5 ms·

Thank you. That's precisely why things are this way. Source: me, Navy veteran

by diggernet 9y ago

Bromskloss 9y ago
What about the question regarding having one guy doing direction, and another guy doing speed? Is that called for?
- diggernet 9y ago
  Absolutely. Maintaining a ship's heading is a full time job. If you get distracted, you get off course pretty quickly. Speed isn't even really handled on the bridge. The engine order (ahead full, back half, emergency stop, etc) goes to the engine room where multiple people do the work. Note: This is in the context of oil and nuclear steam-powered ships. Gas turbine ships may well have an actual throttle on the bridge. Whether the bridge has a throttle or just an engine order telegraph, the helmsman can often have their hands too full to deal with it. But someone else can do it along with their other duties, as speed control is not so intensive.
  - tga 9y ago
    Especially if it's so easy to get off course, and since the responsibility lies with another officer anyway, steering sounds like a job better suited for a computer, rather than a person. As far as I know, airline pilots already dial in most navigational course changes to the autopilot, I would have imagined ships to work similarly.
    - 0xffff2 9y ago
      That seems obvious today, but the McCain was laid down in 1991. Computers were much less sophisticated back then. I wonder if there is enough information publicly available to compare the workflows on the McCain to the same workflows on the Zumwalt.
  - jabl 9y ago
    As an outsider (well, I have plenty of experience with pleasure boats/yachts, but none with large ships) it seems really extraordinary that just maintaining a heading would be a full time job. Somehow in airplanes a single pilot manages to control not only the rudder, but throttles, ailerons, elevators, flaps and whatnot while also yakking on the radio. And airplanes zip along at 500 knots rather than 20 like a ship.
    - pas 9y ago
      Fewer obstacles maybe? Also, with a fast plane you either land or take off, or do stuff in practically free space.
      - vlehto 9y ago
        Also there is the example of infantry tank. There is the driver who has speed and direction. Then there is the commander who gives orders but apparently has backup system to drive if the driver is incapacitated. A ship just can't have as much obstacles as tank negotiating battlefield.
        KineticLensman 9y ago
        > the example of infantry tank. There is the driver who has speed and direction. Then there is the commander who gives orders but apparently has backup system to drive The UK's Warrior armoured personnel carrier is an example of what I guess you mean by 'Infantry Tank'. It has a Commander, Gunner and Driver (plus the 'dismounts' - seven guys in the back who get out to fight on their feet). The driver - as the role name implies - does all the drving. The commander (who is also the loader, incidentally) directs the driver where to go. He does not have duplicate driving controls. If the driver is very inexperienced, the commander will give him very precise direction. If the driver is experienced - in the sense of understanding tactical movement considerations - the commander can be much more hands off. If the vehicle commander is also a platoon commander, he is also giving orders to the commnanders of the three other vehicles in the platoon. He is much more likely to be paired with an experienced driver so he can focus more on the overall battle than control of his own vehicle.
  - cmdkeen 9y ago
    It may be on a US Navy warship, that absolutely isn't the case for other blue water navies. If anything I would suggest that having too many people involved adds confusion. The OOW has repeaters of the course and speed so that they can verify their orders are being followed, they are the check. The Wolf Rock collision board of inquiry makes for interesting (and embarrassing) reading around what happens when assumptions are being made about who is doing what.

Thank you. That's precisely why things are this way. Source: me, Navy veteran

Bromskloss 9y ago

What about the question regarding having one guy doing direction, and another guy doing speed? Is that called for?

diggernet 9y ago
Absolutely. Maintaining a ship's heading is a full time job. If you get distracted, you get off course pretty quickly. Speed isn't even really handled on the bridge. The engine order (ahead full, back half, emergency stop, etc) goes to the engine room where multiple people do the work. Note: This is in the context of oil and nuclear steam-powered ships. Gas turbine ships may well have an actual throttle on the bridge. Whether the bridge has a throttle or just an engine order telegraph, the helmsman can often have their hands too full to deal with it. But someone else can do it along with their other duties, as speed control is not so intensive.
- tga 9y ago
  Especially if it's so easy to get off course, and since the responsibility lies with another officer anyway, steering sounds like a job better suited for a computer, rather than a person. As far as I know, airline pilots already dial in most navigational course changes to the autopilot, I would have imagined ships to work similarly.
  - 0xffff2 9y ago
    That seems obvious today, but the McCain was laid down in 1991. Computers were much less sophisticated back then. I wonder if there is enough information publicly available to compare the workflows on the McCain to the same workflows on the Zumwalt.
- jabl 9y ago
  As an outsider (well, I have plenty of experience with pleasure boats/yachts, but none with large ships) it seems really extraordinary that just maintaining a heading would be a full time job. Somehow in airplanes a single pilot manages to control not only the rudder, but throttles, ailerons, elevators, flaps and whatnot while also yakking on the radio. And airplanes zip along at 500 knots rather than 20 like a ship.
  - pas 9y ago
    Fewer obstacles maybe? Also, with a fast plane you either land or take off, or do stuff in practically free space.
    - vlehto 9y ago
      Also there is the example of infantry tank. There is the driver who has speed and direction. Then there is the commander who gives orders but apparently has backup system to drive if the driver is incapacitated. A ship just can't have as much obstacles as tank negotiating battlefield.
      - KineticLensman 9y ago
        > the example of infantry tank. There is the driver who has speed and direction. Then there is the commander who gives orders but apparently has backup system to drive The UK's Warrior armoured personnel carrier is an example of what I guess you mean by 'Infantry Tank'. It has a Commander, Gunner and Driver (plus the 'dismounts' - seven guys in the back who get out to fight on their feet). The driver - as the role name implies - does all the drving. The commander (who is also the loader, incidentally) directs the driver where to go. He does not have duplicate driving controls. If the driver is very inexperienced, the commander will give him very precise direction. If the driver is experienced - in the sense of understanding tactical movement considerations - the commander can be much more hands off. If the vehicle commander is also a platoon commander, he is also giving orders to the commnanders of the three other vehicles in the platoon. He is much more likely to be paired with an experienced driver so he can focus more on the overall battle than control of his own vehicle.
- cmdkeen 9y ago
  It may be on a US Navy warship, that absolutely isn't the case for other blue water navies. If anything I would suggest that having too many people involved adds confusion. The OOW has repeaters of the course and speed so that they can verify their orders are being followed, they are the check. The Wolf Rock collision board of inquiry makes for interesting (and embarrassing) reading around what happens when assumptions are being made about who is doing what.