Jump to content

Frigate on the rocks, 7th fleet innocent.


Recommended Posts

F-100 frigate built in Spain, I went to the launch of two of these in my hometown, maybe even this one's...

Those are nice ships, Australia bought five as well, IIRC.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, chuso007 said:

F-100 frigate built in Spain, I went to the launch of two of these in my hometown, maybe even this one's...

Those are nice ships, Australia bought five as well, IIRC.

They look very capable, but it's an awful shame for an accident like this to happen.

I have not seen our news over hear mention casualties.

FB- Doug

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, AnotherSailor said:

Curious! I thought this was a US specialty. Those Norwegians must be paying attention to how not to pay attention.

It was a NATO joint effort im sure

 

EDIT: It in fact WAS a NATO joint US/Norway effort lmaooooo:

Quote

The frigate was conducting navigation training with other elements of Standing NATO Maritime Group 1 in the fjord following the Nov. 7 conclusion of the Trident Juncture 2018 exercise, NATO said. Helga Ingstadcollided with the fully loaded Sola TS just after the tanker had departed the oil terminal. Ships from the group remain nearby to support the recovery efforts as needed, NATO said.

The U.S. amphibious warship USS Iwo Jima (LHD-7) is also operating nearby off the coast of Norway. So far, the U.S. Navy has not been asked to assist in the recovery efforts, U.S. Naval Forces Europe spokesman Capt. John Perkins told USNI News on Thursday morning.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It was grounded intentionally to save the ship.

For a light frigate to get hit by a tanker, some people obviously failed at their jobs.

OTOH? It is a testament to the quality of these frigates that no one was killed and the ship wasn't cut in half. The frigate is like 5000 tons vs. the tanker 100,000. Destroyers have been cut in half by collisions with far lighter ships. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Grrr... said:

Holy shit.  You just won everything in this thread.

Yeah, thanks. I was thinking this morning that the Norwegians have really taken the, "Aegis Ashore", concept to a new level. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

"The tanker, which was heading northbound, contacted the frigate, heading southbound, to ask if they had a plan to safely pass them as they seemed to be on a collision course," Kjetil Stormark, the editor of AldriMer.no told the BBC.

Citing what he called key sources, he said: "The response was: 'We have everything under control.'"

Link to post
Share on other sites

It was July 7th and I took one of the  Commodores twin daughter here on vacation from the all girl college down to the group of large rocks at the end of the jetty. It was a very hot day. We started fooling around. She must have been new to this as she appeared to be quite frigid. After a few cherry fizz wine coolers she started to loosen up and started to enjoy our activities  when all of a sudde...... on what? Frigate on the rocks , Oh never mind 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, AnotherSailor said:

Curious! I thought this was a US specialty. Those Norwegians must be paying attention to how not to pay attention.

We have the highest operational tempo, protecting everyone else's ass. It's easy to keep your ships safe when they never leave port.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Grande Mastere Dreade said:

hardly..   there have been worse

Maybe.  But at least that one wasn't lying on her side, half submerged and abandoned with water sloshing around in all her aft spaces. 

But the Norwegians are resourceful people, and they'll probably fix her up.  Perhaps send her back to Spain?  Will be a toss-up between cost of a re-build and a new one with parts saved off the old one, I'd think.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, P_Wop said:

Maybe.  But at least that one wasn't lying on her side, half submerged and abandoned with water sloshing around in all her aft spaces. 

But the Norwegians are resourceful people, and they'll probably fix her up.  Perhaps send her back to Spain?  Will be a toss-up between cost of a re-build and a new one with parts saved off the old one, I'd think.

hold my beer

costa-concordia-archives-hero.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.naval-technology.com/projects/nansen/

She has a steel hull and 13 compartments, but the gash looks like it may involve several machinery spaces.    At least some of the electronics may have stayed dry.    The slick was reportedly helicopter fuel, so it evaporated faster then diesel.   

