Something is wrong with your bloody ships.

a reply to: cheesyleps

You obviously don't know as much about spoofing as you think dude

Here's the solution to the 'boat' problem.

Put the sensor suite like we have on our cars now on ships.

Object avoidance.

Easy peasy.

a reply to: neo96

Ships don't move in an instant like cars do. There's nothing wrong with the ships guidance systems as designed. There is either a problem with training, a problem with manning, a lack of education in protocol, an overworking in crew, or the possibility of a cyber attack. With the hacking of contractors of late a virus isn't out of the question. If it was a GPS spoofing attack than I would think that the commercial vessels would be more affected than a military vessel.

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: Phonixfromtheashes

Yeah, that must be it...

[/sarc]

Well something is "it" you dont just crash destroyers for no reason and crap training is most likely to be the culprit.

a reply to: Phonixfromtheashes

In 30 years there have been how many collisions with civilian ships? Large military and military sealift not included because those are very high risk, close proximity maneuvers. And all of a sudden there two in two months. I'm not ruling training out completely but not my first thought, especially at a time when everyone especially China is challenging our ships routinely and jockeying for control of waterways. China has made it very clear they want US ships to decrease presence in the area, what better way to achieve that without causing a conflict? I'm not saying we are not making mistakes, we are operating many ships at a very high op tempo and crews are stressed to hell considering all the bs going on in the world and at home, possible but we have operated this way for a very long time. Maybe training, has been lots of leadership turnover in last 10-15 years, no doubt some CO's and senior leadership has been fast tracked compared to old days. idk, I do know ATG was on the fitz at the time, they are as senior and as good as it gets, if training is really an issue then things on the water have changed a great deal... your talking well over a few hundred years experience in an ATG team

a reply to: swimmer15

ok - i shall bite :

explain COHERENTLY how " china " can engineer collisions between 2 vessels

a reply to: ignorant_ape

In busy shipping lanes and tight waterways? It wouldn't be very hard, one small boat blocking and your creating an international incident no matter which one you hit. As a CO you decide, take the hit yourself or hit a fishing boat with who knows who's on board, maybe kill a small family. It wouldn't be difficult at all and a lose lose for the destroyer. And you wouldn't even need much boat to do it, make it capable of 15-20 mph and make it look crowded. No CO I have known would chose to hit a boat of say 5-10 innocent people over taking the hit themselves. And a CO plus a handful of crew officers and enlisted won't just simply be relieved of duty, but they will be put on trial if negligence created an environment that killed a few members of crew, just saying. We'll see how this all plays out.

originally posted by: roguetechie
a reply to: cheesyleps

You obviously don't know as much about spoofing as you think dude

So educate me...dude.

I haven't spent a lot of time in the last couple of years doing any research of my own due to teaching commitments but my academic specialism was/is shipboard electronic navigation systems...

If you can explain how it is possible to broadcast fake L2/L5 signals to a specific ship that is in close proximity to many other vessels without it affecting any of them... I'm all ears.

N.B. the naval vessel would be highly unlikely to be using either the P or M codes for general purpose navigation. Standard procedures are to make use of civilian signals unless evidence or risk of GPS denial is recognised.

originally posted by: Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
2. Sabotage, or new type of electronic warfare, cyber attack, that disabled or screwed up ships navigation and radar systems. More of a possibility than the first one, but so far, no evidence of that has surfaced. But with everything considered at this point, probably unlikely.

disturbing thought. MilSpec stuff is contracted and procured and stuffed in warehouses and there are many opportunities for bad guys to access and monkey-wrench.
very very hard to diagnose and catch.

a reply to: Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

As far as the Osprey crash off Australia, Marine Aviation has been a disaster the last couple of years. Their F-18s have been more or less falling out of the sky, and most of the accidents have been pilot error. There was a pretty scathing report about a midair between two Hornets late last year that boiled it down to poor leadership, low readiness rates, and lack of flight hours. One of the pilots wasn't current in the aircraft at the time, and had only had simulator time in the previous 30 or 60 days due to a knee injury.

The other pilot involved, the instructor from the unit, had 13.7 hours the previous 30 days. The Marine requirement was for almost 16 hours in 30 days.

I will go with the poor leadership. As said previously, the watch on a ship is a process, and is managed by the watch officer.
Also, spoofing GPS may be a possibility, but not the radar system. You would think that who ever was watching the displays would have noticed that the radar did not match the GPS presentation, if that were the case.

a reply to: Caughtlurking

He's mocking the rest of you...

Surprised you didn't catch that

a reply to: cheesyleps

I know just enough to know that the stuff you so cavalierly dismissed is not only possible but also very likely proliferated to groups who would totally have the impetus to do it.


Unfortunately not much beyond thst though otherwise i woulda elucidated.

I've found enough technical literature etc to very clearly tell me that, but very little beyond that considering that i lack some of the proper education to really get into the nitty gritty blow by blow stuff.

originally posted by: roguetechie
a reply to: cheesyleps

I know just enough to know that the stuff you so cavalierly dismissed is not only possible but also very likely proliferated to groups who would totally have the impetus to do it.


Unfortunately not much beyond thst though otherwise i woulda elucidated.

I've found enough technical literature etc to very clearly tell me that, but very little beyond that considering that i lack some of the proper education to really get into the nitty gritty blow by blow stuff.

So basically what you are saying is that I should just believe you because... just because. Okay.

There are multiple redundant elements used in navigating a ship that can/should/do prevent the loss of a single source of data from compromising the navigational safety of the ship.

A simple radar overlay on an ECDIS (electronic chart system) is the simplest way to compare GPS and radar data misalignments are very easy to spot very quickly. Other equipment that would be unaffected by gps spoofing would include magnetic and gyro compasses which would typically have off-course alarms programmed.

Note that I'm not saying that spoofing isn't achievable but that it is primarily an area denial tool. Essentially what it does is replace the real satellite signals with a fake signal carrying rogue information. For it to be accepted by the receiver it has to match the characteristics of the real signal.

originally posted by: Plotus
Dude, you riding on the wrong side of the road....

I think there is something afoot with these Tankers intentionally causing these

Even if tankers were intentionally doing this, why isn't the USN ship taking appropriate responses?

Something is horribly wrong with our ships ability to safely navigate it seems.

a reply to: pavil

Seventh Fleet is used harder than any other ships in the fleet, with an average of 40+ days more at sea. They're all behind on maintenance and training, with multiple maintenance items pushed off until they return to the US.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: pavil

Seventh Fleet is used harder than any other ships in the fleet, with an average of 40+ days more at sea. They're all behind on maintenance and training, with multiple maintenance items pushed off until they return to the US.

Thanks for the reply. I might have missed something but im not hearing equipment failure as one of the reasons for the crashes.

Fatigue? Poor Training? Lack of following procedures? Lord help us if we get into a real scrap where the Navy actually has to fire and maneuver against other naval assets.

a reply to: pavil

Maintenance and training. They haven't confirmed it yet, but the initial report was that McCain lost steering at some point, but they're pushing everything but the mission on the back burner because they're using their ships so hard.

a reply to: SprocketUK

It's all about money. The warhip tried to stop the tanker, it couldn't stop. The tanker's owner will pay the price of the warship. Money in huge amounts for such dealers. It's like cheating.

When these accidents happen the commander of the ship is usually in his quarters asleep, and someone else is at the helm. Unfortunately, in the dark hours of night, during peacetime, people are notoriously lazy and easily distracted. I'd be willing to bet most of those at the controls were playing with their cell phones, chasing around Pokemon, or texting nudie pictures. Situational awareness was not turned on.