You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Terror Networks
Something is fishy about USS Fitzgerald story we are getting from the media
2017-06-19
[AmericanThinker] Under no circumstances should a US Navy vessel possibly be damaged by a container ship at sea. Multiple systems exist to prevent this. Even CNN is noticing how little we know about the catastrophe that took the lives of seven sailors and almost caused a powerful warship to founder.

The USS Fitzgerald, an anti-ballistic missile destroyer that was part of the USS Ronald Reagan carrier strike group, will no longer be ready to defend the carrier and other ships from missile attacks launched from North Korea, should push come to shove in the current confrontation with the rogue regime on the threshold of the capability to attack New York, Los Angeles, and our power grid with nuclear missiles. This is an incident that could affect the outcome of a nuclear confrontation of historic moment.

Brian Joondeph yesterday noted how the media have distorted what really happened, by reporting a "collision," as if the ships randomly bumped each other in the fog or something. The truth is that the ACX Crystal, a ship with somewhat murky provenance, rammed into the Fitzgerald with calamitous results:

[Vice Adm. Joseph P. Aucoin of the 7th fleet] described the damage as "extensive," adding that there was a big puncture and gash below the waterline on one side of the ship. He also said three compartments were severely damaged.

"The ship is salvageable ... [it] will require some significant repair," Aucoin said. "You will see the USS Fitzgerald back ... It will take months, hopefully under a year."

Retired Rear Admiral John Kirby describes for CNN the extent of the chaos unleashed:

First, we know the crew fought heroically to save their ship and the lives of their shipmates. We know that from early reports by Navy officials but also from the images that flashed across our screens, our tablets and our phones after the incident happened early Saturday.

One look at the crushed, twisted starboard side, the hoses flaked about, the water being discharged, the frantic work being done tells you all you need to know about the stuff you can't see in those same images: a fiercely brave crew working together to staunch the flooding, to rescue their shipmates and to save their ship.

You can be certain they ended up drenched, exhausted, scraped and bruised -- but not broken. They kept that ship from foundering for 16 brutal hours. And they brought her back into port.

We received an email from a Navy Mother that raises serious questions. We will redact her name, while the rumors (and that’s how they must be categorized for now) reported by her son aboard the Fitzgerald are checked out. Here is what she wrote to us:

My son is assigned to the USS Fitzgerald. I am unable to share his rate with you.

The information is short and not so sweet. The implications are disturbing.

The ship is registered in the Philippines. We do not know who the owner is. The container ship neither had its running lights or transponder on. That is an action taken willfully. Furthermore, for the container ship to strike with such accuracy is troublesome. Given what some have done with cars in Europe, what a feather in the cap it would be to sink a U.S. Navy warship. Think on that.

My son missed being washed out to sea by the blink of an eye. He was on his way to one of the berthing areas that was rammed.

Yes, language is important. "Rammed" is the perfect word.

Loving and Concerned Navy Mother

If there is any substance to this ‐ that the ACX Crystal disabled protective systems and rammed the Fitzgerald at high speed aimed at crtical facilities (evident from the damage)

...we have to consider the possibility of an asymmetric warfare attack designed to disable missile defense of a carrier strike group, as North Korea demonstrates the ability to make exactly such attacks on a multibillion dollar warship carrying thousands of sailors.

Posted by:Anomalous Sources

#20  Not a Philippine vessel. Per Wiki, "ACX Crystal has been owned by Olympic Steamship Co SA, Panama (a subsidiary of Japanese shipowner Sunford Shipping Ltd) and managed by Sea Quest Ship Management Inc of Bacoor, Philippines since 2008.[4][3] The ship has been bareboat-chartered to Sinbanali Shipping Inc of Manila since 2014,[3] but is reported by NYK Line on June 17 as being actually owned by Dainichi-Invest Corporation, a Japanese ship investment firm."

IMO, American Thinker is usually a pretty reliable opinion source. Maybe this is a klinker, maybe not. Time will tell. Had considered the tinfoil hat .jpg, but figured Kimmie was the net beneficiary of this "collision."
Posted by: Anomalous Sources   2017-06-19 20:04  

#19  A nice only facts as known, with a rules of the road graphic:
https://warontherocks.com/2017/06/how-could-this-happen-the-fitzgerald-the-u-s-navy-and-collisions-at-sea/
Posted by: ed in texas   2017-06-19 19:59  

#18  Is it possible to hack the autopilot?

Possible, but very, very, very highly unlikely.

