national

U.S. destroyer collides with Japanese-owned tanker at entrance to Gulf

12 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2012 AFP

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

12 Comments
Login to comment

What's very important is that there was no oil spillage from the oil tanker.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The USS Porter was heading southwest into the Persian Gulf. The destroyer was exiting the Strait of Hormuz while the Otowasan was heading northeast into the strait toward the Gulf of Oman. The general rule, when two vessels are meeting head-on or nearly head-on, is for each vessel to alter its course to starboard (right) so that each vessel passes on the port side of the other. The USS Porter veered instead to port (left) putting the destroyer directly into the path of the tanker. The destroyer was hit on its starboard side around 1 a.m. Sunday. The only thing left to investigate is why Commander Martin Arriola ordered his ship to turn port side.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Human beings sometimes make mistakes. Maybe this is just one of those times.

0 ( +9 / -9 )

I thought the smaller boat was always to blame. I'm surprised they didn't fire on the tanker.

The tanker is larger and more difficult to manouvre. The American vessel would normally be required to give way.

What's very important is that there was no oil spillage from the oil tanker.

Absolutely agree. No lives were lost and there were no injuries is even more so.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"collided with" "with" is a very vague preposition in this instance.

cbs news is running with the preposition 'porter crashed "into" ... in the headline then changes to "with" in the story.

pentagon sources (cbs states), however, says the porter is likely at fault.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

noriyo...

interestingly enough, while digging around for a news entity that would carry this story with a 'proper' preposition to help discern who hit who, I do run across recent articles where iranian naval entities assisted u.s. cargo boats in distress or from pirates... in the background there seems to be at least a handful of unreported stories of ira-us cooperation in current times.

'just to clarify your assertion.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

More on my State Farm remark, it is an insurance company in America. Can see a ad with an agent and Uncle same. Agent "We have a multiple ship discount". Uncle Same "Ah a policy for people with multiple accidents?" Agent "oh no, is your helicopter in a tree again?" Uncle Same "no, we had a get tougher with a ship in the gulf."

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

I thought the smaller boat was always to blame. I'm surprised they didn't fire on the tanker.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

With all the sophistaced intellegence of the US navy, one can only wonder how this can happen?? Obviously it was weekend party time on the US destroyer with no one in control!!

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

It's who hit whom, and it doesn't matter. Good-bye to the captain. The USA taxpayers need an explanation NOW. This story would have been a major incident if it had been between the USA ship and Iran. There really is no excuse.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

INCOMPETENCE. So much for the high-tech, see everything equipment on board. Maybe Iran can shut down the straits by watching the Navy sink itself. "Military Intelligence" at its best.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Its hard to go anywhere in the world these days without bumping into U.S. military.

The article deftly dodged the question of who was responsible, didn't it?

-8 ( +1 / -9 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites