SEVEN U.S. Navy sailors STILL missing from destroyer collision
Looks like the entire hull is bent. God, let them be safe.
(https://media.defense.gov/2017/Jun/17/2001764524/600/400/0/170617-N-XN177-155.JPG)
(https://media.defense.gov/2017/Jun/17/2001764525/600/400/0/170617-N-XN177-158.JPG)
http://www.c7f.navy.mil/Media/News/Display/Article/1217773/uss-fitzgerald-returns-to-yokosuka/
PHILIPPINE SEA -- USS Fitzgerald (DDG 62), aided by tug boats, returned to Yokosuka at 6:15 p.m. this evening, approximately 16 hours after it was involved in a collision with the Philippine-flagged merchant vessel ACX Crystal while operating about 56 nautical miles southwest of Yokosuka, Japan. Seven of Fitzgerald's crew are still unaccounted for.
Vice Adm. Joseph P. Aucoin, Commander, U.S. 7th Fleet, along with many family members, were on the pier when the ship arrived.
"This has been a difficult day," Aucoin said. "I am humbled by the bravery and tenacity of the Fitzgerald crew. Now that the ship is in Yokosuka, I ask that you help the families by maintaining their privacy as we continue the search for our shipmates."
"I want to highlight the extraordinary courage of the Fitzgerald Sailors who contained the flooding, stabilized the ship, and sailed her back to Yokosuka despite the exceptionally trying circumstances," said Rear Adm. Charles Williams, Commander, Task Force 70.
Shortly after the collision the U.S. made a request for support from the Japan Coast Guard (JCG), which were the first on scene and continues to be lead for search and rescue efforts. The Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF) ships JS Ohnami, JS Hamagiri, and JS Enshu were sent to join the JCG ships Izanami and Kano. USS Dewey (DDG 105) served as an escort for Fitzgerald and has also returned to Yokosuka. A U.S. P-8 Poseidon aircraft is working in concert with two JMSDF Helicopters and a JMSDF P-3 Orion aircraft to search the area. Names of the missing Sailors are being withheld until the families have been notified.
The collision affected Fitzgerald's forward starboard side above and below the water line, causing significant damage and associated flooding to two berthing spaces, a machinery space, and the radio room, which damage control teams quickly began dewatering. Though the ship is back in Yokosuka it remains uncertain as to how long it will take to gain access to the spaces in order to methodically continue the search for the missing.
Once the ship arrived in Yokosuka, divers began inspecting the damage and developing a plan for repairs and inspection of the spaces.
Three patients required medical evacuation from the ship. One was Cmdr. Bryce Benson, Fitzgerald's commanding officer, who was transferred to U.S. Naval Hospital Yokosuka by a JMSDF helicopter. All three Sailors are awake and will remain under observation at the hospital until further notice. Other injured are being assessed.
The USS Fitzgerald Emergency Family Assistance Center will remain open for chaplain and counselor care indefinitely, 24/7, on the Command Readiness Center's 4th floor (across from the commissary) - in the same classroom where the Area Orientation Brief (AOB) is hosted.
Interested family should call DSN at: 315-243-1728, 1729, 1730, 1731, 1732, 1733, 1734, 1735 or Commercial at: +81-46-816-1728, 1729, 1730, 1731, 1732, 1733, 1734, 1735
Filipino's pilot a ship like they drive a jeepney through Manila
Although this happened in the middle of the night covered in darkness and the Sailors could be lost at sea maybe, just maybe some might be on board stuck in a cubby-hole. This is way above my pay grade and i'm sure they already have looked at this possibility.
This is one of them freak accidents that should have been avoided with both ships having 21 century technology.
My heart and prayers go out to all that have been affected by this accident.
Quote from: Billy's bayonet on June 17, 2017, 11:10:22 AM
Filipino's pilot a ship like they drive a jeepney through Manila
It's beginning to appear there might be a dereliction of duty charge coming against the US Captain and not because the Navy was at fault, but because no one woke the captain during an approach of another ship.
Sooo many questions to be answered yet, but one thing is certain, unless the other ship changed course abruptly, why was it not tracked and evasive maneuvers taken beforehand?
WTF was that Cargo Ship doing? Look at the track the cargo ship took when this all took shape.
Looks deliberate!!!
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.dailymail.co.uk%2Fi%2Fpix%2F2017%2F06%2F17%2F14%2F417F0B6400000578-4612334-image-a-8_1497707969392.jpg&hash=d7da7189d780324a075ea99ee54c73b803f6097c)
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.dailymail.co.uk%2Fi%2Fpix%2F2017%2F06%2F17%2F15%2F417F0AF000000578-4612334-image-a-11_1497708031094.jpg&hash=ea6ddf9394438c5512bc48d2fff3f56203624c32)
In November 2015, Benson reported as the Executive Officer of the USS Fitzgerald as part of the Surface Navy's Command Fleet Up program.
