Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
She's 300000 tons loaded. The Porter is 6000 tons. As mojo said, the Law of Gross tonnage is proven again.
I just wonder in what direction and at what relative speed they collided. The picture of the Porter shows damage in a very limited area (though pretty heavy). Did the bow of the tanker hit the destroyer?
Posted by Rambler in Virginia 2012-08-12 15:42||
#17 If the tanker bow was the impact point it was a glancing blow, or the USS Porter would be on the bottom. Mass moving fast don't quit.
Posted by Glenmore 2012-08-12 15:49||
#18 The Iranians were probably trying to be rescued and were hoping they would not be sent home.
Posted by JohnQC 2012-08-12 15:50||
#19 The oil tanker captains last name didn't happen to be Hazelwoood did it ?
Posted by junkiron 2012-08-12 16:25||
#20 To all you landlubber sandfleas, it's harder than you think.
Posted by AlmostAnonymous5839 2012-08-12 18:06||
#21 well, AA5839, it would appear to us land-vermin, that it would JOB #1? No?
Posted by Frank G 2012-08-12 18:14||
#22 I don't know why I even have to say this.
Posted by Pappy 2012-08-12 19:21||
#23 It all depends on who was the burdened ship, what visibility was, if both ships had running lights on, etc.
I'll wait for the report. But yeah, the CO's career is toast.
Posted by Pappy 2012-08-12 19:24||
#24 Pappy, I figure a destroyer is like a motorcycle - yield to the bigger guy regardless of right-of-way, and make sure you see him, because if there's a collision, you lose. And I don't know of any stealth, radar-evading super-tankers.
Posted by Glenmore 2012-08-12 19:29||
#25 All snarking aside, we can be very thankful there were no fatailites on either vessel.
Posted by Besoeker 2012-08-12 20:04||
#26 Piloted by FarminBHard's cousin, SailinBHard?
Posted by Rob Crawford 2012-08-12 20:41||
#27 I'll remind all Y'all the aircraft that hit the twin towers on 9-11 were NOT a threat until they hit, and weren't sen as sch, at first the possibility of a gross error was bandied about. (Until the SECOND plane hit, and removed all doubt)
Posted by Redneck Jim 2012-08-12 21:18||
Posted by GORT 2012-08-12 21:20||
#29 I'll remind all Y'all the aircraft that hit the twin towers on 9-11 were NOT a threat until they hit
True. But aside from the tanks of both the 9-11 aircraft and the tanker being full, the likelihood of it being an attack are nil. Professional opinion, for what it's worth.
I figure a destroyer is like a motorcycle - yield to the bigger guy regardless of right-of-way, and make sure you see him, because if there's a collision, you lose. And I don't know of any stealth, radar-evading super-tankers.
I've made the transit through the Strait of Hormuz a few times, two of them at night. It ain't fun. It's a waterway, a choke point with Iran on one side. There's a reason they were going through at that time.
Like I said, I'll wait for the report.
Posted by Pappy 2012-08-12 21:54||