News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Navy’s flawed technology set the USS John McCain up for d... by userbinator on Friday December 20, 2019 @03:55PM (#21847318)
He ordered Bordeaux to take over steering the warship while another sailor controlled its speed. The idea was to avoid distractions by having each man focus on a single task in the heavy maritime traffic.

I've not controlled anything that floats bigger than a small fishing boat, and I realise the timescales of reaction here are much larger, but that just sounds wrong to me --- changes in speed can affect direction, and vice-versa. Splitting that to two separate brains that are communicating only via a low-bandwidth voice channel seems like a recipe for disaster.

Re:Navy’s flawed technology set the USS John McCain up for d... by dctoedt on Friday December 20, 2019 @04:44PM (#21847628)
> He ordered Bordeaux to take over steering the warship while another sailor controlled its speed.

That was standard practice back in the day and for many decades before that: One sailor served as the "helmsman" doing the steering and another as the "lee helmsman" transmitting speed orders to the engine room, each as ordered by the conning officer. (Former aircraft-carrier bridge officer here.)

Example: Conning officer: "Right standard rudder, steady on course 090." Helmsman: "Right standard rudder aye, sir [or ma'am]. Sir, my rudder is right standard." Conning officer: "Very well." Helmsman: "Sir, steady on course 090." Conning officer: "Very well." Conning officer: "All engines ahead standard, make turns for 15 knots." Lee helmsman: [Repeats back the order in the same way; rings up "ahead standard" on the engine-order telegraph [0]; and verbally tells the engine room over a sound-powered telephone [1].] Lee helmsman: "Sir, engine room acknowledges all engines ahead standard, make turns for 15 knots." Conning officer: "Very well." The quartermaster on the bridge records the orders in the ship's log, and the watch officer in the engine room does the same for the engine room log.

Don't know how they do things now.

[0] https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Engine_order_telegraph

[1] https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Sound-powered_telephone

Re:Navy’s flawed technology set the USS John McCain up for d... by hansthehorse on Friday December 20, 2019 @05:43PM (#21848033)
Back in the day I didn't get verbal engine order instructions after the telegraph changed. I matched the telegraph pointer and that signaled to the bridge when they saw it move to match their order.
Re:Navy’s flawed technology set the USS John McCain up for d... by jki275 on Sunday December 22, 2019 @06:51PM (#21860485)
Still done the same way.

CVN CDCWO / TOPWO here.

Re:Navy’s flawed technology set the USS John McCain up for d... by closeparen on Friday December 20, 2019 @04:42PM (#21847614)
Button pushing is beneath a gentleman-scholar commanding officer. On the other hand, a single worker-drone with all the controls in his hands might get his own ideas. Multiple stations with partial control, coordinated by the captain's voice, fit the organizational hierarchy best.

So much so that the military even tried to do this with aircraft cockpits, until it was obviously unworkable. The "hotshot young maverick pilot" archetype was allowed to form because they physically couldn't help it.

At least, this is the story told in The Right Stuff.

Re:Navy’s flawed technology set the USS John McCain up for d... by 7952 on Saturday December 21, 2019 @01:50AM (#21850023)
The advantage of audible instructions is that everyone can hear them. It is easier to catch mistakes and helps maintain situational awareness.
Re:Navy’s flawed technology set the USS John McCain up for d... by at-fates-hands on Friday December 20, 2019 @04:15PM (#21847430)
>> changes in speed can affect direction, and vice-versa. Splitting that to two separate brains that are communicating only via a low-bandwidth voice channel seems like a recipe for disaster.

It's interesting you mention this. My uncle and cousins have been sailing for years on Lake Superior. They navigated some of the largest races on the lake for decades, including the Trans Superior in every imaginable weather conditions. They are, IMHO incredibly experienced sailors.

I just sent this very article to them and my uncle responded within the hour about how having two people doing these in tandem was a recipe for disaster because of the very issue you pointed out. He said you should have one capable person who should be able to do both since it can be a delicate balancing act. Too much speed and over correction with steering can have disastrous results.

Re:Navy’s flawed technology set the USS John McCain up for d... by nwallin on Friday December 20, 2019 @08:57PM (#21849062)
The people with the controls in their hand aren't the people deciding what to put the controls at. They're told where to set them, and they do it or report that the mechanisms have failed.

The reason for this is that the people making the decisions have more important shit to worry about. Things are different when your primary concerns are getting shot at and shooting back. In war time it's not atypical to get your engine or rudder shot out, and if you have someone who has one job - to set the rudder - he'll notice and diagnose it a lot faster than someone who's tasked with avoiding incoming fire, bearing weapons on the enemy, etc. Distribution of responsibilities is incredibly important in war. Combat tends to break down careful, considered decision making.

Also keep in mind most of these people aren't seasoned. This dude was just out of high school. Information overload is a thing.

Re:Navy’s flawed technology set the USS John McCain up for d... by pdonis on Friday December 20, 2019 @07:26PM (#21848639)
The coordination between steering and speed is the job of the conning officer, not the helmsman or lee helmsman. Things happen quite a bit slower on a large warship than they do on a sailboat, so that method of control works fine.
Re:Navy’s flawed technology set the USS John McCain up for d... by nradov on Friday December 20, 2019 @09:40PM (#21849252)
Your relatives don't know what they're talking about. Offshore racing powerboats typically have separate crew members for helm and throttles. Sailboats are completely different.
Re:Navy’s flawed technology set the USS John McCain up for d... by jki275 on Sunday December 22, 2019 @06:51PM (#21860483)
That's the standard for driving Navy ships and has been for a very long time.

The two driving are under the command of someone senior to them (the conning officer) who gives direction to both and is responsible for ensuring the ship is being driven correctly.

Re:Navy’s flawed technology set the USS John McCain up for d... by TeMPOraL on Friday December 20, 2019 @04:06PM (#21847383)
I've not controlled anything that floats bigger than a pedal boat, but to the extent sci-fi shows and navy fictions show can teach me anything, I've always had the impression that the direction and speed of ships are controlled from two different stations on the bridge.
Re:Navy’s flawed technology set the USS John McCain up for d... by dredmorbius on Friday December 20, 2019 @04:43PM (#21847621)
There was a time when the wheelhouse and the bridge were separated, at least in some ships and navies.

See this 1941 British Navy training film:

https://invidio.us/watch?v=ocUD07fvf48

Re:Navy’s flawed technology set the USS John McCain up for d... by exabrial on Friday December 20, 2019 @04:09PM (#21847393)
I'm curious why these things are manually controlled at all. Seems like you should give it a heading and it goes that direction, self-correcting along the way.
Re:Navy’s flawed technology set the USS John McCain up for d... by davengh on Friday December 20, 2019 @04:28PM (#21847508)
Because sometimes he "wrong" action is the right thing to do. No automated system can anticipate everything. Think the NASCAR "drive at the wreck in front of you" - by the time you get there it will have moved.

Especially on a ship that might have to spring from "situation normal" to active combat (maneuver/attack/defend all at once) without a pre-knowable trigger condition.