E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Jonathan Sunderman / AFP - Getty Images
A handout picture released by the U.S. Navy shows the damaged destroyer USS Porter following a collision with a bulk oil tanker in the Strait of Hormuz on Sunday.
An oil tanker collided with a U.S. Navy destroyer near the Strait of Hormuz on Sunday but no one was hurt and shipping traffic in the waterway, through which 40 percent of the world's seaborne oil exports pass, was not affected, officials said.
"Both vessels are okay and the Strait of Hormuz is not closed, and business is as usual there," an Oman coast guard official told Reuters, declining to be named under briefing rules.
The collision nevertheless left a gaping hole in the starboard side of USS Porter, a guided-missile destroyer suffered, but no one was injured on either vessel, the U.S. Navy said in a statement. The collision with the Panamanian-flagged bulk oil tanker M/V Otowasan occurred at approximately 1 a.m. local time.
The cause of the incident is under investigation, the Navy said, adding that there were no reports of spills or leakages from either the USS Porter or the Otowasan.
A collision between an oil tanker and a U.S. Navy missile destroyer in the Strait of Hormuz left the Navy ship with a gaping hole in its hull. NBC's Lester Holt reports.
US won't allow Iran to shut down Strait of Hormuz, Panetta vows
The USS Porter is on a scheduled deployment to the U.S. 5th Fleet, which is based in Bahrain.
The Strait of Hormuz, located at the mouth of the Persian Gulf, is where one-fifth of the world's oil is routed. Tensions have risen there over Iran's threats to block tanker traffic in retaliation for tighter sanctions by the West.
Three years ago, The USS Hartford, a nuclear-powered submarine based in Groton, Conn., collided in the Strait with the USS New Orleans, a San Diego-based amphibious ship.
The New Orleans' fuel tank was ruptured and 15 sailors on the Hartford sustained minor injuries. The collision caused $2.3 million in damage to the New Orleans, and the cost so far of repairs to the Hartford is $102.6 million.
A Navy ship opened fire on a boat that appeared to pose a threat, and a there is a new UAE oil pipeline that bypasses the Strait of Hormuz, with CNBC's Tyler Mathisen and Sharon Epperson.
Strait of Hormuz: Iranians, smugglers and fireworks
The commanding officer was relieved of his duties and the sub's chief of the boat, an adviser to the commanding officer, was reassigned. Several crew members were punished.
Reuters and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
More world stories from NBC News:
- Powerful earthquakes strike Iran, killing at least 180, destroying villages
- US, Turkey explore no-fly zones over Syria
- Olympic heroes turn tourists as London 2012 end nears
- 'There will be no winner in Syria,' UN chief warns
- Three US special ops troops killed, Afghan officials say
- Body found at home of missing UK girl's grandmother
- Day at Olympics well worth $1,000 for family of four, NJ fans say
- Notorious Colombian druglord arrested, headed to US for trial
- Who'll win the gold medal for partying? Olympians let hair down
- One year after London riots, a family still grapples with fallout
Leave a Comment:
Damn, we're gonna have a hard time defending against fast iranian gunboats if we can't detect an oil tanker sneaking up on us. I guess we need to fear texaco more than the republican guard.
All right, Fred, you owe me a monitor! Seems I spewed my drink all over this one! Hilarious!... :-)
"That'll buff right out."
Fred, I was thinking pretty much the same thing, how can you not see an oil tanker, I've heard rumors they are a little larger than wave runners. I fully support our military, but someone screwed the pooch on this one.
In all due respect, just a minor correction. The Republican Guard was Saddam's, and they got their butts kicked, you are thinking of Imajerkoff's Revolutionary Guard, and if they are not careful, they will also get their butts kicked.
So much for all that sophisticated, high-tech, zillion dollar, state-of-the-art, threat detection equipment on board! Maybe somebody should have just looked out a porthole!!!!
For some reason this reminds me of the story of the Navy group that came upon this fella that got in their way. The usual order was given for him to turn but he declined while telling them to turn instead. After a second request proved futile the Commander got on, informing him of the rules and requested he turn. When this fella refused and insisted they turn at once, the Commander ordered him but still the fella declined. Upset, the Commander then told him they were the United States Navy, the greatest power on the ocean and that there were other escourt vessels sailing along with his. He demanded the fella to turn. At which point the fella said he wasn't in the Navy so it didn't matter much what the Commander ordered him to do because he was a lighthouse. But the Commander might rethink his options.
USA!!! We're#1 !!! USA USA USA!
Must have been a stealth tanker. Or else I think a captain just became an ensign.
Our USNavy = asleep at the wheel, on watch, sonar, radar as well as DENSE FOG at the HELMSMANS OFFICE!!! WTF, izza matter w/USN!!!??? Heez name ees Pablo, >>> yusay???
Good one Darthfrodo
Fill'er up, oh yeah better wash that windshield.
