The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX


Go Back   Rolex Forums - Rolex Forum > General Topics > Open Discussion Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 23 August 2017, 02:50 AM   #61
Dr.Brian
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
Dr.Brian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Real Name: Brian
Location: CA dreamin'
Watch: ing the market.
Posts: 5,906
I bet there was some degree of alarm fatigue going on. It's a problem in medicine as well.
RIP brothers.
__________________
-Brian
AUDENTES FORTUNA IUVAT

十人十色
Dr.Brian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 August 2017, 02:59 AM   #62
MonBK
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Kingstown
Posts: 58,279
Quote:
Originally Posted by lapince View Post
https://youtu.be/_VHXRYXzEVU

You guys have got to watch this, seems BS but really funny
Hahaha.....
MonBK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 August 2017, 03:35 AM   #63
MonBK
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Kingstown
Posts: 58,279
The language barrier is always a problem.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNalxy-_SyM
MonBK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 August 2017, 06:44 AM   #64
achenator
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 138
Interesting editorial today in G captain.

http://gcaptain.com/separate-equal-l...rchant-marine/
achenator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 August 2017, 09:27 AM   #65
Old Expat Beast
TRF Moderator & 2024 SubLV41 Patron
 
Old Expat Beast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Real Name: Adam
Location: Far East
Watch: Golden Tuna
Posts: 28,826
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast View Post
External interference possibly? Surely these ships' computer and comms systems are too self-contained to be hacked?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abdullah71601 View Post
They're designed not to be hacked. Electronic warfare and countermeasures are built into every USN ship, and have been since radar was invented.

If someone can hack a guided missile cruiser, it's time to go sit in your bunker, because that capability could have dire consequences in the special weapons systems.
US Navy collisions stoke cyber threat fears that GPS systems can be ‘spoofed’ by hackers

http://www.scmp.com/news/asia/southe...ns-gps-systems
Old Expat Beast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 August 2017, 11:14 AM   #66
Abdullah71601
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Calumet Harbor
Watch: ing da Bears
Posts: 13,568
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast View Post
US Navy collisions stoke cyber threat fears that GPS systems can be ‘spoofed’ by hackers

http://www.scmp.com/news/asia/southe...ns-gps-systems
Not much information presented in the article, other than "we're looking at all possibilities".

Heads have begun rolling. The commander of the 7th Fleet has been relieved.
Abdullah71601 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 August 2017, 12:29 PM   #67
Ruud Van Driver
"TRF" Member
 
Ruud Van Driver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Real Name: Chopped Liver
Location: S. Wales Valleys
Watch: Mickey Mouse
Posts: 9,926
Quote:
Originally Posted by breitlings View Post
not sure why you think the overtaking vessel is always giveway is technical. unsure about why you resort to ad hominem attacks in a subject you are an expert on. seems to me people attack people and not the subject when they are unsure of themselves.

then you say i dont have the background to understand the simplest rule perhaps. you dont know my background at all, wouldnt that be speculating without all of the facts? i thought you didnt make assumptions but seems you have about my experience background and knowledge. you seem to have contradicted yourself three times in one sentence to prove something that is perhaps the most obvious rule. i wont go into it here butthat statement is false and if i explained you would look foolish for making that statement.

what about a recreational yacht versus a similar size commercial vessel? isn't the recreational vehicle supposed to giveway based on it's purpose?

with all that said you do provide interesting information on this. you should be less strident it limits your ability to communicate by distracting from the actual contents of your message.
You're absolutely right, I don't know your background. However, what is pretty clear is that you do not have the knowledge, background or experience of the ColRegs because if you did, you wouldn't insist on repeatedly raising the irrelevant points that you do.

So what about the recreational vehicle and a similar size commercial vehicle? No, the recreational vehicle does not give way because of it's purpose in waters defined in Rule 1. However, as also stipulated in Rule 1, there may be local rules which require the some vessels to keep out of the way of others. That is an entirely different matter and, again, irrelevant to the subject case.

