NavList:

   

Reply

George,

The concept of team navigation is described fairly thoroughly in the
latest Bowditch, which is available online.  I'm not sure the other
teams are addressed, however.  When the nav team is running properly,
there's a three or four-point visual fix every minute or two,
charted, radar ranging, etc.  All very Bristol fashion, almost a
hydrologic survey of course steered and made good.  Yes, a good pilot
also could do it by himself, but the team divides the responsibility
and provides more data flow and thorough analysis.  All this was very
useful when shooting guns at moving targets using visual aiming; I
suppose it still is.  Clearly the captain didn't spend enough time
getting his teams in order, probably counting on doing it at sea.  Oops.

Fred


On Jul 15, 2009, at 4:27 PM, George Huxtable wrote:

>
> I know nothing of Pearl Harbour, or about the way naval vessels
> conduct
> themselves, but these words struck me as ominous-
>
> "Bridge watch team, navigation, and (Combat Information Center)
> team did not
> work together to assess situation and keep the ship from standing into
> danger," the report says.
>
> That seems to be navigation by committee. All it needed was one man
> with a
> chart, prepared to look out of the bridge windows, and make the
> occasional
> visit to the bridge wings to take a few bearings. And the authority
> to ask
> for the way to be taken off, in a hurry!
>
> In this case, there seem to have been too many fingers in the pie,
> with an
> overdose of technology.
>
> George.
>
> contact George Huxtable, at  george@hux.me.uk
> or at +44 1865 820222 (from UK, 01865 820222)
> or at 1 Sandy Lane, Southmoor, Abingdon, Oxon OX13 5HX, UK.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "hch" 
> To: 
> Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 8:20 PM
> Subject: [NavList 9096] Re: Fw: Grounding of cruiser PORT ROYAL
>
>
>
> Amen. Greg - but my, you are too kind.
>
> I am well familar with the reef area off the Honolulu Airport
> runway, having
> some years ago refloated a stranded vessel from the exact location
> described. She mistook the airport lights for the Harbor Entrance
> and went
> up on the reef at 4-bells + a jingle.
>
> There is little or no excuse for a ship going aground in this area
> - unless
> loss of situational awareness simply means not keeping a lookout;
> of course
> keeping enough water under the keel is also helpful - so the
> fathometer was
> not workng; what happened to the hand lead - at one time Navy Regs
> required
> a leadsman in the chain when entering or leaving port or coming to
> anchor.
> Oh well, times do change.
>
> Also "soft grounding" is a new term to me. How many millions in
> repair costs
> define the dividing line.
>
> Regards,
>
> Henry
>
>
> --- On Wed, 7/15/09, Greg Rudzinski  wrote:
>
>
> From: Greg Rudzinski 
> Subject: [NavList 9094] Re: Fw: Grounding of cruiser PORT ROYAL
> To: "NavList" 
> Date: Wednesday, July 15, 2009, 11:37 AM
>
>
>
> The news article did not mention anything about radar utilization or
> wether there was a harbor pilot aboard. Hmmm...even on a shake down
> cruise with a sleep deprived (hung over ?) skeleton crew this should
> not have happened. Maintaining a tug escort out of dry dock until all
> systems are confirmed functional would have been prudent. Simple radar
> ranging would have saved the day for sure.
>
> Greg
>
> On Jul 14, 10:27 am, "George Huxtable"  wrote:
>> I wonder whether this will be of interest, about the grounding of
>> a US
>> Navy
>> vessel off Pearl Harbour in February..
>>
>> You'll need to copy-and-paste the links, I suspect.
>>
>> George.
>>
>> http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20090707/
>> NEWS08/907070350/H...
>>
>> http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20090712/
>> COLUMNISTS32/90712...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
NavList message boards: www.fer3.com/arc
Or post by email to: NavList@fer3.com
To , email NavList-@fer3.com
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

   

Reply