Dag! What Have You Done

In case anyone's still watching, the post-crash investigation have published their preliminary findings. They have had full access to classified material. This wasn't to assign guilt, but establish a detailed timeline and record of what actually happened.

They emphasize that no one single action or event caused the incident. It was a long chain of circumstances, decisions and actions that led up to the crash. But among the more spectacular contributing factors are these two:

• The oil tanker left the terminal with full on-deck floodlighting, which they're not supposed to, and it still appeared to Helge Ingstad as part of an on-shore installation. It was lit up like a small city. In short, they saw it the whole time, but mistook its identity in that critical time-window.
• The water-tight compartments of Helge Ingstad weren't water-tight after all. This was a flaw in the construction, and the Spanish shipyard may be in trouble. If this had been according to spec, the ship wouldn't have sunk, or at least not nearly as fast.

There's a lot more to it. On that night, all the chicken came home to roost, as the saying goes.

There's one more highly unofficial piece to the puzzle. In some interviews with people who have inside knowledge, in various capacities, it has been hinted at what has been called a "cowboy culture". That does not mean they're careless, but that risk is an accepted and indeed celebrated part of the proceedings. It's a sort of masculine ideal and tradition. Those who have read Tom Wolfe's "The Right Stuff" - the book; not the rather sanitized and romanticized film - will know what they mean by that.

If that is true (and based on my own experience I suspect there might be something to it) - it certainly puts the whole "female navigators" talk to final shame. If there were, it happened despite that, not because of it. But we already knew that (and several high-ranking Navy officials have said so in public, repeatedly).

I'm speechless. Who even knows what an "esc0rt girl" is nowadays? And why would they care if they did?

Back to the original story.

A thought-provoking feature story in one of our major newspapers today, written by a former instructor at the Naval Academy. Yes, he probably has a stake in this, but nevertheless.

He starts, "When accidents happen, it's easy to look for blame. Since it usually goes without incident, when something does go wrong it has to be because of an error. Somebody has to take the blame for that error" (my translation).

His point is that these are incredibly complex systems. A long chain of events, none of which in themselves unusual or unexpected, and up to that point not resulting in any ill consequences. But every once in a blue moon they all come together and push in the same direction. And it goes wrong - even though everybody had good reasons to do what they did, based on the information and experience available at the time.

In hindsight we always see actions in light of their consequences. That hindsight is a luxury not available before it happens.

I think it's a good point. The tendency in these investigations is usually to find a scapegoat, feed him to the sharks, job done.

Oh, and I reread what I wrote about "enjoying" my military service. You have to read that in context. This wasn't Syria or Afghanistan where people actually get killed. At that time and place, nobody thought it would ever get serious. It was just a job, and since everybody had to do it unless they could wriggle their way out, I just counted myself lucky that I got an interesting assignment, instead of eating mud in the regular Army service.

Oh, there's coverage all right, all the media are plastered wall-to-wall with this. But as you can imagine, it's mostly speculation and very little hard fact is coming out. Twenty or so police investigators are now going through full-top level security clearance, so that they can access all the secret material with no restrictions.

It's getting really ugly at times. At the extreme right-wing political side - and I'm sure this is no coincidence - the current theory in fashion is that there were female navigators on board. We all know they can't parallel park, right? Our local Breitbart/Bannon variety, Helge Luras at resettdotno, introduced this ingenious theory a couple of days ago, and it was picked up by Harald Lysglimt Johannessen, who has gained notoriety as a Trump evangelist (there's no other word for it) for the last two years. He's now starting his own political party.

What can I say? This is even more embarrassing and shameful than the crash itself.

The steel wire story may be a red herring. Yes, they broke, but apparently it was the bolts drilled into the rock, not the wires. Chain wouldn't have helped.

As I mentioned to Trevor in a PM, I did my 15-month military service as a radio operator on board a similar ship. It's a long time ago, but we did participate in NATO exercises like this one. I've seen this from the inside. Even my old hippie/anti-authoritarian self quite enjoyed it - not for any ideological reasons, but because it was an interesting experience. Even then I was impressed by the professionalism and efficiency. These people are exceptionally well trained.

Which is why I'm not jumping to any conclusions. I suspect this is a complex chain of events.