USS Fitzgerald

Originally Posted By: BAYSTATE YOTEOriginally Posted By: ADK"I guess they should be thankful some bad actor didn't shoot a Exocet ship to ship missile at them!!!"

They nearly sank the Fitzgerald simply by ramming her. The way the cargo ship steered around the Fitzgerald and then came back to ram her it makes me wonder about a terrorist attack. Maybe they saw the U.S.S. Fitzgerald as a 'soft target'?


My point was, that they did not pick up a large ship going relatively slow, vs a missile going at mach whatever..
It just does not inspire confidence that when one puts it in the context of a potential ICBM strike on the homeland!

I got your point BAYSTATE and I agree. I was trying to make a different point.
blush.gif
 
I have heard rumors that it was the OOD that messed up and didn't take evasive action.

I have heard that it was a case of the senior enlisted that told the young officer to move, and he didn't take action and we know the results.


This makes more sense to me personally than a deck full of night watch being at least 8 were all asleep at the wheel and didn't notice any of the alarms going off.
 
That makes a lot of sense involving an incident that should have never happened. There should be enough witnesses that were on the bridge to get to the bottom of what happened before the collision.
 
Having been in similar situations while in the navy I can say that EVERYBODY on the bridge of the navy ship new what was going on. There is no logical reason for the navy ship to not give way - no matter who has the right of way at the time. This is like a cat(navy) evading a rhino(commercial vessel). The commercial vessel is not capable of emergency evasive maneuvers like the navy ship.

I have to fault the navy ships reaction. Personnel opinion.
 
Originally Posted By: dog1whckrHaving been in similar situations while in the navy I can say that EVERYBODY on the bridge of the navy ship new what was going on. There is no logical reason for the navy ship to not give way - no matter who has the right of way at the time. This is like a cat(navy) evading a rhino(commercial vessel). The commercial vessel is not capable of emergency evasive maneuvers like the navy ship.

I have to fault the navy ships reaction. Personnel opinion.


Do you think it should fall on whoever had the command of the Bridge at the time, and if that officer was not on deck whomever was at the helm at that time as well? (even if the officer on watch was in the mess, they should be accountable imo)
 
Originally Posted By: CastThe buck stops on the skipper's desk. He is ultimately responsible. It does roll downhill however.


While the buck does fall on the skipper's desk ultimately, he was in his birth asleep. Whoever was in charge of the bridge should have issued an order to call the skipper to the bridge, they didn't.

There is also speculated report that enlisted personnel advised the officer of the deck that evasive action was needed and he refused to issue the order to take evasive action. You honestly have to wonder why, with a vessel that large bearing down on you, and collision immanent.
 
The Dept. of the Navy is in the process of firing the U.S.S. Fitzgerald's Commanding Officer, the Executive Officer and the senior enlisted non-commissioned officer. Disciplinary action to be taken against other enlisted men for dereliction of duty. I believe criminal charges should be added.
 
Something just doesn't make sense! Either something on that ship was extremely lax, or there's something else that is being covered up!
The CO was in his bunk sleeping, he can't be on the bridge 24/7. Even though he is responsible for the ship I see no fault on his part and would start with the officer who was on the bridge, radar operators, and lookouts. Definitely someone should be charged with dereliction of duty.
I would like to hear what actually caused this to happen, not much info. so far! I also find it interesting that "multiple" enlisted men will be charged with dereliction of duty, something just doesn't seem right unless that ship was that lax when it came to watches etc.
 
Last edited:
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2017/...-collision.html


They all deserve this, and should be forced out. ALL Three. All section chiefs on watch at the time on the bridge should also be courts martial.

Being broad sided by a CARGO SHIP that is traveling at roughly 10 knots while the destroyer was moving at 20, told me a lot.

There is an entire ocean out there, and the smaller agile destroyer can turn like nothing you can imagine. For the Navy that is usually lax, to start cutting all the top people, says that those on watch were not doing their job, as evidence shows with a massive 17x13' hole.

NCIS investigation and recommendations most likely supported the obvious.


This also is most likely the product of 8 years of Odummer influence getting very lax, and the new incoming Sec Def, who i personally know and have seen him in action. There are innocent mistakes made doing the right thing. Loosing sailors lives, putting a destroyer at risk, and having a lax attitude about the job at hand while carrying deadly weapons don't go together.

The fact that just a few years ago there were 20 sailors taken hostage in gun boats armed to the teeth was an embarrassment.
Fixing the attitude and re-instilling proper professionalism is the most important thing for the Navy. This kind of thing deserves this treatment, and will get the attention of the entire Navy and light a fire under all commands to clean it up and be the professionals they should be.
 
Back
Top