News
news The world as we know it is about to end
news Witnesses See 40 UFOs Over a Beach in the UK
news Mysterious and Chilling Photographs of Unidentified People
news Canada's Best-Documented UFO Encounter Celebrates Its 50th
news California Broadcast Interrupted With Ominous Announcement
news Mystery of sonic weapon attacks at US embassy in Cuba deepens
news Is the US Navy Trying to Catch UFOs?
news No, We Can't Control Hurricanes from Space
news This Guy Has Been Tirelessly Documenting the Ghost in His Apartment
news Earth May Be Under Surveillance by Nine Alien Civilizations
news CIA informant claimed Hitler survived WWII



Username:
Password: or Register
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

USS Fitzgerald: If ramming does this much damage to the steel God forbid a torpedo
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 405784
06-20-2017 01:12 AM

 



Post: #31
RE: USS Fitzgerald: If ramming does this much damage to the steel God forbid a torpedo
Advertisement
Be happy it wasn't a rocket. There's three warning systems on the ship all failed?

White guys can't walk out side at night because of the kind of navel race on board so say's Savage.
Quote this message in a reply

LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 418216
06-20-2017 01:14 AM

 



Post: #32
RE: USS Fitzgerald: If ramming does this much damage to the steel God forbid a torpedo
LoP Guest  Wrote: (06-20-2017 01:01 AM)
It's a simple physics issue, looks like the impact caused an initial roll-in to the point of impact (ship listed), lack of a "sheer line" ( where the impacted vessel is moving lateral to the other ship) indicates the Destroyers was in beginning thrust deployment, or a geosynchronous position (still or "all stop"), lack of deeper impact compression of the deck to below water line indicates (on first rough analysis) that the anchor had not been deployed by the destroyer, allowing the more massive vessel to literally "push" the destroyer at a heavy list to starboard, further losing counter kinetic resistance..

The larger vessel literally "pushed" the destroyer forward, most damage looks to be because of the initial impacts listing..

Angle indicated that the destroyer "might" have been trying to turn hard starboard just before impact to "lose some paint", but obviously was far too little, and far too late..

The deck has a total inclination toward impact (lots of dry dock time now), because at least two lower decks have been compressed down at initial impact...

Not a true "T-Bone" event (destroyer would have been taking on water, forcing an abandon ship if that had been the case..)

Final theory/Analysis?..

Both parties were caught napping..

The larger ship is at fault, it's inboard systems would have detected the destroyer much sooner if the position at the helm was being occupied properly), and a Fault of the captain of the destroyer (both captains BTW)..

Because who he left in charge underestimated the propensity for civilians to "act accordingly" and yield way..

A large cargo moving at full speed, will still look like it is barely moving when looking at the bow coming toward you..


Verdict?..

"MISCOMMUNICATION ON BOTH PARTIES"...

An addendum for those curious about an aegis destroyer class...
Addendum ---> {Link}
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 418401
06-20-2017 01:15 AM

 



Post: #33
RE: USS Fitzgerald: If ramming does this much damage to the steel God forbid a torpedo
Fitzgerald connected to two other major events that happened all together.

https://lunaticoutpost.com/thread-772103...id14440866

The dots between all three incidents have been connected.

https://lunaticoutpost.com/thread-772103...id14440892

North Korea involved. Shipping company controlled by Arabs and Inron AWAN involved -

https://lunaticoutpost.com/thread-772103...id14441262
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 396031
06-20-2017 01:41 AM

 



Post: #34
RE: USS Fitzgerald: If ramming does this much damage to the steel God forbid a torpedo
all those years sailing and not incident

people dont say anything

one collision and people loose their minds

same thing happened with this bomber pilot

took the plane to extremes and even did tricks with it!

one time he crashes and dies and everyone freaks out.
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 418401
06-20-2017 01:47 AM

 



Post: #35
RE: USS Fitzgerald: If ramming does this much damage to the steel God forbid a torpedo
LoP Guest  Wrote: (06-20-2017 01:41 AM)
all those years sailing and not incident

people dont say anything

one collision and people loose their minds

same thing happened with this bomber pilot

took the plane to extremes and even did tricks with it!

one time he crashes and dies and everyone freaks out.

You are ignoring the facts and links posted above.
Quote this message in a reply
NormalIsSubjective

User ID: 409403
06-20-2017 02:24 AM

Posts: 19,131



Post: #36
RE: USS Fitzgerald: If ramming does this much damage to the steel God forbid a torpedo
The Ghost of ULP  Wrote: (06-20-2017 12:15 AM)
LoP Guest  Wrote: (06-19-2017 11:30 PM)
Damn.

Are our destroyers made in China now or what?
Looks cheap.

That is what we are all wondering.....

Not "all".

Some of us are wondering why you're not grasping the physics lessons offered upthread.

Once again - the cargo ship has nearly four times the mass of the destroyer.

