by "HammerheadFistpunch" (hammerheadfistpunch)
Published 06/28/2017 at 17:33
by "HammerheadFistpunch" (hammerheadfistpunch)
Published 06/28/2017 at 17:33
No Tags
STARS: 4
So just so people don’t have to recreate this scenario in their minds, I wrote up what I think may have happened, as well as created a mockup of this scenario. Do I think I’m right? I don’t think it matters, just thought you would want to see what It appears to me happened, at least in terms of the where the damage is and what the course info we do have suggests.
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
Based on whats here, and a diagram I drew out to help me picture it, it appears to me that the Fitzgerald was always on a collision path with the Crystal. The fitz on a heading something like 100 degrees and the Crystal something like 85 degrees. My guess is that the crew of the Fitzgerald saw the plot of the Crystal and assuming it stayed on speed and heading that they would cross behind or in front of the Crystal safely.
What happened instead is that the Crystal changed course to, say, 45 degrees turning into the projected path of the Fitzgerald (which is still the giveway vessel) and the margin went to zero. Whether the course change was automated or commanded is up for debate. It appears on my maps as if the Crystal was following established shipping lanes, my guess is in full autopilot mode.
Why the Fitzgerald didn’t react at all (seemingly, with a lack of collision alarm) is a mystery as is the reason such a course was plotted in the first place (though there are explanations for that to a degree)
Both ships seems to have been in autopilot here, both literally and figuratively.
"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn)
06/28/2017 at 17:40, STARS: 1
Crystal was following a pretty erratic course before the collision. I haven’t been following this very closely, but I have yet to hear a good explanation why they were turning and backtracking. Also, I have not read why they continued for 30 minutes after the collision instead of stopping to render aid.
"HammerheadFistpunch" (hammerheadfistpunch)
06/28/2017 at 17:41, STARS: 2
I think the collision took place right at that sharp course change to 180 south, and the autopilot put them back on their original heading before the crew woke up and went back to the site of the accident.
"HammerheadFistpunch" (hammerheadfistpunch)
06/28/2017 at 17:52, STARS: 3
More accurately something like this
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn)
06/28/2017 at 18:10, STARS: 0
It sure would be helpful if the Navy would release Fitz’s course tracking. The courses intersect, but would they necessarily have collided at their relative speeds? How close were they when Crystal turned to port? Fitz might have been expecting them to hold course and continue alongside.
"HammerheadFistpunch" (hammerheadfistpunch)
06/28/2017 at 18:12, STARS: 1
Thats my assumption, that the Fitz saw a course plot and made the assumption that they could cross safely or continue along side.
"facw" (facw)
06/28/2017 at 18:23, STARS: 1
The explanation is that the crash happened at 1:30 local time, not 2:30 as originally reported. So it happened about where the ship turned south, not after that zigzagging. As for everything that happened after the crash, that’s why some people think it was on autopilot, it just resumed course, though it’s also possible they were sufficiently distracted by the collision that they didn’t take further action. Then after about half an hour, they returned to the crash and hung around, presumably until the Japanese coast guard let them go. They didn’t report the crash until a good way into this return trip (Fitz apparently didn’t either due to their electronics being in bad shape), which is where the 2:30 number came from.
"facw" (facw)
06/28/2017 at 18:26, STARS: 0
I like your guess that the destroyer was overtaking the freighter, for some reason in the FA comments a lot of people seem to think the reverse, which makes no sense to me, freighters are damn slow and destroyers are not, it wouldn’t take much for the destroyer to outpace the freighter.
"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn)
06/28/2017 at 18:30, STARS: 1
I just watched the video on the FA article, and it makes clear that the erratic behavior happened after the collision. That makes a lot more sense. You see Crystal turn north on course, hit Fitz, then continue, double back, and loiter on scene until allowed to continue. So it would appear that Fitz didn’t expect Crystal to turn to port, and was just in the perfect place to get nailed. The crew may have known that Crystal was there all along, but expected them to continue on a straight line course, expecting to overtake them.
"facw" (facw)
06/28/2017 at 18:35, STARS: 2
Yep, you can see how it could happen, though only if the crew was ignoring their responsibilities. With advanced radar and a policy of always having multiple lookouts, something really fell through the cracks. Doesn’t sound like they were even aware of the risk until they got hit.
"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn)
06/28/2017 at 18:45, STARS: 0
The video on the FA post about this makes it clear that the erratic course was after the collision.
"gmporschenut also a fan of hondas" (gmporschenut)
06/28/2017 at 22:21, STARS: 0
From a couple books on shipping diasters, those Philippino flagged ships are ones that also should have been decomissioned 20 years ago and typically hire crew that could be described as “expendible” to the shipping company.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/10/shipping-disasters-we-never-hear-about
Whenever I hear someone say “how could this happen?” I think of this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Air_Lines_Flight_401
I know of one incident, the captain left the most junior officer on the ship in control. the situaton changed, called the captain, captain snapped back to the whole bridge “im busy deal with it yourself” luckily a more experienced officer showed up
"facw" (facw)
06/29/2017 at 02:25, STARS: 0
It’s actually only 9 years old, and while chartered to a Philippine company is owned by a Japanese one (I think I read Mitsubishi is the ultimate owner, though there were several layers of ownership).