It's not so much that I'm making assumptions here (which is not contradicting myself; I said I would not make assumptions on the subject case without having the facts in front of me). The points that you raise and the arguments that you attempt to forward do not leave much else to the imagination.
__________________
116520 Black, 116610 LVc, 116660 D-Blue, 116610 LNc, 116622 Blue, PAM359, PAM689, PAM737

"Why should you allow an AD to shake you down, just so you can buy a watch" - Grady Philpott
Card carrying member of TRF's Global Association of Retro-Grouch-Curmudgeons
Ruud Van Driver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 August 2017, 05:17 PM   #68
bayerische
"TRF" Member
 
bayerische's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Real Name: Andreas
Location: Margaritaville
Watch: Smurf
Posts: 19,879
Well, I'm a "layman", but the USN Destroyer collided with an oil tanker. The oil tanker can't yield just like that, due to size and weight.

Could it be stubbornness from the USN? "We won't move".

The USN Destroyer isn't that big of a vessel, so it should fairly easy be able to get out of the Tankers way.
__________________
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
bayerische is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 August 2017, 05:21 PM   #69
MonBK
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Kingstown
Posts: 58,279
Quote:
Originally Posted by bayerische View Post
Well, I'm a "layman", but the USN Destroyer collided with an oil tanker. The oil tanker can't yield, due to size and weight.

Could it be stubbornness from the USN? "We won't move".

The USN Destroyer isn't that big of a vessel, so it should fairly easy be able to get out of the Tankers way.
IMO the closest guess so far as they now blame it on "steering failure".
MonBK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 August 2017, 05:53 PM   #70
TheVTCGuy
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Real Name: Paul
Location: San Diego
Watch: 126619LB
Posts: 21,540
Quote:
Originally Posted by bayerische View Post
Well, I'm a "layman", but the USN Destroyer collided with an oil tanker. The oil tanker can't yield, due to size and weight.

Could it be stubbornness from the USN? "We won't move".

The USN Destroyer isn't that big of a vessel, so it should fairly easy be able to get out of the Tankers way.
Yeah, you would think an Aegis class Destroyer would be able to outmaneuver almost anything on the Ocean. As for not yielding to the tanker out of a superiority complex, I have stood watch on the decks of Navy ships and gurantee this is not the case. The LAST thing that crew wanted was to hit another ship. How it happened I do not know, but it was definitely NOT due to stuborness on the part of the crew, they would have and should have reacted long before there was danger of a collision.
TheVTCGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 August 2017, 05:57 PM   #71
bayerische
"TRF" Member
 
bayerische's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Real Name: Andreas
Location: Margaritaville
Watch: Smurf
Posts: 19,879
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy View Post
Yeah, you would think an Aegis class Destroyer would be able to outmaneuver almost anything on the Ocean. As for not yielding to the tanker out of a superiority complex, I have stood watch on the decks of Navy ships and gurantee this is not the case. The LAST thing that crew wanted was to hit another ship. How it happened I do not know, but it was definitely NOT due to stuborness on the part of the crew, they would have and should have reacted long before there was danger of a collision.
I would think so too.

I mean any person in his right mind would start to haul a$$ once there's a Tanker on a collision course with you!
__________________
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
bayerische is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 August 2017, 06:03 PM   #72
MonBK
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Kingstown
Posts: 58,279
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy View Post
Yeah, you would think an Aegis class Destroyer would be able to outmaneuver almost anything on the Ocean. As for not yielding to the tanker out of a superiority complex, I have stood watch on the decks of Navy ships and gurantee this is not the case. The LAST thing that crew wanted was to hit another ship. How it happened I do not know, but it was definitely NOT due to stuborness on the part of the crew, they would have and should have reacted long before there was danger of a collision.
This I agree with ^
MonBK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 August 2017, 06:55 PM   #73
daveathall
"TRF" Member
 
daveathall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: Dave
Location: England.
Watch: Various
Posts: 7,305
Quote:
Originally Posted by MonBK View Post
IMO the closest guess so far as they now blame it on "steering failure".
I'm thinking this as well.

They would have done all they could to have got out of the way, a ship like that will have had so many sensors and alarms that they will have known that there was a tanker in the vicinity long before the collision. It's tragic.
__________________
KINDEST REGARDS

DAVE


daveathall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 August 2017, 08:22 PM   #74
Cru Jones
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
Cru Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 35,307
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogdogg View Post
This has been a very interesting thread. Thanks for the insight into maritime accident investigation Paul. I hope they can figure out what happened here.