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-11-08/500-milllion-norwegian-frigate-rammed-oil-tanker

DCB15933-04E6-4A35-BC46-AF9FBC457226.jpeg

8704ACF7-2A43-46D3-87A3-476319D12FD1.jpeg

C43938DB-015E-4C3E-9549-0E1F7C2FF9E2.jpeg

AB6AEFA6-3E1B-4954-A2E4-04060876AA38.jpeg

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Miffy said:

Bulbous bows always cause a lot of damage at exactly the wrong place. Massive flooding in engine compartment. Seriously regardless of failings of those at the helm a tribute to crew getting out alive.

No doubt.     Also some fast decisions must have been made to call the tugs and have them ground her before it was too late.   The right people must have had the authority and made the right calls.    

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/24828/norwegian-frigate-to-oil-tanker-before-collision-we-have-everything-under-control.  This article, if accurate, sheds more light on the errors preceding the wreck.  It matches the quote KC375 provided.   I know COLREG always attaches some blame to both vessels, but if a stand on visiting civilian vessel radios a government vessel and is basically told to hold course, doesn’t that change things?

"The tanker, which was heading northbound, contacted the frigate, heading southbound, to ask if they had a plan to safely pass them as they seemed to be on a collision course," Kjetil Stormark, top editor at AldriMer.no, told the BBCin a subsequent interview. "The response was: 'We have everything under control.'"

"The tanker, which was heading northbound, contacted the frigate, heading southbound, to ask if they had a plan to safely pass them as they seemed to be on a collision course," Kjetil Stormark, top editor at AldriMer.no, told the BBCin a subsequent interview. "The response was: 'We have everything under control.'" more galling, it appears likely that the Helge Ingstad was in constant communication with the Fedje Maritime Traffic Center, or Fedje VTS, which is responsible for coordinating all maritime traffic in the fjord in question. The congested nature of the waterway, especially with all the traffic coming out of Sture and the main port in Bergen, means that any ship over 80 feet long, including military vessels, has to get approval from Fedje at least an hour in advance in order to enter the area, to begin with. The Fridtjof Nansen-class frigates are 440 feet long, well over this length requirement.

Per AldriMer.no's sources, Fedje VTS was indeed in contact with both ships and issued repeated warnings about a possible collision to no avail. It is not clear if either ship made a mayday call once it became clear the accident was inevitable. It does appear that Helge Ingstad only turned on her Automatic Identification System (AIS) transporter after the mishap had occurred.

 
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's totally the frigate's fault. There's no way for the 100,000 ton fully laden tanker just underway to avoid the situation. Turn port it could ground itself and cause ecological disaster. Turn starboard it would have hit frigate amidships or bow to bow. 

Frigate has acceleration and turning radius of a sports car compared to the tanker. The tug escort avoided the situation. The frigate did not. Because destroyer jockeys almost always drive like this. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

At least the Norwegians have adequate salvage ability.   The Russians are in a bit of a pickle since they sank their floating drydock from underneath their aircraft carrier.    The Ukrainians aren’t going to let them use Mykolaiv, Europe doesn’t have much love for Putin.   https://www.rferl.org/a/for-russia-s-navy-a-damaged-aircraft-carrier-is-bad-enough-a-sunken-dry-dock-is-even-worse-/29593113.html

E52F06F3-E4B2-44F5-9AAC-3DEA07BC757D.jpeg

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lark said:

At least the Norwegians have adequate salvage ability.   The Russians are in a bit of a pickle since they sank their floating drydock from underneath their aircraft carrier.    The Ukrainians aren’t going to let them use Mykolaiv, Europe doesn’t have much love for Putin.   https://www.rferl.org/a/for-russia-s-navy-a-damaged-aircraft-carrier-is-bad-enough-a-sunken-dry-dock-is-even-worse-/29593113.html

E52F06F3-E4B2-44F5-9AAC-3DEA07BC757D.jpeg

Wow, from that angle, that ship almost looks like an aircraft carrier!

