Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: WLJ on March 26, 2024, 07:38:08 AM
-
Container ship struck the Francis-Scott Key bridge causing it to fall.
They're calling it a 'developing mass casualty event'
The Francis Scott Key Bridge along I-695 in Maryland collapsed into the Baltimore harbor following a "ship strike" early Tuesday morning.
A livestream of the bridge appeared to show a cargo ship colliding with a support beam, causing the bridge to break apart and fall into the Patapsco River. Multiple vehicles were on the bridge at the time, but noupdate on casualties has been offered.
Emergency crews including the U.S. Coast Guard, local first responders and the FBI were searching for at least 20 people believed to be in the water, Kevin Cartwright, director of communications for the Baltimore Fire Department, told The Associated Press around 3 a.m. Officials have described this as a mass casualty event.
Maryland: Ship hits Francis Scott Key Bridge causing it to collapse
https://www.foxnews.com/us/maryland-ship-hits-francis-scott-key-bridge-causing-collapse
Video of the collapse https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVdVpd-pqcM
-
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/live/article-13239379/francis-scott-key-bridge-baltimore-collapse-maryland-live.html
(https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2024/03/26/11/1711451096373_lc_galleryImage_Baltimore_Key_Bridge_grab.JPG)
(https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2024/03/26/11/1711451074133_lc_galleryImage_Baltimore_Key_Bridge_grab.JPG)
-
The videos I've seen of the various harbor cameras are... spectacular? Frightening? Horrific? Not quite sure how to describe them.
As I was coming into work the local news radio program was saying that two people have been rescued from the water (one unharmed, one critical) and they believe that there are at least 7 others in the water.
-
Here's the breaking news from the local news channel that serves this region.
https://wtop.com/baltimore/2024/03/key-bridge-in-baltimore-collapses-after-hitting-large-boat/
-
Huh. I'll be interested in the accident breakdown on this one.
Boat had pilots on board, clear night with good visability, the video shows not much wind when they hit, they were just way the *expletive deleted*ck out to starboard. In the video of the collapse you can see the exhaust plume where they pegged the engines (full astern, I assume) but too late. gotta wonder WTF was happening on that bridge.
Prayers out to the folks that were on that bridge and got dropped in the harbor.
-
Info on the ship
95k tons
https://www.vesselfinder.com/vessels/details/9697428
The vessel DALI (IMO 9697428, MMSI 563004200) is a Container Ship built in 2015 (9 years old) and currently sailing under the flag of Singapore.
-
Reportedly it lost power before striking the bridge
-
Reportedly it lost power before striking the bridge
That video shows an awful lot of black "Oh *expletive deleted*it peg the throttles" diesel exhaust coming from that ship before it hit.
She also doesn't have her anchors out in the morning shots of her under the bridge, which would be SOP for "we lost power and need to stop" kinda situation. I see she has a bow thruster, which doesn't look like it was thrusting at the time, which also would have been a good idea rather than ramming straight into a pylon.
From first glance it doesn't look like a dead ship drifting into a bridge situation, but I guess we'll see. AIS shows her making a nice controlled turn, running down the channel, then veering off to Starboard about 1/4 NM before the bridge.
-
There is a fairly complete video already. I counted at least 2 times when all the lighting on the ship disappeared and, obviously, the main engines also turned off. It is strange that the emergency gensets did not at least provide lighting...
https://youtu.be/m3Sobolb6c4?si=IAX-Cyasu1ihKkBw
-
That video shows an awful lot of black "Oh *expletive deleted*it peg the throttles" diesel exhaust coming from that ship before it hit.
She also doesn't have her anchors out in the morning shots of her under the bridge, which would be SOP for "we lost power and need to stop" kinda situation. I see she has a bow thruster, which doesn't look like it was thrusting at the time, which also would have been a good idea rather than ramming straight into a pylon.
From first glance it doesn't look like a dead ship drifting into a bridge situation, but I guess we'll see. AIS shows her making a nice controlled turn, running down the channel, then veering off to Starboard about 1/4 NM before the bridge.
Thanks for the expert analysis. That certainly raises potential tinfoil questions. I know it can take some significant power and time to change trajectory, but from what you saw, it looks like they weren't even trying. Would bow thrusters on something that big have (powerful enough) backup power sources if main power took a dump?
The crew interviews will be of interest.
-
Not to belittle the lost of life one thing to consider that along with the fact that this is going to create one heck of a traffic issue for a long time to come is that we now have a major port blocked and will remain block for some time.
-
Not to belittle the lost of life one thing to consider that along with the fact that this is going to create one heck of a traffic issue for a long time to come is that we now have a major port blocked and will remain block for some time.
That will be an interesting tangent. I've mentioned before that shortly after 9/11, I was involved in a week long response exercise based on terrorists sinking a ship at the entry to the port at LA/LB (Los Angeles), the largest port in the country. The time to clear things and the lack of capability for other ports to handle the traffic resulted in a pretty devastating post attack scenario where half the country would have empty grocery shelves.
Baltimore is way down at 18th busiest port, so it will probably more of a commerce inconvenience as far as goods coming in and trucking them inland, but it's food for thought had this happened in one of the top ten ports.
-
There is a fairly complete video already. I counted at least 2 times when all the lighting on the ship disappeared and, obviously, the main engines also turned off. It is strange that the emergency gensets did not at least provide lighting...
https://youtu.be/m3Sobolb6c4?si=IAX-Cyasu1ihKkBw
Thanks for that longer video. Couple of things stand out to me.
First, it's worth noting that the Main Engines don't shut off if you loose Ships Power. You may (depending on the boat) lose bridge controls of them, but there are required to be back up manual controls of the engines that work even if the genset goes down. You can tell if you watch the exhaust stack that she was idling along, they lost power the first time, then when the power came back the engines came up full, and stayed at full through the second power loss. If I had to guess the engineer(s) were more worried about getting power back than controlling the ship through the first black out. If that's true it'll come out when the bridge recorders are listened to, and is simple lack of training.
An emergency generator is required to automatically start and take the load within 45 seconds of loosing main ships power. That's the max allowable time, most of them are around 20 secsor so. Dali was dark ship for a full minute the first time, and when power came back it brought up everything including the sodium vapor deck lights. While not 100% those are not normally on the Emergency Switch Board, so if I had to guess that wasn't the E-Gen coming on, the crew got the Ships Service Diesel Generator back up, or started and switched to the other SSDG. The E-Gen should have been tested as part of the Presails and in Automatic mode before they sailed. Since they'd only been underway about an hour, that thing should have been good to go.
Right after power comes back the first time she starts a solid turn to starboard. That's weird because she was lined up with the bridge and channel before the turn, and had been drifting relatively straight for the minute the power was out (consistent with engine at idle or a little above, and rudder mid) so the power came on and someone gave her rudder input to leave the channel. You can see right around 2:30 in the vid Opportunity posted when the aspect change starts on Dali as rudder input is given. If they were trying to turn around they had nowhere near enough time.
Were it me, I would have left the Bow Thruster online until I cleared the river, just in case, but if they didn't have manual control of the engines, they probably didn't have manual control of the Bow Thruster, or they were using it in their ill-fated attempt to turn to Starboard.
Not to belittle the lost of life one thing to consider that along with the fact that this is going to create one heck of a traffic issue for a long time to come is that we now have a major port blocked and will remain block for some time.
I'd bet they have the pieces of that bridge out of the shipping channel and traffic restored this week or mid next week at the latest. We don't leave ports closed very long.
-
There is a fairly complete video already. I counted at least 2 times when all the lighting on the ship disappeared and, obviously, the main engines also turned off. It is strange that the emergency gensets did not at least provide lighting...
https://youtu.be/m3Sobolb6c4?si=IAX-Cyasu1ihKkBw
In that video, you can see the lights turned off on the ship around 1:24 timestamp then come back on about 2:24. I think I see exhaust kick in soon after power comes back. Then it looks like the lights dim again around 3:29. However, the exhaust continues and some lights are still there. Then it looks like impact about 5:36.
-
Thanks for that longer video. Couple of things stand out to me.
First, it's worth noting that the Main Engines don't shut off if you loose Ships Power. You may (depending on the boat) lose bridge controls of them, but there are required to be back up manual controls of the engines that work even if the genset goes down. You can tell if you watch the exhaust stack that she was idling along, they lost power the first time, then when the power came back the engines came up full, and stayed at full through the second power loss. If I had to guess the engineer(s) were more worried about getting power back than controlling the ship through the first black out. If that's true it'll come out when the bridge recorders are listened to, and is simple lack of training.
An emergency generator is required to automatically start and take the load within 45 seconds of loosing main ships power. That's the max allowable time, most of them are around 20 secsor so. Dali was dark ship for a full minute the first time, and when power came back it brought up everything including the sodium vapor deck lights. While not 100% those are not normally on the Emergency Switch Board, so if I had to guess that wasn't the E-Gen coming on, the crew got the Ships Service Diesel Generator back up, or started and switched to the other SSDG. The E-Gen should have been tested as part of the Presails and in Automatic mode before they sailed. Since they'd only been underway about an hour, that thing should have been good to go.
Right after power comes back the first time she starts a solid turn to starboard. That's weird because she was lined up with the bridge and channel before the turn, and had been drifting relatively straight for the minute the power was out (consistent with engine at idle or a little above, and rudder mid) so the power came on and someone gave her rudder input to leave the channel. You can see right around 2:30 in the vid Opportunity posted when the aspect change starts on Dali as rudder input is given. If they were trying to turn around they had nowhere near enough time.
Were it me, I would have left the Bow Thruster online until I cleared the river, just in case, but if they didn't have manual control of the engines, they probably didn't have manual control of the Bow Thruster, or they were using it in their ill-fated attempt to turn to Starboard.
I'd bet they have the pieces of that bridge out of the shipping channel and traffic restored this week or mid next week at the latest. We don't leave ports closed very long.
That last part was my question. Wouldn't they have already been lined up properly to cross under the bridge well before that time? Losing power 2 minutes out shouldn't have drifted them into the bridge unless something steered them that way.
I guess I already heard someone mention conspiracy theories about a 3rd party hacking the ship. However, as mentioned above, there are busier ports that would have a greater impact. Which then makes you wonder if the security reaction is what someone wanted. Further down the hole, you get to wondering if this is part of the pre-election emergency actions to keep Biden in power. That rabbit hole goes on quite a ways.
-
Reportedly the ship radioed in that they had lost power and that a collision with the bridge was possible.
Struck the bridge at 7.6kts
The emergency generator does not connect to propulsion but should support steering and navigation systems but the ships heading appears to have been pushed off course by the wind directly into the support column.
Maritime Journalist Shares Early Analysis of Francis Scott Key Bridge Disaster
https://twitchy.com/samj/2024/03/26/maritime-journalist-shares-early-analysis-of-francis-scott-key-bridge-disaster-n2394406
Article
Ship Lost Control Before Hitting Baltimore Bridge
https://gcaptain.com/ship-lost-control-before-hitting-baltimore-bridge/
-
I suppose the "not as bad" take is that it happened at 0130. I have no idea regarding the traffic that bridge sees, but I have to assume it would be significantly more at rush hour than at likely near the least busiest time for bridge traffic.
-
I'd bet they have the pieces of that bridge out of the shipping channel and traffic restored this week or mid next week at the latest. We don't leave ports closed very long.
I'm certain that the location of the bridge and that it was a bridge, rather than a sunk ship, would get this cleared faster, but in that exercise I mentioned, with a ship sunk at the relatively narrow inlet to LA/LB, SUPSALV estimated, IIRC, a minimum of one month for partial traffic if money and resources were no object and everything went smooth.
-
That last part was my question. Wouldn't they have already been lined up properly to cross under the bridge well before that time? Losing power 2 minutes out shouldn't have drifted them into the bridge unless something steered them that way.
The emergency generator does not connect to propulsion but should support steering and navigation systems but the ships heading appears to have been pushed off course by the wind directly into the support column.
I disagree with that analysis. That video is time stamped, and you can line it up with the AIS date for free at MarineTraffic. They went dark at 05:24:32 UTC and drifted in a generally straight line, directly towards the bridge opening for a minute. Then the power came on at 05:25:33 UTC and she almost immediately begins to turn to starboard. Had she been blown sideways by the wind her heading would have been more or less constant while she crabbed sideways as she doesn't have significantly more sail area fore or aft to induce a wind caused heading change. Also it would take a fair bit of wind to cause a ship that size and draft to turn that quickly while under power and the video clearly shows calm sea with no chop. There's almost no wind there. It looks like a commanded course change to me.
