Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Norwegian frigate sinking has far-reaching implications

aspistrategist.org.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 210 posts

Re: Norwegian frigate sinking has far-reaching implications

#181

Post by dmix »

kristofferR wrote: post #8

This site has a great animation of the crash, including the leaked radio communications: https://www.vg.no/spesial/2018/helge-ingstad-ulykken/ Click "Helge Ingstad natt" to see the POV from the frigate. "Styrbord" means starboard/right, that's basically all the Norwegian you need to know.

Interesting, I love modern journalism.

Why doesn't the tanker have better lighting at the back of the ship? It seems to only be easily visible on the front-side from far away. Although I'm not trained to be able to spot a dark ship against the horizon it looked pretty challenging using the night view.

Re: Norwegian frigate sinking has far-reaching implications

#182

Post by close04 »

MordodeMaru wrote: post #156
close04 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe but we can't really tell from the article if that's the final report on the investigation and if the builder agrees, hence the might in "further investigation might be necessary". It just says: > authorities determined that the stuffing boxes weren’t working properly The why and the how could make the difference between bad design, bad implementation, or bad luck.

That's actually my concern: while it is impossible to determine that from the article, the burden is already in someone's shoulders already.

Keep in mind that news articles are not supposed to replace an investigation report and are only to give more of an outline of the subject. It's just for us laymen and puts very little burden on the involved parties. Certainly less than the official investigation report.

Re: Norwegian frigate sinking has far-reaching implications

#183

Post by kps »

yread wrote: post #50
aardvark291 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a reference to the fact, stated in the article, that Australia, Germany, Spain, and the Netherlands have ships of a similar design built by the same shipbuilder, which may also suffer from design flaws that allowed this one to sink so readily.

And for many of the navies these ships are the biggest most expensive and advanced vessels in the whole fleet. Imagine if the US Navy found out that Nimitz-class has a strange tendency to sink inexplicably

They don't sink, but unplanned time travel remains an issue.

Re: Norwegian frigate sinking has far-reaching implications

#184

Post by elcapitan »

tokai wrote: post #176
sovande wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Styrbord is not germanic, but old norse and literary means the rudder (i.e. steering board), which, as you said, was located on the right side of the ship. Viking ships could therefore only dock on the left-side, hence port for the port side.

Old Norse is a germanic language.

Exactly, as are Old German and Old English - that's why I was pointing out the Germanic relation there and the meaning behind the word :)

Re: Norwegian frigate sinking has far-reaching implications

#185

Post by elcapitan »

sovande wrote: post #175
elcapitan wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many of the words are probably old German in origin, the modern German word "Steuerbord" means the same, "steuern" = to steer (see "styrboard", could also have become "steerboard" in English, instead of starboard). The nautic right side was called that way because on those old viking boats, the rudder was a big paddle on the right side.

Styrbord is not germanic, but old norse and literary means the rudder (i.e. steering board), which, as you said, was located on the right side of the ship. Viking ships could therefore only dock on the left-side, hence port for the port side.

At least in English and German the 'board' (or 'bord' part earlier) means 'side of a ship' (but it is derived from board as piece of wood, but not necessarily the rudder, see 'Backbord' in modern German for the opposite side).

See https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/starboard#Etymology for details.

Re: Norwegian frigate sinking has far-reaching implications

#186

Post by AnimalMuppet »

alkonaut wrote: post #123

I get how they could be confused, not paying attention. But here they are communicating. This wasn't two ships not noticing the danger, (then we should discuss whether tech didn't help). Here one ship DID notice it and even communicated with the other ship. The only viable explanation for that is a) That kind of thing happens dozens of times per day so when it's actually a dangerous situation it's not registered as s…

A warship is not going to have auto-collision avoidance, at least not without possibility of an override. Ramming is a legitimate naval tactic.

Re: Norwegian frigate sinking has far-reaching implications

#187

Post by AnimalMuppet »

Tor3 wrote: post #136
dagw wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder is if their own AIS monitor was also off? Why didn't they see the AIS signature of Sola TS and the other ships? According to the commission looking into the accident they did have AIS-monitoring on and had spotted and identified the 3 other ships on their right (which may explain their initial reluctance to turn right, into their path). No one has any good answer as to why they failed to spot/ignored the tan…

Well.. those other ships weren't really on their right (at that time). They were on their left (as can be seen on the video of the radar monitoring). The reason stated by Helge Ingstad's radio operator for not turning starboard was because of some reefs to their starboard. At the time of the crash those reefs were still 750m away (to starboard) though.

I could be wrong, but 750m seems to me to be not very far when traveling 17 knots.

Re: Norwegian frigate sinking has far-reaching implications

#188

Post by depressedpanda »

elcapitan wrote: post #170
jacobush wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

old German ic if I may :)

That's actually not correct - Germanic is the name for the group, while actual languages are German . Old High German, Middle High German, etc.

Well you argued (without providing any references) that Norwegian "styrbord" was probably from Old German. Given your example of Viking longboats I find it far more likely that the word is from Old Norse.

Hence Germanic is correct, but German highly unlikely.

Given the history of the British isles, I would also venture that English is more influenced by Old Norse than Old German.

Re: Norwegian frigate sinking has far-reaching implications

#189

Post by rue »

dmix wrote: post #181
kristofferR wrote: post #8

This site has a great animation of the crash, including the leaked radio communications: https://www.vg.no/spesial/2018/helge-ingstad-ulykken/ Click "Helge Ingstad natt" to see the POV from the frigate. "Styrbord" means starboard/right, that's basically all the Norwegian you need to know.

Interesting, I love modern journalism. Why doesn't the tanker have better lighting at the back of the ship? It seems to only be easily visible on the front-side from far away. Although I'm not trained to be able to spot a dark ship against the horizon it looked pretty challenging using the night view.

Ship lighting is standardised and very specific (you can always tell which way a ship is facing by the lights for example).

I’m not an expert in visual science, but I suspect it is easier to tell _multiple_ ships apart when they have fewer lights.

ETA: https://www.marineinsight.com/marine-navigation/understandin...

Re: Norwegian frigate sinking has far-reaching implications

#190

Post by nicwolff »

kristofferR wrote: post #8

This site has a great animation of the crash, including the leaked radio communications: https://www.vg.no/spesial/2018/helge-ingstad-ulykken/ Click "Helge Ingstad natt" to see the POV from the frigate. "Styrbord" means starboard/right, that's basically all the Norwegian you need to know.

Interesting – the animation doesn't show red/green lights on the Sola's bow, only way back on the wings – I'm a sailor and I find it very hard to guess where the Sola's prow is as she gets closer in the "Helge Ingstad natt" view.
Post reply on HN