Ship Collisions May be Due to Sleep Deprivation

[longknife]

They refer to “five and dime” watches, with five on and ten off, performing other duties during those ten hours.

“I averaged 3 hours of sleep a night” on a destroyer and cruiser, the sailor wrote:

I have personally gone without sleep for so long that I have seen and heard things that weren’t there. I’ve witnessed accidents that could have been avoided because the person was so tired they had no right to be operating heavy machinery, including an incident in which someone got descalped and someone else almost losing a finger.

The full stgory with lots of links and Tweets @ Amid 7th Fleet Turmoil, Sailors Flag A Silent Threat: Sleep Deprivation

 

[Rexx Taylor]

first it was a few democrats texting while driving trains doing 65mph....then they crashed....please dont tell me that the captain/or driver of the ship this time around was texting.

 

[MarathonMike]

You have multi-billion dollar warships and the priceless crew at stake. There is no reason to rely on tired human eyeballs to be your warning system. Like I've posted before collision warning systems have been in place in commercial aircraft for decades and now they are in cars. It would be relatively simple and inexpensive to put a collision warning system into our ships to take the human out of the loop.

 

[pismoe]

yeah on the trains that crash , what are they , commuter trains in big cities . Now with this sleep deprivation thing on Naval vessels . Off the top of my head before looking at any links all i can say is that it seems that everyone has an EXCUSE . --------------------------------------- also , seems to me that navy bigwigs that are in charge understand the importance of sleep and rest . Anyway , with my limited knowledge and my first thought is that i just figure that this excuse is just more BS excuses .

 

[Fenton Lum]

Pretty stupid isn't it.

 

[pismoe]

You have multi-billion dollar warships and the priceless crew at stake. There is no reason to rely on tired human eyeballs to be your warning system. Like I've posted before collision warning systems have been in place in commercial aircraft for decades and now they are in cars. It would be relatively simple and inexpensive to put a collision warning system into our ships to take the human out of the loop.

---------------------------------------------------- sure , i think it should be all warning devices of all types but i also want human eyes watching . Someone said that human eyes can't be hacked and i think that that is true MMike .

 

[OldLady]

They refer to “five and dime” watches, with five on and ten off, performing other duties during those ten hours.

“I averaged 3 hours of sleep a night” on a destroyer and cruiser, the sailor wrote:

I have personally gone without sleep for so long that I have seen and heard things that weren’t there. I’ve witnessed accidents that could have been avoided because the person was so tired they had no right to be operating heavy machinery, including an incident in which someone got descalped and someone else almost losing a finger.

The full stgory with lots of links and Tweets @ Amid 7th Fleet Turmoil, Sailors Flag A Silent Threat: Sleep Deprivation

Do they need to put more sailors on the ships? Are we short handed? I didn't see that listed as a possible reason in the article, but why would you do that to sailors on a regular basis when their alertness is so important on the watch?

 

[ABikerSailor]

first it was a few democrats texting while driving trains doing 65mph....then they crashed....please dont tell me that the captain/or driver of the ship this time around was texting.

You really are quite simple if you think that there was a possibility of them texting out in the middle of the ocean. Hate to tell you, but there are no cell phone towers out there.

And, there is more than just one person on the bridge when the ship is steaming across the water. There is the helm (the person steering the ship), the lee helm (the person controlling the speed), the Quartermaster (the person plotting the course the ship will take), the Officer of the Deck (person in charge of the bridge), the Assistant Officer of the Deck (secondary supervisor of the bridge), as well as the port and starboard bridge watches.

My opinion on what happened? Probably one of the ships changed course without telling anyone and the quartermasters probably made an error in their math. And yeah, that could happen if their stories about the 5 and 10 watches is true. During the time I was active duty Navy ('82 to '02), watches were in 4 hour increments. They were 00 to 04, 04 to 08, 08 to 12, 12 to 16, and 16 to 24 (watches are posted in military time). Granted, you had to do your watch in addition to your normal work duties, but you were given time off the next day for sleep if you had a 00 to 04 watch.

 

[ABikerSailor]

You have multi-billion dollar warships and the priceless crew at stake. There is no reason to rely on tired human eyeballs to be your warning system. Like I've posted before collision warning systems have been in place in commercial aircraft for decades and now they are in cars. It would be relatively simple and inexpensive to put a collision warning system into our ships to take the human out of the loop.

They ALREADY have electronic warning systems onboard the ship. It's called surface radar and it will tell you everything that is around you. The problem isn't so much with knowing where something is, but rather knowing where something is GOING to be so that you don't try to occupy the same space as another ship, and that is accomplished by reading the radar and calculating the relative bearing and direction of not only your ship, but all the other ships that appear on the radar. However...............if one of those ships makes a sudden unexpected move, you have to re calculate their bearing and speed and make corrections.

Why do you have to do all that? Because there aren't good brakes on a ship. All they can do is spin their propeller backwards to slow down to stop, but ships do not stop on a dime.

 

[leftwinger]

Why not Shoot big on board weapons to eliminate anything coming at you? Bet they all become more careful. First ship "hit" had muslims on it from Southern Philippines.......just pointing that out. Shoot them first.

You are welcome in advance. next problem please.

 

[Rexx Taylor]

You have multi-billion dollar warships and the priceless crew at stake. There is no reason to rely on tired human eyeballs to be your warning system. Like I've posted before collision warning systems have been in place in commercial aircraft for decades and now they are in cars. It would be relatively simple and inexpensive to put a collision warning system into our ships to take the human out of the loop.

maxine waters will claim that many of the ships engine parts were built by a company owned by trump

 

[MarathonMike]

I get it that ships don't have brakes like cars, but then neither do jets. The point is to have your system sound a warning when a ship is closing in and make an evasive maneuver AWAY from the incoming ship. That way, instead of being T-boned by a million ton tanker maybe it turns into a glancing blow or we avoid them altogether.

 

[ABikerSailor]

I get it that ships don't have brakes like cars, but then neither do jets. The point is to have your system sound a warning when a ship is closing in and make an evasive maneuver AWAY from the incoming ship. That way, instead of being T-boned by a million ton tanker maybe it turns into a glancing blow or we avoid them altogether.

Like I said.........you have to calculate relative bearing and speed, and compare that to what your ship is doing. Yes, there is a warning system already onboard, but like I said, if you have an error in your math, you will have an error in where your ship is or where it is going to be, and that is one of the main problems. And, like I said, if the other ship makes an unexpected maneuver and they don't tell you what they are doing, you won't know where they will be until you RECALCULATE their relative bearing and speed. If they are moving too fast in their closure rate, there may not be enough time for evasive maneuvers.

And yes, even jets have had mid air collisions. It's rare, but it has happened.

Same thing with other drivers that make moves that you don't expect. If that happens, you end up in a crash.

 

[MarathonMike]

I get it that ships don't have brakes like cars, but then neither do jets. The point is to have your system sound a warning when a ship is closing in and make an evasive maneuver AWAY from the incoming ship. That way, instead of being T-boned by a million ton tanker maybe it turns into a glancing blow or we avoid them altogether.

Like I said.........you have to calculate relative bearing and speed, and compare that to what your ship is doing. Yes, there is a warning system already onboard, but like I said, if you have an error in your math, you will have an error in where your ship is or where it is going to be, and that is one of the main problems. And, like I said, if the other ship makes an unexpected maneuver and they don't tell you what they are doing, you won't know where they will be until you RECALCULATE their relative bearing and speed. If they are moving too fast in their closure rate, there may not be enough time for evasive maneuvers.

And yes, even jets have had mid air collisions. It's rare, but it has happened.

Same thing with other drivers that make moves that you don't expect. If that happens, you end up in a crash.

Well if there is a warning system already in place then it isn't working very well. In both collisions, these were not quickly turning ships, they were huge tankers. Are you saying it can't be done? We can't implement an automated collision avoidance system that actually works on a Navy ship? It may not cover every scenario but we can certainly improve what we have and I think they will be.