-
I disagree with that analysis. That video is time stamped, and you can line it up with the AIS date for free at MarineTraffic. They went dark at 05:24:32 UTC and drifted in a generally straight line, directly towards the bridge opening for a minute. Then the power came on at 05:25:33 UTC and she almost immediately begins to turn to starboard. Had she been blown sideways by the wind her heading would have been more or less constant while she crabbed sideways as she doesn't have significantly more sail area fore or aft to induce a wind caused heading change. Also it would take a fair bit of wind to cause a ship that size and draft to turn that quickly while under power and the video clearly shows calm sea with no chop. There's almost no wind there. It looks like a commanded course change to me.
Not agreeing or disagreeing until we know more but you have to take the wind surface area of the ship into account and with containers it is massive.
Remember reading about how the wind would move the stern around of the Nelson class BBs* making docking fun. It don't take much wind to do so.
Hopefully more will come out on just what was going on the ship
*If you look at their layout you'll understand why.
-
I'm certain that the location of the bridge and that it was a bridge, rather than a sunk ship, would get this cleared faster, but in that exercise I mentioned, with a ship sunk at the relatively narrow inlet to LA/LB, SUPSALV estimated, IIRC, a minimum of one month for partial traffic if money and resources were no object and everything went smooth.
I always figured stage 2 of 9/11 was supposed to be wreck a couple of container ships right on top of the Hampton and or Chesapeake tunnels, Restrict a ton of ports, including all the east coast aircraft carrier. Bonus for dirty bomb to foul the cleanup
-
I'm certain that the location of the bridge and that it was a bridge, rather than a sunk ship, would get this cleared faster, but in that exercise I mentioned, with a ship sunk at the relatively narrow inlet to LA/LB, SUPSALV estimated, IIRC, a minimum of one month for partial traffic if money and resources were no object and everything went smooth.
Interesting data point there. I wonder what constraints they gave themselves. I've done some similar exercises where we work with the navy to open ports that have been closed by military action (either blown on the way out by the enemy, or collateral damage from the initial assault) and are estimates are a lot faster for opening chanels and ports. Basically we bring in Army Salvage Divers and Navy UDT and blow up anything that sticks up higher than we want it to, then rock on.
In this situation I would assume they'll drag some barge derricks in and use divers to cut up the bridge in the channel and then pull it up, or let it flop to the seafloor. It's not that much metal in the grand scheme of things, but I may be out of calibration of the time required due to military tehniques.
-
In this situation I would assume they'll drag some barge derricks in and use divers to cut up the bridge in the channel and then pull it up, or let it flop to the seafloor. It's not that much metal in the grand scheme of things, but I may be out of calibration of the time required due to military tehniques.
Big difference between a military "we need this channel cleared now!" and a government red tape clogged operation. I'm thinking 3 months min. We shall see. Hopefully your estimate is closer.
-
Not agreeing or disagreeing until we know more but you have to take the wind surface area of the ship into account and with containers it is massive.
Remember reading about how the wind would move the stern around of the Nelson class BBs* making docking fun. It don't take much wind to do so.
Hopefully more will come out on just what was going on the ship
*If you look at their layout you'll understand why.
Yes, I know all about sail area with vessel maneuvering. As I said, that boat didn't have uneaven sail area which you would expect for a wind induced heading change. You also need to take into account the underwater surface area resisting wind drift, and the fact that she had a fair bit of forward motion over her keel and rudder, which also counteracts wind induced heading change. You can estimate wind speed from the waves and from the ships exhaust smoke. They were under 5 knts of wind, and probably under 3 knts. IMHO that turn was too fast to be caused by that little wind.
-
Sail area, that was the term I couldn't get out of my head this morning.
Always the possibility something shorted out causing the rudder to kick over.
But like I said we shall see. It's still early in the investigation and info outflow. Something may have happened we're completely unaware of
-
Saying around two dozen cars were on the bridge. Not sure if that figure includes cars on parts that didn't collapse
Rescue crews are continuing their efforts to save those impacted by the accident, with around two dozen cars believed to have been on the bridge at the time.
Around 20 construction workers were also working on the bridge at the time, sending them plummeting into the frigid 47-degree water.
Wiedefeld added that the construction crew were not working on anything related to the structural integrity of the bridge, and were fixing potholes at the time.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13239953/Singaporean-Dali-Baltimore-propulsion-bridge-collapse.html
-
Sail area, that was the term I couldn't get out of my head this morning.
Always the possibility something shorted out causing the rudder to kick over.
But like I said we shall see. It's still early in the investigation and info outflow. Something may have happened we're completely unaware of
True, weird things can happen, but Occam's Razor: Rusty ass Singaporean flagged boat that's crew clearly didn't have their E-Gen running or set correctly? I'll take "Someone *expletive deleted*ed up and did something they weren't supposed to because of poor training" for $700.
Ships have multiple, independent, redundant systems for just this reason. So that if you lose a generator (or anything else) near an obstacle you can keep control of the boat and not hit things.
-
Big difference between a military "we need this channel cleared now!" and a government red tape clogged operation. I'm thinking 3 months min. We shall see. Hopefully your estimate is closer.
That was actually a big factor in the exercise I did. EPA had a major presence, regardless of it being a major disaster, caused by terrorism, and potentially devastating to inland food supplies within like three weeks, they were there talking regulations, and USCG was factoring them in. I was there from the oil spill response side, which even without EPA involvement, and operational only, was potentially a hold up just for booming areas for salvage crews to work, for the worst case scenario of all fuel on board bursting out.
It has been over 20 years, but I recall the major parameters being a container ship (we might have looked at a car carrier as well) being sunk inside the breakwater, kind of in the worst possible place for ships maneuvering to the cranes. Sunk via explosives hidden in conex boxes. The blast was big enough that the FBI guys said that there would have been building damage on shore from the shockwave. I can't remember for sure, but how the ship was damaged/sunk had a lot to do (worst case scenario) with how fast the port could be cleared. Also there was like at least a week waiting for assets to arrive to do some parts of the job.
-
The gov is saying cars were stopped from crossing the bridge before the collision.