My thoughts are with the family and friends of the missing crewmen.

x2!
Cru Jones is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 24 August 2017, 01:32 AM   #75
Ruud Van Driver
"TRF" Member
 
Ruud Van Driver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Real Name: Chopped Liver
Location: S. Wales Valleys
Watch: Mickey Mouse
Posts: 9,926
Quote:
Originally Posted by bayerische View Post
Well, I'm a "layman", but the USN Destroyer collided with an oil tanker. The oil tanker can't yield just like that, due to size and weight.

Could it be stubbornness from the USN? "We won't move".

The USN Destroyer isn't that big of a vessel, so it should fairly easy be able to get out of the Tankers way.
Not quite so simple. From the gaping hole in the side of McCain, it seems likely to me that the tanker hit the warship. As I've said several times above, it's not a good idea to make assumptions without all the facts.

Also, the collision appears to have occurred in the Traffic Separation Scheme to the east of Singapore. I've navigated ships through there more times than I care to remember and it's usually congested with dense traffic. The bridge team really have to be on the ball in the whole of the Singapore Strait. When a vessel finds herself in a situation where a close quarters situation is developing, sometimes the only safe option is to reduce speed or take all way off. For reasons I am unable to explain, most mariners are extremely reluctant to do that and by the time they realise it's the only thing they can do, it's too late.
__________________
116520 Black, 116610 LVc, 116660 D-Blue, 116610 LNc, 116622 Blue, PAM359, PAM689, PAM737

"Why should you allow an AD to shake you down, just so you can buy a watch" - Grady Philpott
Card carrying member of TRF's Global Association of Retro-Grouch-Curmudgeons
Ruud Van Driver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 August 2017, 01:44 AM   #76
Knappo 1307
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
Knappo 1307's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Real Name: Jason
Location: USA
Watch: Sea Dweller
Posts: 8,561
Quote:
Originally Posted by bayerische View Post
Well, I'm a "layman", but the USN Destroyer collided with an oil tanker. The oil tanker can't yield just like that, due to size and weight.

Could it be stubbornness from the USN? "We won't move".

The USN Destroyer isn't that big of a vessel, so it should fairly easy be able to get out of the Tankers way.
Unless, I'm seeing something wrong and the destroyer was travelling side ways. From the damage, how is it possible the destroyer hit the tanker?
Knappo 1307 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 August 2017, 03:15 AM   #77
linesiders
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
linesiders's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: RedSox Nation
Watch: U Talkn Bout Wilis
Posts: 5,503
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knappo 1307 View Post
Unless, I'm seeing something wrong and the destroyer was travelling side ways. From the damage, how is it possible the destroyer hit the tanker?
It didn't. The tanker hit the DDG. The question to be determined is "WHY". The AIS data shows the tanker on a steady course until the assumed point of collision, with several other ships in the immediate vicinity. The DDG is not on AIS. The follow on investigations will take a deep dive into the why part.
__________________
I'm a sailor peg. And I've lost my leg. Climbing up the top sails. I've lost my leg!
linesiders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 August 2017, 08:32 AM   #78
bayerische
"TRF" Member
 
bayerische's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Real Name: Andreas
Location: Margaritaville
Watch: Smurf
Posts: 19,879
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knappo 1307 View Post
Unless, I'm seeing something wrong and the destroyer was travelling side ways. From the damage, how is it possible the destroyer hit the tanker?
OK ok.

I may have written my words wrong. Sure the Tanker hit the USN Destroyer. Obviously from the damage shown in the pics. What I meant was the USN Destroyer was in the way of the Tanker.

But technically they both hit each other, right? Surely my words of using "collided" with the Tanker was right... Are we fine picking here or what?
__________________
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
bayerische is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 August 2017, 10:06 AM   #79
Knappo 1307
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
Knappo 1307's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Real Name: Jason
Location: USA
Watch: Sea Dweller
Posts: 8,561
Quote:
Originally Posted by bayerische View Post
OK ok.

I may have written my words wrong. Sure the Tanker hit the USN Destroyer. Obviously from the damage shown in the pics. What I meant was the USN Destroyer was in the way of the Tanker.