FB- Doug (ex-BT1 USN)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Russian carrier with their turbo boilers that spew smoke and one breakdown away from being an open ocean wreck. Always deployed with tugboats. 

 

Prob better left sunk in the sunken dry dock than trying to make it operational. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

A norwegian newspaper got the sound log from the local marine traffic control station , Fede VTS ( there are lots of refineries and traffic in the area and reporting to Fede VTS is mandatory minimum 1 hour before you enter their controlled area). I guess someone thought: fuck I’m not losing my job over this 

 

after some one back and forth the tanker (Sola TS ) and Fedje VTS conclude that the 17knot radarshadow coming straight for the tanker  might be KNM Helge Ingstad (who have reported that they are in the area but have lights off and no AIS transponder on). They call them and HI reply

1min before crash:

Sola TS: Helge Ingstad go Starboard immediately 

HI: then we will go to close to “Blokkene” ( note: not clear what they mean with blokkene )

S: turn sb if it is you coming towards me, you’ve got.....

silence for ten seconds 

HI: I have a couple of degrees SB when we have passed’ eh, eh, SB

S: HI you need to do something. You are starting to get very close

 

15 second silence 

S: HI!turn!

3second silence 

S: we’ll have a collision here then

15 s silence 

s: Fedje VTS. It might have been a warship. I hit it

 

Then follows mayday, calling for tugs etc can’t. Interesting to listen to, but unfortunately in Norwegian . Court martial next

 

 

Edited by AndreasE
Missed one sentence
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Miffy said:

It's totally the frigate's fault. There's no way for the 100,000 ton fully laden tanker just underway to avoid the situation. Turn port it could ground itself and cause ecological disaster. Turn starboard it would have hit frigate amidships or bow to bow. 

Frigate has acceleration and turning radius of a sports car compared to the tanker. The tug escort avoided the situation. The frigate did not. Because destroyer jockeys almost always drive like this. 

 

 

Pretty much what I said when the Whale Warriors got their carbon trimaran smashed by a big, lumbering hulk. A hulk smaller than this frigate, I believe, but it's all relative.

Whatever the rules of the road may say, it's always a skipper's job to avoid trading paint. If a big, lumbering hulk hits your smaller, faster, boat, that's your fault in my view unless you can prove something very unusual about the situation.

On 11/9/2018 at 12:43 PM, KC375 said:

"The tanker, which was heading northbound, contacted the frigate, heading southbound, to ask if they had a plan to safely pass them as they seemed to be on a collision course," Kjetil Stormark, the editor of AldriMer.no told the BBC.

Citing what he called key sources, he said: "The response was: 'We have everything under control.'"

If a big, lumbering hulk hits your smaller, faster, boat, that's your fault in my view unless you can prove something very unusual about the situation. Especially if you just said you had it under control.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll continue to remind that there has never been a 100% fault finding against any party to a collision .

COLREGS preamble explains why .

Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s interesting reading what everyone has said about the collision and I still love the Clark and Dawe “the front fell off” I could watch it over and over again. 

 

When you you look at each of the ships the naval ship I believe should of given way to the tanker. The size differences  and draft in the 2 ships means the tanker had very few option to get out of the way 

 

War ship KNM Helge Ingstad       Tanker Sola TS

length                  134 m                                    250

beam.                  16.8 m.                                44 m 

draft                  4.6 m.                                    13.1 m 

displacement  5290 tons                            62557 tons         

                                                                        112939 tons loaded 

speed max        27 knots.                            11 knots 

 

So if you look at the basic stats of both vessels the frigate had less draft, was shorter, was half the size of the tanker and could of very easily got out of the way of the tanker. It’s the old thing of “Might has Right”  for the tanker and the naval officer just being pigheaded and not moving out of the way of the tanker. 

 

I keep thinking of the old story 

 

US Warship doing 30 knots and on collision course with radar contact. 

 

Warship captain radios 

I’m a US warship closing in fast on you, you must alter course and get out of my way.