But he also says the ship was moving at a "very rapid speed". Reports I've seen are it was moving at 7.6kts so... what?
Ship was moving at 'very rapid speed'
Governor Moore says the ship was moving towards the bridge at a "very rapid speed".
He said the cargo ship's operators called a "mayday' - an emergency signal - but the vessel's speed appeared to be too fast to avoid the incident.
However, he said the distress call did ensure more cars were stopped from crossing the bridge, averting greater disaster.
"These people are heroes," he said. "They saved lives last night."
https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-us-canada-68663071?ns_mchannel=social&ns_source=twitter&ns_campaign=bbc_live&ns_linkname=6602d83b683d4b45f9380354%26Bridge%20will%20be%20rebuilt%262024-03-26T14%3A16%3A52.775Z&ns_fee=0&pinned_post_locator=urn:asset:aa37f81f-a007-4496-81a3-317ec4c12a7f&pinned_post_asset_id=6602d83b683d4b45f9380354&pinned_post_type=share
-
. . . . I guess I already heard someone mention conspiracy theories about a 3rd party hacking the ship. However, as mentioned above, there are busier ports that would have a greater impact. Which then makes you wonder if the security reaction is what someone wanted. Further down the hole, you get to wondering if this is part of the pre-election emergency actions to keep Biden in power. That rabbit hole goes on quite a ways.
Conspiracy theories WILL proliferate. [tinfoil] Practice run for a bigger port. Pirates took over the ship at gunpoint. (Gun Control!). DEI hires didn't know what they were doing. Sabotage. Harbor pilot was drunk. Joe Hazelwood's younger brother was the captain. And so forth and so on. Very likely all nonsense.
Although as a landlubber, I DO wonder why the ship made what seemed to be a sharp turn towards the bridge support.
True, weird things can happen, but Occam's Razor: Rusty ass Singaporean flagged boat that's crew clearly didn't have their E-Gen running or set correctly? I'll take "Someone *expletive deleted*ed up and did something they weren't supposed to because of poor training" for $700 . . .
I'm NOT going to bet against that scenario. Just about every industry has been cutting staff and training to the bone to save money, it wouldn't surprise me if something along those lines has been taking place in the maritime arena.
-
This guy did basically the same thing I did syncing video and AIS, he just has a computer set up to share: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N39w6aQFKSQ
You can see what I was talking about, where when she was drifting, she was basically on the trackline with just a subtle southward drift and basically no heading change. That is consistent with engine on, rudder stuck in last position within a half a degree or so of mid. Then the power comes back on, they peg the throttles, and she veers to starboard with a massive heading change. That is NOT consistent with wind drift.
I will amend my previous thinking out loud that if they went full astern and held it that could cause the heading change. Torque from the prop will spin the boat around, and since the propwash is no longer over the rudder you lose like 80% of rudder authority, sometimes more, when full astern. A crash stop on my boat often leaves you 20 or so degrees off heading, and that's with counter-rotating props.
In addition to not having enough time to turn, they had nowhere near enough time to stop (kinda obvious now) and even if they did manage to get her stopped that puts them trying to hold the vessel in place, while having power problems, inside a harbor, which is a really weird decision to make. That close to the bridge when the power came back the right call would have been to come to dead slow to maintain steerage but bleed speed, correct your course the degree or two north you need and try to make it under the bridge before anything else goes wrong. Once you clear the bridge, you have all the water in the world to drift around and wait for tugs to show up and help. I wonder if the pilot or the skipper made the call to crash stop.
Additionally this picture post collision (https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/photos/of/ships/shipid:2810451/shipname:DALI#5424417) clearly shows the port anchor housed. If you are trying to crash stop before a bridge you'd drop the anchor you have on standby for just that reason. The shipping dude said they were standby on their port anchor (I can't verify that) but they didn't use it, even though it would have pulled them away from the pylon.
I really want to hear the bridge recorder transcript. It certainly appears somebody made some real bad calls for close quarters maneuvering.
-
Maryland Transportation Secretary Paul J. Wiedefeld said eight people were on the bridge when it collapsed, and two of them were rescued from the water, with one declining medical treatment and the other being taken to the hospital.
Officials said they have spotted five vehicles submerged under water thanks to infrared and side-scan sonar technology - three passenger vehicles, a cement truck and a fifth vehicle.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13240657/baltimore-bridge-collapse-ship.html
Could have been much worse but workers (repairing potholes) on the bridge did manged to stop many cars after the ship issued a mayday. How it got relayed to them so fast I'm not seeing mentioned yet.
The crew of the cargo ship that struck the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore lost power and issued a mayday in the moments before the disaster, Maryland Gov. Wes Moore said.
The container ship Dali sent the mayday in time for authorities to stop traffic from entering the bridge, limiting the number of vehicles involved in what officials have called a "mass casualty event."
"We're thankful that between the mayday and the collapse that we had officials who were able to begin to stop the flow of traffic so more cars were not on the bridge," Moore said.
Authorities said a crew of eight construction workers were on the bridge, in addition to any traffic at the time of the collapse.
https://www.foxnews.com/live-news/us-baltimore-bridge-collapse-mass-casualty-event-03-26-2024
-
From posts I've seen the tin-foil hatters are out, some claiming there's no way a ship could knock down that bridge. Sort of like what we saw with the "jet fuel can't melt steel beams" crowd
-
From posts I've seen the tin-foil hatters are out, some claiming there's no way a ship could knock down that bridge. Sort of like what we saw with the "jet fuel can't melt steel beams" crowd
Jesus Christ...
-
Bridge work crews will have Marine VHFs on the job site and monitor Ch16. Mostly so they can tell boats if they F up and drop something or break the bridge, but it's SOP. They probably directly heard the Mayday go out.
-
From posts I've seen the tin-foil hatters are out, some claiming there's no way a ship could knock down that bridge. Sort of like what we saw with the "jet fuel can't melt steel beams" crowd
That ought to be fun.
-
Bridge work crews will have Marine VHFs on the job site and monitor Ch16. Mostly so they can tell boats if they F up and drop something or break the bridge, but it's SOP. They probably directly heard the Mayday go out.
Got it. I figured it would have to be relayed.
-
https://twitter.com/monsterhunter45/status/1772636648318046534
:angel:
-
https://twitter.com/monsterhunter45/status/1772636648318046534
:angel:
An early one was this is just to distract from Biden throwing Israel under the bus to save his campaign.
