Another U.S. Navy destroyer collides with a merchant ship, rescue efforts underway

[CriticalThought]

This is what I don't understand the most....

Are you saying a professionally train navy should not have collision? Because what you are actually doing is incinerating two things.

1.) Professional never crash (never crash within 2 months anyway) The question actually is, does that have any correlation between collision and professionalism to begin with? Let's say I am I am talking about Profession driver (like a truck, buses or taxi driver) and professional driver do crash, and sometime even fatal, it's impossible to not to have any crashes if you are a professional driver, no matter how well train you are, because the time you spend on the road is double, triple or even quadruple than a normal driver (like you and me, assuming you drive) and that mean the chance of crashes is increased by multiple fold.

When you compare Professional Seaman (Who pilot ship for a living) and Professional Navy Captain, There are more collision with Sydney Ferries alone this year (3 in 2017) resulting death and injury, and that is just Sydney Ferries, not even other Ferry service here in NSW, let alone the whole country. And I am pretty sure a normal everyday Sydney ferry captain spend more time at sea than a normal US Navy Captain, considering US Navy tour of duty is 6 months.

So, by your logic, nobody is professional on anything. Then your point will become moot.

2.) US Navy Captain is more professional than normal Merchant Captain. In some respect, yes, but not safety getting from A to B. In the military, you are trained to fight, you are a professional warfighter, you may or may not have to drive, pilot or captain any vessel, car, truck or aircraft, but in all, if those are provided, you are supposed to be proficiency with it, much like you did as in a normal person getting their driving license, pilot license or captainship.

Problem is, anyone could join the navy and become Naval Captain, but just because I am joining the navy, that does not make me more professional than anyone on the road, you train to fight, not train to carry cargo or passenger. I could be a second rate or third rated seaman before I join the navy, just because I joined the navy, that does not make me magically become first rate seaman. I mean you won't expect me to get exceptionally good at something (other than warfighting) after I join the Navy, they are people too, you know? And people DO make mistake, just like you and me.

On the other hand, if a naval captain discharge his missile by mistake or shell the wrong target, that may relate to professionalism that captain process, because those are what he trained to do, I mean, would you expect your navy to be professional on going from A to B or professional on fighting a war?

As I said many time, accident can be cause by many issue and item, unless we get to the bottom of the story, you won't know the whole story, hence commenting on it would be jumping the gun.



You do know,

A.) The cargo ship is ballasted, which mean it was empty.
B.) Destroyer is similar in dimension of a cargo ship

So, let's say you are driving a truck, and I am driving a mini-van, you saw me coming into an intersection, 5 km away (let's not say 10 KM away). you crash into me when you are supposed to be give way. What do you think the police would say when they are call? Would they say because you are driving a truck, then you don't need to do anything because you are slow to slow down?

What a stupid assumption. If you think just because you are piloting a bigger ship then every other rules does not apply to you because it is hard for you to stop, then you should not be a ship captain at all, rules are there which CONSIDERED EVERY ASPECT, the ship sizes, tonnage, travelling direction. So EVERYONE, and I MEAN EVERYONE from 200 meter long cargoship to the 5 meter long sampan are suited in that law. They give it 6 nm range for a reason, just so you can't say you don't have enough time to stop

You can of course go drive a truck on the highway and not stopping at any stop sign and giveway sign, that's your choice, but would you be prosecuted, that's the police choice. And you are quite delusional to say since you are in a larger ship/truck, that law doesn't matter....lol

This post bring out how naïve some Chinese Poster can be. I mean it's so naïve, it borderline Stupidity.

Here is how the course book on Financial Risk Management explains risk management. A risk manager is given the task of devising a strategy that has a 99% chance of avoiding a loss of 1 billion dollars or more in one year. The first year the strategy is put into place, you get a loss of 1 billion dollars. Should you fire the risk manager? NO! This loss is perfectly within the tolerance levels. But, the next year, you again have a loss of 1 billion dollars. Now, the strategy is confirmed as flawed.

These two events so close together reflect the unprofessionalism and unpreparedness of USN beyond any doubt.

 

[jhungary]

Here is how the course book on Financial Risk Management explains risk management. A risk manager is given the task of devising a strategy that has a 99% chance of avoiding a loss of 1 billion dollars or more in one year. The first year the strategy is put into place, you get a loss of 1 billion dollars. Should you fire the risk manager? NO! This loss is perfectly within the tolerance levels. But, the next year, you again have a loss of 1 billion dollars. Now, the strategy is confirmed as flawed.

These two events so close together reflect the unprofessionalism and unpreparedness of USN beyond any doubt.

The question is, is this the risk manager fault he lose both 1 Billions. The answer in this case is, it will not be. Because it is a either-or situation

Problem with this, is that you can never look at the situation on one side. How much do we know about the crew with USS Fitzgerald when it collided with the ACX Crystal, not much, then how can you judge a crew by it professionalism? Because I can also say this

The Crew save the ship from sinking, despite the lack of command effort. that shown the professionalism of the crew of USS Fitzgerald, if not, which is according to you, the crew and the navy is unprofessional and unprepared, I am pretty sure the Fritz would have already been on the bottom of the ocean.

While your example is talking about the action of one man (The risk manager) and applies to a bigger organisation like the US Navy. Even, let's say if the Risk manager is at fraud, that does not mean the whole organisation is unprofessional.

Then, there are the issue of the other party, you can be as professional as you want, that does not mean the other crew (which you collided to) is the same, I would have say if both crew conduct professionally, there will never be
a collision to begin with. And we all know accident happens because of many reason, and not just one to blame, so you what you also need to weight in is that how professional the other crew vs your own crew, because that is, at the end of the day, why you collided each other. As per your example, if you fund manager loses the money because out an outside factor, (like someone is hedging against him with more resource) and he lose, he lose the money, that does not mean your fund manager is unprofessional, that mean he is less capable than the other guy, less resourceful than the other guy, and sometime unluckier than the other guy,

So, to point to the fact that 2 collisions alone and then point your finger at USN, WIHTOUT EVEN KNOWING WHY THEY TWO COLLISION HAPPENED. I don't know how anybody can judge like this. As I said, there are 3 accident with the Sydney Ferrier the last financial year alone, are the whole Sydney Ferry unprofessional? But now you are claiming the whole Australian Ferry industry is unprofessional, because of the 3 collisions that Sydney Ferry had in the last 12 months, and honestly you are telling me you don't think this is kind of a stretch?

 

[Yaseen1]

u.s navy becoming unprofessional day by day.how such a sluggish navy can fight any war with russia and china.it seems naval soldiers are drunk and involved in doing immoral activities with women during naval operations

 

[AndrewJin]

Once again those trumpish whites prove their level down to the Supa Powa level.
White soldiers once gain lose their lives in their immoral missions, totally meaningless life!
The existence of Meri milltary is only for building more ships, let private Jewish milltary complex make money.

 

[TaiShang]

What a joke of a navy that was supposed to be well-trained.

Reality must be mixed with Hollywood propaganda on those would-be US navy personnel's mind.

So unprofessional, amateurish, dangerous and funny.

And now we are supposed to be fearful of them. I would be fearful of US navy only if I was a crew on a merchant ship.

US needs to be reduced in size, breaking up into three nations, each more compact and the main section composed of 1950s white-dominated US.

 

[CriticalThought]

The question is, is this the risk manager fault he lose both 1 Billions. The answer in this case is, it will not be. Because it is a either-or situation

Problem with this, is that you can never look at the situation on one side. How much do we know about the crew with USS Fitzgerald when it collided with the ACX Crystal, not much, then how can you judge a crew by it professionalism? Because I can also say this

The Crew save the ship from sinking, despite the lack of command effort. that shown the professionalism of the crew of USS Fitzgerald, if not, which is according to you, the crew and the navy is unprofessional and unprepared, I am pretty sure the Fritz would have already been on the bottom of the ocean.

While your example is talking about the action of one man (The risk manager) and applies to a bigger organisation like the US Navy. Even, let's say if the Risk manager is at fraud, that does not mean the whole organisation is unprofessional.

