The F16 is a classic example of early mistakes. Took a long time to fix that thing.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Another collision in South China Sea .
- Thread starter Clearlight
- Start date
The F16 is a classic example of early mistakes. Took a long time to fix that thing.
Yea the military always eats the biggest piece of the technology head-in costs and rightfully so, as cutting edge is not cheap but worth every penny if it allows you connect first. The issue I have always had is the cheapening of the systems (none military) to save XXX so more of XXX could be loaded or blacken the bottom line better.
No comparison between an airplane where you're stuck in the cockpit and a ship where you can walk down to any machinery system and take over from there.
I mean right at the servo/motor/handcrank whatever. No touchpad. Simple mechanical/electromechanical/electrohydraulic system that can't be hacked.
When a sailor enters an input, he's looking for an expected output. I move the wheel to right 30 degrees and I want to see the rudder position indicator move there as well as watching the gyrocompass (completely different system) react the way I expect it to. Any mismatch between them and it's loss of steering casualty go time with immediate actions taken by engineering below.
We do train for such things, you know?
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-0...en-nato-allies
Given a working model, or the tech specs to same there is no system can't be defeated.
Please explain if everyone (or only 50% on duty at the time of the ships crash) was doing their job, and all systems even operating in a redundant mode, could this have happened?
Given a working model, or the tech specs to same there is no system can't be defeated.
Please explain if everyone (or only 50% on duty at the time of the ships crash) was doing their job, and all systems even operating in a redundant mode, could this have happened?
Last edited:
I said I wasn't going to entertain stupid ass conspiracy theories and I'm going to do just that.
No conspiracy at all righteous question. You indicated you had the ship in your hands, so please explain how this could have happened with all the safety's in place you touted.
What safeties did I tout? The ship in my hands? WTF are you talking about?
Go back and re-read post #9 over and over until you understand.
Answer me this: why is it that we still have commercial aircraft crash with all the "safety's" in place?
Last edited:
These,
quote---- Every vital system on a navy ship has local control override that eliminates electronics from the control loop and puts it back straight into mechanical or electro-mechanical (not digital) control.
But I guess you had to have been a BTDT type of guy, qualified in those systems operation, to know that. Conspiracy theorists needs not apply. ----end quote
quote--- I mean right at the servo/motor/handcrank whatever. No touchpad. Simple mechanical/electromechanical/electrohydraulic system that can't be hacked.
When a sailor enters an input, he's looking for an expected output. I move the wheel to right 30 degrees and I want to see the rudder position indicator move there as well as watching the gyrocompass (completely different system) react the way I expect it to. Any mismatch between them and it's loss of steering casualty go time with immediate actions taken by engineering below.
We do train for such things, you know?--- end quote
So with all that and so many eyes on watch how could the crashes happen?
Because humans are the weakest link. Most aviation accidents happen when the autopilot is off.
operator error and dumbing down of training... cant influence or touch something in the airplane, dont need to know about it. Thats been the trend I have witnessed in my 12 years as an airline pilot.
Started out as "what does this switch do, what is its power source, how does it operate(electric, air, hydraulic or mechanical valve), etc..." to "this switch opens or closes this valve, anything else is not pertinent because it either opens or closes and if it fails you run a checklist"... Which to a large extent I understand, but when you start to have a system failure such as losing 1 electrical bus and you no longer know what other systems could be affected, it can start to snowball and lead you down checklist pathways that it shouldnt. The true failure is masked by other symptoms. "hey these 2 screens went out" leads to running a checklist for "loss of primary/secondary display screen" or something like that, when you should be thinking "holy shit, I possibly just lost half the electrical system".
Also the auto pilot(flight guidance) systems have become so complex that if you arent reading the mode annunciator and understanding what things mean, which some airlines have a better understanding and training than others, you can think its going to do one thing, but it does a different thing. I see it all the time and my airline is one that is pretty good at teaching the various modes and how they work and what they do, how they interact with other modes, etc... We strive to always be in LNAV(lateral navigation) and VNAV(vertical navigation) which is the most fully coupled mode you can be in with the most protections. As you venture away from LNAV and VNAV you start to lose protections for altitude, track, air speed, etc...
Or your comms are down.
Question, could a runner get to eng fast enough to stave off a collision?
Easy buddy, I never said anything disparaging towards you personally.
You provided another view point. With a knowledge based background. Great
I then asked for more knowledge so I could understand and then build my knowledge base.
If you want to argue Vortex vs Nightforce all day I can do that. but having an attitude when I believe i am just asking for clarification seems counter productive.