-
https://twitter.com/monsterhunter45/status/1772636648318046534
:angel:
Well, my father's, mother's, cousin's former roommate told me all about his days as a janitor on a cruise ship so I am a bit of an expert on these things. :angel: :old:
-
Has anyone blamed Trump yet?
I know a few have tried to pin it on Da Joos.
-
Some video footage of the ship after the collision:
https://twitter.com/Dragonsoul9Fire/status/1772678704935620923
Probably best to ignore most of the comments. Lots of [tinfoil]
-
Bets on the bridge getting a new woke name when it's rebuilt?
https://twitchy.com/brettt/2024/03/26/ap-gives-us-a-biography-of-controversial-figure-francis-scott-key-n2394433
-
^^ So it's the bridge's fault and the ship was fighting for the rights of..........somebody?
-
I just cannot listen to the talking heads about this anymore, so many experts who know exactly what was going on from a minute or two of video. Douches.
bob
-
At least we can be reasonably certain of what DIDN'T happen:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3m5qxZm_JqM
-
The ship in Tuesday's crash, Dali, was involved in at least one prior accident when it collided with a shipping pier in Belgium.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/baltimore-bridge-collapse-wasnt-first-major-accident-for-giant-container-ship-dali/ar-BB1kzkfA
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/cargo-ship-that-collided-with-baltimore-bridge-was-involved-in-a-previous-collision/ar-BB1kAf3C
https://abcnews.go.com/Business/massive-ship-bali-crashed-baltimores-francis-scott-key/story?id=108505848
-
Now hear me out ...
https://twitter.com/macgregor63/status/1772767358911729677
(might be a bit too far)
-
Bets on the bridge getting a new woke name when it's rebuilt?
https://twitchy.com/brettt/2024/03/26/ap-gives-us-a-biography-of-controversial-figure-francis-scott-key-n2394433
It's going to be named the King Turner Truth Douglas DuBois Jackson Tubman Evers Emancipation Juneteenth Reparations Memorial Bridge.
-
The bridge was built in 1977 for more than $60 million, which is around $300 million today when adjusted for inflation.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/safety-investigators-probe-whether-dirty-fuel-contributed-francis-scott-key-bridge-collapse
Bet rebuild will cost well north of $1b and it wouldn't shock me $2b
-
https://www.foxnews.com/us/safety-investigators-probe-whether-dirty-fuel-contributed-francis-scott-key-bridge-collapse
Bet rebuild will cost well north of $1b and it wouldn't shock me $2b
Well that can't be right, because ALL fuel is dirty!
And racist!
-
One comment I saw yesterday was paraphrased: "I was today years old when I learned bridges could be knocked down so easily."
I was thinking bridges like that had pylons of some sort around the supports, but this one didn't have much. Not sure what would be necessary to resist impact from ships that size.
-
Some video footage of the ship after the collision:
https://twitter.com/Dragonsoul9Fire/status/1772678704935620923
Probably best to ignore most of the comments. Lots of [tinfoil]
The twitter post implies there is something there to see. All I see is an anchor chain on one side and a hole in the ship on the other. The community notes imply there is some marking to be seen, but I don't know what they are talking about.
-
Some video footage of the ship after the collision:
https://twitter.com/Dragonsoul9Fire/status/1772678704935620923
Probably best to ignore most of the comments. Lots of [tinfoil]
The twitter post implies there is something there to see. All I see is an anchor chain on one side and a hole in the ship on the other. The community notes imply there is some marking to be seen, but I don't know what they are talking about.
Down in the comments
The bow thruster symbols are iron crosses :facepalm:
-
Maybe they could open bids for naming rights. It could be the Truth Social bridge. =)
-
Maybe they could open bids for naming rights. It could be the Truth Social bridge. =)
Right after I saw it was the F.S.Key bridge and knowing how the left loves to paint F.S.K. as a racist who wrote a racist poem which was then turned into a racist nation anthem I was thinking the new bridge will be the BLM Bridge or the George Floyd Bridge.
Although naming it the George Floyd Bridge opens the door to sick The "I can't breath" Bridge jokes if you catch my drift.
-
https://www.foxnews.com/us/safety-investigators-probe-whether-dirty-fuel-contributed-francis-scott-key-bridge-collapse
Bet rebuild will cost well north of $1b and it wouldn't shock me $2b
How much for the actual rebuild and how much for the graft, kickbacks, and other mordida?
-
One comment I saw yesterday was paraphrased: "I was today years old when I learned bridges could be knocked down so easily."
I was thinking bridges like that had pylons of some sort around the supports, but this one didn't have much. Not sure what would be necessary to resist impact from ships that size.
Like anything else Bridge design changes. Newer bridges that span major shipping channels often do incorporate pylons to shove ships away from bridge supports. Below is a picture of the pylons in front of the Sunshine Skyway bridge over Tampa Bay. The pylons are about 70ft in diameter concrete and steel. The current Sunshine Skyway was opened in 1987 after the previous bridge collapsed due to being hit by a cargo ship.
Wiki tells me that construction began on the Francis Scott Key Bridge in 1972, so it may predate the common use iof anti-ship pylons. I'll bet the replacement span has them though.
(https://i.imgur.com/wGifEBd.jpg)
-
Interesting data point:
After posting that I tried to think of other ports in the US that both serve deep water large shipping, have to go under a bridge to get there, and have a relatively new bridge. New York and SF are obviously old bridges, as is the Delaware Memorial Bridge (over the Delaware River).
The San Diego-Coronado Bridge looks to have extra pylons/fenders added to it at some point.
Most other large ports I can thing of are either not behind a bridge, or the bridge has been there for 50ish years. So I'm not sure how prevalent anti-ship pylons are going to end up being in new construction. Looking at NY and S harbor on satellite views, this might be a good use of some of those infrastructure funds. Dropping the Golden Gate or Verrazano Narrows Bridges would be a much bigger deal economically than Baltimore is.
-
I'm following with interest (with all due respect to the dead) the economic fallout from this. Much of it is breathless talking heads this morning, but it looks like we'll get a definite sampling of the negative consequences of an event like this. Yesterday I posted that Baltimore is the 18th busiest port, but this morning I heard 10th. Possibly different metrics.