The fact that the Fitzgerald held up as well as it did is a testament to its engineering.

And probably a bit of luck helped, too.
Quote this message in a reply
NormalIsSubjective

User ID: 409403
06-20-2017 02:25 AM

Posts: 19,131



Post: #37
RE: USS Fitzgerald: If ramming does this much damage to the steel God forbid a torpedo
LoP Guest  Wrote: (06-20-2017 12:44 AM)
LoP Guest  Wrote: (06-20-2017 12:34 AM)
https://americanboating.org/bigger_on_the_water.asp


So, anyway...

Also, the USS Fitz was struck on the port side.
http://www.dummies.com/sports/following-...ing-rules/

It was struck on the starboard side.
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 404077
06-20-2017 02:52 AM

 



Post: #38
RE: USS Fitzgerald: If ramming does this much damage to the steel God forbid a torpedo
The Ghost of ULP  Wrote: (06-19-2017 09:35 PM)
Hamburgerwagon  Wrote: (06-19-2017 09:34 PM)
Looks like the ship that hit it was much larger.

Jhikpghf What does this tell us about the steel and construction ?
Even better yet! What does this tell us about the new ship they named after Gabby Giffords?????? It's mostly aluminum!!!! Think that container ship would've cut an aluminum ship in half. Yep! Navy ships that look all cool until they go into battle.............
Quote this message in a reply
The Ghost of ULP
Registered User
User ID: 417094
06-20-2017 02:58 AM

Posts: 30,128



Post: #39
RE: USS Fitzgerald: If ramming does this much damage to the steel God forbid a torpedo
LoP Guest  Wrote: (06-20-2017 02:52 AM)
The Ghost of ULP  Wrote: (06-19-2017 09:35 PM)
Jhikpghf What does this tell us about the steel and construction ?
Even better yet! What does this tell us about the new ship they named after Gabby Giffords?????? It's mostly aluminum!!!! Think that container ship would've cut an aluminum ship in half. Yep! Navy ships that look all cool until they go into battle.............

That is what we should be worried about after this incident.

Crazy Lunatic Since 2014.... I post and you debate and think about it.
Quote this message in a reply
softwwareguy
lop guest
User ID: 422108
06-22-2017 05:12 AM

 



Post: #40
RE: USS Fitzgerald: If ramming does this much damage to the steel God forbid a torpedo
IMHO this was an aggressive act. On the bridge of the Fitzgerald there was certainly enough information to interpret what the container ship was doing. This goes triple for the bridge of the attacker. This ship committed the equivalent of a u-turn in a four lane freeway at rush hour, not something you do without intent. Unless you've been in front of an 800 foot container ship going full out--I have--you may not realize it, but they're going about 30 miles an hour which means they'll close with you very very rapidly. It also means they can steer very well at that speed, it's only when they're moving slowly that maneuverability is limited. Collision alarms would have been going off on both ships and neither crew heeded them. Why not? something's very wrong here, this was no accident. They meant it, we misconstrued their intent or commitment. The only other possibility I can think of is one or both ships was electronically disabled (so the positions were misleading, or ?). A US destroyer can accelerate out of harms way just like a ski boat takes off. It didn't. Don't pay attention to the strength of the steel hull, that's like trying to win a car race by loading your vehicle with armor; it's a sensible but mistaken concern. Speed and evasion are the keys to survival for these ships. This advantage was not invoked. We need to understand why not.
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 398235
06-22-2017 05:21 AM

 



Post: #41
RE: USS Fitzgerald: If ramming does this much damage to the steel God forbid a torpedo
The Ghost of ULP  Wrote: (06-19-2017 09:35 PM)
Hamburgerwagon  Wrote: (06-19-2017 09:34 PM)
Looks like the ship that hit it was much larger.

Jhikpghf What does this tell us about the steel and construction ?

It tells me nothing except... Physics Still Works!

For Dummies:

https://image.slidesharecdn.com/density-...1379340252

AND

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736...a2b877.jpg
Quote this message in a reply
Dr Phil
lop guest
User ID: 304026
06-22-2017 01:02 PM

 



Post: #42
RE: USS Fitzgerald: If ramming does this much damage to the steel God forbid a torpedo
The Ghost of ULP  Wrote: (06-19-2017 09:33 PM)
link to image: https://media3.s-nbcnews.com/j/newscms/2...0-1000.jpg



Why so much damage ?

How could they not see a another ship with all the radar and gps we have today?

The Other ship that colluded with this had to be going full speed !

Something is off with this.

150,000+ tons moving at any speed is carrying tremendous energy.

You should be embarrassed at exposing your shocking ignorance of the most basic aspects of physics...something you should have pretty much locked down by grade 10.
Quote this message in a reply








Contact UsConspiracy Forum. No reg. required! Return to TopReturn to ContentRSS Syndication