posing a threat to navigation.

  13. #28
    Defense ProfessionalSenior Contributor tbm3fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Nov 09
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Posts
    3,083
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    No way to exploit, best to keep their distance. If on a collision course, move out of the way : D

    If this is what happens to innocents then imagine what the USN will do to potential adversaries. These people are completely nuts !!

    And so the FON patrols continued and the Chinese learnt to accept them
    Well, apparently the Chinese press has a few things to say about the dangerous US Navy.

    Criticism in Chinese press


    An opinion piece in the state-run China Daily newspaper criticized the wave of accidents, saying the US Navy was becoming "a hazard in Asian waters."


    "It may be hard for people to understand why US warships are unable to avoid other vessels since they are equipped with the world's most sophisticated radar and electronic tracking systems, and aided by crew members on constant watch," said the unbylined piece published in the English-language daily.


    Calling the Navy a "dangerous obstacle" and an "increasing hindrance to ships sailing in Asian waters," it said there was "no denying the fact that the increased activities by US warships in Asia-Pacific since Washington initiated its rebalancing to the region are making them a growing risk to commercial shipping."


    It added that investigations into the cause of the Fitzgerald collision in June "shed some light on the way US warships tend to sail without observing maritime traffic rules and the sloppiness of their crews."
    China Daily but won't link as my security programs picked up a malicious threat.


    The US Navy, which likes to claim its presence can help safeguard "freedom of navigation" in the South China Sea, is proving to be an increasing hindrance to ships sailing in Asian waters.


    Early on Monday, the guided missile destroyer USS John S. McCain collided with an oil and chemical tanker in waters east of the Strait of Malacca, causing significant damage to the hull that resulted in flooding to nearby compartments. Four sailors were airlifted to hospital and 10 are missing, according to a statement released by the navy.


    No members of the crew on the tanker were injured, but the vessel sustained damage near the bow.


    The latest incident occurred just two months after the USS Fitzgerald and a Philippine container ship collided in waters off Japan, killing seven US sailors.


    It may be hard for people to understand why US warships are unable to avoid other vessels since they are equipped with the world’s most sophisticated radar and electronic tracking systems, and aided by crew members on constant watch.


    But investigations into the cause of the USS Fitzgerald collision shed some light on the way US warships tend to sail without observing maritime traffic rules and the sloppiness of their crews. According to the Philippine container ship’s captain, it signaled with flashing lights after the Fitzgerald “suddenly” appeared on a course to cross its path. Yet the US warship did not respond or take evasive action.


    The US Navy concluded the collision was the result of "poor seamanship and flaws in keeping watch" on the part of the warship, which led to its captain and two other senior officers being removed from their posts and administrative actions being taken against members of the watch teams.


    The investigations into the latest collision will take time to reach their conclusions, but there is no denying the fact that the increased activities by US warships in Asia-Pacific since Washington initiated its rebalancing to the region are making them a growing risk to commercial shipping; this is the third collision involving a US naval vessel in the region so far this year. And a US guided missile cruiser ran aground off the coast of Japan.


    While the US Navy is becoming a dangerous obstacle in Asian waters, China has been making joint efforts with the members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations to draw up a Code of Conduct for the South China Sea and it has boosted navigational safety by constructing five lighthouses on its islands.


    Anyone should be able to tell who is to blame for militarizing the waters and posing a threat to navigation.

    Mind you five lighthouses. How very generous of them. Is each one manned by one civilian family?

  14. #29
    Defense ProfessionalSenior Contributor tbm3fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Nov 09
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Posts
    3,083
    7th Fleet Commander to be dismissed.

    http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/22/politi...sal/index.html

    (CNN)The US Navy intends to remove Vice Adm. Joseph Aucoin as the commander of the US 7th Fleet, based in Yokosuka, Japan, according to a US official. This follows an incident Monday in which the USS John S. McCain collided with a merchant vessel.

