U.S. Navy warship sustains crack in hull transiting the Canal

One of the US Navy's newest littoral combat ships can't catch a break.

 

In its latest mishap, the USS Montgomery, an Independence-class LCS that's been in service less than two months, sustained an 18-inch-long crack to its hull while passing through the Panama Canal en route to its homeport in San Diego.

The Montgomery (LCS-8) was traveling from the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean through the canal's series of "locks" when it hit a cement structure known as the "center lock wall" while under the control of a local Panama Canal pilot, according to a statement to CNN from the Navy.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/02/politics/uss-montgomery-hull-crack/index.html

Anyone have more info? I'm hoping the Canal experts can tell us more, or how this might have happened.

Also, what precisely is the "center lock wall"?

Thanks!

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/02/politics/uss-montgomery-hull-crack/index.html

 

Anyone have more info? I'm hoping the Canal experts can tell us more, or how this might have happened.

 

Also, what precisely is the "center lock wall"?

 

Thanks!

I have not heard anything about the accident other than another news story. I suspect the rather unusual dimensions of the Montgomery possibly could have had a hand in the striking of the center lock wall... being 417x104... just might be a little cumbersome it tight quarters. I would also think that the vessel is probably constructed of an extremely lightweight material possibly a lot of composite? Being lightweight could cause her to react very quickly to an unexpected hard pull of a mule or a rough nudge of a tug.

The center lock wall is the center wall of the lock complex which separates the two lanes. The center wall is the longest wall of each lock complex as it extends beyond the lock chambers by more than 1000' on either end of the lock chamber. The center wall's most important purpose is to provide an area where the ships can gradually approach the lock complex and attach the center wall mules as they shape up to enter the chamber and receive the side wall mules. This would be a very likely area where hard contact with the wall could have occurred in spite of a large amount of fendering on this part of the center wall. That is just a guess on my part, the ship could have made hard contact with the center wall at any other part of the locks with similar results.

The Independence class LCS ships are a trimaran hull design which widens abruptly midway down the hull, and are made of aluminum. A couple of design features that could have contributed to this mishap are the lack of bridge wings (which apparently will be retrofitted) not allowing pilot/Captain the required vision of the side of the ship, especially given the hull shape. Also, is the retractable bow thruster, which may or may not have been available.

Now that I have a cup or two of caffeine, maybe this will help with the visualization. As you can see the the center wall extends some distance beyond the locks. I'm not sure why they described it as the center lock wall other than just trying to be as descriptive as possible. The portion of the center wall that juts out into the Atlantic Entrance and Gatun Lake are often referred to as the approach wall, but they are all part of the center wall. To put some perspective on the size of the center wall... the length of the center wall from one end to the other is just a little over a mile. A little trivia, the extreme ends of the center wall are called the soft nose... but they aren't! Another item, to get your north-south orientation for your mental GPS, Gatun Locks runs almost due north-south.

The contact with the center wall could have occurred anywhere around the lock complex... I am just guessing it occured while approaching or possibly when it was actually entering one of the locks. The approach and entering the locks are the most common points where such an incident can occur. It could occur anywhere else in the locks or even while exiting. Also I have not read anything as to which locks were involved... could have been Gatun, Pedro Miguel or Miraflores.

Also, just reading between the lines, it doesn't sound like the Montgomery waited around for an investigation of the accident. If that is the case, then "we the people" are on the hook for the damage to the ship! If a vessel does not wish an investigation... then they assume all liability for the damage to the vessel. Oh well, probably just couch change;)!

Thank you both, Chief and Bill; as I've said on other threads, the information you contribute to Cruise Critic is invaluable, and I truly appreciate learning from you.

And Bill -- thanks for the captioned photo; it may be a cliché, but a picture really is worth 1,000 words. :)

When we make our first transit in January (N to S), I will be carefully watching our approach to the center wall!

One problem I see is that the bridge wings will detract from the "stealth" characteristics of the upper hull, which is why the were not included in the first place, probably. It will be interesting to see what the "gray funnel line" comes up with to get around this conundrum, and how much it will cost.

While this info doesn't really shed a whole lot of light on the particulars of the incident, at least we now know it happened at Pedro Miguel Locks. No other additional details...

While this info doesn't really shed a whole lot of light on the particulars of the incident, at least we now know it happened at Pedro Miguel Locks. No other additional details...

Thanks Bill.

BTW, that great explanatory photo you posted above (post number 4) has disappeared. :(

Thanks Bill.

 

BTW, that great explanatory photo you posted above (post number 4) has disappeared. :(

Aha... One of my own pictures in another thread is no longer visible. Photobucket says the site is down for maintenance. (Wow, an entire day. And they were down about a week ago as well.)

Thanks Bill.

 

BTW, that great explanatory photo you posted above (post number 4) has disappeared. :(

I noticed that as well... I used tinypic but they are owned by photobucket so I supposed they are suffering from the same problem. Read somewhere pb "up graded" some software and that's the result:eek:! At least the pic has returned for now!!