"It's 1am and all is well."
*CRUNCH*
"This isn't the Titanic and that's no iceburg!!! WTF just happened?!!!"
"Awesome, the pizza delievery dude is here."
i can see retirement in this captains near future! were they all sleeping on the bridge?
Wow, that captain is set for a large demotion. There is no way a destroyer should collide with a tanker. The onus on the destroyer to avoid a collision. The tanker is continually tracked on radar from both CIC (combat information center) and radar on the bridge, as well as by sight.
This is a further cost for our belligerence, which is geared to satisfy Israel that the US is being tough on Iran. Our navy has no business sailing around the Gulf, wasting fuel and it now has a huge repair bill on it's hands. I guess it will provide jobs in some naval shipyard.
Fred, no use me posting because you said it all right there! (thumbup). If a great big oil tanker can get that close to one of our boats, than that boat is HISTORY. That was CHECK MATE on that destroyer. Good that it was friendly. The skipper of that boat has to go, an investigation, inquiry must take place, and if warranted, a court martial be covened. In addition, new orders need to be issued to the fleet in that area as far as rules of engagment.
Look, I am a liberal, and proud of it, but was everybody asleep on that boat? It is obvious the tanker was UNDETECTED! Come on, and COMPLETE revamping of the command in that area needs to take place, and quickly too.
"ICEBERG, Roight Ahead!!"
"Did you hear something?"
"Sounded like a crunch!"
"Is somebody eatin' Grapenuts up here?
OOPS!
Due to the State side repair cost they'll probably sail it over to India instead.
There is a country western band called 'Asleep at the Wheel'
Has anyone considered the possibilty that they challenged each other to a game of "Chicken" [ in this case, "chicken of the sea" ] and that they both won...or lost...just sayin'.
Its all good, Both guys at the helm were NASCAR fans and rubbing is racing ! The boys in the round room are just going to have to figure out who gets the black flag waived at them first.
How much does a gallon of gasoline really cost? If all the costs of protecting oil tankers were taken into account, alternative energy is cheaper. How much does our Navy subsidize oil company profits by protecting their product?
Interesting question, antiX. the flip side is how much would the price of gas go up if the oil companies couldn't get their product out? One way or another our dependency on foreign oil seems to be breaking our backs.
This wouldn't have happened if a Marine had been at the helm!
I have a questionk: Is the destroyer made of Steel or Aluminum? I know that a lot of recently -built Naval vessels have been made of Aluminum (lighter than steel, and probably cheaper to make). However, Steel is a lot tougher than Aluminum, and is a lot easier to repair (among other things, steel doesn't need high-tech welding equipment.). Can anybody answer which material was used for the destroyer?
If a marine had been at the helm, it would have hit the beach first.
Damn drunken sailors!
How do you protect ship traffic if you don't know where it is. The Iranians are probably going giddy trying to figure out how to duplicate this incident.
Wreck one US Navy Vessel and they never let you live it down.
News Flash:
Captain of USS Porter naval destroyer now offered $5 million/yr no cut, 10 yr contract to pilot Costa Cruise ships!!!!!!!!!
How in the heck does a guilded missle destroyer not see a frickin oil tanker on radar. RightOn comment Fred. This is both scarey and hilarious to me.
To Fred: The hull of the destroyer is made of steel plates. The bulk of the superstructure is made of aluminum. Modern frigates and cruisers are made the same way.
As for the expensive electronics, the US Navy frequently cruises in a war-time condition known as EMCON Alpha (at least that's what it was called while I served). It's a "stealth" mode where all electronics are turned off so the enemy can't find you by your electronic "signature". The destroyer may have even had its running lights off. But even so, lookouts should have seen the running lights on the tanker, if they were on.
Larry you may just be on to something. Do you know if the tanker could have the capability to run dark as well? And does EMCON Alpha also mean the Navy ships aren't using any kind of radar or sonar, only human eyes, to see what other vessels may be near them? I'm just wondering if that could explain how this happened. It just seems so unlikely that an event like this could occur. Especially in a narrow, busy straight with a lot of big ships in it. Seems like extra precautions would be taken in those circumstances.
These comments are freaking hilarious! My vote goes to #1.4: "Maybe somebody should have just looked out a porthole!!!!"
The captain's new call sign of the destroyer should be called Captain Crunch...because the impact will make him delegated to serving breakfast in the galley for the rest of his career.
Michelle-It didn't happen in the Strait itself, but near the mouth of it in an area where high traffic is occurring, so the possibility is the tanker may not have had its running lights on or multiple tankers were involved traveling together for safety. If the USS Porter was in stealth mode only human eyes would have been available to see the tanker. In addition if it were foggy, overcast or windy causing choppy waters, it would have made it even more difficult. The possibility of warnings that enemy boats could be in the area may also have played a part if the Ship were trying to remain hidden. We will have to wait to find out more details. Often stories that don't make sense are missing vital information that later clears things up. The tankers do not run in stealth mode per sae.They just turn off their equipment but it isn't recommended.The companies hire protection or request military support if needed.
