USS Monson USS Harper's Ferry

Foreverslow

Super Anarchist
Pac Fleet pumps the dog operating big grey boats yet again.

initial report (note the disparging remarks about SD sailors midway..)



follow up with more detail




Doesn't harbor control look for shit like this?
Who is driving USS Harpers Ferry. wrong side of channel and drove right out of the channel in broad daylight.
 

KSB

New member
10
0
Sandy Eggo
Somebody failed basic seamanship 101.....

Side note;
My Dad 23 yrs active black shoe Navy Tin Can driver, only time he sounded the danger signal was coming into San Diego bay on a summer Wed night during the beer can race!! ;)
 

TJSoCal

Super Anarchist
Momsen actually draws about 9 feet more than Harpers Ferry, it would have been pretty sketchy for her to turn starboard and exit the channel. I'd lay most of the blame for this on HF, despite the "extra context" clip.

But at least they communicated and agreed on starboard to starboard. Could have been much worse.
 

Foreverslow

Super Anarchist
Harper's Ferry was on the wrong side of the channel.
One can say there was a missing buoy coming out that may have led to this (aka Ever Forward in Baltimore), but a $500 7 inch Raymarine Axiom would show they were on the wrong side of the channel.

Amazed how long it took for both vessels to understand there could be an issue.
A little too nonchalant navigating a heavily trafficked area in big boats.
Not exactly the canyon run scene in Hunt for Red October, or the video of the inside run of Cape Horn by USS Reagan when she was first built.

Hope there is an inquiry into the breakdowns in command despite no damage occurred. Some seamen need a bit schooling.

There also needs to be some accountability of harbor control. Watching videos of NYC/NJ area, nothing commerical moves without approval so that 2 big boys do not meet up a a choke point. Was watching a video of a cruise ship leaving SD while a flat top was entering at 4 am. Harbor control left them to work it out themselves even though both were communicating to Harbor Control which lead to meeting at a pinch point. If one is proactive, there is no need to be reactive. Amazed Sal did not discuss this.
 

Zonker

Super Anarchist
10,216
6,401
Canada
Based on what the 2 destroyers that had collisions a few years ago, the US Navy still does a very shitty job of educating bridge officers.

The Royal Navy is much much better. The deck officer career path doesn't spend significant time in engineering spaces; there are engineering officers learning how to run those areas. And vice versa.
 

P_Wop

Super Anarchist
7,156
4,347
Bay Area, CA
The Royal Navy is much much better. The deck officer career path doesn't spend significant time in engineering spaces; there are engineering officers learning how to run those areas. And vice versa.
The RN typically has far fewer crew on the bridge, just 6 or 7, compared with the USN 20+. This leads to much better communication. Situational awareness is well taught, and it needs to be, getting in and out of heavily tidal and congested harbours in the UK.
 

Zonker

Super Anarchist
10,216
6,401
Canada
That is a much better idea too. I was involved in the bidding of a USCG inland waterway cutter (basically a river buoy tender/fixed nav aid construction and repair vessel). Very small crew. Yet it had several bridge stations for plotting postions/steering/etc etc. All a recipe for losing the big picture.

One of the issues with one of the destroyer collisions was that the prop controls and steering could be independently transferred from one station to another. So one guy was controlling the port prop and the other had control of starboard prop. Both thought they had control of both props. Either could have controlled the rudder.


Who, in their right mind, signs off on a conning system that allows that kind of bullshit? I just can't fathom why that was designed that way.
 

PaulK

Super Anarchist
One of the issues with one of the destroyer collisions was that the prop controls and steering could be independently transferred from one station to another. So one guy was controlling the port prop and the other had control of starboard prop. Both thought they had control of both props. Either could have controlled the rudder.


Who, in their right mind, signs off on a conning system that allows that kind of bullshit? I just can't fathom why that was designed that way.
Redundancy, in case one control is shot away from each side then two crew can still steer and/or drive the vessel? Or perhaps if one crew is killed the other can take over?
 

Steam Flyer

Sophisticated Yet Humble
45,612
10,284
Eastern NC
One of the issues with one of the destroyer collisions was that the prop controls and steering could be independently transferred from one station to another. So one guy was controlling the port prop and the other had control of starboard prop. Both thought they had control of both props. Either could have controlled the rudder.


Who, in their right mind, signs off on a conning system that allows that kind of bullshit? I just can't fathom why that was designed that way.
Redundancy, in case one control is shot away from each side then two crew can still steer and/or drive the vessel? Or perhaps if one crew is killed the other can take over?

Or one crew kills the other?

The Navy has a lot of desk pilots who are utterly convinced they know more than you. And a lot of sales types pushing their latest and greatest hi-tech idea to spent gazillions on. Hence the DDG1000 and the littoral combat ship and the ship that nobody knows who the fuck is driving it.

IMHO the bridge space is not large enough that some sort of weapons hit would disable the conn on one side and not the other; unless maybe a Somali pirate shooting his AK47 at the bridge windows.
 

Crash

Super Anarchist
5,216
1,113
SoCal
Part of the problem is the Navy continues to treat bridge watchstanding as a collateral duty. Part of the problem is the decision makers are Captians and Admirals who’ve had no “close calls” and consider driving the ship as “easy.” Finally part of the problem is training in a fleet of dedicated training craft (Like the YPs at USNA) is expensive.

Now add in the idea that we can make it easier with automation, and add in that we are doing it all as OJT, on top off all the other duties and OJT young officers are subject too, and it’s no wonder we are having all these seamanship issues in the Navy.

Like in car racing where you first have to make it to the finish to win, the Navy seems to have forgotten that to prevail in battle, you first have to get the ship TO the battle.
 

Zonker

Super Anarchist
10,216
6,401
Canada
There will be 4 steering stations. On the bridge a center, 2 wings and a separate one emergency one aft of the bridge is bridge is blowed up.

What I cant understand is the ability of 1 station to drive the port rudder and the other still has control or stbd rudder and throttles.
 

billy backstay

Backstay, never bought a suit, never went to Vegas
There will be 4 steering stations. On the bridge a center, 2 wings and a separate one emergency one aft of the bridge is bridge is blowed up.

What I cant understand is the ability of 1 station to drive the port rudder and the other still has control or stbd rudder and throttles.

AKA, Recipe for a Clusterfuck!! :eek:
 


Latest posts



Top