It is apparently the #1 port for auto parts, and also gets a large number of RORO ships. Especially those carrying agricultural equipment. Some trucking industry people interviewed were saying that the rerouting is already becoming a boondoggle.
-
Are there any bridges over the shipping lanes into the Port of Philadelphia?
There have to be. Of course... Ben Franklin Bridge and the Delaware Memorial Bridge.
Not sure if the Betsy Ross or Walt Whitman are north of the primary port facilities or not.
-
Interesting addendum to the pylon question above:
NTSB released some drone footage of the wreck, and it appears that some small anti-ship pylons had been built on wither side of the main supports. You can clearly see them maybe 2/3rds the length of M/V Dali out on either side of the main bridge supports. There also appears to be scrape marks on Dali's Stbd bow like she turned into and hit the pylon and rubbed along it, but was still turning so when her bow cleared the pylon it turned back into the bridge. That would imply sustained Stbd turn input, either from rudder input, or the stbd anchor was out and dragging. I can't tell from the video if the stbd anchor is housed or not, it's under the bridge pieces.
Also those pylons must be reasonably new, because they aren't on Google Maps sat view.
Drone video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6P1x1ifFHsY
-
One small blub on this this morning said the anchor was out and turned the boat into the bridge.
-
One small blub on this this morning said the anchor was out and turned the boat into the bridge.
I have heard that from several blurbs, but the blurbs I have read/heard all said specifically they drpped the port anchor. Problem being the port anchor is in a picture stowed after the crash, and the port anchor doesn't turn a boat to stbd.
If they dropped the stbd anchor and dragged it it could cause the turn seen in the videos.
-
Port anchor chain can be seen in the first picture. It may or may not have been dropped afterwards but I'm thinking afterwards because correct me if I'm wrong but if it was dropped before impact and dragged shouldn't the chain be angled to aft?
In the first and second pictures unless I'm missing something I don't see the starboard chain and where it should be appears to be in very bad shape.
Reported the black box is in the hands of investigators so maybe it'll provide some answers
(https://www.rollingstone.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/BaltimoreBridgeDisaster.jpg?w=1581&h=1054&crop=1)
(https://s.abcnews.com/images/US/bridge3-rt-ml-240327_1711543476764_hpMain_1x1_608.jpg)
-
I posted a link to a pic back in Reply 30 that shows the ship under the bridge and the port anchor clearly housed. I'm gonna bet they lowered it in the aftermath once the sun came up just as insurance against not drifting off the bridge wreckage.
Pic is here: https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/photos/of/ships/shipid:2810451/shipname:DALI?order=date_uploaded
As for the Stbd anchor........ I'm pretty sure I see it in that picture you posted WLJ. Look sitting on the bridge wreckage kinda midship on the Dali. Just over the bow of that orange RIB. I'm like 75% sure that's the Stbd anchor.
ETA: That pic is the first time I noticed that. I'm gonna have to wait till I get home and can put stuff on a big screen in 4K to be more sure than: "It kinda looks like the anchor and chain"
-
I posted a link to a pic back in Reply 30 that shows the ship under the bridge and the port anchor clearly housed. I'm gonna bet they lowered it in the aftermath once the sun came up just as insurance against not drifting off the bridge wreckage.
Pic is here: https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/photos/of/ships/shipid:2810451/shipname:DALI?order=date_uploaded
As for the Stbd anchor........ I'm pretty sure I see it in that picture you posted WLJ. Look sitting on the bridge wreckage kinda midship on the Dali. Just over the bow of that orange RIB. I'm like 75% sure that's the Stbd anchor.
Took me a moment to see what you're pointing out but I wouldn't be betting any money that being the anchor. If we're thinking they dropped the starboard anchor before impact why would it be on top of the wreckage? It should be sitting on the bottom of the channel.
-
I'm thinking they didn't drop it. I'm thinking the bridge tore the windlass up when it hit the bow and the anchor fell off in the allision
-
Biden: We gonna pay for it all
Janet Yellen: No so fast
U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen on Wednesday appeared to walk back comments from President Joe Biden that U.S. taxpayers would foot the bill for the Francis Scott Key Bridge collapse.
Appearing on MSNBC Wednesday, Yellen said money from the bipartisan infrastructure law that could “potentially be helpful.”
“My expectation would be that ultimately there’ll be insurance payments, in part, to cover this. But we don’t want to allow worrying about where the financing will come from to hold up reconstruction,” Yellen said.
Her comments come a day after Biden said it was his “intention that the federal government will pay for the entire cost of reconstructing that bridge, and I expect the Congress to support my effort.”
Biden said that, while the effort will take some time, the people of Baltimore “can count on us.”
Janet Yellen walks back Biden's comments US taxpayers to foot the bill for Baltimore bridge collapse
https://www.foxnews.com/live-news/us-baltimore-bridge-collapse-mass-casualty-event-03-26-2024
-
I'm thinking they didn't drop it. I'm thinking the bridge tore the windlass up when it hit the bow and the anchor fell off in the allision
Was the allison in chains?
-
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/allision#:~:text=1,distinguished%20from%20collision
-
I'm thinking they didn't drop it. I'm thinking the bridge tore the windlass up when it hit the bow and the anchor fell off in the allision
I look at the picture again and now I see the chain.
So what's going with they dropped an anchor before impact story? The starboard anchor is on top of some wreckage which would mean it wasn't dropped at all and the port anchor chain is straight and you saw it still up in after photos which means it was dropped afterwards. Something is not adding up or the media is f'ing with us. I've seen some ships have three anchors, two on one side one on the other. Any evidence of this?
-
Nope, not that I've seen in before pics.
-
Nope, not that I've seen in before pics.
Me neither but I thought I would ask if you saw any.
Well unless we're off base here either the pilot and/or crew is lying about dropping the anchor before impact and/or the media is lying (shocker) about what they said.
Edit: Maybe the pilot gave the order to drop anchor but the crew didn't actually carry out the order. Maybe that's what's going on here.
-
Biden: We gonna pay for it all
Janet Yellen: No so fast
Janet Yellen walks back Biden's comments US taxpayers to foot the bill for Baltimore bridge collapse
https://www.foxnews.com/live-news/us-baltimore-bridge-collapse-mass-casualty-event-03-26-2024
I was going to post, "Not with my dough, you ain't," but it got covered pretty quick.
