Jump to content

U.S.S. Harry S Truman carrier collides with a merchant ship while preparing to enter the Suez Canal- supposedly no below waterline damage to either ship


Recommended Posts

  • AUS-97HORN changed the title to U.S.S. Harry S Truman carrier collides with a merchant ship while preparing to enter the Suez Canal- supposedly no below waterline damage to either ship
Posted

I was wondering the same thing.  That is when the ship is most vulnerable.  That is when the manuevering watch is set.  It's all hands on deck.  Doesn't make any sense.  All I know is that an admiral or 2 and a bunch of captains are about to fluff up their resume

  • Like 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, FartingMonk said:

I was wondering the same thing.  That is when the ship is most vulnerable.  That is when the manuevering watch is set.  It's all hands on deck.  Doesn't make any sense.  All I know is that an admiral or 2 and a bunch of captains are about to fluff up their resume

USS Cole comes to mind here on a much larger scale.  Got damn lucky and the whole world was/is watching.  

Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

USS Cole comes to mind here on a much larger scale.  Got damn lucky and the whole world was/is watching.  

The USS Cole was a lot different.  It was a pre 9/11 thing when the top side watch wasn't even allowed to has their guns loaded.  The security posture back then was so weak that ships would pull up next to it to sell magazines and other things to the sailors.  The machine gunner asked for permission to open fire and the OOD refused to give that order.  In today's world unless that merchant ship lost power and made all indications that it lost steering to the Truman.  They would have smoked that ship

 

The Cole was also tied to the pier

Edited by FartingMonk
  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
2 minutes ago, FartingMonk said:

The USS Cole was a lot different.  It was a pre 9/11 thing when the top side watch wasn't even allowed to has their guns loaded.  The security posture back then was so weak that ships would pull up next to it to sell magazines and other things to the sailors.  The machine gunner asked for permission to open fire and the OOD refused to give that order.  In today's world unless that merchant ship lost power and made all indications that it lost steering to the Truman.  They would have smoked that ship

 

The Cole was also tied to the pier

All true.  Only nautical suicide bombing I could think of.  The thought of how much explosives you could pack into a cargo ship is mind-bottling.  

Posted
15 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

JFC, two massive, slow moving ships collide?  Was it like this?

JIh-9s.gif

I wonder how far beforehand it was when the impact became inevitable? 15 minutes? 30? An hour?

Posted
7 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

All true.  Only nautical suicide bombing I could think of.  The thought of how much explosives you could pack into a cargo ship is mind-bottling.  

Texas City and Halifax say hi

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 4
Posted
4 minutes ago, NeverMarryAStripper said:

How long until Trump and Hegseth blame it on DEI

I may be wrong, but wasn't the offending ship black and making furtive movement?

  • Drool 1
Posted
23 minutes ago, NeverMarryAStripper said:

Here is who probably gets the blame

image.thumb.png.93f3e27b22a03b939eabc28035561264.png

She would be part of the triad of leadership that usually gets let go because of this.  An aircraft carrier is crazy though because there are at least 3 captains on board.  Probably 4-5 if you count the medical corps.  

Posted
6 minutes ago, FartingMonk said:

She would be part of the triad of leadership that usually gets let go because of this.  An aircraft carrier is crazy though because there are at least 3 captains on board.  Probably 4-5 if you count the medical corps.  

They’re all woke

Posted

Not the first time USN has had a collision in that patch of water.  It's a highly congested area.  

This is one of the hardest force protection problems to crack - how do you keep threat actors away from high value assets in high traffic international straits?  Without prior intelligence, large merchants are always going to be classified as a non-threat.  They are simply a navigation problem to solve, not a threat to avoid or mitigate.  It's not practical to maintain separation of more than a couple hundred yards max with these ships in some of the tighter areas.  As the carrier, you can't really say, "500 yds and no closer" in tight areas like international straits.  

It's a bit of a different story with smaller craft.  There is usually host nation security that will keep small craft outside of the carrier's security zone.  We are reliant on host nation for the most part.

We don't have patrol craft in this area to do surface interdiction of potential threat craft (we do have these in Djibouti, Fujairah, Jebel Ali/Dubai, Bahrain, and Kuwait), and they can't travel with a strike group.  Escorts (DDGs and CGs) are too large themselves and the area is too congested for them to do threat interdiction.  There was probably an armed SH-60 airborne doing nominal force protection duties. 

 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
1 minute ago, FartingMonk said:

I think this is the first time I've heard of a carrier having a collision though.  Yeah small boys and stuff hit in those areas 6-7 times a year.  But a carrier is something new to me.  

Same.  They are kind of a big deal.  When you see how many supporting ships accompany them, it's wild.  

Sidenote - only surface ships can pass these straights, right?  No subs?  So if it's a battlegroup, they either divert others or they go around?

Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

Same.  They are kind of a big deal.  When you see how many supporting ships accompany them, it's wild.  

Sidenote - only surface ships can pass these straights, right?  No subs?  So if it's a battlegroup, they either divert others or they go around?

Subs do a surface transit through the straits.  The straits are pretty shallow and a sub would get sucked up by the bigger surface ship.   It's also an act of war to be submerged in another country's property 

 

A submarine can become a surface ship at anytime.  Hopefully 

Edited by FartingMonk
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
3 hours ago, FartingMonk said:

In today's world unless that merchant ship lost power and made all indications that it lost steering to the Truman.  They would have smoked that ship

This is today’s world, and the Truman didn’t smoke it. Am I missing something or are you making the assumption that they communicated to the Truman that they’d lost steering? If that’s the case, then I guess everyone now knows how to sink a carrier

Posted
1 hour ago, FartingMonk said:

I think this is the first time I've heard of a carrier having a collision though.  Yeah small boys and stuff hit in those areas 6-7 times a year.  But a carrier is something new to me.  

JFK plowed over a dhow in NAG during OIF.

Posted
14 minutes ago, SquishMitten said:

This is today’s world, and the Truman didn’t smoke it. Am I missing something or are you making the assumption that they communicated to the Truman that they’d lost steering? If that’s the case, then I guess everyone now knows how to sink a carrier

Collisions are almost like they pointed out with the Austin Powers thing.  I'm assuming the ship just drifted into it and there was nowhere else to maneuver.  

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...