posted 01-01-2006 04:44 PM ET (US)        

The recently built USCGC MACKINAW WLBB 30, a new replacement for the beloved USCGC MACKINAW WAGB 83, was on a cruise from the builders in Marinette, Wisconsin to her home port of Cheboygan, Michigan under U.S. Coast Guard command. The Coast Guard had just taken over the ship from Marinette Marine Corporation, a subsidiary of The Manitowoc Company, Inc. on November 16, 2005. On Monday, December 12, 2005, she was calling on South Haven, Michigan to make a planned public relations appearance. Coming up the entrance between the breakwalls, something went awry on the new $90-million ship. She made an abrupt right turn and rammed the breakwall, hitting it hard enough to do (by one report an estimated $100,000) damage to the structure. The allision with the breakwall also caused a rather visible 8-foot by 3-foot dent in the new ship's bow.

Considering that the new USCGC MACKINAW is designed as an icebreaker, you would anticipate that her bow is rather well designed and reinforced to sustain heavy blows and repeated contact with ice. The impact with the breakwall must have been quite a bang to dent her structure like that. The damage to the bow was painted over, but the vessel remained in port for two extra days while a careful inspection was made to determine the extent of the damage. This resulted in the cancellation of other planned PR stops (in Sault St. Marie and Rogers City) on the route to Cheboygan.

The commanding officer was relieved of his command pending an investigation, and the new ship left port under a new captain. The MACKINAW arrived in Cheboygan without further incident, where a welcoming ceremony and gala was held, albeit perhaps with some slight damper on the festivities due to the awkward situation with her commanding officer and the pending investigation.

According to some observers, it is highly unusual for a commanding officer to return to a vessel after being relieved of command in a situation like this. However, this is a somewhat unusual situation in that the captain had been involved in two years of specialized training in preparation for command of the new vessel.

The new MACKINAW has some rather different propulsion systems, including twin ABB Azipods that provide her main ship's thrust. The immediate explanation for the maneuvering problem coming up the harbor entrance blamed a junior officer and his unfamiliarity with control systems.

A few interesting articles on this incident and some background:

The Old MACKINAW
http://continuouswave.com/boats/mackinaw/

The New MACKINAW
http://www.mightymac.org/mackinawlaunch1.htm
(Shows the Azipod propulsion system.)

Coast Guard icebreaker crashes into Grand Haven pier
http://www.twincities.com

posted 01-01-2006 05:17 PM ET (US)            

http://www.wzzm13.com/news/videoarchiveplayerframe.asp?cmd=view& articleid=7649

They should have had the BMC on the bridge and everything would have been fine. :-)

phatwhaler out.

posted 01-01-2006 05:22 PM ET (US)            

"After the incident Monday, Triner publicly accepted responsibility for the collision. He said when the Mackinaw began veering unexpectedly to the starboard, a junior officer was at the helm. Triner said he took control of the helm but it was too late to avoid striking the seawall.

"'It was inexperience with the control system and we made mistakes,' Triner told The Chronicle in an interview about an hour after the collision. 'I tried to let someone bail themselves out longer than I should have. But again, I'm the captain -- it's my fault.'"

See: http://www.mlive.com/news/muchronicle/index.ssf?/base/news-4/ 1134753302195500.xml&coll=8 for the full article.

----

Here is the ship's homepage:

http://www.uscg.mil/d9/glib/DEFAULT.htm

posted 01-02-2006 06:28 PM ET (US)            

Over the summer I was on the Old Mackinaw during the Coast Guard Festival in Grand Haven. On the stern deck there was a PO standing next to a nice display and presentation of the New Mackinaw. I asked him what the public's reaction to the new Mackinaw. He said probably 90% of the people did not like it. I had to agree on the design of the new ship does not seem as grand as the ship of old but, the technology does out weight the design.

posted 01-03-2006 08:33 PM ET (US)            

quote:

---

$90,000,000?!!!!! To break ice?

---

I share Speedo's sentiment.

I understand the need for icebreakers: they keep vital lanes of commerce open, and can help prevent ice damage to things like bridges that can cost tens of millions to repair.

I also understand this vessel is most likely stupefyingly state of the art, and having one of the most advanced ship on the water anywhere in the world can't be cheap.

But that begs the question, why do you need such an expensive, advanced ship to break ice, something that's been unglamourously* practiced since the 1860s?

Maybe it's answering my own question, but is the old WWII era Mackinaw so expensive to operate, that a new $90m dollar ship is actually more cost effective?

I'm not trying to sound like an old curmudgeon, I'm just curious.

-Chris

*No disrespect meant to the Coast Guard. Regardless of this incident, I think they are Maritime & Aviation Professionals of the highest caliber.

posted 01-05-2006 12:44 PM ET (US)            

As for the price tag of the new ship, consider that the old one has lasted since 1944, ergo, this one should still be bustin' ice come 2068, when $90 million will likely seem a pittance.

And I have to agree that the Old Mackinaw is much better looking that the new one. She was also the world standard in ice breaking for most of her commission. Here's a nice shot of her withthe 14 foot Shoals Light and her namesake bridge in the same shot, taken from the deck of Ichthus last Summer:

posted 01-12-2006 10:35 AM ET (US)            

Date: January 11, 2006

PERMANENT RELIEF RECOMMENDED FOR (NEW) MACKINAW CAPTAIN

CLEVELAND – Rear Adm. Robert Papp, Commander of the Ninth Coast Guard District, has recommended to the Commandant of the Coast Guard that Capt. Donald Triner, commanding officer of the new Mackinaw, homeported in Cheboygan, Mich., be permanently relieved of command.

Papp temporarily relieved Triner of his command Dec. 15 after the cutter hit a break wall in Grand Haven, Mich. Papp made the decision to recommend permanent relief, citing loss of confidence in Triner’s ability to command. He reached this conclusion after reviewing investigations concerning the collision and subsequent reports of inappropriate use of alcohol by Triner and some members of his crew at an event in Cheboygan on Dec.17.

“After reviewing both investigations, I have concluded that Capt. Triner gave insufficient attention to navigation and ship-handling training during the ship’s shakedown cruise, thus contributing to the collision in Grand Haven,” said Papp. “With respect to the event in Cheboygan, Capt. Triner has exhibited personal behavior and conduct inconsistent with service norms and expectations for the commanding officer of a Coast Guard cutter.”

posted 01-12-2006 10:58 AM ET (US)            

At sea, where no one but the crew is around, and as a morale booster - okay...but on the mainland with civilians all around? Perhaps not the best command decision, and two poor calls in as many days would lead any commanding officer to wonder.

I agree, it's too bad...and we don't really know what all was involved in the decision; but when you damage the newest boat in the fleet, you need to lay low for awhile.