On May 13 this year, he relieved Commander Robert Shu as the Commanding Officer of the destroyer.
According to a report from the Navy Times, Executive Officer Commander Sean Babbitt has assumed command after the collision.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4612334/USS-Fitzgerald-involved-collision-merchant-vessel.html
Been doing some digging.... :glare:
"It was traveling at a speed of 12.4 knots and was still in motion in the hours after the collision."(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DCf3HIPXsAA8a2Q.jpg)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DCf-2csXYAAhkJx.jpg)
Looks good on my screen, let me know if it forces you to scroll.
https://twitter.com/esneet4113/status/875948867099004929/photo/1
http://heavy.com/news/2017/06/acx-crystal-uss-fitzgerald-tracking-owner-flag-schedule-container-ship-photo/
Quote from: Solar on June 17, 2017, 04:42:52 PM
Looks good on my screen, let me know if it forces you to scroll.
Looks good on this end.
Quote from: walkstall on June 17, 2017, 04:51:32 PM
Looks good on this end.
Good, I wanted to leave it large for better detail.
I've been following this story religiously since it unfolded and (I'm guessing here) that the Fitzgerald was monitoring the cargo ships behavior, possibly because it wasn't responding to hails from other ships or the Fitz itself, so they pulled alongside when it the ship abruptly struck the Fitz then went on it's way.
Video appears to show the cargo ship avoided the Fitz, then made an abrupt U-Turn, hit the ship, corrected course then left the scene in a hurry.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJPt3pZ9zlU
Gets even weirder. Collision took place at approximately 0230 UTC, note the speed the vessel was going from 2300 UTC to approx. 0230 UTC before the collision, was going under 1 knot, then speed increases 2.0 knots at approx. time they collided with the Fitz. then picks up speed to 13.2 knots at 0300 UTC where it continues on its way to its final destination.
Am I seeing this correctly, it's as if they waited to attack?
https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/details/ships/shipid:722169/mmsi:548789000/imo:9360611/vessel:ACX_CRYSTAL
This stinks and I'm not talking about the fish. Just look at the captains route.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on June 17, 2017, 07:28:40 PM
This stinks and I'm not talking about the fish. Just look at the captains route.
Yes, there is sooo much wrong here.
This guy seems to have analyzed the data better than I, so I'll post what he thinks happened.
Those who know my blog will not be disapointed; of course I want to show you the minute-by-minute account of the ACX Crystal's journey and try and tease out what we can from it. Above you have the AIS data from what I believe covers the entire horrific event, and
the ACX Crystal leaving the scene of the collision. Yes. LEAVING the scene, only to return an hour later. I'll get back to that. I believe this shows that 1) nobody was on the bridge of the Crystal and 2) "Iron Mike" was in controls for a full 15min *after* the collision; see item 1.
There have been no reports that any distress call went out until after the ACX Crystal came back at 17:30Z, an hour after the collision.Some people hate analogies, but here's one anyway. If you were in the driver seat of a self-driving car, hit another car, and your self-driving car kept driving along the road... how long would it take you to hit the off button?
Well, it took the crew of the Crystal, who I'm positive were not on the bridge, 15 minutes to find the autopilot off button. Either they were very disoriented by the impact, or they weren't on the bridge to begin with, and had to get up to the bridge in order to shut down the autopilot.16:27Z
All is well, the ship is on a 70° course, sailing at a fast 18.5kn.
16:30Z
Course has changed +18°, speed dropped slightly, 1.2kn. The collision has likely already happened
16:33Z
Course is now +65° off original, and speed is down to 11.2kn. Something is clearly wrong, the collision has likely happened, and the 30,000ton container ship has been spun 65° off course by the impact or thrust of the USS Fitzgerald's engines.
16:36Z
It gets weirder. Speed is back up to 14.6kn, and the ship is coming back on course, now "only" +48° off her original course. Did the ACX Crystal spear the USS Fitzgerald, and just shake it off? That's right, after smashing into another ship, the 30,000 ton container ship is swinging around and increasing speed. If anyone was at the helm, this would not be happening.
16:38Z
ACX Crystal has now swung around in 2 minutes to a course of 41°, -22° off the original course, and is seemingly trying to correct its course toward her original destination. Almost like nobody is at the helm, and the ship is being controlled by Iron Mike (the autopilot)
16:40Z
Course corrected, back on a heading of 70°, speed is up to 15.3kn, and the ship is steaming away from the accident. It's been ten minutes since the collision, and nobody has disengaged the autopilot yet. How do I know? Because they haven't reduced speed or turned around.
16:43Z, 16:46Z
Course corrections, but still no slowing down, now up to 15.4kn. How far are the crew quarters from the bridge on that ship?
