Really bad weapons...

[helbent4]

Nate,

Such disasters pre-date the modern computerised era, of course!

In 1893 two British pre-Dreadnaught battleships (HMS Camperdown and HMS Victoria) collided while on exercises and sank. It's a somewhat complicated story but it boils down to how a reputedly brilliant admiral planned a showy maneuver, and no one questioned his calculations either through blind faith or a rigid adherence to orders:

http://ahoy.tk-jk.net/macslog/Stupid...ndthenAdm.html

Not exactly a "stupid GI" trick!

Tony

[natehale1971]

Originally Posted by helbent4

Nate,

Such disasters pre-date the modern computerised era, of course!

In 1893 two British pre-Dreadnaught battleships (HMS Camperdown and HMS Victoria) collided while on exercises and sank. It's a somewhat complicated story but it boils down to how a reputedly brilliant admiral planned a showy maneuver, and no one questioned his calculations either through blind faith or a rigid adherence to orders:

http://ahoy.tk-jk.net/macslog/Stupid...ndthenAdm.html

Not exactly a "stupid GI" trick!

Tony

Very true Tony... i was just going by something i had heard about that happened during the past twenty years. Because I swear I read about the two ships swapping paint after I got out of the Navy... and that it had happened at night, and the computers acted up and said the ships were about twenty meters further apart than they actually were. Thus when they saw the running lights they thought everything was okay, the guys on watch were saying "i think they are too damn close!" and the offical statements were "no the computer says were safely apart" and when they got really close even the officers in charge said "They're to f**king close!" and started to pull out of their turns. and they scrapped as they turned apart.

[dragoon500ly]

when the Field Artillery started using computers, some of the firing errors would shock you.

I was doing a FTX once and we got to actually call in artillery. Now, I've never had problems figuring out where I am on a map, and on previous exercises I was always able to get the round on target with only 2-3 adjustments.

Got into an arguement with out FO, who swore that our positions was five clicks from where I said we were. Needless to say, the ole E-5 got out voted by the 1st Lieutenant. And we used his grid coordinates to call for fire. As he was completing his fire mission, I had dismounted from his M-113 and stepped into an old foxhole, and was pulling on my kevlar. About the time our Lieutenant finished saying "Get your ass back on the track now Sergeant!" We heard the whistle of incoming artillery. The spotting round struck less than 40 meters from our track.

As you can imagine, the FO was back on the radio screaming "CHECK FIRE! CHECK FIRE!"

And I sat in the foxhole, grinning at the Lieutenant....

[Fusilier]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

when the Field Artillery started using computers, some of the firing errors would shock you.

I was doing a FTX once and we got to actually call in artillery. Now, I've never had problems figuring out where I am on a map, and on previous exercises I was always able to get the round on target with only 2-3 adjustments.

Got into an arguement with out FO, who swore that our positions was five clicks from where I said we were. Needless to say, the ole E-5 got out voted by the 1st Lieutenant. And we used his grid coordinates to call for fire. As he was completing his fire mission, I had dismounted from his M-113 and stepped into an old foxhole, and was pulling on my kevlar. About the time our Lieutenant finished saying "Get your ass back on the track now Sergeant!" We heard the whistle of incoming artillery. The spotting round struck less than 40 meters from our track.

As you can imagine, the FO was back on the radio screaming "CHECK FIRE! CHECK FIRE!"

And I sat in the foxhole, grinning at the Lieutenant....

That just seems incredibly unsafe and well... dumb - that on a training exercise you actually have the ability to either call in artillery on your own position or can be in an designated impact area during a live fire. No range safety staff either?

I'm guessing the apparent lack of ensuring the safety of its members is a reason for such a high rate of US military training deaths?!?

[Legbreaker]

Sounds like it doesn't it....
The amount of safety staff and checking that's carried out on the range here in Australia makes events like that effectively impossible.

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by Fusilier

That just seems incredibly unsafe and well... dumb - that on a training exercise you actually have the ability to either call in artillery on your own position or can be in an designated impact area during a live fire. No range safety staff either?

I'm guessing the apparent lack of ensuring the safety of its members is a reason for such a high rate of US military training deaths?!?

Like I said in the Post, the Lt (and that new computer) was off by 5 kilometers. THis was back in 1981 and the FX was to teach us old soldiers about the latest advance in calling in fire.

As for the training accidents, the us military does seem to have a lot of them. And most of them are sheer stupid human error.

[Targan]

Originally Posted by natehale1971

Very true Tony... i was just going by something i had heard about that happened during the past twenty years. Because I swear I read about the two ships swapping paint after I got out of the Navy... and that it had happened at night, and the computers acted up and said the ships were about twenty meters further apart than they actually were. Thus when they saw the running lights they thought everything was okay, the guys on watch were saying "i think they are too damn close!" and the offical statements were "no the computer says were safely apart" and when they got really close even the officers in charge said "They're to f**king close!" and started to pull out of their turns. and they scrapped as they turned apart.

In 1964 the Royal Australian Navy lost the destroyer HMAS Voyager due to a collision. The Voyager was cut in half by our carrier HMAS Melbourne.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melbour...ager_collision

Two Royal Commissions were held into the incident (the only time two Royal Commissions have ever been held into the same incident) with the second focussing on allegations that the captain of the Voyager may have been unfit for command (apparently he was an alcoholic).

Given the modest size of the Australian Defence Force (both then and now) we really couldn't afford to lose a destroyer that way. Now we'll probably never again see an Australian aircraft carrier sinking an Australian destroyer because we now longer have an aircraft carrier. But that's fine because our best buddies the USA has more than enough aircraft carrier to go around