This administration will undoubtedly be named the "What he meant was" Presidency..
-
Me neither but I thought I would ask if you saw any.
Well unless we're off base here either the pilot and/or crew is lying about dropping the anchor before impact and/or the media is lying (shocker) about what they said.
Edit: Maybe the pilot gave the order to drop anchor but the crew didn't actually carry out the order. Maybe that's what's going on here.
Now the anchor story changes to be more in line with what we're seeing
One officer on the Dali also said that before the crash, the engines 'coughed and then stopped.' There was not enough time before the ship hit the bridge to drop anchors prompting the vessel to drift.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13246433/Bodies-recovered-Patapsco-River-Dali-cargo-ship-baltimore-Francis-Scott-key-bridge.html
-
Nah, I blew up the original picture on a good monitor. It's just strange shaped wreckage. False alarm.
Blown up, I can see the Stbd Windlass under some wreckage, and clearly moved from where it should be on the deck, and I can see the Stbd anchor chain going into the mess of wreckage, but I haven't found either the anchor chain coming out of the wreckage (like the anchor was in the water) or the anchor itself. Of course if they were dragging it when they hit the wreckage could have snapped the chain.
-
Nah, I blew up the original picture on a good monitor. It's just strange shaped wreckage. False alarm.
You had me seeing it . The power of suggestion :rofl:
But it turns out as stated above they didn't drop it.
If that article is correct of course.
-
Hmmm
The Dali cargo ship which smashed into the Francis Scott Key Bridge suffered a 'severe electrical problem' while docked in Baltimore days before, according to a port worker.
Julie Mitchell, co-administrator of Container Royalty, a company which tracks cargo, told CNN the ship was anchored at the port for at least 48 hours prior to the deadly crash.
Following the devastation, she said: 'And those two days, they were having serious power outages… they had a severe electrical problem. It was total power failure, loss of engine power, everything.'
Mitchell explained that refrigerated boxes tripped breakers on board the ship on several occasions, and mechanics had been trying to fix the issue.
She said she didn't know whether the problem had been fixed when the ship set off.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13246079/Dali-cargo-ship-suffered-severe-electrical-problem-docked-Baltimore-days-prior-bridge-collapse-crash-saw-suffer-total-power-failure-loss-engine-failure-port-worker-says.html
-
OK sure, but again:
1. Marine diesel engines do not shut off when they lose electrical power. They have enough battery power to keep running for a bit, and
2. The Dali was required by International Maritime Organization regulations (and US CFRs) to have an Emergency Generator that comes on line automatically within 45 sec and powers, among other things, engines, steering, and navigational equipment.
Those things are required in ship design for exactly this reason, so if you lose an SSDG you can navigate the vessel safely until power is restored. I'm confident watching that video that the E Gen didn't come on as it was supposed to, but unless the whole thing was just an unmaintained POS (a possible scenario) this doesn't add up. This is multiple failures in multiple non connected systems, and we still don't have an explanation as to what caused that abrupt turn to starboard right when the power came on the first time. The internet can *expletive deleted*ck right off with "wind and current". You don't drift in a straight line while dark ship for a full minute, then as soon as the power comes on have the current swing your bow 15*-20* in 40 secs.
-
I keep being reminded of what happened to the USS South Dakota where the main guns would sometimes trip the circuit breakers and the engineer's solution was to tie them down which was against regs. This caused cascading failures in her electrical systems causing her to go blind and deaf during battle. Lucky for the SD USS Washington was there otherwise thing could have gone very badly for her.
Wonder if the "fix" for the Dali's elec problems while in port caused something similar.
Not to sound discriminatory but read her crew was all Indian and the Indians I've worked with in IT were know to Jerry-rig things and not in a good way.
Just a bit of speculation.
-
OK sure, but again:
1. Marine diesel engines do not shut off when they lose electrical power. They have enough battery power to keep running for a bit, and
2. The Dali was required by International Maritime Organization regulations (and US CFRs) to have an Emergency Generator that comes on line automatically within 45 sec and powers, among other things, engines, steering, and navigational equipment.
Those things are required in ship design for exactly this reason, so if you lose an SSDG you can navigate the vessel safely until power is restored. I'm confident watching that video that the E Gen didn't come on as it was supposed to, but unless the whole thing was just an unmaintained POS (a possible scenario) this doesn't add up. This is multiple failures in multiple non connected systems, and we still don't have an explanation as to what caused that abrupt turn to starboard right when the power came on the first time. The internet can *expletive deleted*ck right off with "wind and current". You don't drift in a straight line while dark ship for a full minute, then as soon as the power comes on have the current swing your bow 15*-20* in 40 secs.
What is typical for checking or testing that backup generator? In my employer's plants that have them, it isn't unusual for them to fail to start or something on the electrical side fail.
-
My theory is cyberattack or sabotage that spoofed the navigation or took over the controls. The "power failures" were deliberate attempts by the crew to reboot systems and take back control of the ship or reset the systems.
-
So is it past too soon yet?
So anyone over that way considered that they now have a real boating accident to blame for missing guns?
-
Interesting data point:
After posting that I tried to think of other ports in the US that both serve deep water large shipping, have to go under a bridge to get there, and have a relatively new bridge. New York and SF are obviously old bridges, as is the Delaware Memorial Bridge (over the Delaware River).
Thanks for reminding me of my age.
The Delaware Memorial Bridge isn't all that much older. It was ONE bridge when I was on active duty and stationed at Edgewood Arsenal in Maryland. The second, parallel bridge was either in construction when I was stationed there (mid-1960s) or was constructed after I had returned from Vietnam in 1968.
Update: According the Wikipedia, the original span (now the eastbound side) was completed in 1951. The westbound span was completed in 1968.
-
Found on X:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GJtmSWGXQAABo2U?format=jpg&name=small)
-
Found on X:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GJtmSWGXQAABo2U?format=jpg&name=small)
NO NO NO! FALSE FLAG! IT WAS ALIENS! AND NORKS! AND ISLAMOJIHADIS! SHIPS CAN'T BEND STEEL! THE BRIDGE WAS PULLED! IT WAS AN INSIDE JOB! TRUMP!