EMCON would mean no electronic emissions, radar, sonar, radio, nothing. However, except in case of a hot war situation, no U.S. Navy ship would be in the Strait of Hormuz or any other limited navigation area. I doubt they would be running those areas without radar when visibility is limited.
Regardless of who is found at fault in this, I would imagine the Porter's captain will be finding new employment soon.
There goes one naval career down the drain.
Thanks Windancer. If all the ships were dark and the tanker had its lights off, one can a least start to see how in the heck this could have happened. Sailing "blind" in a high traffic area with many large ships seems irresponsible at the very least, even in the case of enemy ships possibly being near by. After all, didn't our Navy get sent there to make sure the straight stayed open and oil tankers could get through unmolested? If the Navy was doing a practice drill of some sort I'd hope they'd check to see whats in the area before going stealth, especially if visibility was compromised due to weather or waves. Somebody messed up but as you said, we'll have to wait to find out more details. Thanks again for your response to my questions.
Wow. Not wow at the article, wow at the people commenting. Not a single, "happy that no one was hurt." Let's just start pointing fingers, acting like marines would do a better job, and playing the conspiracy theory game. It's obvious that most of you were never in the navy. Just sad if you ask me.
You sank my BATTLESHIP!
obama said its the former administration's fault ----- just had to say it lol
Uh Oh! Better get MAACO!
Michelle: Sorry for the late response, but it appears your questions were answered. During EMCON all electronic emitting devices are turned off. There would be no radio broadcasts from the destroyer. But there's any number of operational circumstances and / or errors that could cause the destroyer to be where it was. It may have been a poorly timed "interdiction" for some reason. The destroyer cut across the bow of the tanker: was it trying to stop them?; was the tanker "dark"?; some other threat in the area? Maybe Iranian boats / ships?
I'll be happy when the whole story is revealed.
Two big questions here. Did this happen in broad daylight and how were they allowed to get so close to each other? TAC officer and staff must have been asleep at their posts and the topside watches were all blind as bats!
Let's put the Coast Guard officers on these small Navy ships so these things won't happen!
After going back and rereading the article, I see that this happened at 0100 AM. Either way, my question still stands. Running lights still should have been on on both vessels. TAC crew and topside watches stiil should have seen something either on their scopes or visually.
The commander of this ship is in deep, deep $hit. This had to be a conscious decision on his/her part to turn in front of the tanker. The speed and maneuverability of a destroyer compared to a tanker is comparable to a sports car VS a semi. Once the Porter was in the way, the tanker has no chance of avoiding the collision. Only by the grace of GOD was no one injured or killed. Worse yet, the Porter couldhave been cut in two, costing the lives of dozens perhaps even most of the crew. I see a court marshal in this persons future.
Hey Fred,
The republican guard is Iraqi, not Iranian you dipstick. Anytime you put this many ships in that small an area, this is going to happen. The Navy knows perfectly well oil tankers are programmed by computer to follow specific ocean routes and since the Navy ship is much smaller than an oil tanker, it is the Navy's responsibility to get out of the way. They don't own the ocean and since they are invaders and occupiers, they are the strangers, not the other way around.
Wow David. Wake up on the wrong side of the bed?
This is some seriously entertaining stuff though. Leave it to the Navy to somehow manage to mess up a mulit-million (or billion?) dollar vessel. This situation should never have happened to begin with. There's no reason for it to have been in EMCON in such a high traffic area. Furthermore, oil tankers are on predetermined routes that the Navy is fully aware of. If the weather created very poor visibility conditions that should further necessitate the use of radar and other equipment. Not the other way around... but leave it to the Navy to pull of something like this.
6 years in the Army and I don't remember going 'black' in the middle of a highway at night because there was a 'threat'.
This is a classic sailing error. This happens every day with smaller boats. You can pretty much tell from the damage pattern what happened.
A faster ship is overtaking a slower ship. As soon as the faster ship's stern passes the slower vessel's bow, the faster ship turns across the bow of the slower ship. The slower vessel then rams the faster vessel. What has happened is that when the faster vessel cut across, they failed to realize that the slower vessel now was the faster vessel in terms of true headway.
So far I have nailed two jet skis in exactly the same way with my dinky 23-foot sailboat. They were much faster than I, but couldn't compute the vectors in their heads, so they got nailed. One of them was really torn up and sunk, but neither driver was hurt.
They were probably practicing evasive procedures and dry runs and screwed up. Have you ever been buzzed by a VERY LOW fl B-52 on a practice run on a lonely road in North Dakota? I have.
They want to see how close they can maneuver without actual contact. In this case, they guessed wrong and now the taxpayers will get the $multimillions bill--That's okay, they'll just increase the budget to cover it.