I don't believe I ever questioned your manhood. I am sure most systems are classified but i would love to see a schematic.
Last edited:
I definitely think it was a training issue on the part of the bridge watch to not avoid the collision AND I am suspicious of the fact that we have had 2 collisions in a month in the same part of the world. I don't have enough to discern intent but I have enough to suspect it.
Q
QuickNDirty
Guest
Well then there's this gem... Probably just bullshit, but who knows..
http://maritime-executive.com/articl...rom-fitzgerald
Also an interesting read.
https://assets.documentcloud.org/doc...Fitzgerald.pdf
308pirate, how likely is it that there were no handheld comms onboard that were available to anybody after getting fucked by that other ship? Also, does 68 mean that 8.5 hours passed before the Fitzgerald crew called for help?
http://maritime-executive.com/articl...rom-fitzgerald
Also an interesting read.
https://assets.documentcloud.org/doc...Fitzgerald.pdf
308pirate, how likely is it that there were no handheld comms onboard that were available to anybody after getting fucked by that other ship? Also, does 68 mean that 8.5 hours passed before the Fitzgerald crew called for help?
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm off this thread. The overwhelming ignorance of several here can't be fucking helped because they think they know what they are talking about and they think they understand what they have read when both are false.
Example: "In his after-accident report, the captain of the ACX Crystal alleged that the destroyer USS Fitzgerald failed to respond to multiple warnings of an impending collision, according to Reuters."
Bullshit.....the only signals the ACX Crystal has ever admitted sending were "flashing lights". Flashing lights on aids to navigation mean something. Flashing lights on another ship could mean anything and it just serves to confuse those who see it.
Example: "Also, does 68 mean that 8.5 hours passed before the Fitzgerald crew called for help?"...........I'm not going to second guess their decision to call for help whenever they did. It's their duty to help themselves and also their duty to determine when do they need outside assistance. Who the fuck do you think you are to armchair admiral these sailors?
Example: "308pirate, how likely is it that there were no handheld comms onboard that were available to anybody after getting fucked by that other ship?"
If Mr Know It All had kept reading he might have noticed this (or maybe he did and just wanted to argue for argument's sake):
52. When the 1MC stopped working, the DCA continued to communicate with the damage control parties on Net 80, an internal communications network which can be accessed at various locations throughout the ship. Along with sound powered telephones and hand-held radios, these comprise the normal communications channels used during emergencies
Carry on with your dumbass theories and I will just sip my rum and laugh my ass off
Example: "In his after-accident report, the captain of the ACX Crystal alleged that the destroyer USS Fitzgerald failed to respond to multiple warnings of an impending collision, according to Reuters."
Bullshit.....the only signals the ACX Crystal has ever admitted sending were "flashing lights". Flashing lights on aids to navigation mean something. Flashing lights on another ship could mean anything and it just serves to confuse those who see it.
Example: "Also, does 68 mean that 8.5 hours passed before the Fitzgerald crew called for help?"...........I'm not going to second guess their decision to call for help whenever they did. It's their duty to help themselves and also their duty to determine when do they need outside assistance. Who the fuck do you think you are to armchair admiral these sailors?
Example: "308pirate, how likely is it that there were no handheld comms onboard that were available to anybody after getting fucked by that other ship?"
If Mr Know It All had kept reading he might have noticed this (or maybe he did and just wanted to argue for argument's sake):
52. When the 1MC stopped working, the DCA continued to communicate with the damage control parties on Net 80, an internal communications network which can be accessed at various locations throughout the ship. Along with sound powered telephones and hand-held radios, these comprise the normal communications channels used during emergencies
Carry on with your dumbass theories and I will just sip my rum and laugh my ass off
Last edited:
But when they did it became the greatest fighter and the greatest fighter bomber ever created by man. Still in production and still highly desired.
I don't buy all crew related. My gut says WW III is about to start an some are testing their latest an greatest. Much like the Russian fly by that caused a minor issue some thing back, forget the ships name. They tried to keep that tidbit from the public but failed. Then again, allowing your enemy to openly test an show their hand, is a good thing before it goes hot.
As old as Ernest Evans, Captain of the DD Johnston in the Battle of Samar, shouting orders through a hatch in the fan tail for sailors below decks to move the rudder by hand while fighting off cruisers and the like in his relatively tiny tin can.
The technological part of WWIII will last about 25 minutes.
After that we will be reverting to rocks and sharpened sticks.
.308pirate - can you discuss the USS Donald Cook incident?