Then, there are the issue of the other party, you can be as professional as you want, that does not mean the other crew (which you collided to) is the same, I would have say if both crew conduct professionally, there will never be
a collision to begin with. And we all know accident happens because of many reason, and not just one to blame, so you what you also need to weight in is that how professional the other crew vs your own crew, because that is, at the end of the day, why you collided each other. As per your example, if you fund manager loses the money because out an outside factor, (like someone is hedging against him with more resource) and he lose, he lose the money, that does not mean your fund manager is unprofessional, that mean he is less capable than the other guy, less resourceful than the other guy, and sometime unluckier than the other guy,

So, to point to the fact that 2 collisions alone and then point your finger at USN, WIHTOUT EVEN KNOWING WHY THEY TWO COLLISION HAPPENED. I don't know how anybody can judge like this. As I said, there are 3 accident with the Sydney Ferrier the last financial year alone, are the whole Sydney Ferry unprofessional? But now you are claiming the whole Australian Ferry industry is unprofessional, because of the 3 collisions that Sydney Ferry had in the last 12 months, and honestly you are telling me you don't think this is kind of a stretch?

Mate, destroyers are made to be virtually unsinkable.

These incidents exactly highlight the failures of USN as an organization. Think of it. Global terrorist organizations now understand what it takes to hit the USN. What if that oil tanker was also rigged with explosives? You have the likes of North Korea looking to score points against you. I hope USN learns some lessons and performs some deep introspection so these types of incidents are avoided in the future.

 

[Rashid Mahmood]

It is not the Straits of Malacca. It happened at the entrance to the Traffic Separation Scheme off the Malaysian coast of Johor.

SINGAPORE (Reuters) - The USS John S. McCain, a U.S. warship that collided with an oil tanker east of Singapore on Monday, arrived at Changi Naval Base in Singapore after suffering damage to its hull that caused flooding in compartments, the U.S. Navy said.

"Significant damage to the hull resulted in flooding to nearby compartments, including crew berthing, machinery, and communications rooms. Damage control efforts by the crew halted further flooding," the U.S. 7th Fleet said in a statement.

 

[jhungary]

Mate, destroyers are made to be virtually unsinkable.

These incidents exactly highlight the failures of USN as an organization. Think of it. Global terrorist organizations now understand what it takes to hit the USN. What if that oil tanker was also rigged with explosives? You have the likes of North Korea looking to score points against you. I hope USN learns some lessons and performs some deep introspection so these types of incidents are avoided in the future.

You know why they called Destroyer "Tin-Can" right?

No ship is unsinkable, even the unsinkable titanic sunk, so, there are no such thing as "unsinkable".

As I said before, there are circumstance regarding each incident. The problem is, those are individual incident. An incident which we do not have any detail about, there are SOP are there to face every kind of situation. Which mean for these kind of incident, there are effective countermeasure on the issue.

Organisational wise, what do you want the US Navy to do? Declare free fire zone to each ship that allow commander of each Navy Ship to sink any traffic within certain amount of distant? Because otherwise you would have to allow ship to pass by the Navy ship and if you are allowed sail past, there would be accident.

I took this picture when I was on a Manly Ferry 5 months ago.

This is a Korean Warship, we are passing within I would say about 40 ft with each other (You can see the railing on the manly ferry on Down Right corner, now, if I am the master of the Ferry and I suddenly have an heart attack, and I steer the ship to port, I would hit the destroyer and with 40 ft, there are not much the destroyer can do, does that mean there are any organisation problem with the Korean Navy as well? Because that could be the reason why Fitzgerald collided with Crystal or the McCain collided with Alnic MC or both, the question is, we don't know.

At the end of the day, the big question still is, do you know what happened? Because I don't know, and I have know people who serve in Fritz and US navy, my cousin is a CPO of US Coast Guard, and nobody I know knew exactly what happen or whether or not the accidents is avoidable, then you start talking about Organisational Problem?? Was it a tad bit too early?

 

[CriticalThought]

You know why they called Destroyer "Tin-Can" right?

No ship is unsinkable, even the unsinkable titanic sunk, so, there are no such thing as "unsinkable".

As I said before, there are circumstance regarding each incident. The problem is, those are individual incident. An incident which we do not have any detail about, there are SOP are there to face every kind of situation. Which mean for these kind of incident, there are effective countermeasure on the issue.