AND YES, it is very fortunate that no one was seriously hurt in this. That is very good.
Captain Baker! Captain Baker! We didn't see the tanker, and the tanker did see us, we all live in a yellow submarine! A Yellow submarine! A Yellow submarine! And we crashed upon the blue every one of a dufuse too!
And the Iranians didn't do it?
I was an Infantry grunt "back in the day" so I don't know anything about sailing the high seas, but I do remember playing Marco Polo as a child. That game may be an interesting and cheap approach to keep track of the vessels when they are running with their electronic signatures powered down. Just a thought. :)
More then 4-6 sailors where a sleep on watch not including the lookouts. How could you miss a tanker..come on guys..I see heads rolling on this one.
How is that a casual read can find this, but a highly trained, Liberal Arts Journalism major didn't see it? Want fries with that?
That's for large values of 20% or small values of 40%. Seems to have been totally rewritten now.
Ahh, nukeman...hate to rain on your parade, but "the world's seaborne oil" and "the world's oil" are not equivalent. Agreed that the similar phrasing is confusing (could they please hire a proofreader?!), but the one does not contradict the other...
Sorry. I guess the difference passes through the massive underwater oil pipelines in the Strait?
Ok, genius. 40% of the SEABORNE oil, 20% of the WORLD'S TOTAL SUPPLY.
Go back to McDonalds, moron.
Thanks James. I humbly apologize to all Liberal Arts Majors. I will personally make sure your lights stay on today.
Anyone looking for a job driving a ship?...there'll be a couple openings at texaco and u.s. navy soon.
James, you can correct someone without being nasty about it.
Looks like that destroyer is out of commission for a long time!
Not all oil is "seaborne" that is where the difference comes from. Meanwhile it would have been nice if they mentioned WHICH " Gulf " in the headline ! There are many "Gulfs" in the world and we don't want the people in Louisiana, Texas and Florida to think they are under oil attack again !
Usually most often when a news article is listed under world news+Navy + Gulf+oil tank it will equal Persian. where a large chunk of oil passes through. I can't think of the last time I heard all those words that wasn't there.But then again, I'm not the sharpest pencil in the box.Especially one thinks of the role the Navy plays in protection with all the attacks lately.One would hope most Americans would be smart enough to make a foreign connection and not immediately think of their own country under world news.
Somehow I doubt that. Some folks are just born that way. It's a shame, but it happens.
NUKEMAN...
Don't feel bad...I read it the same way. HOWEVER, I been wondering by your name...are you a nuke electric engineer?
We don't like for yous guys to make mistakes. Do you know the name...Chuck Nelson?
And the OP could not have insulted the author without re reading the article.
But somehow that's acceptable?
Have people become so hateful of journalists that they get outraged when someone gives back what the OP gave, even though the OP was wrong in the first place to insult the articles author?
Double standard or hypocritical? Take your pick.
Watch and see how many senior Naval officers are relieved as a result of this disgraceful event. I am betting on none, as we have a plethora of political flag-graders who cover their own butts. The ship's captain is a goner, but I doubt anyone over the grade of O-5 will be floating resumes instead of ships.
While we're debating reading and comprehension, I have to admit I am having trouble with where the story headed in the last couple of paragraphs. Second from last speaks of the USS New Orleans & USS Hartford. It's not clear to me in the last paragraph, the commanding officer of which ship was relieved?
I believe it was the sub skipper, because the concluding clause of that sentence also mention the COB being relieved...
Butch;
I'm willing to bet the Captain of the Destroyer will be relieved of his command. Along with the XO and officer of the watch on duty. Most ships captains are O-5's. What you expect the CNO and Admiral staff all be relieved of command because of an incident half a world away? The captain of the ship is responsible for what happens with his ship, not the Admiral staff. It is the Captain who is intrusted with operational command of the vessel and is responsible for it. That's the reason ships Captains are generally O-4 or higher rank and not a Chief Petty Officer. The Navy will deal with those responsible, whether you hear about it or not.
As to the Hartford and New Orleans incident, that would be the commander found to have caused the incident. Just like it was the captain who surfaced his sub under a fishing boat some years ago was relieved and discharged.
Put the Coast Guard officers on these small Navy ships and none of these problems will occur!
Other than the fact that two ships impacted with one another, I'm at a total loss as to why the Hartford vs New Orleans incident was even raised. Guess they needed a little something to incite the masses other than "two ships collided, no injuries, no environmental concerns, no other specifics available ... insurance companies notified, no citations issues."
Fred Guisse - maybe it was an Iranian gunboat disguised as a tanker? :-) Clever fellows, those Iranians.
Hmmm...starboard side under the green sidelight. In a crossing situation, the destroyer was the give way vessel. Probably running without lights and a JG as the deck watch officer. The navy always has the hardest time with groundings, collisions, and maneuvering.