If you search for info on the web, the outline of the story is simple - at the height of the destabilization efforts in the Ukraine by Vicky Nuland and crew, the Cook sails into the Black Sea. An SU-24 equipped with a EW package snuffs out the Aegis System, makes a few mock runs on the ship, the ship is spooked and the heads to port in Romania.
Those portions of story are all over the web and most of it smells like propaganda. The few sites that offer an opposing view are light on details to the point where it feels like propaganda too.
If you search for info on the web, the outline of the story is simple - at the height of the destabilization efforts in the Ukraine by Vicky Nuland and crew, the Cook sails into the Black Sea. An SU-24 equipped with a EW package snuffs out the Aegis System, makes a few mock runs on the ship, the ship is spooked and the heads to port in Romania.
Those portions of story are all over the web and most of it smells like propaganda. The few sites that offer an opposing view are light on details to the point where it feels like propaganda too.
No
I did not serve on an Aegis-equipped ship. I have no direct knowledge of that combat system's capabilities and even if I did I would not speak publicly about them and even less about any vulnerabilities that I may be aware of
I also guarantee you that everything you've read about this incident on the web is pure speculation unless someone in the Navy or one of its contractors has released highly classified information. In which case anyone in possession of it should be prosecuted.
My father was a plot/Captain with TWA for many years. Retired around 1968 I grew upon DC 3's and Martin 404's, then the Constellations...actually got to fly Captain's chair in a Connie. I remember when he transitioned from the Constellation to the Boeing 707. Their school was 6-8 weeks if I remember correctly and I watched it age pop 20 years, it was that tough and intense. They had to know every system inside and out and be able to diagnose on the fly, so to speak.
How does training compare today?
Nice aint it. Reminds me of the Hide before the move to Scout. We had some in depth discussions on a plethora of subjects.
"Do you know what a plethora is Jefe?"
But what isn't speculation - is that one way or another the SU made several mock passes, correct?
How about the deal where the Iranians captured about bunch of our sailors? Any insights you can shed?
I have never even been on the ocean and could not even tell you what side starboard is, and I want to be clear that I am not baiting you, however in the span of less than 1 yr we have 4 high profile Naval events. The Cook / the capture / and 2 collisions. Are they all 'training deficiencies'?
Last edited:
So it has been reported. Not the first time they make a pass at us, and we've done the same to them. The statements about the combat and comm systems being disabled are speculation.
The LT in charge got lost (training issue) and ended up in their waters. What happened after that borders on cowardice.
for the most part, we are no longer required to reengineer the airplane for qualifications. we used to have to know torque values of engine mounting bolts on the engines and stupid shit like that. how does that help me fix something in the cockpit? today we focus on what we can control from the flight deck for qualification purposes. However, all the info is available and those who wish to be masters of their profession will go above and beyond and gain that in depth knowledge of their particular aircraft on their own time. we have all the manuals and CBT programs at our disposal. but we no longer spend 3 weeks in classrooms doing nothing but systems knowledge. at my airline its all done via the iPad on self study. Many would say this is dangerous, but I disagree. its far better to focus on what you can immediately control vs filling your head with useless info and not be able to recall the correct info when the SHTF.
Just like the dumbasses who put a P-3 spy plane on the ground in China in 01. They should have either ditched or flown back to Japan.
Cowardice on the part of the LT or cowardice on the part of the guy at the end of the radio line going all anti John Paul Jones and ordering him to give up the ship?
Im thinking the final call came from some place in DC on or abouts Pennsylvania Avenue.
I will say one thing about the propaganda photos of the crew on its knees and having a Hallal lunch courtesy of the Ayatollahs.....
the chubby crewman appeared pissed. Im guessing he is a chief of some sorts and he was probably ordered away from his M249b.....at least I hope so
second from right.
Q
QuickNDirty
Guest
Nah, not really. Some things just bug the fuck out of me to a point where I want to get info from folks who know at least a shitload about the field. To be honest, I think it would be preferable that there were some vulnerabilities exploited on these ships, because the alternative, the one you proposed, the simplest explanation - gross negligence/incompetence/whatever of multiple parties on two very expensive and very badass ships.... That's un-fucking-believable.
Again, thanks for taking the time.
Regardless of what orders came across the radio the Lieutenant in charge of that boat was the officer-in-charge at the scene. He had the choice to surrender or escape and die trying if necessary.
Maybe he felt that he should not subject his sailors to a firefight when he got them lost due to his navigational incompetence.