But technically they both hit each other, right? Surely my words of using "collided" with the Tanker was right... Are we fine picking here or what?
There is a big difference between running into, and getting run into. Whether you choose your words wrong or not, that is what you typed. And technically no, they didn't run into each other. One ran into another. The way you phrased it, made it sound like the destroyer did the colliding. So again no, not fine picking, just stating there is a difference between running into and getting hit.....
Knappo 1307 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 August 2017, 10:13 AM   #80
Abdullah71601
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Calumet Harbor
Watch: ing da Bears
Posts: 13,568
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knappo 1307 View Post
There is a big difference between running into, and getting run into. And technically no, they didn't run into each other. One ran into another. The way you phased it, made it sound like the destroyer did the colliding. So again no, not fine picking, just stating there is a difference between running into and getting hit.....
These big commercial ships can't stop on a dime, nor turn like a warship. If the destroyer cut across the bow of the tanker, it would be the same as colliding with the tanker. The Aegis class cruiser is a much more maneuverable ship and well capable of staying out of the path of a tanker. One really has to wonder what occurred to put this ship in the path of the tanker.
Abdullah71601 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 August 2017, 10:18 AM   #81
TheVTCGuy
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Real Name: Paul
Location: San Diego
Watch: 126619LB
Posts: 21,540
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abdullah71601 View Post
These big commercial ships can't stop on a dime, nor turn like a warship. If the destroyer cut across the bow of the tanker, it would be the same as colliding with the tanker. The Aegis class cruiser is a much more maneuverable ship and well capable of staying out of the path of a tanker. One really has to wonder what occurred to put this ship in the path of the tanker.
Exactly, what the he// happened?
TheVTCGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 August 2017, 12:02 PM   #82
Ruud Van Driver
"TRF" Member
 
Ruud Van Driver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Real Name: Chopped Liver
Location: S. Wales Valleys
Watch: Mickey Mouse
Posts: 9,926
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knappo 1307 View Post
There is a big difference between running into, and getting run into. Whether you choose your words wrong or not, that is what you typed. And technically no, they didn't run into each other. One ran into another. The way you phrased it, made it sound like the destroyer did the colliding. So again no, not fine picking, just stating there is a difference between running into and getting hit.....
What you're saying here is correct. However, keep in mind that whilst Andreas's English is usually impeccable, it might not be his first language.
__________________
116520 Black, 116610 LVc, 116660 D-Blue, 116610 LNc, 116622 Blue, PAM359, PAM689, PAM737

"Why should you allow an AD to shake you down, just so you can buy a watch" - Grady Philpott
Card carrying member of TRF's Global Association of Retro-Grouch-Curmudgeons
Ruud Van Driver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 August 2017, 12:18 PM   #83
Knappo 1307
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
Knappo 1307's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Real Name: Jason
Location: USA
Watch: Sea Dweller
Posts: 8,561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruud Van Driver View Post
What you're saying here is correct. However, keep in mind that whilst Andreas's English is usually impeccable, it might not be his first language.
Point taken..
Knappo 1307 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 August 2017, 06:23 PM   #84
bayerische
"TRF" Member
 
bayerische's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Real Name: Andreas
Location: Margaritaville
Watch: Smurf
Posts: 19,879
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruud Van Driver View Post
What you're saying here is correct. However, keep in mind that whilst Andreas's English is usually impeccable, it might not be his first language.
It's My third language.

Still, I don't see how "collided" is wrong? Since the two ships did collide. Just as two cars would "collide".

Getting into details, yes, it seems as the Tanker hit the side of the Destroyer. What we don't know is; was the Destroyer standing still? Since steering problems are reported it may have sailed infront of the Tanker, this making the Destroyer collide. Imho.

Sad about the missing sailors either way.
__________________
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
bayerische is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 August 2017, 06:36 PM   #85
MonBK
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Kingstown
Posts: 58,279
Follow up on the lighthouse incident.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_r_9rfoinc
MonBK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 August 2017, 06:40 PM   #86
Star Ferry
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: down by the river
Posts: 4,926
Quote:
Originally Posted by bayerische View Post
It's My third language.

Still, I don't see how "collided" is wrong? Since the two ships did collide. Just as two cars would "collide".

Getting into details, yes, it seems as the Tanker hit the side of the Destroyer. What we don't know is; was the Destroyer standing still? Since steering problems are reported it may have sailed infront of the Tanker, this making the Destroyer collide. Imho.