Go Coast Guard!
Double Tap
That is to the best of my navigating recollection also. Wonder how that will be explained or will the USN being looking for another Captain of the Ship?
Someone on that bridge is going to catch hell !!! Most likely it will be a low ranking seaman and who ever was on watch at that time. We all know officers don't make mistakes. That is why the army has Sargent's. They catch all the crap.
bob
They must have updated the story after you read it, bob. The captain has been relieved of duty and the senior enlisted man reassigned. Their careers are over. The others who were punished may or may not recover professionally.
AG99. Those careers might not be over. During 1978. I was on a USN aircraft carrier, it had a collision with an oil tanker. The Asst Navigator was the conning officer at the time with the Navigator being the
Senior officer on the bridge and the Capt sleeping in his state room. The Capt and Navigator were relieved of duty and the Asst Nav stayed. The Asst Nav went on to have 27 years of service in the navy and reach the the rank of Capt. He was a Lt. at the time of the accident. We clearly hit the port side of the tanker. Not that in its self make it the carriers fault but it sure make it hard to explain yourself. How they didn't force him out is mind boggling. The Navy doesnt like those kind of operational embarrasments. Fortunately no one was hurt.
Double Tap-3423862......it's easier when you never leave sight of land !
Not much danger of collision in six feet of water! Just messin' with you coastie.
As a Navy vet who spent my time in CIC, heads will and should roll on this one. The mid watch is sometimes a little laid back, but during a straights passage? This was an inexcusable screwup.
AG99, I think they're referring to the USS Hartford's COB and commanding officer from 3 years ago.
@bob1/28 --- Yes, you might well know how crap roles down hill. Like Danger 6 and the lst Div hierarchy trying to make a hero out of Ltc Terry Allen following his Oct 67 debacle. They probably placed blame on some lowly Sp4 point man.
Dreadnaught Bravo, 2/34 Armor
Lai Khe 67-68
Doug: I think you're right. My bad.
To nagua23: Are you referring to the collision of the USS Ranger and the Liberian tanker? I was on a guided missile frigate in that battle group. Got a lot of liberty in Subic while waiting for a relief carrier from Japan! And, if this is the one you're talking about, it was early 1979 when it happened.
Yes Larry you are correct. April, 1979. I was on the Ranger and on the bridge at the time.. Witnessed the whole collision and had to make a statement to the JAG.
nagua23: I was on the USS Brooke (FFG-1) - we escorted you back to Subic. Nasty gash y'all had. But they had cool tshirts out in town: Ranger 1, Tanker 0. And, without the Internet, there was no major demonstration of uninformed rhetoric like we're seeing here.
@doubletap
You may think that the US Navy has problems with such, but take it from an old intell guy --- the old Soviet Navy was the worst and no one else has ever come close. The Old Soviet Black Sea Fleet was constantly changing their pennant numbers and even above decks configurations to confuse NATO watchers who kept track of their transits of the Bosphorus/Dardenelles. Whay they didn't realize was that it was just as easy to keep track of them by their dents and replaced sections. It was never unusual to see a Soviet DD with its whole bow section replaced not once but twice. Most ships were constant dings and dents and patched holes from stem to stern.
How in hell, with miles and miles of open waterspace, did this happen?
Well, Chris, I'd say the Strait of Hormuz isn't exactly the wide-open ocean...
The Strait of Hormuz is not very wide and also has a lot of shallow water. The channel for ships to move/cross is really very narrow.
Do you remember when a U. S. submarine surfaced in the PACIFIC ocean and hit a Japanese fishing vessl? Now, that's miles and miles of open water.
That was supposed to be just orange juice in the designated drivers glass!
We must decrease our military budget, soon and should be a considerable decrease. There have always been a tabu to critize our troops. But we must admit they are just not performing to expectations. Both wars have been badly planned and have become a burden to our Country. We have not been able to completely defeat a foe like the Taliban!! with a killion more resources, thats beyond belief! Iraq fiasco is also unbelievable and mighty expensive. Then small accidents like must makes us think if it is worthy spending so much resources in our Military.
ES...just what the hell does this have to do with anything here?...
ES, let's not confuse the actual troops performance with the planning done by desk jockeys. As to the military budget, just look at the massive cuts done prior to WWII to see how easy it is to get into trouble. After all, war IS the natural state of mankind.
It was a Navy ship involved, right?
ES - wth are you talking about? First of all, wrong story. Second of all, the Taliban can't be defeated because they are hiding in vast stretches of mountainous terrain in another sovereign country with which we aren't at war. It doesn't matter how well plans are designed or executed; you can't win impossible battles. Vietnam was not lost for us due to an incompetent military, Afghanistan was not lost for the Russians due to an incompetent military, and Afghanistan isn't our longest war due to an incompetent military. You simply can't completely root out guerrilla warriors and terrorists in mountainous or jungle terrain by conventional means, especially if they can hide in neighboring countries and/or blend in with the civilian population.