17:52Z onward
There is a 14 minute gap that I can't explain, did they turn off AIS?
From this time forward, regular updates keep coming in at 2-3min intervals. Speed and course changes seem to suggest they were looking for survivors or trying to otherwise assist.
In conclusion I have absolutely no idea what happened out there; I'm trying to think through the story with the available evidence and string it together. By my understanding of the events I believe there was nobody on the bridge of he ACX Crystal at the time of the collision, and for ~15 minutes afterwards showed no signs of being manned with anyone on the bridge as the course auto-corrected, and increased speed, moving way from the impact site, trying to come back up to the original speed. The damage on the bow, below the water line, slowed the ship down from it's original 18kn due to drag. Knowing when the Japanese Coast Guard was called is a detail that has not been revealed yet, and we all know there's a recording of it out there somewhere.
I'll update as I find out more, or more evidence is revealed.
More details at his blog.
http://www.vesselofinterest.com/2017/06/mapping-acx-crystals-collision-with-uss.html
Very interesting..............
Quote from: taxed on June 17, 2017, 08:03:12 PM
Very interesting..............
They sure are being tight lipped about this.
His analysis on it is that they first passed the Fitz, but from what I'm seeing, it looks like they missed it and came back. God, let's hope I'm wrong.
Bodies of 7 Missing U.S. Sailors Found in Destroyer Damaged in Collision
snip~
The bodies of seven U.S. sailors missing after a Navy destroyer collided with a container ship off Japan were found in flooded berthing compartments, the U.S. 7th Fleet and a defense official said Saturday.
more @
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/bodies-7-missing-u-s-sailors-found-damaged-destroyer-after-n773721?cid=par-xfinity_20170618
Quote from: walkstall on June 17, 2017, 08:25:52 PM
Bodies of 7 Missing U.S. Sailors Found in Destroyer Damaged in Collision
snip~
The bodies of seven U.S. sailors missing after a Navy destroyer collided with a container ship off Japan were found in flooded berthing compartments, the U.S. 7th Fleet and a defense official said Saturday.
more @
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/bodies-7-missing-u-s-sailors-found-damaged-destroyer-after-n773721?cid=par-xfinity_20170618
May God watch over them.
Faceplant is all upset because some have posted the faces of those that died, claiming the Navy had yet to contact the families, which is pretty stupid, because the families had already been informed none of the seven had survived, and they knew the names of the sailors missing before hand.
This smells of hacking an auto-pilot of the ACX Crystal.
Quote from: Hoofer on June 18, 2017, 05:44:14 PM
This smells of hacking an auto-pilot of the ACX Crystal.
Definitely something not right and the military is keeping this under wraps. I really hope the real truth comes out over this.
We know we have the Navy's data intact hours before it happened and hours after, we have satellite data on the ACX, speed, time and position every moment it was on the water, not to mention onboard computers.
They better not lie to the public!
Quote from: Solar on June 18, 2017, 07:56:58 PM
Definitely something not right and the military is keeping this under wraps. I really hope the real truth comes out over this.
We know we have the Navy's data intact hours before it happened and hours after, we have satellite data on the ACX, speed, time and position every moment it was on the water, not to mention onboard computers.
They better not lie to the public!
What is it that strikes you as something not being right or is it just a gut feeling?
Quote from: Ms.Independence on June 19, 2017, 07:18:09 PM
What is it that strikes you as something not being right or is it just a gut feeling?
Both. We know everything about the Fitzgerald, and next to nothing about the ACX Crystal, not even the name of the Captain.
Quote from: Solar on June 19, 2017, 07:24:46 PM
Both. We know everything about the Fitzgerald, and next to nothing about the ACX Crystal, not even the name of the Captain.
Gottcha.
Quote from: Ms.Independence on June 20, 2017, 08:37:50 AM
Gottcha.
It would appear that my earlier suspicions were correct. This is beginning to look like a deliberate act.
The Japan Coast Guard subsequently revised the time to 1:30 a.m. meaning the container ship waited 55 minutes before contacting the coast guard, according to the Japan Coast Guard.
Shipping data in Thomson Reuters Eikon shows
the merchant ship chartered by Japan's Nippon Yusen KK, made a complete U-turn between 12:58 a.m. and 2:46 a.m. on June 17.
Earlier I said it looks as if the ACX made a U-turn, came back, deliberately struck the Fitzgerald and immediately left the vicinity.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.dailymail.co.uk%2Fi%2Fpix%2F2017%2F06%2F17%2F14%2F417F0B6400000578-4612334-image-a-8_1497707969392.jpg&hash=d7da7189d780324a075ea99ee54c73b803f6097c)
https://gcaptain.com/u-s-coast-guard-interviews-acx-crystal-crew-warship-collision/
I have tried diligently and have yet to find one single reference to the Captain of the ACX Crystal.
I'm beginning to expect to hear a Muscums name.
Quote from: Solar on June 20, 2017, 10:56:18 AM
It would appear that my earlier suspicions were correct. This is beginning to look like a deliberate act.
The Japan Coast Guard subsequently revised the time to 1:30 a.m. meaning the container ship waited 55 minutes before contacting the coast guard, according to the Japan Coast Guard.
Shipping data in Thomson Reuters Eikon shows the merchant ship chartered by Japan's Nippon Yusen KK, made a complete U-turn between 12:58 a.m. and 2:46 a.m. on June 17.
Earlier I said it looks as if the ACX made a U-turn, came back, deliberately struck the Fitzgerald and immediately left the vicinity.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.dailymail.co.uk%2Fi%2Fpix%2F2017%2F06%2F17%2F14%2F417F0B6400000578-4612334-image-a-8_1497707969392.jpg&hash=d7da7189d780324a075ea99ee54c73b803f6097c)
https://gcaptain.com/u-s-coast-guard-interviews-acx-crystal-crew-warship-collision/
I have tried diligently and have yet to find one single reference to the Captain of the ACX Crystal.
I'm beginning to expect to hear a Muscums name.
These developments might explain the silence from the Navy. They may be putting their ducks in a row awaiting who the actual perps may be. If it is Islamic terrorism I suspect Trump will hit them hard in the far east.
•Principal Particulars for ACX Crystal
Gross Tonnage (G/T) : 29,093 tons
Length Overall : 222.60 meters
Flag : Republic of the Philippines
Built : 2008
Captain : Ronald Advincula
Crew : 20 seafarers (All Filipino)
Cargo : General cargo
Ship Charterer : NYK Line
Shipowner : DAINICHI-INVEST CORPORATION
http://www.nyk.com/english/news/2017/1188064_1553.html
Quote from: Ms.Independence on June 20, 2017, 01:20:22 PM
•Principal Particulars for ACX Crystal
Gross Tonnage (G/T) : 29,093 tons
Length Overall : 222.60 meters
Flag : Republic of the Philippines
Built : 2008
Captain : Ronald Advincula
Crew : 20 seafarers (All Filipino)
Cargo : General cargo
Ship Charterer : NYK Line
Shipowner : DAINICHI-INVEST CORPORATION
http://www.nyk.com/english/news/2017/1188064_1553.html
I see they finally released the info. yesterday. Why were they keeping it a secret? Sooo much wrong with the way this is being handled.
Quote from: Solar on June 20, 2017, 01:41:37 PM
I see they finally released the info. yesterday. Why were they keeping it a secret? Sooo much wrong with the way this is being handled.
I would be splashed all over the papers, top topic on the news, magazines, talk radio, etc., everywhere... if there was a hint of a connection to Donald Trump. :ttoung:
Quote from: Hoofer on June 20, 2017, 04:49:14 PM
I would be splashed all over the papers, top topic on the news, magazines, talk radio, etc., everywhere... if there was a hint of a connection to Donald Trump. :ttoung:
The week is young yet. :lol:
Obviously a deliberate collision is being considered.
http://www.dailywire.com/news/17705/fitzgerald-collision-investigation-brings-frank-camp
Quote from: Ms.Independence on June 21, 2017, 02:41:41 PM
Obviously a deliberate collision is being considered.
http://www.dailywire.com/news/17705/fitzgerald-collision-investigation-brings-frank-camp
I knew I wasn't alone in this.
Lots of Militant Muslims in the Philippines....just sayin'
Quote from: Billy's bayonet on June 21, 2017, 03:49:34 PM
Lots of Militant Muslims in the Philippines....just sayin'
That was the reason I thought they weren't releasing the Captain of the ACX' name, I would have bet it was Mohamad or some sand crab loser, then again, he still could be a muscum.
Quote from: Solar on June 21, 2017, 03:58:02 PM
That was the reason I thought they weren't releasing the Captain of the ACX' name, I would have bet it was Mohamad or some sand crab loser, then again, he still could be a muscum.
Well, I can't find out any other information on the captain of the ACX other than his name. Google search shows no other information; he may be a Fillipino, but you are correct he may be of Muslim descent, have muslim ties, radicalized Muslim ... who knows at this point.
Quote from: Ms.Independence on June 21, 2017, 04:40:36 PM
Well, I can't find out any other information on the captain of the ACX other than his name. Google search shows no other information; he may be a Fillipino, but you are correct he may be of Muslim descent, have muslim ties, radicalized Muslim ... who knows at this point.
With this info out, it won't be long before people start talking, that know him.
Not sure if this is to be believed since it doesn't explain the "U-turn" other than to say the autopilot could have been hacked.