 

[ABikerSailor]

I get it that ships don't have brakes like cars, but then neither do jets. The point is to have your system sound a warning when a ship is closing in and make an evasive maneuver AWAY from the incoming ship. That way, instead of being T-boned by a million ton tanker maybe it turns into a glancing blow or we avoid them altogether.

Like I said.........you have to calculate relative bearing and speed, and compare that to what your ship is doing. Yes, there is a warning system already onboard, but like I said, if you have an error in your math, you will have an error in where your ship is or where it is going to be, and that is one of the main problems. And, like I said, if the other ship makes an unexpected maneuver and they don't tell you what they are doing, you won't know where they will be until you RECALCULATE their relative bearing and speed. If they are moving too fast in their closure rate, there may not be enough time for evasive maneuvers.

And yes, even jets have had mid air collisions. It's rare, but it has happened.

Same thing with other drivers that make moves that you don't expect. If that happens, you end up in a crash.

Well if there is a warning system already in place then it isn't working very well. In both collisions, these were not quickly turning ships, they were huge tankers. Are you saying it can't be done? We can't implement an automated collision avoidance system that actually works on a Navy ship? It may not cover every scenario but we can certainly improve what we have and I think they will be.

Like I said, there is more to it than just radar, and it takes quite a distance for a ship to stop, even if it's emergency stop. You have to use the radar to find out what the other ship is doing and you have to calculate it to make sure there is no collision. If there is an error in the math, or if the other ship makes an unexpected move, there may not be enough time to recalculate a course that avoids a collision. You might think that civilian ships follow the same rules of the sea that the U.S. Navy does, but you would be sorely mistaken. I served in the Navy from '82 until '02, and have seen civilian ships, both cargo and tanker, as well as smaller fishing vessels get in the way of our course without even letting us know what they were doing.

 

[pismoe]

I get it that ships don't have brakes like cars, but then neither do jets. The point is to have your system sound a warning when a ship is closing in and make an evasive maneuver AWAY from the incoming ship. That way, instead of being T-boned by a million ton tanker maybe it turns into a glancing blow or we avoid them altogether.

Like I said.........you have to calculate relative bearing and speed, and compare that to what your ship is doing. Yes, there is a warning system already onboard, but like I said, if you have an error in your math, you will have an error in where your ship is or where it is going to be, and that is one of the main problems. And, like I said, if the other ship makes an unexpected maneuver and they don't tell you what they are doing, you won't know where they will be until you RECALCULATE their relative bearing and speed. If they are moving too fast in their closure rate, there may not be enough time for evasive maneuvers.

And yes, even jets have had mid air collisions. It's rare, but it has happened.

Same thing with other drivers that make moves that you don't expect. If that happens, you end up in a crash.

Well if there is a warning system already in place then it isn't working very well. In both collisions, these were not quickly turning ships, they were huge tankers. Are you saying it can't be done? We can't implement an automated collision avoidance system that actually works on a Navy ship? It may not cover every scenario but we can certainly improve what we have and I think they will be.

Like I said, there is more to it than just radar, and it takes quite a distance for a ship to stop, even if it's emergency stop. You have to use the radar to find out what the other ship is doing and you have to calculate it to make sure there is no collision. If there is an error in the math, or if the other ship makes an unexpected move, there may not be enough time to recalculate a course that avoids a collision. You might think that civilian ships follow the same rules of the sea that the U.S. Navy does, but you would be sorely mistaken. I served in the Navy from '82 until '02, and have seen civilian ships, both cargo and tanker, as well as smaller fishing vessels get in the way of our course without even letting us know what they were doing.

----------------------------------------------------------------------- seems to me and i have no knowledge but the most professional types on the high seas would be the USA Navy and other Western Navies . And might be farfetched but some of these commercial ships MAY be purposely causing collisions simply because their nations are enemies or they are just annoyed with the 'big boy' USA . Also , who loses in a collision between a commercial tanker and a ship like the 'mccain' . Looks like the 'mcain' lost in this collision , did the tanker just sail away with no or little damage to possibly ram another USA Navy ship BSailor .