I'd like to think that if that had been me (in charge) I would not have surrendered under any circumstances and that I would bear the brunt of responsibility for the aftermath, including responsibility for the deaths of any of my sailors.
That's what a leader does, IMO.
Surrendering when you have the means to maneuver and fight is unforgivable.
Agreed.
Public opinion would be with the LT, hopefully that would be enough to defeat the Leviathan.
When the Indianapolis was sunk and its crew had been castaway for days a LT landed his PBY in open ocean against standing orders saving 56 men that were being actively attacked by sharks.
There are giants that walk among us.
http://blog.uspatriottactical.com/uss-indianapolis-part-3-angels-sky-water/
http://www.nytimes.com/1998/03/15/us/adrian-marks-81-war-pilot-who-led-rescue-of-56-is-dead.html
The paperwork was put in place to court martial him for disobeying orders.
The leviathan realized this was not going to go well for it and the paperwork was shit canned as it should have been.
Sounds a lot like Bowe Bergdahl. Obama protected him and as soon as he could no longer the military went after his ass.
Thank GOD that motherfucking cocksucker is gone.
My service spanned Presidents Reagan, GHW Bush, and Clinton. I left under Clinton, thinking it couldn't get worse.
Boy was I ever fucking wrong.
The first mistake in war is to understatement your enemy's capability. The second is not linking the puzzle pieces because you don't believe something is possible. Your tin foil photo was great, but the flip side should be a head in sand photo. That way your 100% covered, like we were when first told about radar.
There is only one correct response when people are in peril at sea, regardless of who they are or how they got there.
I think we all hope that in the situation we would act as this MAN:
"I Have Not Yet Begun to Fight," 1779
John Paul Jones in Battle
Printer Friendly Version >>>
"I have not yet begun to fight!" This was the immortal retort of Captain John Paul Jones to a request to surrender as he and his crew engaged in a desperate battle with a British frigate off the northern coast of England during the American Revolution.
John Paul Jones |
Born in Scotland in 1747, Jones went to sea at age thirteen and became Captain of his own ship by the time he was twenty-one. By 1775, he had emigrated to America where he volunteered for service in the fledgling American Navy and was given his own command. In 1777 he was dispatched to the European waters with orders to create whatever havoc he could accomplish including attacking British ships and sea ports.
In 1779 Jones took command of the 42-gun Bonhomme Richard a reconstituted merchant ship given as a gift to the Americans by the French. Leading a squadron of five ships, Jones attacked the coast of Ireland and then sailed north around the tip of Scotland to a point off the coast of Northern England where on September 23, 1779 he encountered a large merchant convoy escorted by two British naval vessels. The stage was set for John Paul Jones’s most famous naval battle.
"Has your ship struck? "
An observer aboard Captain John Paul Jones's ship describes his most famous battle:
"On the 23d of September, 1779, being below, I was roused by an unusual noise upon deck. This induced me to go upon deck, when I found the men were swaying up the royal yards, preparatory to making sail for a large fleet under our lee. I asked the coasting pilot what fleet it was. He answered:
'The Baltic fleet, under convoy of the Serapis of forty-four guns, and the Countess of Scarborough of twenty guns.'
A general chase then commenced of the Bonhomme Richard, the Venseance, the Pallas, and the Alliance [American ships in Jones's squadron].
At this time our fleet headed to the northward, with a light breeze, Flamborough Head being about two leagues distant. At 7 P.M. it was evident the Baltic fleet perceived we were in chase, from the signal of the Serapis to the merchantmen to stand in shore. At the same time, the Serapisand Countess if Scarborough tacked ship, and stood off shore, with the intention of drawing off our attention from the convoy. When these ships had separated from the convoy about two miles, they again tacked and stood in shore after the merchantmen. At about eight, being within hail, the Serapis demanded:
"What ship is that?"
He was answered: "I can't hear what you say." Immediately after the Serapis hailed again:
At this moment I received orders from Commodore Jones to commmence the action with a broadside, which indeed appeared to be simultaneous on board both ships. Our position being to windward of the Serapis, we passed ahead of her, and the Serapis coming up on our larboard quarter, the action commenced abreast of each other. The Serapis soon passed ahead of the Bonhomme Richard, and when he thought he had gained a distance sufficient to go down athwart the fore foot to rake us, found he had not enough distance . . . and the Bonhomme Richard, having headway, ran her bows into the stern of the Serapis. We had remained in this situation but a few minutes when we were again hailed by the Serapis:
"Has your ship struck?"
The Battle |
To which Captain Jones answered: "I have not yet begun to fight."
