US destroyer collides with oil tanker in Gulf

1 + 2 + 1

I once had a job on a fishing boat as a Baitor

with you being a master and me being a baitor maybe we should get together.

I certainly do not need to be told how to count so maybe we should take up CaptJ's idea.

You were so quick to blame the crew for this accident and I have no doubt that at the end of the day some ones career will be finished but in my opinion you only pointed out some limited information.

Yes the straits are 20 miles wide but most of that is taken up with restricted Iranian waters so the shipping channels are pushed close to the tip of Oman making an approximately 90 degree turn at 1am in the dark in a very busy shipping lane with flare stacks on land and in the water.

why do you think the ships were in the middle of the shipping lanes, try this one, 2 mile wide lane with a 2 mile buffer but instead of being in the center each is on the edge of their respective lanes, that, as I pointed out in my other post makes the distance only 2 miles and the tanker is 1400 feet long with an averge speed of 12 knots.

are you following, those two ships are now only about 11,000 feet or about 8 ship lengths apart now add in the speed of the tanker at say 12 knots and the destroyer at 20 knots so you have a closing speed of 32 knots.

So, how many on here could avoid a collision if trying to turn a 1400 foot long yacht out of the way of a jet ski heading towards you but it takes 3 miles to complete a full turn.

I am not looking to pick a fight (your words) but can certainly handle it however why are you so in-secure and offensive, I can understand when stupid posts come up about exhaust temps etc and changing pistons when engines are running but you jumped all over this pointing blame when you and me and all of the rest of us have no idea what happened.

Do we even know that there was not a major malfunction, a black out on eiher ship for 2 or 3 minutes is all it would take.

Anyway since you are not going to reply (yeah & pigs can fly) I can say what I want so 2 + 2 + 2 could be 2 or less in the real world. I am away to google the straights and the TSS

try this

Look at the TSS in the following link, note the restricted waters to the top which is Iranian waters and obviously off limits.

Note the 90 degree turn in the narrowest part

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ae/Strait_of_hormuz_full.jpg

..and do all of that at night and the bow of your yacht is 1400 foot away

Don't know if the destroyer transmitted AIS data, I doubt it but it probably received it. The AIS track clearly shows the tanker was fitted with AIS and it was functioning. Don't know about ship to ship comms but it is a given that no one sneaks around that area without a radar picking them up and telling all those concerned about it.

It is difficult to put a 1092 foot long 300,000 ton tanker into stealth mode when the AIS is working.

AEGIS destroyers are advertised as being capable of tracking "hundreds" of targets in the air, on the surface, and undersea for a hundred miles. In addition, there was another naval vessel accompanying the destroyer. Maybe its radars and radios didn't work either?

The collision occurred over an hour before the reportedly loaded and clearly shown to be outbound tanker would have been in the area where the lanes turn sharply to the south. The area where the collision occurred is a long straight run.

The news blackout on this probably says more about the event than anything else.

If this could be blamed on anything other than the laughable failure (again) of a billion dollar boondoggle or incredible incompetence or profound arrogance we would have been deluged with stories about the heroic struggle to save the ship after some Act of God or nefarious deed by operatives from the axis of evil.

change

that took you a long time to change your mind about replying.

PS. yes I need a maths lesson I added about 300 feet to the length of the tanker but only to make it sound good

YF is fortunate to have so many experienced and knowledgable members aboard. And how fortuitous for all of us that they are frequent contributors. How many forums has anyone else been on where 2 highly esteemed and brilliant members could have an intellectual argument over something so relevant and yet removed from most of us? Doesn't matter to me who is more right - I learn from the back and forth either way.

I know both of these very highly respected, professional gentleman and I merely slough off any appearance of egocentricity in my appreciation for all of their contributions both broad and deep to YF.

Thanks, Marmot & Yachtjocky. Please continue providing all of us on the lower rung with your knowledge and opinions.

Judy

I guess I should have made it more clear:

Don't expect another response to your provocations and attempts to start a flamefest.

I won't waste my time or contribute to the degeneration of what could be an interesting thread.

Navy vessels almost always DO NOT transmit AIS, it kind of would put them at a big disadvantage. Every single one I've passed has never been transmitting AIS.

No ring needed. A few people wanna take a swing at me, usually someone I banned.

I get a kick out of the wannabe bad @$$ who hides behind the vale of internet anonymity. For some reason, a forum admin is expected to be a stunted growth, geek in glasses with a social disorder.

At 6'2", 210 lbs, I suppose I'm the referee on YF, but if needed... I'll be the bouncer.

It's too bad that they don't when operating in shipping lanes. It is not difficult to imagine the reasons they claim they don't transmit AIS data but they are fairly well equipped (so they brag) to defend against the threat they feel AIS may pose.

The problem is that the threat they present to innocent shipping by running in stealth mode in a public thorofare is even greater.

It looks to be some kind of miracle that the environment didn't suffer a multimillion barrel crude oil spill.

It is kind of amusing to consider that a class A AIS can be had for less than a few minutes worth of fuel for one engine on that destroyer but they would rather create a hazard to navigation than navigate responsibly. They seem to be equipped to deal with the bad guys but completely fail at simple and responsible navigation.

If they broadcasted AIS, anyone could go on the internet and see where all of the warships were located in the world. This would be a major disadvantage by giving an enemy the worldwide location of all of your assets at all times. Even simple terrorists could look them up and do a USS COLE type incident easier. Typically the military ships have people glued to radar and other electronics and alert any ship that is approaching them too closely......obviously not in this situation.

The military spends billions of dollars trying to avoid radar and detection when they build new aircraft, ships, submarines etc etc......for this reason. Look at this Russian Akula submarine that supposedly spent an entire month in the Gulf Of Mexico, undetected.

No, not a swing at you. A boxing ring so the various members can duke it out between each other, versus sparring over the internet. LOL The rest of us could bet on them and sit back and laugh........right now we're only able to chuckle......

The people who might use that information already have it.

A military vessel equipped with AIS doesn't have to transmit its identity, all they have to do is say "military vessel" or maybe just some pseudonym. The information that matters is that a ship in a certain position is heading a certain direction at a certain speed. Everything else is immaterial.

The Navy doesn't have to have the things on when they are doing nasty stuff to other people or are afraid of being whacked by a bad guy but they also don't have some inherent right to threaten ships in innocent passage just because they are paranoid.

Well, what did all of these commercial ships, with commercial crew do 10 years ago, before AIS even existed?

Posts

It is an interesting thread even if you and I are not involved, to think I am agreeing with CaptJ has to be a first.

Who in their right mind would expect a naval ship to transmit an AIS, obviously you have a bee in your bonnet about the navy as all criticism appears directed at them. what about the tanker, what about all of the watch keepers on the destroyer's bridge, sonar rooms etc etc.

What about the Captain standing alongside his officer on watch plus a crew man watchkeeper on the tanker, twin radars should be working, plots taken, chart-plotters & paper charts.

I read that the tanker was not loaded and heading into the Gulf.

I never set out to turn this into a flamefest but your views can not be the only ones on here so take the chill pill and stop knocking anybody until the full facts are known.

PS. Carl, how many years ago was that picture taken

Looked at the radar, looked out the window, and talked on the radio.

The literature is filled with interesting case studies:

USCGC Cuyahoga
USCGC Blackthorn
USCGC Eastwind
USCGC Morrow Bay
USCGC White Alder ... a particularly interesting probable cause.

About a month ago. I digitized my face as part of a protocol I have to follow.

So does anyone have any real, new info on what happened? Why the news blackout. Why isn't ABC following up?

It may have something to do with the Yogi sinking and they don't want us to know.

Marmot,
I assume you're not referring to Boo Boo's friend sinking. Any link to "Yogi". Just curious. NOT looking for classified information OR a visit from TPTB.
Peter

Once again. Anybody have any REAL info?