Freighter Was On Autopilot When It Hit U.S. Destroyer
The Philippines-flagged cargo ship ACX Crystal was under control of a computerized navigation system that was steering and guiding the container vessel, according to officials familiar with preliminary results of an ongoing Navy investigation.
Investigators so far found no evidence the collision was deliberate.
Nevertheless, an accident during computerized navigation raises the possibility the container ship's computer system could have been hacked and the ship deliberately steered into the USS Fitzgerald, an Arleigh Burke-class guided missile destroyer.
A more likely explanation is that collision was the result of an autopilot malfunction, or the autopilot's warning signals, used to notify the ship's operators, were missed.
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/freighter-autopilot-hit-us-destroyer/
Quote from: Dubinsky on June 23, 2017, 08:54:04 AM
Not sure if this is to be believed since it doesn't explain the "U-turn" other than to say the autopilot could have been hacked.
Freighter Was On Autopilot When It Hit U.S. Destroyer
The Philippines-flagged cargo ship ACX Crystal was under control of a computerized navigation system that was steering and guiding the container vessel, according to officials familiar with preliminary results of an ongoing Navy investigation.
Investigators so far found no evidence the collision was deliberate.
Nevertheless, an accident during computerized navigation raises the possibility the container ship's computer system could have been hacked and the ship deliberately steered into the USS Fitzgerald, an Arleigh Burke-class guided missile destroyer.
A more likely explanation is that collision was the result of an autopilot malfunction, or the autopilot's warning signals, used to notify the ship's operators, were missed.
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/freighter-autopilot-hit-us-destroyer/
I smell the makings of a cover-up in its early stages.
To believe a perfect storm occurred, one has to believe space aliens were in control of the minds of both crews.
First off:
QuotePrivate naval analyst Steffan Watkins said the course data indicates the ship was running on autopilot. "The ACX Crystal powered out of the deviation it performed at 1:30, which was likely the impact with the USS Fitzgerald, pushing it off course while trying to free itself from being hung on the bow below the waterline," Watkins told the Free Beacon.
The ship then continued to sail on for another 15 minutes, increasing speed before eventually reducing speed and turning around. "This shows the autopilot was engaged because nobody would power out of an accident with another ship and keep sailing back on course. It's unthinkable," he added.
What a dumb ass! UNLESS IT WAS DELIBERATE, you moron! Already he is discounting the fact that this may have been a deliberate maneuver, hacked or otherwise.
Now they want us to believe that everyone on the Fitzgerald was either asleep or turned off all their systems?
QuoteFor the Navy, investigators are trying to determine why the ship's radar and other sensors did not detect the Crystal in time to take steps to avoid the collision.
The Fitzgerald is equipped with the AN/SPS-64 advanced military navigation radar, and also uses a commercial radar system to enhance the shipping traffic picture of ships in its vicinity.
Navy ships operate radar systems to detect approaching ships or submarines. Lookouts posted on the bridge are responsible for detecting ships that pose a risk of collision.
Additionally, all commercial ships over 300 tons are required under international rules to operate AIS location data. AIS information from Crystal should have been monitored by sailors on the bridge of the Fitzgerald.
Quote from: Solar on June 23, 2017, 10:16:33 AM
I smell the makings of a cover-up in its early stages.
To believe a perfect storm occurred, one has to believe space aliens were in control of the minds of both crews.
First off:
What a dumb ass! UNLESS IT WAS DELIBERATE, you moron! Already he is discounting the fact that this may have been a deliberate maneuver, hacked or otherwise.
Now they want us to believe that everyone on the Fitzgerald was either asleep or turned off all their systems?
Yep it sure smells like one.
Might this whole incident be tied in to the current state of affairs in the Philippines
I am wondering where the guided missile cruiser was headed? Could the disputed area of the Philippines be its classified destination? Has the US agreed to back Duterte's war against the Militant Muslims? Like we did previously under Bush? Blasting the shit out of Abu Sayeef militants?
Also just because the merchant ship is registered in the Philippines it doesn't mean it has a Filipino crew.....it could, or it might which raises other questions, are they Filipino Muslim's?
Quote from: Billy's bayonet on June 24, 2017, 10:01:00 AM
Might this whole incident be tied in to the current state of affairs in the Philippines
I am wondering where the guided missile cruiser was headed? Could the disputed area of the Philippines be its classified destination? Has the US agreed to back Duterte's war against the Militant Muslims? Like we did previously under Bush? Blasting the shit out of Abu Sayeef militants?
Also just because the merchant ship is registered in the Philippines it doesn't mean it has a Filipino crew.....it could, or it might which raises other questions, are they Filipino Muslim's?
Given the secrecy surrounding the ACX that's an entirely plausible scenario, Billy.