    Ten sailors assigned to the ship were missing following the accident, and the Navy has reported that "some" remains have been since recovered.
    Developing story - more to come

  15. #30
    Senior Contributor DonBelt's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Oct 08
    Location
    Taxachusetts, somewhere between Boston and Wista
    Posts
    1,064
    "I averaged 3 hours of sleep a night on my DDG and CG. Sometimes I'd go days, 48-36 hours, depending on scheduling, before I could catch more than a 90 minute nap over lunch in my shop.

    Quarters is at 07. Work goes until 1700, give or take until 2000 if there's a big project going on.

    Watch was port and starboard, so, 0600-1200, and then six hours off, and then 1800-2400. After three months we got someone qualified and we jumped to three section, which was worse: five hours of watch followed by ten hours off, followed by five hours of watch. Keep in mind that work, PT, your current qualifications, and meals must all fit into this schedule.

    Then, I was on flight quarters. We pretty much ran helo ops from 2000-04, maybe 0500 every night.

    Break this down for you, this is what my day looked like.

    0600-1200, watch.
    12-1230, lunch
    1230-1600 work.
    1600-1800, dinner/quals/gym.
    1800-0000, watch. If we were at flight quarters, I'd get relieved by another watchstander and I'd go man up the flight deck.

    Flight quarters would go until 0400. I'd be lucky to catch two hours of sleep before assuming the watch again at 0600. I often showered and would nap in my shop.

    If we were in five-and-dimes, my day would look like this:

    0600--Breakfast. Which I wouldn't get up for, because that's an extra hour of sleep.
    0700--quarters, work until 0800 when I would assume the watch.
    0800-1200, watch.
    1200-1230, lunch.
    1230-1600, work.
    1600-1800, dinner/gym/quals/personal time to decompress.

    IF we we had a huge project, I'd be back at work from 1800-2000.

    Flight quarters would man up....give or take their schedule was usually at 2000, sometimes earlier, sometimes later.
    Watch again at 2200-0300. Again, if at flight quarters, someone else had to fill that in. If not, I'd get to go back to sleep until the next day.
    Same schedule, but this time my next watch would be 12-17 and 02-08.

    (watch blocks on five and dime look like 07-12, 12-17, 17-22, 22-02, 02-07.....watch for five, off for ten hours. Repeat. It's awful. Even if you don't have flight quarters and you get broken sleep with that rotating schedule, what ends up happening is you have a sleep deficiency of hours, it eventually adds up to you being so tired that you're hallucinating. NPC did a sleep study and found that after a week on a rotating watch schedule you basically are operating as if you'd been two beers (or more) deep. Here's the solution the Navy developed, but nobody wants to implement, in order to fix this problem: https://my.nps.edu/web/crewendurance/index

    So. I don't know what the other guy is saying about "being run ragged" is an exaggeration, but I have personally gone without sleep for so long that I have seen and heard things that weren't there. I've witnessed accidents that could have been avoided because the person was so tired they had no right to be operating heavy machinery, including an incident in which someone got descalped and someone else almost losing a finger. I've been off sea duty for about six months and my sleep schedule is so fucked I can't go more than about four hours without jolting awake and having to basically go through a relaxation process to get myself to go fall back asleep. Past experience has shown it'll take me another 6 months to a year to get out of the just enough sleep to function" phase and then I'll be up for sea duty again, anyway.

    I'm not bitching about my underway work schedule, I'm stating it as a fact: It's fucked, and I'm not happy about it."


    This is the same sort of thing I am hearing from friends still in. Ships chronically undermanned, high op tempo. The other things that end up suffering are scheduled maintenance- work gets put off or not done properly.
    Last edited by DonBelt; 23 Aug 17, at 03:13.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. John McCain responds in Pravda
    By Minskaya in forum International Politics
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 21 Sep 13,, 22:04
  2. Can John McCain run an efficient organization?
    By citanon in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10 Jul 08,, 22:40
  3. John McCain's Good Flip on Oil Exploration
    By SteaminDemon in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 07 Jul 08,, 19:19
  4. Senator John McCain and LCpl Jim McCain, USMC
    By S2 in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 02 May 08,, 15:53
  5. John McCain Wins FL Primary
    By Ironduke in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 77
    Last Post: 08 Feb 08,, 21:44

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •