McCain and Fitzgerald collision reports

4,903 Views | 9 Replies | Last: 4 yr ago by DogCo84
CanyonAg77
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
http://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=103130

Has links to the full reports. Synopsis
Quote:

USS FITZGERALD

The collision between Fitzgerald and Crystal was avoidable and resulted from an accumulation of smaller errors over time, ultimately resulting in a lack of adherence to sound navigational practices. Specifically, Fitzgerald's watch teams disregarded established norms of basic contact management and, more importantly, leadership failed to adhere to well-established protocols put in place to prevent collisions. In addition, the ship's triad was absent during an evolution where their experience, guidance and example would have greatly benefited the ship.

USS JOHN S. MCCAIN

The collision between John S. McCain and Alnic MC was also avoidable and resulted primarily from complacency, over-confidence and lack of procedural compliance. A major contributing factor to the collision was sub-standard level of knowledge regarding the operation of the ship control console. In particular, McCain's commanding officer disregarded recommendations from his executive officer, navigator and senior watch officer to set sea and anchor watch teams in a timely fashion to ensure the safe and effective operation of the ship. With regard to procedures, no one on the Bridge watch team, to include the commanding officer and executive officer, were properly trained on how to correctly operate the ship control console during a steering casualty.

ABATTBQ87
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

With regard to procedures, no one on the Bridge watch team, to include the commanding officer and executive officer, were properly trained on how to correctly operate the ship control console during a steering casualty.
Who is responsible for training in the Navy? And what is a steering casualty?
CanyonAg77
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
My layman's interpretation: Apparently, there are three places to steer the ship; the main helm, the lee helm, and the aft steering control. Main and Lee are side-by-side. In a busy sea lane, the most experienced man should be on main helm, and someone should be in aft steering. Neither happened. The sequence as I understand is

Current from the right, so main helm was holding 1-4 degrees right rudder to counteract tendency to turn left

Main helmsman was overwhelmed, so control of the two props (thrust) was switched to lee helm

Control of props was switched, and rudder control was also accidentally switched

This centered the rudder, causing a slight left turn

Main helmsman failed to recognize that he had switched helm control, so he declared the helm to be broken (steering casulty)

No one was in aft steering to take over emergency helm control from "broken" bridge control

Lee helmsman was was ordered to reduce speed from 20 knots to 5. He mistakenly only reduced speed on the left shaft, right shaft continued to turn at 20 knots. Ship turned even more to the left. Mistake was not corrected for over a minute.

Someone got to aft steering and took over helm control, three minutes after the bridge thought they had lost control.

The Alnic, moving faster than McCain, and originally on a parallel course, strikes McCain in the port rear.
2004FIGHTINTXAG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Another one to read about in PCO/PXO School.
I Like Mike
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ok so forgive my ignorance of maritime sea lanes but how are these ships close enough in the first place for an accidental slight turn to port or starboard enough error to cause a collision? Unless these ships are travelling at flank speed, how do they have enough steam to collide with another ship in the middle of the ocean? Do they not have time to correct course?

My only mental picture of this is cars in a parking lot, but ships are never that close at sea when they aren't in port, right?
CanyonAg77
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'm ignorant, as well. But these are some of the busiest sea lanes in the world. And ships are so massive, they take a very long time and distance to stop, as much as five miles. Here's a page I found about some California shipping lanes, for example.

https://www.usps.org/ventura/art-03-3-tankertips.html
Quote:

The shipping lanes are approximately 5 nautical miles wide and consist of two lanes and a separation zone. There is a northbound lane and a southbound lane. Each of the two lanes measures approximately 1 nautical mile wide. The separation zone measures approximately 3 nautical miles in width.

these ships may require as much as 5 miles to stop (with gears in full reverse)...

a 500 foot, 8000-ton ship needs over a third of a mile to turn around. Moreover, once such a ship commits to a turn, it will not waiver

Often, foreign crews that speak little or no English operate these ships.

Also, I am given to understand that a destroyer is pretty manuverable. The McCain, for example, may have turned pretty rapidly.
Jak981
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I am a 22 year Surface Warrior. I am not qualified to talk about McCain's bridge console. I am very qualified to talk about the Sea of Japan and the Straits of Mallaca. The Sea of Japan is a crowded, easily misunderstood visual body of water. Fishing boats light up the horizon like it's daytime with massive banks of lights filling the horizon. It takes attention to detail by both the bridge crew and CIC radar plotters to keep track of the situation. With Fitzgerald, it appears the Bridge lost track on the merchant after it had passed closest point of approach when it changed course back toward the US destroyer. It also appears the bridge did not notitfy the CO per standing orders about the merchant at any time. That ship was very familiar with the area and might have been a little complacent.
WRT to the McCain, that area near Singapore is one of the busiest bodies of water in the world. Imagine a super highway with massive ships all heading the same direction at high speed, very close to each other with other ships heading the opposite direction. Imagine you are on this highway and the guy next to you has a blow out and pulls sharply toward you. This is NOT the middle of the ocean. Very constricted. The CO's the main problem here. You set the sea and anchor detail well before you get to where they had the collision. Among other things, this puts a Master Helmsman on both the bridge helm AND in After Steering. This was the CO's fault. He disregarded the advice of the XO and the next most senior officer for the purpose of allowing members of his crew to get a little more sleep. He will likely face serious charges at Courts Martial for hazarding his vessel and dereliction of duty.
The loss of life from preventable accidents is horrible for all involved.
jupiter
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TowGun93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
How the Navy's Top Commander Botched the Highest-Profile Investigation in Years
"On Wednesday, the Navy said it was abandoning all remaining criminal charges against sailors involved in fatal accidents in the Pacific. Here's how the actions of the chief of naval operations helped doom the cases."

https://www.propublica.org/article/navy-commander-tainted-investigation
Markets are Superior
How long do you want to ignore this user?















DogCo84
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
My son was on deployment in a DDG when McCain & Fitzgerald went down. He's heading out to West Pac this month (same ship) for another round. Hope they've got all these issues wired by now.
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.