ES: Actually, we spanked the Taliban pretty well in 2001, so good in fact that they fled to neighboring Pakistan. Iraq's army was dispatched in about a month.
Since then, the Taliban resorted to hit and run tactics which will allow them to stick around for decades if they want, but they cannot defeat us as long as we stay put. The insurgents were defeated in Iraq and we handed the country to back to the Iraqis.
It's a matter of military tangled with politicians. The U.S. Armed Forces are not the scapegoat about why we are still in Afghanistan and why we only recently left Iraq.
By the way, I'm not sure a fender bender in the Straits of Hormuz is enough to set off a debate about slashing defense spending
McGuffin, I strongly disagree. Incompetence in our Military is to blame for not accomplish the mission and for our Troops not being able to return home. Terrible planning and execution in both wars are to blame they have lasted this long. We must break our tabu and be able to critize our Troops performance, which has not been good.
No, war is not the natural state of mankind. War has become big business in America. Just look at how much chick cheney made via haliburton and kbr.
To the point ES is trying to make, why are we even over there? I fully support our military as the "defend" our shores from.....what? A stealth invasion?
We need to be far more thoughtful concerning issues that affect our military and our way of life. We should not have troops, ships or bases over there to keep oil flowing to the rest of the world.
If you factor in the immense cost of our military into our overall energy costs, we pay far more than 8 or 10 dollars per gallon.
Viable alternatives exist, we should be making use of them.
ES: What "tabu" (and by the way, it's spelled taboo) are you talking about? I've read and heard plenty of criticism of our troops, much of it is unfounded and misguided.
Planning a baatle: There are two types of plans, the one that will not work and the one that might work. Planning for war isn't as easy as planning a wedding.
Roger White, you are right, I mispelled the word. I have not read strong critizing towards our Military, most of the times it is directed to Washington and the politicians. Our Generals are sacred. Its time they share the blame.
Seems you mispelled several words.
ES: Let's take a look at why the military does not take the criticism you think they should take and contrast that with why the politicians take the heat.
The military is under civilian control, Congress, the President, add to that the key cabinet members who make the four key decisions about a war: 1). Where and when to go in; 2). What limitations will be placed on the troops; 3) When to withdrawal and; 4). What the endgame will be in the aftermath of war.
We elect the President and Congress, we listen to what they campaign on and what they do once they are in office. That does not happen with the armed forces. We do not choose who goes in and we, therefore, do not scrutinize their actions with the vigor we apply to our politicians. Furthermore, the average citizen does not possess the experience and first-hand knowledge regarding the prosecution of war, leaving, thusly, the average citizen with an obvious void in critical analysis.
Our top brass do get called on the carpet right there in the Oval Office, going as far back as WWII. Congress takes the top brass to task in several congressional hearings, and that does make the news (C-SPAN for one).
What neither Congress nor citizen can crticize is how troops execute a battle plan for the reasons aforementioned.
And look at the record when the troops are allowed to do their job; our soldiers vanquished both the Taliban and the Iraqi armed forces with lightning speed and amazing precision. General Petraeus's plan - or surge - to defeat the insurgents in Iraq worked quite well. Limitations and the endgame strategy, left in the hands of politicians, dragged out Iraq. As for the Taliban, they were defeated in November of 2001, they fled to Pakistan. The Pakistanis would not allow us to pursue Al Qaida and the Taliban in their country, they had their reasons. Their guerilla tactics can last for decades, yet it will also forestall our departure.
Allow me to close with this question: What criticism or criticisms do you wish to level at the military?
Roger White, your answer was very complete. You made strong points, but my quetions to the Military leadership go back to the original point, why took 10 years to get out of Iraq? (their Military was out of the map in the first month) and why our enemy is still a real threat in Afghanistan after all this time? Its about time to bring our Troops home and revisit the number of the Defense budget to make significant cuts. It is sky high.
Maybe a commission reviewing the Military strategy and performance could be made, for the taxpayers to know.
ES, not going to come down on you too hard, because you seem to be a liberal like me. With that said, how in the h*ll do you tie this to MILTARY SPENDING??? Go to a topic on government/military-spending and posts your points there. You have carried this ball way over into left field, and if you did have any good points, they were lost in the traveling.
Also, you are using CAPITALIZATION in the wrong way. the terms, "general, country" do not get capitalized unless they are naming a particular country or general.
Look, I am in your corner, but this topic is not the place to vent. IMO, the skipper of both boats should go, a big investigation should take place too.
@ES: My post #6.12 does in fact answer your questions.
I assume you are not a native speaker of English and, therefore, might have had some trouble getting through my post. Having taught English to second-language users of English, I can understand.
Work on you English, okay bud? Time for me to go. I need to prepare Sunday dinner and celebrate our gold medal in basketball!
