The USS Fitzgerald collision.

Regarding the collision of the USS Fitzgerald and the container ship. While it is too early to say exactly what happened or who is at fault there are things to be considered. It has been said that the container ship doubled back on its course before the collision for unknown reasons. If this is true it does not relieve responsibility for the collision from the Fitzgerald. Why? 

Think of safe navigation of a ship and collision avoidance like defensive driving. You always assume that the other driver will do something unexpected so you give yourself room to maneuver or stop just in case the unexpected happens. Never assume the other vessel will take action to avoid collision or will not pull a bonehead move. 

I served on submarines for 11 years and part of my job as a navigation electronics technician was to assist in the safe navigation and maneuvering of the ship, it is what we do. From the navigator who is in charge of navigation to the lowest person on the piloting party we undergo extensive training on collision avoidance. We are taught the "rules of the road" and Colregs which deal with collision avoidance. We attent piloting trainer while in off crew which is a simulator for navigating the ship in enclosed waters like entering port. We go over past collisions to see why they happened and how it could be avoided. The training continues your whole career. Why? Because one of He most dangerous things faced by a submarine or surface vessel is the act of entering or leaving port, especially in a high traffic area. We are taught to never depend on the other vessel to avoid a collision even if we have the right of way. We track every vessel, contact, around the ship and plot their course, speed, and closest approach. We have certain standing orders to maintain a safe distance from other vessel and to not let the closest predict approach come within a certain range around the ship. Above all we are taught to pay attention to detail and not slack off because the moment you do is the moment the unexpected happens. This has to be done no matter how busy a port is or how many vessels there are. If it gets real busy only vessels within a certain range are tracked, especially those that will intersect plotted course.

A submarine is unique because most of its hull is under water and that part that is not is low to the water compared to surface vessels. A submarine is not as maneuverable as surface ships so that is taken into account. We also note the type of vessels around us so we have an idea of how they maneuver. A container ship is large and is not as maneuverable as a ship such as the USS Fitzgerald so the control Party would take that into account. Allowances would have been made, or should have been made to give the container ship a wide berth. The moment when the control team saw the container ship swing around the officer of the deck should have maneuvered to put distance between the two ships. And since a container ship cannot turn on a dime there should have been plenty of time for the Fitzgerald to take evasive action unless they left it too late or allowed them to get to close to begin with. Since it seems likely that both vessels were on a similar course to begin with before the collision and the Fitzgerald was probably over taking the container ship, bridge to bridge communications should have been established with the Fitzgerald declaring her intention to over take the container ship and keep a safe distance. The vessel being overtaken has the right of way. If the Fitzgerald tried to overtake the container and the container ship maneuvered into the Fitzgerald the onus would still be on the Fitzgerald.

The Navy and other authorities will look at the logs of both vessels, examine plots, and communications to reconstruct the collision. It is sad but the fault will be placed on the USS Fitzgerald unless there are extenuating circumstances, the container ship deliberately tried to ram. If the officer on watch or others In control failed to follow procedures or were derelict in their duties they will be courts  martialed, probably for the military equivalent of manslaughter times seven.

This was a preventable tragedy and it is now up to the investigators to determine why and who is at fault. 

My thoughts and prayers are for the crew and Families of the USS Fitzgerald. And though It has been 20 years since I left the Navy, I am and will always be a sailor. These people are my shipmates just like all those who served, now serve, and will serve the Greatest Navy in the World and in History. Fair winds and following seas shipmates.

Trump is an idiot when it comes to Military equipment. Ok, he is just an idiot.

I recently read an article where Donald (Moron) Trump commented on the electromagnetic launch system on the Gerald R. Ford class aircraft carriers. He doesn't like it and wants to use steam catapults that prior Aircraft Carriers use. Here is the problem, The Gerald R. Ford class was designed around the use of the electromagnetic catapults.
The thing with steam catapults is that they require a massive amount of piping and other equipment which takes up space, not to mention bulkheads would have to be changed to facilitate routing of the piping. It would mean a redesign of the entire carrier to accommodate the changes. You cannot just throw in new piping here and there, you have to have the room and you have to balance the weight distribution.
Another drawback to steam catapults is that they require a lot of maintenance and people to maintain. The Gerald R. Ford class was designed to need fewer people to operate because of less need of catapults maintenance and more automation. A change to a steam catapults system would require increased manning and berthing space. Another redesign.
The electromagnetic catapults have advantages over the steam system in that it is a more controlled system. This new control over the catapult puts less strain on the aircraft and pilot. The reduced size stress put on the aircraft means less maintenance and longer service life. The pilots themselves would be subject to less force and possible injury. The new system means the carrier can launch aircraft once considered to delicate to be launched by the hard to regulate steam catapults. Yes there are some bugs to work out but that is true for all new class of ships.
Back to the steam catapults for a bit. The steam system uses steam which his generated by the carriers nuclear reactors. The Gerald R. Ford doesn't have to generate as much steam and those reactors were designed accordingly. Replacing the electromagnetic magnetic catapults with steam ones would require different reactors; another redesign.
Naval engineering is not the same as building a hotel, you cannot just decide to change something and expect someone to erase this and add that. No, it is complicated and only a moron would think you could shift the Gerald R. Ford to steam catapults without having to redesign the complete vessel. Trump is that moron.