 

Voice on the other end radios back 

No, I’ll not alter my course. You must alter your course. 

 

Warship captain radios again getting pissed off 

You must get out of our way or we will run over you, I’m not going to alter my course. 

 

Voice on the other end saids again 

No I’m not going to alter my course, you must alter yours now. 

 

Warship captain is very pissed off and radios back one final time 

This is US warship alter your course or I’ll blow you out of the water.

 

Voice on the other end saids 

I’m a light house, it’s your call 

 

pulpit 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Found a link showing the AIS path of the tanker.  It is fascinating (and instructive) to see the huge turning radius, and how the ship's track  continues in one direction despite their heading and the tugs pushing it in another.   Keep clear of these guys - they can't turn or stop!

 

https://gcaptain.com/video-ais-animation-shows-collision-between-oil-tanker-and-norwegian-frigate/

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hearing the "play by play", even if you don't understand Norwegian, was fascinating.

It really appears that there was no communication between the radio room and the bridge about the actual situation they're in.  Both traffic control AND the tanker were warning the frigate of the impeding problem.  Each department on the warship (radar, radio, watches, bridge, mess, engines, etc.) seems to just focus on it's tiny piece of the puzzle and no one seems to be coordinating it so as to come to an overall understanding.  Was this what happened in the 7th fleet's collisions too?   

It was interesting to hear that the frigate was able to report their number of crew to traffic control immediately, while the tanker had to stop to  count them up before replying.  The time lapses between transmissions - as things are happening on board each vessel - make for great suspense-building. Thanks, nolatom.  

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎11‎/‎2018 at 3:47 AM, Mid said:

I'll continue to remind that there has never been a 100% fault finding against any party to a collision .

COLREGS preamble explains why .

Well, it's not common, but 100% / 0% collision cases do happen:

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/564/729/1407350/

But you're right, the stand-on vessel has definite duties to react, no matter how badly the give-way vessel has screwed up, so zero-fault is a pretty rare bird.  And  cases where the facts are that one-sided, generally never make it to a courtroom or particularly to trial, they get settled instead.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

What a disaster! That's not a small ship. The old Fletcher class that was the US Navy's mainstay right on up to the late sixties was only 2500 tons loaded and about 375 feet long, if I recall. This thing is right between that and an Arleigh Burke class, I recon. Lots of oil and other contaminants must be leaking into that fragile ecosystem not to mention the hazards to navigation in a confined fjord that will undoubtedly arise from recovery efforts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, PaulK said:

It was interesting to hear that the frigate was able to report their number of crew to traffic control immediately, while the tanker had to stop to  count them up before replying.  

But the frigate got its number wrong. Reported 134, but they were 137.

”done is better than perfect” approach of Mark Zucherberg fame is not always the solution. Sometimes you should spend some extra seconds and get it right:-)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Rasputin22 said:

The guy that sells chain says they should have used chain!

and their factory & warehouse is only a few miles from the site.  Could have had it there pronto.  Worked for the Costa Concordia...

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, sailak said:

The plot thickens. 

First, some incels tried to claim that it all happened because females have joined the navy. Then it turned out that no female officers where onboard. That silenced them a bit but they still say that women have weakened the navy. Men can't navigate if they are around, it turns out. 

And now this. I want it to be an exciting story behind it all, not just a navigation fuckup..

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, NORBowGirl said:

The plot thickens. 

First, some incels tried to claim that it all happened because females have joined the navy. Then it turned out that no female officers where onboard. That silenced them a bit but they still say that women have weakened the navy. Men can't navigate if they are around, it turns out. 

And now this. I want it to be an exciting story behind it all, not just a navigation fuckup..

Who said this? People in the Norwegian Navy or just men in general?

As for the "US Navy Officer", he was merely part of an exchange program. He was there to learn and perhaps offer some insight into the way the US operates its ships. I'm virtually certain that he was not in any position of authority nor was he making any key decisions during this incident. Hell, he may not even have been on watch at the time.