As we were unable to bring a single gun to bear upon the Serapis, our topsails were backed, while those of the Serapis being filled, the ships separated. The Serapis bore short round upon her heel, and her jib boom ran into the mizen rigging of the Bonhomme Richard. In this situation the ships were made fast together with a hawser, the bowsprit of the Serapis to the mizenmast of the Bonhomme Richard, and the action recommenced from the starboard sides of the two ships .... A novelty in naval combats was now presented to many witnesses, but to few admirers. . . .
From the commencement to the termination of the action, there was not a man on board theBonhomme Richard ignorant of the superiority of the Serapis, both in weight of metal, and in the qualities of the crews. The crew of that ship was picked seamen, and the ship itself had been only a few months off the stocks; whereas the crew of the Bonhomme Richard consisted of part American, English, and French, and a part of Maltese, Portuguese, and Malays, these latter contributing, by their want of naval skill and knowledge of the English language, to depress rather than elevate the first hope of success in a combat under such circumstances.
Neither the consideration of the relative force of the ships, the fact of the blowing up of the gundeck above them by the bursting of two of the eighteen pounders, nor the alarm that the ship was sinking, could depress the ardor or change the determination of the brave Captain Jones, his officers and men. Neither the repeated broadsides of the Alliance, given with a view of sinking or disabling the Bonhomme Richard, the frequent necessity of suspending the combat to extinguish the flames, which several times were within a few inches of the magazine, nor the liberation by the master-at-arms of nearly five hundred prisoners, could change or weaken the purpose of the American commander. At the moment of the liberation of the prisoners, one of them, a commander of a twenty-gun ship taken a few days before, passed through the ports on board the Serapis, and informed Captain Pearson that if he would hold out only a little while longer, the ship alongside would either strike or sink, and that all the prisoners had been released to save their lives. The combat was accordingly continued with renewed ardor by the Serapis.
The fire from the tops of the Bonhomme Richard was conducted with so much skill and effect as to destroy ultimately every man who appeared upon the quarter-deck of the Serapis, and induced her commander to order the survivors to go below. Nor even under shelter of the decks were they more secure. The powder-monkeys of the Serapis, finding no officer to receive the eighteen-pound cartridges brought from the magazines, threw them on the main deck, and went for more. These cartridges being scattered along the deck, and numbers of them broken, it so happened that some of the hand grenades thrown from the main-yard of the Bonhomme Richard, which was directly over the main hatch of the Serapis, fell upon this powder, and produced a most awful explosion. The effect was tremendous. More than twenty of the enemy were blown to pieces, and many stood with only the collars of their shirts upon their bodies. In less than an hour afterward the flag of England, which had been nailed to the mast of the Serapis, was struck by Captain Pearson's own hands, as none of his people would venture aloft on this duty; and this, too, when more than 1,500 persons were witnessing the conflict, and the humiliating termination of it, from Scarborough and Flamborough Head."
It's not unbelievable if you understood that at sea the Officer of The Deck answers to no one but the Captain. No one, in the bridge or in CIC has the right to give orders to the helmsman, to make contact with other ships, or to take any action that changes the course and/or speed of the ship without the OOD's permission
Everyone else could be doing their jobs right but if the OOD is a fuckup and loses situational awareness it is very conceivable that the situation will deteriorate to the point of being unsalvageable regardless of what anyone else may do. That is why the CO personally sits on every OOD qualification board and his vote is law.
And it can be no other way. There can only be one final authority at sea.
I understand why some of you are incredibly confused about this: a ship at sea works very differently from anything you've ever known so you have no frame of reference.
Last edited:
Nothing can explain what happened. At the end of the day, another U.S. navy ship proved to be a sitting duck, means totally useless waste of very expensive resources. If I were in charge, I would push for death sentences for officers in charge and for prison sentences of everybody else who was on the bridge at the time of the accident.
This kind of shit requires extreme measures, otherwise, nothing will be fixed.
This kind of shit requires extreme measures, otherwise, nothing will be fixed.
Last edited:
Meh, too much money spent on non core areas, if you stopped the BS diversity training and actually trained sailors how to be goddam sailors these kids wouldn't be getting entombed in their quarters and then drowned like trapped rats. How many fk ups until the squids realize they have a goddam problem. Didn't a admiral just come out spouting off about his dedication to diversity and inclusion the day after trump gave his second charlotte speech. These little political officers need to be culled, all of them, any for that got fpromoted to field grade Nader Obamas and Bushes term need to get gone, they are tainted very tainted.