ES-
right church, wrong pu...
ALL the politicians for this country need to be removed, and there rate of pay and pensions need to be put to rest...
ES, roger is correct. After the politicians start the war and tell the military where and when to go in, they also tell the military what they will have to fight with and where they can and can't fight. In some cases they even tell the military how hard they can fight. The generals and admirals must plan within those constraints.
Es, the thing is, the generals and admirals had nothing to do with this accident beyond the reason the Porter was in the strait in the first place. Now, they (the admirals) will get involved again, ordering a board of inquiry to determine who did what right and who did what wrong. Those who did the wrong thing will receive commensurate sanctions and punishment. The captain, even if he is found not to be at fault, may still be relieved.
As for the performance of flag officers, if they aren't up to standards they are quickly relieved. I have seen a few with my own eyes.
ES... You want to cut military spending or all spending? When someone is consistent with their ideas it's understandable. But their are too many liberals who want to complain and cut military spending but increase welfare and benefits to people that don't want to help themselves.
99.9999% of the time, the CO is toast when his ship tries to occupy space with another large floating or underwater object. There is a great example of the opposite however. USS Enterprise ran aground in San Fran harbor in 1983. The CO was a golden boy who had just been selected for Commodore, so a crapload of junior officers had to be thrown under the bus as a sacrifice to the Naval gods to keep him from getting canned. Lots of promising careers ruined. I had just left the ship and still had lots of contacts aboard.
i always wondered if that was the case in that incident, thank you for the update.
This one will probably be in the 99.9999% group. The CO and the Officer of the Deck are probably toast, and maybe the CIC officer. Even if the Captain were asleep at the time, it is still his responsibility to make sure that the junior officers know that the ship on the right has the right-of-way, and that the radar operators and lookouts and helmsmen know how to do their jobs, and that the OOD should always wake up the CO if there is any abnormal situation (before the collision occurs.)
You're correct....I thought CO of the Enterprise was relieved. Didn't realize he was THAT Adm. Kelly
Proves one irrefutable principle in the military:
MOST OFFICERS RISE IN RANK TO THEIR MAXIMUM LEVEL OF INCOMPETENCY!!! :)
wikipedia
I remember the grounding. Even though Kelly had already been frocked to O7, there were those who wanted to take his star back. Kelly eventually rose to O10. If memory serves me, what allowed Kelly to escape with his star was the fact that the sandbar was in the shipping channel and didn't appear on any charts. I don't remember anyone other than Kelly, being under the gun on this one.
Anyone selected to be the captain of an aircraft carrier is a "golden boy." They have to do their year in command and then they get their star. There was one big change made after this incident. Until this incident, aircraft carrier captains were often selected and frocked to O7 and some were even promoted, before they left the ship. After this incident, aircraft carrier captains don't even go before the O7 board until after the change of command. Typically, they are assigned to a desk job in Washington, while they wait for the board to meet and their first flag officer assignment.
We Can hit anything folks, Missiles, 600 ft long tankers, heck we can even hit the ground.
Getting kinda expensive.
Must have been the law of attraction at work here...
Been smoking good weed up there on the bridge?
Pretty sure there is an entire book written on safe navigation and that the U.S. Navy wrote it.
Maybe the Captain should have read it?
unforunately it was checked out by capt. schettino at the time.
You don't think whoever wrote the headline could have bothered to write "Persian Gulf"? There are a lot of gulfs, and "Gulf" and "US" in the same sentence usually imply the Gulf of Mexico. I, for one, was misled.
feel sorry for the helmsman, he was just following orders, and the captain was probably asleep and a j.g. was in wheelhouse, pickin his nose.thinkin about ol mary jane rotten crotch....
TMZ reporting that actress Amanda Bynes was witnessed swimming away from the accident
There's at least one Navy career cut short!
What the hell!!! This ship needs a new captain and a new crew.
Unbelievable that in today's electronic world a naval vessel supposedly having "lookouts" in addition to extensive radar, gps, sonar and God knows what else would still run into another vessel in the wide open sea.
It was in the straight not the open sea. However, one would think they would have extra watches set when proceding through there.
This happened at 1:00 a.m., right? Did the tanker have its running lights on? This is another incomplete story, with all sorts of people commenting who have absolutely no knowledge of military operations in a hostile zone.
If our military commanders were actually put in charge of combat operations we would kick butt and leave. But our Constitution places civilians in charge of military operations. Many of them also have never served in the armed forces, and have no clue. These same civilians are the ones who are beholden to the military industrial complex for campaign donations.
And for those of you who want to cut the military further, one thing is blatantly obvious: you are not students of history. Massive cuts were done after WWI, leading to our military being way behind when WWII started. It was the need for massive military building that ended the Great Depression here.
We also greatly down-sized after WWII, and had to rebuild for Korea and Vietnam. Again, it was our civilian leaders who got us into those "conflicts". Clinton dismantled the Reagan-era military machine, and we've been at war with Islamic radicals ever since.