Posted by: Pappy   2017-06-19 16:16  

#17  Was this a IED in a shipping container? Or, on a cargo truck?
Posted by Tennessee


Neither, we were told it was in a small trailer. Someone in Kandahar had it under UAV observation and believed it to be a HME transporter, due to it's somewhat frequent relocations. Some lads from up north did a vertical insertion via UH-60 and one of them set it off as he conducted a recce. A couple of the survivors attempted to climb to the 'high ground' and radio for MEDIVAC. They tripped strategically placed anti-personnel mines. All in all, a very, very bad day.
Posted by: Besoeker   2017-06-19 15:01  

#16  Is it possible to hack the autopilot?
Posted by: BrerRabbit   2017-06-19 14:59  

#15  Daily Mail roundup
Posted by: Skidmark   2017-06-19 14:35  

#14  #6 A few years ago, I was 6-8 kilometers away from a booby trapped cargo trailer and line mine incident along the PAK border in AFG that resulted in a number of US killed in action. Incidents like these in wartime or peace just make an old man silently weep.
Posted by Besoeker
Was this a IED in a shipping container? Or, on a cargo truck?
Posted by: Tennessee   2017-06-19 13:06  

#13  Been awhile, but when I sailed on merchant ships they had "collision avoidance" radar...which I believe filtered out small fishing vessels..1980's..
Posted by: crazyhorse   2017-06-19 11:16  

#12  That's the key point rjschwarz. There can be a lot of clutter on primary radar. In a busy place like the seas off Japan, the Fitzgerald may have relied on the cleaner looking symbology of secondary radar.

In any case the Fitzgerald almost played PT-109 to a lumbering container ship with a huge radar signature.
Posted by: The peanut gallery   2017-06-19 10:40  

#11  The container ship neither had its running lights or transponder on.

But presumably it was still visible on radar for miles in every direction. I find it hard to imagine they didn't know exactly where that ship was which begs the question why would a nimble destroyer ever allow a lumbering mountain of metal to get so close when they had the whole ocean to maneuver in.



Posted by: rjschwarz   2017-06-19 10:04  

#10  ...which means you'll never get it via the Lame Stream Media.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2017-06-19 09:40  

#9  Facts are lacking. I will withhold judgement but not forever. It is incumbent on all involved parties to get to bottom of this and publish the facts in a timely manner.
Posted by: Ulineter Darling of the Sith6718   2017-06-19 08:52  

#8  The container ship neither had its running lights or transponder on

That's not surprising to anyone who's dealt with flag-of-convenience merchant shipping, merchant shipping in Asia, and merchant shipping in general.

As for 'transponder-off', if the news reports are accurate, there supposedly a radar track on the merchant's course and maneuvering.

The only things remotely accurate about this whole article are the ships' names, the causalties, and "the rumors (and that’s how they must be categorized for now)".

Everything else is tin-foil hat.
Posted by: Pappy   2017-06-19 08:28  

#7  Good to know, Angung Gonque4787.
Posted by: trailing wife   2017-06-19 06:19  

#6  A few years ago, I was 6-8 kilometers away from a booby trapped cargo trailer and line mine incident along the PAK border in AFG that resulted in a number of US killed in action. Incidents like these in wartime or peace just make an old man silently weep.
Posted by: Besoeker   2017-06-19 05:52  

#5  This is tinfoil...

The only thing fishy is the USS Fitzgerald below the waterline.
Posted by: Bright Pebbles   2017-06-19 05:34  

#4  The USS Fitzgerald does not carry a crew of thousands. The number is 300.
The location of the collision is in the area of the largest shipping harbor in Japan that is considered dangerous any time day or night and requires caution to navigate.
The Philippine ship is under control of a Japanese shipping company.
The Philippine ship decided to pull a U-turn and is several times larger and cumbersome than the agile and quicker US Warship.
The US Ship, though a part of the Reagan carrier taskforce, was not active with the task force but was on an independent, routine mission.
Posted by: Angung Gonque4787   2017-06-19 04:39  

#3  They claim to br Filipinos, are they really?
Posted by: Seeking cure for ignorance   2017-06-19 03:23  

#2  You can never know, gorb. Personally, I think it's like car accident - which mostly happen when both drivers screw up.
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2017-06-19 03:13  

#1  The ACX Crystal was crewed by Filipinos. This doesn't seem like the ideal nationality to serve Nork interests.
Posted by: gorb   2017-06-19 01:54  

00:00