There's been no mention of the ACX crew's makeup, what their nationality is, who hired them or when they were hired, did they come from another shipping company?
But we know virtually everything about the American Navy crew? We now know the inferred message is that the crew of the Fitzgerald is incompetent, that no one was on deck watching, that all radar must have been malfunctioning and/or the entire crew was either asleep or derelict in their assigned duties for not alerting command of the ships electronics failure. :rolleyes:
That's assuming anyone is stupid enough to believe the idiot authors narrative in the article, which I'm almost certain the Pentagon fed to him verbatim.
Remember when commercials made the shift to "Men stupid, women Smarter" back in the 80's? That's what this article smells like, that the American Navy must be so incompetent, that they allowed themselves to be overtaken by a lumbering freighter.
In the past when an accident occurred, the Captain was relegated to desk duty assuming he still wore the uniform, but I'm willing to bet this commander will be quietly reassigned to another ship with the promise he keeps his mouth shut. This will be the evidence that he was never at fault, to begin with.
The only new reports that I can find is that the incident still makes no sense and that the ACX was on auto pilot.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/7a23bc41-1e58-319a-9e7a-0e53486c4503/ss_uss-fitzgerald-tragedy-still.html
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/freighter-autopilot-hit-us-destroyer/
Quote from: Ms.Independence on June 25, 2017, 06:00:13 AM
The only new reports that I can find is that the incident still makes no sense and that the ACX was on auto pilot.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/7a23bc41-1e58-319a-9e7a-0e53486c4503/ss_uss-fitzgerald-tragedy-still.html
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/freighter-autopilot-hit-us-destroyer/
See my post above. But you're right, the "Autopilot"
excuse answer lie seems to be the narrative they're going with.
I'm not buying it for a second.
From Military.com --- note date. Why haven't they released preliminary findings?
QuoteAssociated Press | 22 Jun 2017 | by Mari Yamaguchi
TOKYO — Japanese authorities said Thursday they have obtained a data recording device from a container ship to help determine why it collided with a U.S. destroyer, killing seven American sailors.
Japanese transport safety officials said they obtained the voyage data recorder, similar to an airplane's "black box," from the Philippine-flagged ACX Crystal, which is currently docked in Yokohama near Tokyo.
Investigators are examining the ship's movements, including its location, direction, speed and other data to determine the cause of its collision with the USS Fitzgerald early Saturday off Izu Peninsula, west of Tokyo.
"By analyzing the data, we should be able to determine the circumstances of how it crashed," Transport Safety Board spokesman Katsunori Takahashi said.
The safety board is focusing on the cause of the collision and the lessons to be learned, while Japan's coast guard is investigating possible professional negligence in the accident.
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2017/06/22/investigators-obtain-data-recorder-us-warship-collision.html
Same source...
The U.S. Navy has named its own lead investigator.
QuoteYOKOTA AIR BASE, Japan -- Rear Adm. Brian Fort will lead a Navy investigation into the collision that killed seven USS Fitzgerald sailors off the Japanese coast, a 7th Fleet statement said Friday.
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2017/06/23/navy-names-lead-investigator-uss-fitzgerald-collision.html
Note: I know nothing about how the Navy operates, so maybe I'm asking the wrong questions.
a. Isn't someone on "watch" 24/7 on a military vessel? Did that go out with sailing ships & the dude in the crow's nest? Even with passive detection, how the heck wouldn't you know a ship is near or steaming towards you?
b. If it's a secret mission, I guess radar or anything that emits a trackable signal would be turned off, right? How did the cargo ship chase down the American Destroyer...? Wouldn't the cargo ship's active radar be detectable by the navy ship's passive radar, if they were in radio silence?
c. Auto-pilot - that's laughable, and of course it was probably hacked, unless... someone communicated with the cargo ship, and told someone to reverse course to chase down a destroyer and ram the crap out of it.
IMHO - we're missing some key elements from both ships. This isn't 2 speed boats accidentally colliding at 45 knots - what am I not "getting" about this, what's missing here???
Quote from: Hoofer on June 25, 2017, 07:14:52 AM
Note: I know nothing about how the Navy operates, so maybe I'm asking the wrong questions.
a. Isn't someone on "watch" 24/7 on a military vessel? Did that go out with sailing ships & the dude in the crow's nest? Even with passive detection, how the heck wouldn't you know a ship is near or steaming towards you?
b. If it's a secret mission, I guess radar or anything that emits a trackable signal would be turned off, right? How did the cargo ship chase down the American Destroyer...? Wouldn't the cargo ship's active radar be detectable by the navy ship's passive radar, if they were in radio silence?
c. Auto-pilot - that's laughable, and of course it was probably hacked, unless... someone communicated with the cargo ship, and told someone to reverse course to chase down a destroyer and ram the crap out of it.