Sad about the missing sailors either way.
I think by putting the Naval ship as the subject, this sentence implied that the Naval ship hit the other ship

Quote:
Originally Posted by bayerische View Post
Well, I'm a "layman", but the USN Destroyer collided with an oil tanker.
Not a big deal -- I think you meant "the USN Destroyer and an oil tanker collided" or "the USN Destroyer and an oil tanker were involved in a collision"
Star Ferry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 August 2017, 07:02 PM   #87
tyler1980
"TRF" Member
 
tyler1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Houston
Posts: 17,622
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knappo 1307 View Post
There is a big difference between running into, and getting run into. Whether you choose your words wrong or not, that is what you typed. And technically no, they didn't run into each other. One ran into another. The way you phrased it, made it sound like the destroyer did the colliding. So again no, not fine picking, just stating there is a difference between running into and getting hit.....
based on maritime rules as far as i understand them I believe you to be correct judging by where the navy ship was damaged that would indicate it was on the starboard side of the tanker at the time of the impact? However, the navy ship has very advanced radar and is more maneuverable so why they continued on even knowing they had the right of way is baffling. I still look when driving through a green light to make sure some car isn't speeding toward me and isn't stopping.

Maybe Rudd can explain the right of way better than me as my maritime knowledge is limited.
__________________
Instagram: tyler.watches
current collection: Patek 5164A, Patek 5524G, Rolex Platinum Daytona 116506, Rolex Sea Dweller 43 126600, Rolex GMT II 116710LN, AP 15400ST (silver), Panerai 913, Omega Speedmaster moonwatch, Tudor Black Bay (Harrods Edition)
tyler1980 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25 August 2017, 12:00 AM   #88
Ruud Van Driver
"TRF" Member
 
Ruud Van Driver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Real Name: Chopped Liver
Location: S. Wales Valleys
Watch: Mickey Mouse
Posts: 9,926
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knappo 1307 View Post
Point taken..


Quote:
Originally Posted by bayerische View Post
It's My third language.

Still, I don't see how "collided" is wrong? Since the two ships did collide. Just as two cars would "collide".

Getting into details, yes, it seems as the Tanker hit the side of the Destroyer. What we don't know is; was the Destroyer standing still? Since steering problems are reported it may have sailed infront of the Tanker, this making the Destroyer collide. Imho.

Sad about the missing sailors either way.
'Collided' isn't wrong. However, where one has to be careful, particularly in my line of work, is when we're describing which ship hit the other.

In this case, it looks like the tanker hit McCain because the warship has a bloody big hole in her port quarter. I again reiterate that I shouldn't opine because I don't have all the facts and I know from first hand experience how new evidence can emerge at a later date that tips a case on its ear hole.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tyler1980 View Post
based on maritime rules as far as i understand them I believe you to be correct judging by where the navy ship was damaged that would indicate it was on the starboard side of the tanker at the time of the impact? However, the navy ship has very advanced radar and is more maneuverable so why they continued on even knowing they had the right of way is baffling. I still look when driving through a green light to make sure some car isn't speeding toward me and isn't stopping.

Maybe Rudd can explain the right of way better than me as my maritime knowledge is limited.
You could try asking Ruud, too

Again, says Ruud exercising extreme caution, just because McCain is holed on her port side doesn't necessarily mean that she was on the starboard side of the tanker. She could have been dead ahead, overtaking, whatever.

Anyway, from what you're saying above, I assume you're referring to a crossing situation. If so, Rule 15 (crossing situations) states:

"When two power-driven vessels are crossing so as to involve risk of collision, the vessel which has the other on her own starboard side shall keep out of the way and shall, if the circumstances of the case admit, avoid crossing ahead of the other vessel."

However, even if you're the stand-on vessel, if you find yourself in a situation where the give-way vessel isn't doing enough (or anything at all) then you're obliged under Rule 17 to take whatever action will best avoid collision.

__________________
116520 Black, 116610 LVc, 116660 D-Blue, 116610 LNc, 116622 Blue, PAM359, PAM689, PAM737

"Why should you allow an AD to shake you down, just so you can buy a watch" - Grady Philpott
Card carrying member of TRF's Global Association of Retro-Grouch-Curmudgeons
Ruud Van Driver is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

OCWatches

Wrist Aficionado

My Watch LLC

WatchesOff5th

DavidSW Watches

Takuya Watches


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2024, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.