Audio from bridge of USS Porter during collision at sea

LITS,

I think you are missing the overall point. If a pilot got into a crash, would it be proper for another pilot to say, "if I did this, if I did that" then the crash wouldn't have happened (emphasis on the "I")? I know in these situations a lot of people will have questions -- yourself and myself, included -- but it doesn't give me the right to post an opinion without all the facts and start saying, "the easy and simple answer was to come to this course, use bridge to bridge (which no one here knows if it was even done), have been more forceful, etc." Leave that to the investigation and when the facts come out, then if you want to speculate what you would have done, fine (still something I wouldn't do).

I can tell you that in the pond, I was in a situation that had potential to go south, but took appropriate actions so it wouldn't (this wasn't safety of navigation related or anything remotely close to this incident). However, had the situation gone that way, I wouldn't want someone saying (particularly who wasn't there), "oh, if I did this and I did that...it wouldn't have happened."

I made my point and moving on. I can't stop anyone's free speech rights...but wish their would be a little more professional courtesy about forming opinions.
 
Last edited:
It's not an opinion. it's a fact. Can yes, if a helo pilot was landing, and his co-pilot said "sir, I don't think we should land right now, there is another helo immediate below us and if we try to land we're going to land on his rotor" and then the pilot lands anyway..... I'm pretty sure a pilot could say "I'd never do that."

This isn't that hard. The professional courtesy is not violating clear rules and hitting another ship.

The nice thing about this situation is it's on a 2-D surface, we have the audio of what happened, and the OOD is telling the CO that he SHOULDN'T violate the rules... and the CO does it anyway.

Oh, and this is one of those "this is why the rules exist" moments... so everyone knows what's going on....but apparently this Navy CO wasn't on the same page.


Everyone has a hairy situation that could have gone south, that's the nature of the beast. On top of that, there are a number of choke points around the world that make hairy situations hairier. That's OK. Instead of taking the correct actions, he turned hard to port and went flank speed to cut another ships bow. That other ship likely expected him to come to stbd and take his stern. I'm not saying it wasn't a tense, highly stressful evolution. I am saying he made it far worse with the decisions he made.
 
usnabgo08 said:
I respect the amount of experience you have...BUT you weren't there.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it’s probably a good thing I wasn’t there. The last thing such a sophisticated, thoroughly professional, well trained and organized bridge like that would need is an old broke down Merchy captain like me getting in the way.. besides just listening to that audio in the comfort of my home scared me enough to make my grommet pucker..

I will tell you one thing with certainty though. If that was my ship I would taken the conn (at least a half an hour before the start time on the audio) and posted myself at the centerline bridge window. Then with a good pair of binoculars, my Mark 1 Mod 0 eyeballs and the support of my well trained bridge team (probably my Chief Mate, Second Mate and helmsman) driven her through.

Here are a few things that stand out to me in the audio clip..
1) There was WAY too much noise on that bridge. In contrast the bridges on almost all Merchant ship are dead quiet.

2) For the life of me, I couldn’t tell who had the conn. Although I did hear the Old Man give an order to the helm; so I would assume he did. That’s the way it works in the Merchant world; not sure about the Navy.

3) I never heard any radar plot information on the approaching ship (i.e. CPA, TCPA or BCR) passed to the CO or OOD. Was anything even plotted by CIC or an ARPA equipped bridge radar? Puzzling to say the least..

4) I heard no attempt to make contact with the tanker by VHF radio on channel 16.

5) The CO's lack of situational awareness of the developing disaster. He’s roughly a minute and a half from being “in Extremis” and he seems almost blase about it.

For those that aren’t familiar with the International Regulations for Prevention of Collision at Sea (ColRegs72) here’s rule 15 that applies in this situation.

When two power-driven vessels are crossing so as to involve risk of collision, the vessel which has the other on her own starboard side shall keep out of the way and shall, if the circumstances of the case admit, avoid crossing ahead of the other vessel.

Many moons ago when I first started sailing on my license I had an old captain tell me… “Remember kid, if you’re going to deviate from the Rules of the Road, you better do it in FLAWLESS fashion.”

usnabgo08 are you still going to sea in the Navy?
 
usnabgo08 are you still going to sea in the Navy?
Click to expand...

Yes. I have my own thoughts on the whole situation, but I am going to wait to see what the final investigation turns up. As a generalization and as you quite well know when doing a restricted waters/straits transit, you can't just worry about the closest contacts (even though those are priorities)...you have to worry what is "down the road" to avoid problematic issues from emerging; who knows if that was being done in this case. Who knows what the scope of the radar was set to and/or if that contact was tracked...I'm sure that is something that will be investigated/reported. What were the lookouts doing? Were these guys trained properly?
 
usnabgo08 said:
Yes. I have my own thoughts on the whole situation, but I am going to wait to see what the final investigation turns up. As a generalization and as you quite well know when doing a restricted waters/straits transit, you can't just worry about the closest contacts (even though those are priorities)...you have to worry what is "down the road" to avoid problematic issues from emerging; who knows if that was being done in this case. Who knows what the scope of the radar was set to and/or if that contact was tracked...I'm sure that is something that will be investigated/reported. What were the lookouts doing? Were these guys trained properly?
Click to expand...

Well son, I sincerely hope the bridge of your ship is run better than the PORTER's; otherwise I fear for your safety.

You're absolutely right about traffic "down the road". That's why the CPA and TCPA plot information obtained from the radar is so vitally important. You deal with the "most dangerous contact" first. The "most dangerous" contact is defined as the one with the closest CPA in the shortest period of time. It's also why all IMO approved ARPA radars I've work with have a "trial maneuver" feature. That way you can run a test, if you will, of your new course and/or speed and see how it's going to effect the plotted contacts. And that will help you formulate a collision avoidance strategy.

What were the lookouts doing? Were these guys trained properly?
Click to expand...
Remember the PRIMARY lookout is the conning officer. Just a word of advice; when things start to get tight.. get your nose in that centerline bridge window and drive.

By the way, I happen to work in a place where I might be able to reconstruct this incident. I can't do it right now due to schedule and I won't go into a lot of details, but I might give it a go when summer rolls around. If I do get it done, I'll try and share with you guys (by PM) what I find out. Anyway usnabgo08.. Sail Safe
 
Last edited:
"Guys, I'm going to attempt to bounce Porter off that supertanker there, in the hopes that the resulting damage will force us to come down in speed, so as to avoid a 1.5 NM CPA with that other vessel 25 NM down our trackline. Any issues with that?"


"Well sir I think..."

"No, no. You think you think? It doesn't matter! Hurry up before they get by us!"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top