Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
44 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Breaking on CNN - US Destroyer taking on water after a collision (Original Post) malaise Jun 2017 OP
How in the world does this happen? MontanaMama Jun 2017 #1
Link malaise Jun 2017 #5
How does that happen in this day and age? Laffy Kat Jun 2017 #35
.. furtheradu Jun 2017 #2
Oh no. FM123 Jun 2017 #3
** luvMIdog Jun 2017 #4
Video - Looks like the merchant ship ran into it HipChick Jun 2017 #6
If you wanted to ram this vessel and take out its combat systems jpak Jun 2017 #10
Maybe it is incompetence that trickles down, not money. n/t rzemanfl Jun 2017 #7
"An official characterized it as large and like a container ship" dalton99a Jun 2017 #8
Compartmentalization will save the ship from sinking. NutmegYankee Jun 2017 #9
They said it was flooding and listing n/t malaise Jun 2017 #11
The compartments will flood and the off center buoyancy loss will cause the ship to lean. NutmegYankee Jun 2017 #12
True malaise Jun 2017 #13
Sailors are at extreme peril at all times when something like this happens. Eliot Rosewater Jun 2017 #26
There were injuries in the initial impact. NutmegYankee Jun 2017 #30
I know, I was supporting what you were saying. There were injuries, that sucks. Eliot Rosewater Jun 2017 #33
The pictures I saw showed a lot of topside damage. I wonder if the warship caught the Bulbous bow NutmegYankee Jun 2017 #34
The Fitzgerald? Leith Jun 2017 #14
Yes. nt Persisted Jun 2017 #21
Yes, I had the same thought! LisaM Jun 2017 #29
I wonder if the US destroyer is at fault canetoad Jun 2017 #15
Maybe because the container ship was the larger one malaise Jun 2017 #17
Might makes right. mercuryblues Jun 2017 #31
Forty years ago canetoad Jun 2017 #36
True but basic protocol is the bigger will find it harder malaise Jun 2017 #39
Exactly canetoad Jun 2017 #42
A 30 knot destroyer should be able to get out of the way.. EX500rider Jun 2017 #16
May be worse than that malaise Jun 2017 #18
Any collision, even one not their fault, usually sinks a Captain's career. NutmegYankee Jun 2017 #20
I take it you were a Navy man malaise Jun 2017 #23
Depends on where and how it happened... Adrahil Jun 2017 #32
Some DoD contractor is about to get a fat contract. lpbk2713 Jun 2017 #19
The tow truck driver will be fat city Hassin Bin Sober Jun 2017 #28
Let's hope this isn't the USS Maddox. nt Persisted Jun 2017 #22
Fitzgerald malaise Jun 2017 #24
Malaise, google the Maddox. nt Persisted Jun 2017 #25
Damn malaise Jun 2017 #27
This isn't that type of incident. cwydro Jun 2017 #37
Perhaps you are confused. I merely hoped that this was not the USS Maddox. Persisted Jun 2017 #44
Our local news just said 7 sailors are missing. countryjake Jun 2017 #38
Yep that was the worry malaise Jun 2017 #40
Washington Post article csziggy Jun 2017 #41
... Lucinda Jun 2017 #43

malaise

(269,063 posts)
5. Link
Fri Jun 16, 2017, 05:50 PM
Jun 2017
https://www.navytimes.com/articles/us-navy-destroyer-collides-with-merchant-ship
<snip>
The guided missile destroyer Fitzgerald collided with a merchant vessel just southwest of Yokosuka, Japan at around 2:30 a.m. local time on Friday, according to a Navy release.

In a brief written statement, U.S. Pacific Fleet in Hawaii said the Navy has requested assistance from the Japanese Coast Guard, the Associated Press reported.

The statement said Friday that the USS Fitzgerald collided with a merchant ship 56 nautical miles southwest of Yokosuka, Japan. A U.S. defense official said there is flooding in three compartments of the Fitzgerald and there were injuries.

Pacific Fleet said the extent of injuries and damage to the Fitzgerald are "being determined," and the incident is under investigation, according to the Associated Press.

FM123

(10,053 posts)
3. Oh no.
Fri Jun 16, 2017, 05:47 PM
Jun 2017

As if the whole ordeal isn't bad enough, the merchant vessel our Navy destroyer collided with is from the Philippines. I hope that maniac Duterte doesn't use this as an excuse for crazy behavior.

jpak

(41,758 posts)
10. If you wanted to ram this vessel and take out its combat systems
Fri Jun 16, 2017, 06:00 PM
Jun 2017

that would be the place to do it.

dalton99a

(81,526 posts)
8. "An official characterized it as large and like a container ship"
Fri Jun 16, 2017, 05:54 PM
Jun 2017
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2017/06/16/navy-destroyer-calls-assistance-collision-off-japan.html
Navy Destroyer Calls for Assistance After Collision Off Japan

Navy officials are making damage assessments after the Arleigh Burke-class guided missile destroyer Fitzgerald collided with a merchant ship southwest of Yokosuka, Japan.