Also, do you really read the news??? The COLD WAR with Russia is back on! They are rebuilding their nuclear powered cruiser fleet. They are in negotiations with Cuba, Vietnam, and some Indian Ocean nation to build forward-deployment naval bases. Putin cited "deteriorating relations with Washington" for the Russian Navy build-up.
So, let's stop deploying our Navy overseas. I'm betting it won't take long for most of you to start yelling for our government "to do something!".
It looks like just a 100 million dollar fender bender is all.
give or take a few hundred thousand
I hear Allstate cancelled them after the last incident, and this ones on us the taxpayer....
may be they are covered by Hartford Insurance...
Stealth oil tanker attacks US Navel war ship LOL....
Where was the right of way for the Navy destroyer passing through the strait Of Hormuz. That was no accident. That was a deliberate attack on the destroyer to cripple it. Charges should be filed and the oil tanker the person in charge should be under arrest. That was a act of anger passing in the wrong lane.
Ever manouvered an OilTanker? Which one can actually manouver like a ship, an oiltanker, or a modern navy-vessel with the best navy personel in the world? (Yes, sarcastic). What is a non manouvering navy vessel doing in the navy anyway?
What are you smoking this morning Joe? A bulk oil tanker, travelling at perhaps 10-12 knots cannot hope to attack and damage a modern guided missile destroyer with the agility to manuever in excess of 35 knots without supreme incompetence on the bridge of that destroyer.
If your looking for someone to hang, look no farther than the bridge watchstanders and those who gave them their orders.
Joe c: Look at the photo. It appears that the destroyer was hit on the starboard side; therefore, the tanker was approaching from the right. If the "rules of the road" apply at sea, the tanker had the right-of-way.
The destroyer was trying to beat the light....
Oil tankers are difficult to maneuver even in good conditions. Being the more"burdened" vessel, the oil tanker would have been most likely correct to hold course and allow the more maneuverable USN destroyer to avoid it. I was once operating a 30ft boat and at no time did I think I had the "right of way" over the 300ft ships operating in the area. I avoided them. I might have been able to show that some of them were in fact highly maneuverable, and that technically I had the "right of way", if I had survived the collision with them. I still would have been considered the more maneuverable vessel with the responsibility to avoid the collision. Same thing with this destroyer.
As a 24 year veteran who served as Junior Officer of the Deck and Combat Information Watch Officer the CO has no career left and the Officer of the Deck and Junior Officer of the deck and lookouts need to be brought up on charges along with the Combat Information Center Watch Officer and surface scope operator. It is their job to ensure that no ship get within a defined distance of the Navy ship and to initiate radio contact to insure safe passage if in confined shipping space. This should have never happened.
You're exactly right, CWO3.
Seems to me someone was sleeping on duty.
The lookouts won't be brought up on charges. The trouble with the navy system is that there are too many voices on the bridge and officers afraid to make decisions that are out of the box. As a Merchant Marine Master (unltd tonnage) I have navigated and conned vessels in the Straits of Hormuz over many passages. As a watch officer I done this with only 1 or 2 people assisting me. A helmsman and a lookout. If I thought the traffic was extra congested I would call the Capt. With the vessels in close proximity the lookout serves as a backup. Usually finding the small craft that pop up close. If i got into any kind of jam It would be hard to blame the lookout as it would be classless. A leader is respondsible for his action.
Please tell me it's a typo, and it won't really cost $102.6 million to repair the Hartford.....
A nuclear submarine is an expensive item - Hartford cost about $1 billion to build. Life expectancy is about 25 years, and the sub was 20 years old when the wreck happened. So the repair cost of $120 million (went back in service in 2011) allowed about 5 additional years of service after the collision.
New construction is more costly now, of course. So the repair bought 5 years of service for less cost, and it was available much quicker than a contract for a new boat.
SORRY PAUL
not a typo.
Please don't google the cost of BUILDING one of these ships.....you will have a stroke.
Who was guiding these ships? Could it have been the former captain of the Exxon Valdez?
A highly manouverable warship with modern radarequipment cannot see a gigantic oiltanker which cannot manouver within hours. What if the Iranian navy uses small rubberboats which carries explosives? Someone clearly offguard, or drunk, or radar out of order and there was a party on board? It cannot be a collision on purpose, now can it? What a great navy. The most volatile waters at the moment in history and all cannot see an oiltanker.
Things aren't always what they look like. For a cruiser to get dinged by a foreign ship, during wartime and heightened tension in the straits shows enormous restraint on our U.S. Navy's behalf. For all any of us know, they may have been under orders to stand down. I am just happy to read that no U.S. Sailor was harmed and look forward to reading the followups.
You mean a kind of (farfetched) "Hunt for red october"-thingy? But for real?
Never know.....stranger things have happened.