 

[ABikerSailor]

I get it that ships don't have brakes like cars, but then neither do jets. The point is to have your system sound a warning when a ship is closing in and make an evasive maneuver AWAY from the incoming ship. That way, instead of being T-boned by a million ton tanker maybe it turns into a glancing blow or we avoid them altogether.

Like I said.........you have to calculate relative bearing and speed, and compare that to what your ship is doing. Yes, there is a warning system already onboard, but like I said, if you have an error in your math, you will have an error in where your ship is or where it is going to be, and that is one of the main problems. And, like I said, if the other ship makes an unexpected maneuver and they don't tell you what they are doing, you won't know where they will be until you RECALCULATE their relative bearing and speed. If they are moving too fast in their closure rate, there may not be enough time for evasive maneuvers.

And yes, even jets have had mid air collisions. It's rare, but it has happened.

Same thing with other drivers that make moves that you don't expect. If that happens, you end up in a crash.

Well if there is a warning system already in place then it isn't working very well. In both collisions, these were not quickly turning ships, they were huge tankers. Are you saying it can't be done? We can't implement an automated collision avoidance system that actually works on a Navy ship? It may not cover every scenario but we can certainly improve what we have and I think they will be.

Like I said, there is more to it than just radar, and it takes quite a distance for a ship to stop, even if it's emergency stop. You have to use the radar to find out what the other ship is doing and you have to calculate it to make sure there is no collision. If there is an error in the math, or if the other ship makes an unexpected move, there may not be enough time to recalculate a course that avoids a collision. You might think that civilian ships follow the same rules of the sea that the U.S. Navy does, but you would be sorely mistaken. I served in the Navy from '82 until '02, and have seen civilian ships, both cargo and tanker, as well as smaller fishing vessels get in the way of our course without even letting us know what they were doing.

----------------------------------------------------------------------- seems to me and i have no knowledge but the most professional types on the high seas would be the USA Navyand other Wesern Navies . And might be farfetched but some of these commercial ships MAY be purposely causing collisions simply because their nations are enemies or they are just annoyed with the 'big boy' USA . Also , who loses in a collision between a commercial tanker and a ship like the 'mccain' . Looks like the 'mcain' lost in this collision , did the tanker just sail away with no or little damage to possibly ram another USA Navy ship BSailor .

Don't go conspiracy theorist on me. No, I have never heard of a commercial ship intentionally ramming a U.S. Navy vessel. As far as who is the biggest loser when a collision like this happens? Depends on which ship is larger, and also depends on the direction the impact came from, as well as where it hits on the ship that does the ramming. Yeah, the McCain took damage, but I'd also like to see what happened to the other ship.

And no, when ships of that size collide, there is significant damage to both ships. The reason that the McCain has more casualties is because the tanker hit them directly where the berthing area is. Tankers and cargo ships don't have their berthing areas near the waterline like that because that is where the cargo and oil are.

 

[MarathonMike]

I get it that ships don't have brakes like cars, but then neither do jets. The point is to have your system sound a warning when a ship is closing in and make an evasive maneuver AWAY from the incoming ship. That way, instead of being T-boned by a million ton tanker maybe it turns into a glancing blow or we avoid them altogether.

Like I said.........you have to calculate relative bearing and speed, and compare that to what your ship is doing. Yes, there is a warning system already onboard, but like I said, if you have an error in your math, you will have an error in where your ship is or where it is going to be, and that is one of the main problems. And, like I said, if the other ship makes an unexpected maneuver and they don't tell you what they are doing, you won't know where they will be until you RECALCULATE their relative bearing and speed. If they are moving too fast in their closure rate, there may not be enough time for evasive maneuvers.

And yes, even jets have had mid air collisions. It's rare, but it has happened.

Same thing with other drivers that make moves that you don't expect. If that happens, you end up in a crash.

Well if there is a warning system already in place then it isn't working very well. In both collisions, these were not quickly turning ships, they were huge tankers. Are you saying it can't be done? We can't implement an automated collision avoidance system that actually works on a Navy ship? It may not cover every scenario but we can certainly improve what we have and I think they will be.

