Agato Destroyer Collision: Bridge Management Questions

February 22nd, 2008 · Comments

The bow and stern parts of the Seitoku Maru fishing boat are lifted onto the deck of a salvage barge Wednesday off Tateyama in Chiba Prefecture. Two fishermen from the boat were still missing on Wednesday. (TSUYOSHI TAKEDA/ THE ASAHI SHIMBUN)

A number of sources are beginning to flush out the circumstances surrounding the collision between the Japanese Aegis class Destroyer Agato, and the fishing vessel Seitoku Maru. The collision took place about 04:00. The two fisherman aboard Seitoku Maru are missing.

Here’s an excerpt from The Daily Yomiuri:

“Before the accident, a crew member went out on deck in readiness to replace the crew member on duty, taking a lookout position at about 3:45 a.m. to get used to the dark. The relieving crew member spotted a red light on a fishing boat ahead of the destroyer to the right. The crew member continued surveillance, but it is likely that the member failed to tell the radar crew or other crew members about the sighting. Having just taken over lookout duty, the relieving crew member may have incorrectly assumed that the crew member who had just been relieved of duty already knew about the light, thereby failing to recognize the importance of this information.”

While news sources do not refer to Bridge Resource Management issues, it is apparent that the collision developed around the 04:00 change of watch.

Google news links on the Destroyer Agato collision can be found here.

___________________________

This post was written by Richard Rodriguez, Rescue Tug Captain, and US Coast Guard approved instructor for License Training. You can read more of his articles at the BitterEnd of the net.

Enjoy this story? Subscribe

Categories: Incidents · Navy

Tags: · Aegis, Agato, colregs, Eiji Yoshikawa, Seitoku Maru, THE ASAHI SHIMBUN

Viewing 2 Comments

John G.Denham 6 months ago 1 point
Please login to rate.

Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.

During the investigations at APL preceeding the SAS program, we discovered that most at sea incidents between vessels occurred at watch changing time. A survey on gCaptain.com confirmed that. On naval vssels this is managed by bridge personnel verifying reports and exchanging and verifyhing data ( what we see) between CIC and bridge lookouts, OOD and JOOD and JOOW and POOW. Something like the change of sentries passing on orders. But it has to practiced and enforced, and that is not easy! In some of the better ships, lookout training is mandatory. At one time in the US Navy there was a special rating badge. In merchant ships, the only procedure I can suggest, and this is from experience, is the Master talks to all topside watch standers and reminds them of the importance of communication, and enforces the role lookouts play; they are a major member of the ship security and safety team, not just some one standing a boring watch. It' s helpful if one knows the laws about lookouts and the key role they play in trials. In an admiralty case some years ago, an involved captain , said, "That G.D. loookout has my license in his hands."

reply edit flag record video comment

Capt. Jack 5 months ago 1 point
Please login to rate.

Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.

Standing watch on the USS Missouri BB-63 back in the mid 80s, I too found the lookout watch very boring. To pass the time we would report all satellites we saw. This kept the communications moving along and to let the bridge know we where in fact doing our jobs. I remember always being thanked for reporting Satellites. During our watch changes we always tried to relive the watch 15 minutes early to get all the pass down information of current contacts, changes in standing orders or night orders. Also it was a time to get warmed up and our minds clear and ready for watch standing. I alway knew the shift change was kind of dangerous because of taking time to do the pass down information.

As we stood watch would get yelled at if the OOD or JOOD would spot a target before we did. We where trained in to identify ships that might not have lights on but we could identify just by the silhouette they made. We even had flash cards to practice identifying ships (friend or foe). We where constantly reminded of the importance of our job as if we where driving the vessel and had command. We where responsible of 1,500 lives and a 58,000 ton historic war ship that is imposable to stop on a dime. When a target was getting close we would get excited and report all kind of information. We would report the size, type, stats, what we see the crew doing on the back deck, etc. It annoyed the OOD sometimes but they where mostly thankful for the weird reports. We might have gone a bit overboard but we kept very vigilant on our duties.

So to hear that the lookout failed to report the target makes me wonder if he was properly trained ( and experienced enough ) to do the duties of lookout. Also what was his back up? The Might Mo always had 3 flybridge lookouts, one stern watch. In fog we would post a bow watch. If we ever had a problem with a watch stander not doing their job then we would suggest to our department head they be put on some other duty.
Standing watch was more interesting than scrubbing the decks. At 4 in the morning there is very little distractions from daily maneuvers. Also there is usually double watch standers during a shift change so. It amazes me that something like this happened. I have never served on a Japanese ship so I wouldn't know how thing are done correctly or not. I just know heads will roll on this one, hopefully for the good of the Japanese Navy and Merchant sailors.

reply edit flag record video comment

http://captainjack.ws

gCaptain.com

A Blog About Ships