Organisational wise, what do you want the US Navy to do? Declare free fire zone to each ship that allow commander of each Navy Ship to sink any traffic within certain amount of distant? Because otherwise you would have to allow ship to pass by the Navy ship and if you are allowed sail past, there would be accident.

I took this picture when I was on a Manly Ferry 5 months ago.

View attachment 419991

This is a Korean Warship, we are passing within I would say about 40 ft with each other (You can see the railing on the manly ferry on Down Right corner, now, if I am the master of the Ferry and I suddenly have an heart attack, and I steer the ship to port, I would hit the destroyer and with 40 ft, there are not much the destroyer can do, does that mean there are any organisation problem with the Korean Navy as well?

At the end of the day, the big question still is, do you know what happened? Because I don't know, and I have know people who serve in Fritz and US navy, my cousin is a CPO of US Coast Guard, and nobody I know knew exactly what happen or whether or not the accidents is avoidable, then you start talking about Organisational Problem?? Was it a tad bit too early?

A ferry wouldn't cause much damage to a destroyer. It lacks the momentum, and the strength. As opposed to a ferry, an oil tanker CAN cause serious damage. Which leads us to the question: why was the destroyer's path planned to put it into such a situation in the first place? Haven't lessons been learnt from the previous incident?

 

[Beast]

USN is very unprofessional Navy in the world. The rest of the world must be worry.

 

[Hallian_Khan]

USN is very unprofessional Navy in the world. The rest of the world must be worry.

rest of the world would be less worry if they are unprofessional

 

[jhungary]

A ferry wouldn't cause much damage to a destroyer. It lacks the momentum, and the strength. As opposed to a ferry, an oil tanker CAN cause serious damage. Which leads us to the question: why was the destroyer's path planned to put it into such a situation in the first place? Haven't lessons been learnt from the previous incident?

But how about, as you said, if I load up my ferry with Bombs, or Even chemical weapon? I can bring them on board because no one is stopping me and check me at Manly Wharf.... Problem is, you don't know which ship is safe and which ship is not. All you know is that they are civilian ship and they are close. So, either you don't allow all ship to come close, which is impossible (How do you dock in civilian dock then?) or you allow them to come close and accident WILL happen.

Before asking the question you ask, you need to ask yourself this question, what happened last time. If any of us didn't know what happened last time, how do we know that the Navy did not learn anything? Better yet, how do we even know there are things to learn from last time? I mean, would you ask yourself what you learn after a traffic accident?

I am not saying you are biased, as I didn't see that level yet, but a simple rules is, when we do not know something, it's wise not to comment on the general direction.

 

[CriticalThought]

But how about, as you said, if I load up my ferry with Bombs, or Even chemical weapon? I can bring them on board because no one is stopping me and check me at Manly Wharf.... Problem is, you don't know which ship is safe and which ship is not. All you know is that they are civilian ship and they are close. So, either you don't allow all ship to come close, which is impossible (How do you dock in civilian dock then?) or you allow them to come close and accident WILL happen.

Before asking the question you ask, you need to ask yourself this question, what happened last time. If any of us didn't know what happened last time, how do we know that the Navy did not learn anything? Better yet, how do we even know there are things to learn from last time? I mean, would you ask yourself what you learn after a traffic accident?

I am not saying you are biased, as I didn't see that level yet, but a simple rules is, when we do not know something, it's wise not to comment on the general direction.

OK. If this happens a third time, what would you say?

 

[jhungary]

OK. If this happens a third time, what would you say?

the same thing, we don't even know what exactly happened with the first time, and the second time.

What would you say if someone borrow your car 3 times and ended up crashing 3 times, you would want to know who's fault is it before you make a decision right? Or you are the kind of people who will say "You are a bad driver" before everything else?

 

[CriticalThought]

the same thing, we don't even know what exactly happened with the first time, and the second time.

What would you say if someone borrow your car 3 times and ended up crashing 3 times, you would want to know who's fault is it before you make a decision right? Or you are the kind of people who will say "You are a bad driver" before everything else?

I know for sure I won't give my car to him the second time even. Once bitten, twice cautious. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.