At most, he *might* have been a member of the navigation team or piloting party as a team member but not making decisions or recommendations. He's probably being interviewed because he was within earshot of the control room and is a witness.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I read the article above and saw no mention of anything about women on board. 

I served on the big grey boats and on one ship about 10% of the crew was female (working in all departments and at all ranks). 

While not trying to drift too far, I found the women as equally competent as any of the men.  Most of the fellows simply saw the women as crew mates and got on with their jobs.  While there was some resistance by a few, there were generally no serious problems. Indeed, I would say some of the guys behaved better with the ladies around (watching their language, improving their person hygiene, etc.).  Sailors can be a rough bunch but overt sexism wasn't one of the major problems at sea.  

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

While senior leadership always takes most of the responsibility it is the character of all that sit around the wardroom table that impact the operations of a ship.  There are so many more enlisted on-board that a few outliers won't greatly affect the character of the crew, but with only a few officers on board each one can contribute significantly.  Last I heard officers on the exchange program assumed full responsibilities of their post, and no we don't know what the 6th fleet guy was doing at the time but it will be interesting to find out, if we get to.  Maybe they were assigned to engineering, or in the galley inspiring the Norwegian cooks to make some fine American cuisine.  Regardless, my take is that eliminating the need for basic navigation and to remember phone numbers or street addresses for that matter is not going to benefit humanity in the long run.  Time for some more automation perhaps.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Ann Kristin Salbuvik, an official at the Norwegian Defense Ministry, confirmed that an American officer was onboard the ship but declined to specify the officer’s duties. 

“The exchange program has been established to share experiences and create a basis for good cooperation between our navies,” Salbuvik said."

 

Here, let me share with you how WE do this particular manouevre.......

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jhellan said:

Nobody died, but it was a *really* close run thing. This sailor climbed out of his flooding cabin on the outside of the ship.

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tv2.no%2Fnyheter%2F10223553%2F&edit-text=

Oh, man, that was as close to death as you'll ever want to be, those sailors on the starboard side just made it out,  by the hardest.   

Looking at the damage photo and then the damage diagram, HELGE seems to have been hit by tanker's bulbous bow almost midships on starboard, which impact rolled Helge to port as she scraped along tanker's bow, hence the damage "stripe" angles down closer to the keel the farther aft it goes.  So, a big roll to port.  Evidently then followed by a roll back to starboard, which would put the gash line underwater as the two ships separated, and kept it underwater since Helge is by then taking on water and increasingly listing "clockwise", which cascaded water into the damage and the cabins in way of the damage.. 

At night.  In really cold water.  Wow.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I took a nice tour of a German frigate when it did joint NATO exercises in the Caribbean. They had a liberty call on St. John and apparently one of the officers ran into an old German buddy who had started a nice restaurant there. The restaurant owner invited the whole wardroom to a wonderful dinner at the establishment and not to be outdone the German skipper invited the whole island to a big party on the ship! They really put on a great event and I was surprised at all the food, beer and booze that was a part of the event. I thought is was just for the 'special occasion' until wandering into the officers mess and seeing beer taps installed full time there. Apparently they are not as uptight about alcohol onboard a Naval Warship as the US Navy. 

    Not sure how that works in the Norwegian Navy, but if beer is served onboard and there was an American exchange officer on board I could imagine the incident started something like this

Image result for hey y'all hold my beer

Which then leads to this

Image result for hold my beer quotes

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Ajax said:

Who said this? People in the Norwegian Navy or just men in general?

As for the "US Navy Officer", he was merely part of an exchange program. He was there to learn and perhaps offer some insight into the way the US operates its ships. I'm virtually certain that he was not in any position of authority nor was he making any key decisions during this incident. Hell, he may not even have been on watch at the time.

At most, he *might* have been a member of the navigation team or piloting party as a team member but not making decisions or recommendations. He's probably being interviewed because he was within earshot of the control room and is a witness.