Trump is already a danger to our military

TRUMP HAS ALREADY ENDANGERED THE LIVES OF AMERICAN SERVICEMEN AND WOMEN .
If you think that having a Russian spy ship, an AGI, off our coast is no big deal you obviously don't have a clue about security when it comes to naval matters. The same can be said of a Russian fighter buzzing a destroyer.
Let me discuss the Russian AGI off the east coast as I have experience in such matters. Why? Because I served on SSBNs during the last part of the Cold War and one of my collateral duties involved keeping track of those guys.
The AGI and Trawlers Russia uses have multiple purposes. The primary is to monitor Naval activities like Submarines entering and leaving port, their mainly concerned with Strategic assets, Ballistic Missile Submarines. They wait of the home ports of Trident subs and wait just outside the boundary between our national waters and international water for a Sub to leave or enter port. They then listen electronically and acoustically to gather as much information as they can. The information they gather is passed on to their intel guys for evaluation to try and find ways of breaking encryption or finding our Submarine when they submerge. This information goes to their attack Submarines you then tail, as quietly as they can, our Submarines.
If they are tailing a Trident Submarine they have effectively neutralized a strategic asset. If during a time of war, or if Russia wanted to attack first they would have their attack Submarines take out our Trident Submarines which are the most important part of the nuclear triad and what Russia fears most. If they plan it right, they could take out a Trident Submarine in such away it would look like an accident. That is until the wreckage is found and compared to acoustic recordings. Trident Submarines patrol in such a way that no one knows exactly where they are except those onboard who navigate the ship. Radio transmissions from a Trident sub are restricted to a minimum, basically emergencies. The Sub itself constantly receives radio broadcasts but does so in a way as not to reveal its position, it just listens. I will leave it at that. Now if there is now emergency beacon deployment the loss of a Submarine could go unnoticed for sometime, during that time a Russian Sub could clear datum and nobody would know it was even there. This is just one danger.
Another is Russian Trawlers and AGIs will purposely put themselves in the way of Navy ships and Submarines. This is to harass the crews and to see if they can provoke a response. They will even risk collisions because they know that a collision will damage a Submarine or Ship that would then have to return to port for repair. Don't think they would? I have seen them do just that. Many times another US Navy ship or Coast Guard vessel is used to keep the AGIs clear but the Russian skippers still try. They would like nothing more than to sideline one of our Subs for month while it is repaired. They would gladly trade an AGI or trawler to damage a Submarine. I have known air assets scrambled to drive off AGIs. They don't like being buzzed by low flying jets either.
Why are they doing this if they have Trump in their back pocket? They are testing their man to see how far he will let them go, and judging by Trump's response that is pretty far. When a man is worried more about why he didn't win the popular vote than Russian assets harassing our Navy you have to wonder what is wrong. First, setting aside the fact he is a traitor, it shows how unsuited for the job he is. Second, it shows he doesn't give a crap about the men and women under his command because he didn't do anything really to show he is looking out for them. You want to feel low? Consider how you would feel if you were put in a dangerous situation and your CO could careless. If you don't think a Submarine colliding with something is dangerous you obviously failed physics. Even a Submarine put putting around has quite the inertia to overcome just to stop, now imagine that tonnage stopping in a short distance. Things and people go flying on the inside and people get hurt, some have even died. I never have been in a collision on a Submarine but I have been in a situation that had people thrown across the compartment, not fun.
So yeah, Trump is putting our people at risk because of his actions and you don't know just how much. What do you expect from a man who has a pee-pee party tape, or worse, being held over his head? Do you expect he is going to stand up to the man blackmailing him?