Shambolic start to probe into USS Fitzgerald collision
An investigation into a collision between a USS destroyer and a Japanese container ship which killed seven sailors has got off to a shambolic start – because neither side can agree what time it happened.
The Japanese coastguard is investigating the USS Fitzgerald and the Philippine-flagged ACX Crystal for professional negligence and endangerment.
Both vessels collided in an early morning crash just outside Tokyo Bay on Saturday.
Seven US Navy sailors were killed in the collision, authorities have confirmed. They are (top row, left to right) Fire Controlman 2nd Class Carlos Victor Ganzon Sibayan, 23, from Chula Vista, CA; Gunner’s Mate Seaman Dakota Kyle Rigsby, 19, from Palmyra, VA; Sonar Technician 3rd Class Ngoc T Truong Huynh, 25, from Oakville, CT; and Yeoman 3rd Class Shingo Alexander Douglass, 25, from San Diego, CA. Bottom row (left to right Fire Controlman 1st Class Gary Leo Rehm Jr., from Elyria, OH; Personnel Specialist 1st Class Xavier Alec Martin, 24, from Halethorpe, MD; and Gunner’s Mate 2nd Class Noe Hernandez, 26, from Weslaco, TX
Heavy damage is pictured on the US Navy missile destroyer USS Fitzgerald after it collided with a cargo ship near Japan early on Saturday morning
Several months to fix: An aerial view shows the damage to the $1.5bn guided-missile destroyer
As US forces are exempt from Japanese judicial process owing to an agreement between the two countries, the coastguard has so far only questioned the Crystal’s exclusively Philippine crew and captain, said the authorities.
The US Navy however said it was also aiding the Japanese authorities.
The Japanese authorities confirmed to Mailonline that they received the distress call from the Crystal container ship at 2.25am local time.
However, the Tokyo based shipping firm NYK Line told the Mailonline that the collision occurred at 1.30am.
The victims might have been killed by the impact of the collision or drowned in the flooding, said Navy spokesman Lt Paul Newell, who led the media on a visit to get a firsthand look at the mangled destroyer. ‘The damage was significant,’ he said. ‘This was not a small collision’
Listing: A shot of the ship’s helipad shows how dramatically the USS Fitzgerald is listing after the accident
‘We had a report from the ship around that time saying something had been hit. We believe the ship then informed the coast guard after 2am,’ said a spokeswoman.
Analysts tracking the movements of the ship agree the crash came at 1.30am and not an hour later, according to reports in Japan.
The US Navy’s official log notes that the collision took place at 2.20am, confirmed a US Navy spokesman.
The discrepancies led to some media reports, based on the tracking of the Crystal, suggesting the Crystal had turned suddenly before the time the Navy insists the crash took place.
But the tracks of the merchant ship showed this was impossible, as the Crystal slowed just after 01.30am and then made a U-turn.
Commercial shipping can be tracked, such as the ACX Crystal, in real time via maps on maritime tracking websites.
Steffan Watkins, an IT security consultant and ship tracking analyst for Janes Intelligence Review, told MailOnline that the u-turn could have been carried out to find out what had been hit.
The damage to the destroyer suggests that the ACX Crystal might have slammed into it at a high speed, raising questions about communication between the two vessels in an area where as many as 400 ships pass through every day, according to Japan’s coast guard
The coast guard questioned crew members of the ACX Crystal, and is treating the incident as a case of possible professional negligence, said Masayuki Obara, a regional coast guard official
He stated: ‘The collision happened at 1.30am, not 2.20am or 2.25am as the US Navy and the US 7th Fleet has mistakenly reported.’
A spokesman for the Pacific Fleet confirmed the Navy is sticking with its time of 2.20am for the time of the collision.
After shifting through the data of the Crystals tracks at sea Watkins has concluded the cargo carrier mistakenly blindsided the Fitzgerald as the ship was without a human pilot at the time.
‘I suspect, from the data, that the Crystal was running on autopilot the whole time, and nobody was on the bridge. If anyone was on the bridge, they had no idea how to turn off the autopilot.
‘The ship taking off from the collision and resuming course, to me, is 100 per cent proof the ship was on autopilot. Nobody speeds away from that.’
According the the tracking data 15 minutes after the presumed 1.30am collision with the Fitzgerald, the ship righted it’s course, and increased speed, readjusting for the change in course the collision had made.
The container ship was seen making a U-turn before the collision on some ship trackers, a move that has raised questions about what happened. Both Aucoin and the Japanese coast guard, however, said it was too early to determine what led to the collision
‘This is, to me, proof that a computer was driving. No captain shakes off a collision with a US Navy Destroyer and resumes course so perfectly,’ said Watkins.
The company that charted the Crystal, NYK Line, confirmed to Mailonline that its offices received a call from to say they had hit something.
It wasn’t until an hour later that the merchant ship informed the Japanese coast Guard.
‘After further review of all the data and their own information (I am not privy to what sensors and transponders they might have) I’m sure the US Navy knows by now the hit was at 1.30am, but is in a difficult position to explain that time difference,” said Watkins.
‘Not calling it in until 2.25am is unbelievable unless you consider they had no idea what they hit until 2.25am.
‘It is unconscionable to think a 30,000 ton vessel collided with, and could have utterly destroyed, another vessel, and waited an hour to call the Japanese Coast Guard and report the collision.’
Most of the damage is below the waterline, including a large gash near the keel, Aucoin said. ‘So the water flow was tremendous, and so there wasn’t a lot of time in those spaces that were open to the sea,’ he said adding that the accident was ‘traumatic’
So far there is nothing to indicate how two well equipped vessels could not avoid one another.
Scott Cheney-Peters, division officer aboard the Fitzgerald 2006-2008, suggested the accident was down to human error.
‘There’s a lot that can go wrong even when the bridge team one or both ships is doing everything it can to avoid a collision. It’s too early to speculate on the exact circumstances in this case so this is only to help understand the context,’ he told Mailonline.
‘The first thing to remember is the physics – ships can carry an immense amount of momentum with them given their size.
‘Every time two ships approach each other at sea they rely on codified rules of the road to govern how they perform their delicate dance.
‘But making sure they get the steps right depends on a shared understanding of the situation – which can be more difficult at night – and failing that, communication.’
The US Navy and the Japanese authorities, and NYK have declined to comment on aspects of the ongoing investigation, nor has an explanation been offered as to why USS Fitzgerald did not see the ACX Crystal coming and vice versa.
All parties have refused to discus the investigation which they say is still ongoing.
According to Japanese law suspects in criminal proceedings, such as these, can be held for at least 23 days without charge and without access to lawyers.
The coast guard declined to confirm if they were still questioning the Philippine crew and captain in Yokohama with the Crystal in now berthed.
from WordPress http://ift.tt/2sGAbv0
via IFTTT
0 Comments