Like I said, there is more to it than just radar, and it takes quite a distance for a ship to stop, even if it's emergency stop. You have to use the radar to find out what the other ship is doing and you have to calculate it to make sure there is no collision. If there is an error in the math, or if the other ship makes an unexpected move, there may not be enough time to recalculate a course that avoids a collision. You might think that civilian ships follow the same rules of the sea that the U.S. Navy does, but you would be sorely mistaken. I served in the Navy from '82 until '02, and have seen civilian ships, both cargo and tanker, as well as smaller fishing vessels get in the way of our course without even letting us know what they were doing.

I am not disagreeing you that it's very complicated and you clearly know way more about the specifics of the difficulties than I do. And I am not saying stop, I am saying keep going and turn like a mutherf*kr!

I am also not a sailor but I am a software engineer who worked on air data computers and other commercial airborne computer systems back in the 90s. I know that we can significantly improve what we have in terms of collision avoidance. I truly believe that is one of the things being looked at during the Navy stand down.

 

[pismoe]

thanks but conspiracy to me is just thoughtful thinking . USA Military USA Navy , USA People and USA Nation has lots of enemies . We dealt with airliners crashing the Trade Towers , we deal with muslims that blow themselves up to kill their enemies and years ago we dealt with 'kamakazis flying into USA Navy Ships BSailor . ------------------------------------------

 

[ABikerSailor]

I get it that ships don't have brakes like cars, but then neither do jets. The point is to have your system sound a warning when a ship is closing in and make an evasive maneuver AWAY from the incoming ship. That way, instead of being T-boned by a million ton tanker maybe it turns into a glancing blow or we avoid them altogether.

Like I said.........you have to calculate relative bearing and speed, and compare that to what your ship is doing. Yes, there is a warning system already onboard, but like I said, if you have an error in your math, you will have an error in where your ship is or where it is going to be, and that is one of the main problems. And, like I said, if the other ship makes an unexpected maneuver and they don't tell you what they are doing, you won't know where they will be until you RECALCULATE their relative bearing and speed. If they are moving too fast in their closure rate, there may not be enough time for evasive maneuvers.

And yes, even jets have had mid air collisions. It's rare, but it has happened.

Same thing with other drivers that make moves that you don't expect. If that happens, you end up in a crash.

Well if there is a warning system already in place then it isn't working very well. In both collisions, these were not quickly turning ships, they were huge tankers. Are you saying it can't be done? We can't implement an automated collision avoidance system that actually works on a Navy ship? It may not cover every scenario but we can certainly improve what we have and I think they will be.

Like I said, there is more to it than just radar, and it takes quite a distance for a ship to stop, even if it's emergency stop. You have to use the radar to find out what the other ship is doing and you have to calculate it to make sure there is no collision. If there is an error in the math, or if the other ship makes an unexpected move, there may not be enough time to recalculate a course that avoids a collision. You might think that civilian ships follow the same rules of the sea that the U.S. Navy does, but you would be sorely mistaken. I served in the Navy from '82 until '02, and have seen civilian ships, both cargo and tanker, as well as smaller fishing vessels get in the way of our course without even letting us know what they were doing.

I am not disagreeing you that it's very complicated and you clearly know way more about the specifics of the difficulties than I do. And I am not saying stop, I am saying keep going and turn like a mutherf*kr!

I am also not a sailor but I am a software engineer who worked on air data computers and other commercial airborne computer systems back in the 90s. I know that we can significantly improve what we have in terms of collision avoidance. I truly believe that is one of the things being looked at during the Navy stand down.

You know, I was on the USS GEORGE WASHINGTON when they did their shakedown sea trials. One of the tests was to see how quickly the carrier could turn at a high rate of speed. Thankfully we didn't have any aircraft onboard because the whole ship tilted about 15 to 20 deg. when we did a super tight turn. Know what kind of distance was covered during that turn to do a 180? A little over half a mile.

And yeah, those systems the aircraft use to keep from hitting each other are good, but they are also tied in nationwide. Won't work for a Naval vessel, because there are sometimes when the ship has to shut down all radio emissions.

Yes, during the stand down they are going to be looking at stuff like what you suggested, but that is just a small part of what they will examine.