IMHO - we're missing some key elements from both ships. This isn't 2 speed boats accidentally colliding at 45 knots - what am I not "getting" about this, what's missing here???
Yes!!! To the most obvious question, everyone is asking and getting no answers to.
It's for this reason I called fraud on the author of the most recent article I posted. He, in so many words, claimed dereliction of duty because he personally had no evidence that procedure had been followed.
According to a website by a former Admiral, states that no less than two spotters be on duty on deck 24/7, that there are several redundant systems for avoidance that scream out alarms in the event the computer sees impending danger.
No doubt Hell was breaking loose on the bridge as the Fitz was desperately trying to avoid a sneak attack by a vessel playing dead in the water.
Yes, I went there because a multi billion dollar piece of equipment is on the line as well as hundreds of lives at stake, and to even assume they were all derelict in their duties is pure bull shit.
But that seems to be the narrative the Pentagon wants to go with. :sneaky:
AP story anonymous source.
"account from one of those directly involved" WTF AP, you still don't have names?
TOKYO, June 26 (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 signalled 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.
The collision tore a gash below the Fitzgerald's waterline, killing seven sailors in what was the greatest loss of life on a U.S. Navy vessel since the USS Cole was bombed in Yemen's Aden harbour in 2000.
Those who died were in their berthing compartments, while the Fitzgerald's commander was injured in his cabin, suggesting that no alarm warning of an imminent collision was sounded.
A spokesman for the U.S. Navy's Seventh Fleet in Yokosuka, the Fitzgerald's home port, said he was unable to comment on an ongoing investigation.
The incident has spurred six investigations, including two internal hearings by the U.S. Navy and a probe by the United States Coast Guard (USCG) on behalf of the National Transportation Safety Board. The Japan Transport Safety Board, the JCG and the Philippines government are also conducting separate investigations.
Spokesmen from the Japan Coast Guard (JCG), U.S. Coast Guard and ship owner, Dainichi Invest, also declined to comment. Reuters was not able to contact Advincula, who was no longer in Japan.
The investigations will examine witness testimony and electronic data to determine how a naval destroyer fitted with sophisticated radar could be struck by a vessel more than three times its size.
Another focus of the probes has been the length of time it took the ACX Crystal to report the collision. The JCG says it was first notified at 2:25 a.m., nearly an hour after the accident.
In his report, the ACX Crystal's captain said there was "confusion" on his ship's bridge, and that it turned around and returned to the collision site after continuing for 6 nautical miles (11 km).
Shipping data in Thomson Reuters Eikon shows that the ACX Crystal, chartered by Japan's Nippon Yusen KK, made a complete U-turn between 12:58 a.m. and 2:46 a.m. (Reporting by Tim Kelly; Additional reporting by Nobuhiro Kubo; Editing by Alex Richardson)
http://news.trust.org/item/20170626101937-6xsul
Something really STINKS here.
I'll be really SICK to my stomach if this is the fault of the US NAVY.
Quote from: Hoofer on June 26, 2017, 05:19:06 PM
Something really STINKS here.
I'll be really SICK to my stomach if this is the fault of the US NAVY.
It's not, but that's the narrative they're setting up. :sneaky:
Quote from: Hoofer on June 26, 2017, 05:19:06 PM
Something really STINKS here.
I'll be really SICK to my stomach if this is the fault of the US NAVY.
I am a former naval officer and I just scratch my head on this whole thing. Even if it was a deliberate ramming (which I do not believe), any ship as quick and nimble as the Fitzgerald should have been able to easily avoid the freighter. Were the other ship's navigation lights out? If so, the Fitzgerald's surface radars (plural) would have easily picked up the freighter. If also the Fitzgerald's surface radars were not working, the captain would have been on the bridge in such busy waters. In fact, barring dire emergency, they probably would have repaired the radars before leaving port. My ship was homeported in Yokosuka, so I have been through that very area any number of times.
One thing I have not read is the destination of the Fitzgerald. That might give us an idea of the Fitzgerald's course. I assume they departed Yokosuka the previous day/evening. I can not wait to see the paths of the two ships in the five minutes before the collision.
Quote from: Wyatt5 on July 01, 2017, 05:25:22 PM
I am a former naval officer and I just scratch my head on this whole thing. Even if it was a deliberate ramming (which I do not believe), any ship as quick and nimble as the Fitzgerald should have been able to easily avoid the freighter. Were the other ship's navigation lights out? If so, the Fitzgerald's surface radars (plural) would have easily picked up the freighter. If also the Fitzgerald's surface radars were not working, the captain would have been on the bridge in such busy waters. In fact, barring dire emergency, they probably would have repaired the radars before leaving port. My ship was homeported in Yokosuka, so I have been through that very area any number of times.
