| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#11
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Destroyer crash
On Wed, 28 Jun 2017 09:03:46 -0700 (PDT), True North
wrote: On Wednesday, 28 June 2017 12:01:06 UTC-3, wrote: On Wed, 28 Jun 2017 06:57:55 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/27/2017 11:39 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Tue, 27 Jun 2017 13:27:51 -0400, wrote: I am hearing that the destroyer was passing in front of the freighter. The Fitz was the give way vessel and the freighter was the stand on vessel. The ACX was supposed to maintain course and speed. The story is it turned right full rudder, and that is what put them on a collision course. They hit 10 minutes later. If the ACX maintains course and speed, it passes astern of the destroyer. ACX was trying to help but following the rules of the road is what they were supposed to be doing === For the "give way" vessel to attempt passing in front strikes me as being very questionable. It fails to comprehend the various Murphy's Law possibilities and of course that's exactly what happened. At the very least the destroyer should have communicated and negotiated their intentions well in advance of the actual crossing situation to prevent any possible confusion. We hear commercial ships negotiate meeting and crossing situations all the time on VHF radio. We've even participated in a few ourselves where there was ambiguity. I'm always impressed by the high degree of professionalism that we've encountered even though much smaller than the big guys. I don't follow Greg's assertion that the freighter, as the stand on vessel, would pass astern of the destroyer. The destroyer in this situation should have passed astern of the freighter. As the "give way" vessel, it was up to the destroyer to either slow down, stop, turn to starboard (to pass astern of the freighter) or take whatever evasive action required to avoid a collision. IMO, the destroyer was at fault here. It appears that the ACX was pretty far away from the destroyer and passing in front was not an unreasonable maneuver. Are you saying that if you see a vessel approaching from your starboard side you will stop and wait, no matter how far away it is? I think that the OD made the determination that if the freighter maintained course and speed, he had plenty of time to be gone when the freighter got there. As it was the freighter turned 90 degrees and it took 10 minutes to hit the destroyer on the starboard side. That makes it sound like he would have been a couple miles behind the destroyer if he stayed on course. The open question is why the destroyer did not detect the course change and take evasive maneuvers. I still have not seen the movements of the destroyer or what it's base course was when this all started. My only thought about "arrogance" is these destroyer guys think they are race car drivers and think freighter captains are truck drivers. In one of our boating classes we talkes about a reliable way to judge whether a boat approaching would be directly in your path or if it wouls pass ahead or astern of you. You line up something on your boat with the other vessel. If he stays in this line of sight, you will collide, if he moves ahead of the point...he'll pass across your bow and if he falls behind the reference point...he'll pass behind you. This all assumes you keep the same speed and course. That is summarized by "constant relative bearing and decreasing range". That is why the destroyer has the lions share of the blame. They are supposed to be tracking "targets" with far more sophisticated equipment than a freighter. Unfortunately CIC may have known they were on a collision course sooner than the bridge. I also understand the RADAR signature of a modern destroyer is smaller than a freighter. I already said, the destroyer should have seen the course change of the freighter, even if it was unexpected, and adjusted their course. BTW if the course change put the freighter more than 135% abaft the beam, they became the burdened vessel. I suppose it depends on how fast the destroyer was moving. The ACX cruises at around 23 kts (26MPH) according to their wiki. |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| new destroyer goes for sea trials | General | |||
| Local man builds mini destroyer | General | |||
| New Type 45 Destroyer | General | |||
| Plane Crash on Hudson - FDNY at plane crash 01-16-09-2.jpg | Tall Ship Photos | |||
| WTB: Stainless Destroyer Wheel, 32" | Cruising | |||
Threaded Mode