A right wing journo wrote an article about it. It's in Norwegian but google-translate it if you want :)   I think it's funny. He's saying that men can't navigate and focus when they have women around. Like women are cryptonite for the strong men. Ok, sometimes they are, but I am confident that men - in general - are able to focus on their job. And I have heard male skippers say that they take less risks and play it safer if they have a mixed crew - something about instinct to protect the women. If that's true, the navy should have MORE women. 

All in all - the Norwegian boys have grown up in a society with gender equality and hence shouldn't be affected by female presence anywhere. This journalist is just trying to make money on his stupid little magazine. And he was quickly silenced, since we only hear male voices from both ships. He lost his point there. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, nolatom said:

HELGE seems to have been hit by tanker's bulbous bow almost midships on starboard

Hmmm. Let me amend my earlier statement.

 

On 11/11/2018 at 4:44 AM, dogballs Tom said:

If a big, lumbering hulk hits your smaller, faster, boat, that's your fault in my view unless you can prove something very unusual about the situation.

And if you come out of it with a big dent on your hull, it had better be on the PORT side.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, NORBowGirl said:

A right wing journo wrote an article about it. It's in Norwegian but google-translate it if you want :)   I think it's funny. He's saying that men can't navigate and focus when they have women around. Like women are cryptonite for the strong men. Ok, sometimes they are, but I am confident that men - in general - are able to focus on their job. And I have heard male skippers say that they take less risks and play it safer if they have a mixed crew - something about instinct to protect the women. If that's true, the navy should have MORE women. 

All in all - the Norwegian boys have grown up in a society with gender equality and hence shouldn't be affected by female presence anywhere. This journalist is just trying to make money on his stupid little magazine. And he was quickly silenced, since we only hear male voices from both ships. He lost his point there. 

 

How odd. Yeah, he sounds woefully uninformed. Thanks for the clarification.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/18/2018 at 8:28 PM, P_Wop said:

I never quite understood why the frigate turned to port.  Essentially right across the tanker's bow in the last few seconds.  Any enlightenment from you SOLAS peeps?

 

If you listen very closely to the tape you can just hear a voice saying, "No, no the other port!"

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, monsoon said:

If you listen very closely to the tape you can just hear a voice saying, "No, no the other port!"

Which for us rag sailors and (port side) winch handlers, is a close cousin of "No, no, the *other* clockwise" ;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/20/2018 at 4:43 AM, dogballs Tom said:

And if you come out of it with a big dent on your hull, it had better be on the PORT side.

Not as important as you may think. Any vessel is required to take early and obvious action to avoid collision. Being struck on your port side is not at all the same situation as a car running a stop sign. Very very rarely can a vessel involved in a collision be 100% at fault for a collision. Don't know if I am aware of that happening. But I can imagine a situation or two or may be possible. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Baldur said:

Not as important as you may think. Any vessel is required to take early and obvious action to avoid collision. Being struck on your port side is not at all the same situation as a car running a stop sign. Very very rarely can a vessel involved in a collision be 100% at fault for a collision. Don't know if I am aware of that happening. But I can imagine a situation or two or may be possible. 

Anchored in daylight, good visibility?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Baldur said:

Not as important as you may think. Any vessel is required to take early and obvious action to avoid collision. Being struck on your port side is not at all the same situation as a car running a stop sign. Very very rarely can a vessel involved in a collision be 100% at fault for a collision. Don't know if I am aware of that happening. But I can imagine a situation or two or may be possible. 

Well, OK, I'll try one more amendment.

If a big, lumbering hulk hits your smaller, faster, boat, that's your fault in my view unless you can prove something very unusual about the situation. Especially if you just said you had it under control. And if you come out of it with a big dent on your hull, it had better be on the PORT side. But it's really not much worse if it's on the starboard side because of the whole big, lumbering hulk vs smaller, faster boat thing.

Is that better?

Link to post
Share on other sites