Maybe I am not appreciating how large the barge is in relation to the Fitzgerald.
"The collision occurred at around 1:30 a.m. local time but was not reported by the freighter's crew until around 2:25 a.m. Investigators believe the time lag was the result of the crew not realizing they had hit another ship."
With a 20 MPH impact, I would have thought people on the barge would have been thrown out of their beds and into the walls when the barge impacted the Fitzgerald. I wonder what would have clued them in an hour later that there had been an accident?
Other things bother me....the fact that the barge turned sharply before ramming into the Fitzgerald....the fact that maneuvers were made to dislodge the barge from the Fitzgerald before returning to the previous course.
I would think ANYTIME another ship passed near a military ship in open sea, it would trigger some sort of heightened alert.
I believe that the Fitzgerald hit a container ship and that is what is show in the photo
A container ship can be 1200 feet long and contain 900-1200 containers
Also the container ships have a quite small crew
But I also believe that something is not right with this story!!!!!
I'd believe that the container ship could hit the Fitzgerald and not have a very noticeable impact, similar to how a 360 ton haul truck can run over and completely flatten a 1/2 ton pickup without the driver noticing (yes, this is true, but that's another story). What I'm having trouble with is how the two ships could possibly have collided. Even if the container ship was purposefully trying to ram the Fitzgerald they never should have been able to get close enough, IMHO. I'm a Navy vet, and I know that the folks on the bridge of a ship are (at least supposed to be) paying attention to stuff like that.
So we can all agree that there is more to this story than we are getting at this point in time.
Yes, someone got some 'splaining to do!
Check out this site for an idea of how much vessel traffic there can be in Japan and the US ports
https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/centerx:139.3/centery:31.8/zoom:6
Lee D, post: 433817, member: 7971 wrote: I'd believe that the container ship could hit the Fitzgerald and not have a very noticeable impact, similar to how a 360 ton haul truck can run over and completely flatten a 1/2 ton pickup without the driver noticing (yes, this is true, but that's another story). What I'm having trouble with is how the two ships could possibly have collided. Even if the container ship was purposefully trying to ram the Fitzgerald they never should have been able to get close enough, IMHO. I'm a Navy vet, and I know that the folks on the bridge of a ship are (at least supposed to be) paying attention to stuff like that.
Yes - normally there would be a whole series of verbal communications and warning alarms... I was once a crewman on a 64-foot yacht. The Captain knew nothing and turned into the path of one of these container ships when it was miles away. It started honking at us and passed about 15 minutes later. Its hard believe how big those things are until you are right beside one - the make locomotives look tiny!
There is something very fishy with this story!
The USS Fitzgerald failed to yield the right of way to a giant container ship. Accidents happen. The Captain will lose his job.
Initially they thought the container ship maneuvered before the accident but all the maneuvers occurred after 1:30am is what I read.
The Navy, CG and the Japanese are doing the investigation and they will figure out what happened.
The captain better have his resume in order because his Navy career is effectively over. He may not be the only one.
To err is human.
To forgive is not Navy policy.
Trying to deliberately hit a destroyer with a container ship would be like trying to hit a Ferrari with a Semi-truck and trailer, it could be done but would take an inordinate amount of luck to accomplish. If the Ferrari ran a red light right in front of the semi a collision could occur but how could the semi driver plan that? So right now it looks like simple bad luck. If there's some nefarious intent involved then the investigation will most likely uncover it.
Dave Karoly, post: 433834, member: 94 wrote: If there's some nefarious intent involved then the investigation will most likely uncover it.
"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity"
Lee D, post: 433832, member: 7971 wrote: The captain better have his resume in order because his Navy career is effectively over. He may not be the only one.
The Captain was asleep in state room when this happen, and he was injured, and had to be removed from the Ship. Overall he is responsible for everything that happens to the Ship. His orders may or may not have been followed, the Junior Office in charge of the Bridge at the time, their career is over, the Captain if his orders were not followed, he may stay Captain of the Fitzgerald.
I was in the Navy as well on DDG-66 a ship just like the Fitzgerald, and I am surprised there are not more collisions between Ships.
I hadn't heard all of those details. The captain may get by but it will still be a black mark on his record.
They actually were not in the busy shipping lane according to that map provided via. link.
Dave Karoly, post: 433829, member: 94 wrote: The USS Fitzgerald failed to yield the right of way to a giant container ship. Accidents happen. The Captain will lose his job.
Initially they thought the container ship maneuvered before the accident but all the maneuvers occurred after 1:30am is what I read.
The Navy, CG and the Japanese are doing the investigation and they will figure out what happened.
"The USS Fitzgerald failed to yield the right of way to a giant container ship. "
Is this a fact?
[SARCASM]I think it was an inside job... if you look closely you can see minute burns in strategic places caused by nano-thermite...[/SARCASM]
Lee D, post: 433851, member: 7971 wrote: I hadn't heard all of those details. The captain may get by but it will still be a black mark on his record.
I do agree with you, it would be hard to continue a Naval career with a shipwreck and dead Sailors under your Command, however it is possible if his direct orders were not followed.
Ha Ha Rankin are you saying I'm pushing a conspiracy theory? Something just does not sound right.
Jim in AZ, post: 433853, member: 249 wrote: "The USS Fitzgerald failed to yield the right of way to a giant container ship. "
Is this a fact?
What I read was the side the damage is on indicates the container ship had the right of way.
imaudigger, post: 433859, member: 7286 wrote: Ha Ha Rankin are you saying I'm pushing a conspiracy theory? Something just does not sound right.
No - just kidding around. Something doesn't sound right- we'd expect things on the naval vessel to be wired a bit tighter so these things don't happen- I'd imagine there are protocols in place to prevent these scenarios- but SOMETHING went wrong... People are dead and someone's going to take a beating for it -hopefully it lands on the correct individuals....