The collision happened around 2:30 a.m. Saturday local time. An official familiar with the incident could not confirm which country the merchant vessel hailed from, but characterized it as large and like a container ship.

The Fitzgerald had been conducting routine operations in Sagami Bay, about 56 nautical miles southwest of Yokosuka, a Pacific Fleet spokesman, Lt. Cmdr. Matt Knight, told Military.com.

The destroyer sustained an unspecified amount of damage, and Navy officials have requested assistance from the Japanese Coast Guard, Knight said.

NutmegYankee

(16,200 posts)
12. The compartments will flood and the off center buoyancy loss will cause the ship to lean.
Fri Jun 16, 2017, 06:12 PM
Jun 2017

If the lean is bad, they can counter flood trim tanks. These ships can take a lot of beating.

Remember the USS Cole:

Eliot Rosewater

(31,112 posts)
26. Sailors are at extreme peril at all times when something like this happens.
Fri Jun 16, 2017, 07:17 PM
Jun 2017

At the same time our ships are amazing works of art, actually, and unless someone was hurt in the initial impact, there should be no further injuries.

NutmegYankee

(16,200 posts)
30. There were injuries in the initial impact.
Fri Jun 16, 2017, 07:30 PM
Jun 2017

I was pointing out that the design of war ships is that they expect to get holes punched into them and design compartments to be closed and sealed while being small enough to not sink the ship.

Eliot Rosewater

(31,112 posts)
33. I know, I was supporting what you were saying. There were injuries, that sucks.
Fri Jun 16, 2017, 07:33 PM
Jun 2017

I hadnt had time to read it yet.

NutmegYankee

(16,200 posts)
34. The pictures I saw showed a lot of topside damage. I wonder if the warship caught the Bulbous bow
Fri Jun 16, 2017, 07:35 PM
Jun 2017

Last edited Fri Jun 16, 2017, 11:50 PM - Edit history (1)

of the cargo ship. The bulbous bow could cause unseen damage below the water line.

canetoad

(17,169 posts)
15. I wonder if the US destroyer is at fault
Fri Jun 16, 2017, 06:20 PM
Jun 2017

Hard to tell without knowing the circumstances, but it's been hit on the starboard side and I think maritime rules that power vessels always give way to starboard.

malaise

(269,063 posts)
17. Maybe because the container ship was the larger one
Fri Jun 16, 2017, 06:34 PM
Jun 2017

which means it had the right of way - just heard that on ABC

canetoad

(17,169 posts)
36. Forty years ago
Fri Jun 16, 2017, 07:41 PM
Jun 2017

I did the Coastguard small vessel course, so it's very rusty now. I recall an ultimate overrider to rules at sea; take any action possible to avoid a collision.

malaise

(269,063 posts)
39. True but basic protocol is the bigger will find it harder
Fri Jun 16, 2017, 08:07 PM
Jun 2017

to change direction - here both are huge.

EX500rider

(10,849 posts)
16. A 30 knot destroyer should be able to get out of the way..
Fri Jun 16, 2017, 06:27 PM
Jun 2017

....a Captain and bridge crew just saw their careers evaporate.

lpbk2713

(42,760 posts)
19. Some DoD contractor is about to get a fat contract.
Fri Jun 16, 2017, 06:42 PM
Jun 2017



There probably won't be much haggling to do emergency repairs either.

 

Persisted

(290 posts)
44. Perhaps you are confused. I merely hoped that this was not the USS Maddox.
Fri Jun 16, 2017, 11:36 PM
Jun 2017

Professing a hope that one is not witnessing a potential start to a war is very different from jumping to the conclusion that we are facing one.

DJT is perfectly capable of wagging the dog.

countryjake

(8,554 posts)
38. Our local news just said 7 sailors are missing.
Fri Jun 16, 2017, 07:44 PM
Jun 2017

I've been following this online but haven't seen anything like that anywhere else.

Everything I'd read earlier said there were injuries.

csziggy

(34,136 posts)
41. Washington Post article
Fri Jun 16, 2017, 08:27 PM
Jun 2017

U.S. Navy destroyer collides with container ship near Japan, suffers damage
By Anna Fifield and Thomas Gibbons-Neff June 16 at 7:31 PM

TOKYO — A U.S. Navy destroyer, the USS Fitzgerald, collided with a container ship off the coast of Japan early Saturday morning, causing significant damage and flooding.

Local broadcaster NHK reported that seven sailors were missing, while the U.S. Navy said one sailor was being medically evacuated.

The Fitzgerald was 56 nautical miles southwest of Yokosuka, the home of the U.S. Navy’s Seventh Fleet, when it collided with a loaded container ship at about 2:30 a.m. local time, the Navy said.

NHK showed footage of the Philippine-flagged container ship named the ACX Crystal with minor damage to its bow. The vessel is roughly 700 feet long and was bound for Tokyo before colliding with the Fitzgerald, according to a maritime traffic tracking website.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/us-navy-destroyer-collides-with-container-ship-near-japan-suffers-damage/2017/06/16/111df46e-52e7-11e7-b74e-0d2785d3083d_story.html

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Breaking on CNN - US Dest...