One thing I have not read is the destination of the Fitzgerald. That might give us an idea of the Fitzgerald's course. I assume they departed Yokosuka the previous day/evening. I can not wait to see the paths of the two ships in the five minutes before the collision.
Just taking a shot in the dark here, but what reason would the Fitzgerald have for getting that close to the ACX in the first place?
Could have the ACX been sitting dead in the water? With the floodlights on the Navy ship and spotters on deck, it would only make sense to pull along side circling the bow, when suddenly the ACX lurches forward locking the starboard side and pulling it down underwater.
Granted it's only speculation, but I can't imagine any other reason the Fitz would drop it's guard, allowing it to be hit.
Quote from: Solar on July 01, 2017, 06:02:19 PM
Just taking a shot in the dark here, but what reason would the Fitzgerald have for getting that close to the ACX in the first place?
Could have the ACX been sitting dead in the water? With the floodlights on the Navy ship and spotters on deck, it would only make sense to pull along side circling the bow, when suddenly the ACX lurches forward locking the starboard side and pulling it down underwater.
Granted it's only speculation, but I can't imagine any other reason the Fitz would drop it's guard, allowing it to be hit.
There is absolutely no reason the Fitzgerald should have been that close. If they were going to come within a certain distance of the freighter, the captain would have been awakened, though he probably would have stayed in bed. He might have instructed the Officer of the Deck to maneuver to increase the closest approach between the vessels. If the freighter had called for help, the captain would have been awakened. If help was to be rendered, most of the ship would have been awakened. Even at that, they would never have crossed the bow of the other ship. They also probably wait until daylight and send a small boat over to investigate.
The Navy is made up of human beings, who sometimes make mistakes. I have seen the rocks the Leahy hit; it was inexcusable.
http://www.ussleahy.com/Rocks.html
Also google Melbourne-Evans Incident.
Quote from: Wyatt5 on July 02, 2017, 03:51:56 AM
There is absolutely no reason the Fitzgerald should have been that close. If they were going to come within a certain distance of the freighter, the captain would have been awakened, though he probably would have stayed in bed. He might have instructed the Officer of the Deck to maneuver to increase the closest approach between the vessels. If the freighter had called for help, the captain would have been awakened. If help was to be rendered, most of the ship would have been awakened. Even at that, they would never have crossed the bow of the other ship. They also probably wait until daylight and send a small boat over to investigate.
The Navy is made up of human beings, who sometimes make mistakes. I have seen the rocks the Leahy hit; it was inexcusable.
http://www.ussleahy.com/Rocks.html
Also google Melbourne-Evans Incident.
That's the point, the Fitz had no reason to suspect anything was amiss, so crossing, or possibly circling the bow for a closeup inspection isn't out of the realm of possibility, after all, it's only an unarmed cargo container ship in friendly yet busy waters.
The ACX was said to be doing 2 knots at the time of collision, meaning it had been at nearly full stop when it hit Fitz, again, meaning someone had to give the order "Full speed", and overtaking an unsuspecting Fitz on a routine inspection, or under orders from higher up.
I agree, this was not normal procedure which is why I believe the Fitz was lulled into believing there was no reason to suspect anything was amiss, or again, under orders from upper command to move in closer.
Though I suspect we will never know the truth, this whole incident has taken on the smell of something rotten on both ends of the Navy and ACX carcass.
QuoteThe captain of the ACX Crystal said the container ship flashed lights toward the USS Fitzgerald after it "suddenly" began heading on a collision course near Tokyo Bay on June 17, Reuters reported, citing a copy of Ronald Advincula's account to Dainichi Investment Corporation, the ship's owner.
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/06/26/uss-fitzgerald-collision-ship-failed-to-react-to-warning-signals-captain-says.html
Interesting... not much news on this, no followup articles.
Quote from: Hoofer on July 03, 2017, 03:32:03 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/06/26/uss-fitzgerald-collision-ship-failed-to-react-to-warning-signals-captain-says.html
Interesting... not much news on this, no follow up articles.
I hate these kinds of articles, they have more but refuse to release the information.
Check out the bias.
"The U.S. Navy destroyer that
slammed into a cargo ship in Japanese waters in mid-June"
Only to be followed by:
"Advincula said in the account that his ship
steered hard right to avoid the Fitzgerald but hit it 10 minutes later, around 1:30am local time."
Bias or simply poor reporting?
Quote from: Solar on July 03, 2017, 04:35:00 PM
I hate these kinds of articles, they have more but refuse to release the information.
Check out the bias.
"The U.S. Navy destroyer that slammed into a cargo ship in Japanese waters in mid-June"
Only to be followed by:
"Advincula said in the account that his ship steered hard right to avoid the Fitzgerald but hit it 10 minutes later, around 1:30am local time."
Bias or simply poor reporting?
Hmm... I my book poor reporting is BIAS.