-
What is typical for checking or testing that backup generator? In my employer's plants that have them, it isn't unusual for them to fail to start or something on the electrical side fail.
Regulatory requirement is that the E-gen is started and run once a week, and you must do a full test, where you kill power to the E Switchboard the E. generator starts and takes the load automatically in under 45 sec, once a month.
-
Interesting that the other spans collapsed as well.
-
Found on X:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GJtmSWGXQAABo2U?format=jpg&name=small)
I mostly agree with Chief here. (I posted something similar back on Page 2) with a few minor things:
Dali doesn't have a Stern Thruster If she did she would have the same thruster marks she has above the bow over the stern thruster and you can clearly see in plenty of pics she does not.
I still stand by my statement the the E Gen didn't kick on. If it had, you'd have seen the nav lights come back on before the deck lights. Deck Lights are *rarely* on the emergancy switchboard, while nav lights are required to be. This is a big deal, because if the E. Gen had done what it was supposed to, she could have just continued her transit under the bridge and the engineers could have fixed her main gens at their leisure. That 1 minute power outage is the snipes getting main power back.
"Shortly after the lights come back the Captain relizes he's on a collision course with the bridge" This makes no sense. All the nav equipment on the bridge is on a battery backup (again required to be there and tested) so he would have known for the whole time he was dark ship exactly where the boat was going, and he wasn't on a collision course with the bridge until they turned the boat. They were still heading straight through the opening.
Whoever, or whatever, caused the sharp Stbd turn right after they got power back the first time, either thruster, dropped anchor, rudder input, or crash stop engine torque, that's what caused the crash. I'm still reasonably confident it wasn't the current though. You don't drift straight for a minute then lose control to the current once power comes back on.
-
NTSB Press conference discussing the timeline and what was recorded on the Vessel Data Recorder: https://youtu.be/jyF_ug1cK9w?t=92
At 0124:59 numerous audible alarms were recorded on the ship's bridge audio. About the same time VDR {Voyage Data Recorder] sensor data ceased recording [this was the first power outage, VDR audio has a battery backup-dogmush]
.....
at around 0126:02 the VDR resumed recording sensor data and during this time there were steering commands and rudder orders recorded on the audio
bolding mine.
I called it: that turn was the result of rudder input, given in haste when the power came back on. They should have just steered through the opening they were already heading towards instead of ordering a hard right turn.
Interestingly, (and this is speculation on my part) in that brief the NTSB specifies when it's the pilot ordering things "The Harbor piolet radioed...the pilot ordered the port anchor dropped....etc) but declines to mention who gave the rudder commands on the audio. It doesn't really matter, as pilot or no pilot the ship is the Master's responsibility.
ETA: It also sounds like the pilot was on the right track. After the unneccicary turn to STBD, and with control lost again, he ordered the port anchor dropped, which would have slowed the ship and slewed it back to port. It should have been rigged for freefall in the harbor, so it wouldn't have needed power to emergency drop. If they had gotten it out they might have been able to slip under the bridge, but it's hard to say. Once she turned that far to Stbd it was about their only chance though. Props to the pilot for thinking of it in the moment.
-
At 0124:59 numerous audible alarms were recorded on the ship's bridge audio. About the same time VDR {Voyage Data Recorder] sensor data ceased recording [this was the first power outage, VDR audio has a battery backup-dogmush]
.....
at around 0126:02 the VDR resumed recording sensor data and during this time there were steering commands and rudder orders recorded on the audio
According to the report, the VDR stopped recording when the power went out. But, you state that the VDR has a battery backup. Why would it stop recording?
-
According to the report, the VDR stopped recording when the power went out. But, you state that the VDR has a battery backup. Why would it stop recording?
VDR stopped recording sensor data. NTSB states that it continued recording audio data. The mics are built into (or plugged directly into) the VDR. The sensor data (helm angle, rudder angle, throttle command, throttle actual, heading, rate of turn, etc) are pulled from the Integrated Bridge System. Without looking at the particular installation on the Dali, I can tell you that the one's I've seen pull that info through an interconnection box (think router for the IBS) That interconnection box is probably powered by 120VAC (maybe 220) from the emergency switch board.
So the VDR itself has battery backup. The Electronic Charts and Radar displays, GPS, one of the VHF's, probably some other stuff that are all critical have battery backup, but some of the "2nd tier critical" stuff will be on the E. Switchboard and come back on when the E. Gen fires up. Remember that's supposed to be less than 45 secs, and there's only so many batteries you can shove under the console on a bridge.
The NTSB says that the VDR lost sensor date when the alarms went off (Audio alarms on all the battery powered stuff.) then picked up sensor data again a minute later when the power came back on. That sounds like power cycling to the interconnection box.
Look at this VDR system: https://markogroup.com/en/ship-supply/voyage-data-recorder-rutter-vdr-nw6000/
The mics are PoE directly to the Core unit, which has an Uninterruptable power supply, but a bunch of the sensors are going through the NW64XX Data Acquisition Unit, which is going to pull power from the E. Switch board. Some of the other sensors (RADARs and ECDIS mostly) may have to have digital-NMEA conversion boxes to pull the signal from the PC and make it readable to ship electronics depending on what exactly is installed. Those boxes may also be on E. Switchboard power.
-
Your explanations reek of strawman false flag misdirection.
It was Islamojihadis.
:rofl:
Interesting that the unit will still record audio after a power failure. I'd have figured it would all be processed through the integrated bridge system.
-
Makes sense. When I read "sensor data" I *assumed* all sensors - including audio.
-
Trying to digest it all...
I think someone touched on this. What if during the power outage someone was trying to get the directional equipment to work by heeling the "wheel' back and forth in a panic, then it was left in starboard mode so when power was restored, the directional equipment suddenly responded to the last command... i.e., to full starboard.
Is that what dogmush was saying here? "I called it: that turn was the result of rudder input, given in haste when the power came back on. They should have just steered through the opening they were already heading towards instead of ordering a hard right turn."
Sorry, but I'm just bewizzled by this complex matter.
-
Trying to digest it all...
I think someone touched on this. What if during the power outage someone was trying to get the directional equipment to work by heeling the "wheel' back and forth in a panic, then it was left in starboard mode so when power was restored, the directional equipment suddenly responded to the last command... i.e., to full starboard.
That scenario would depend a lot on the exact model of helm installed on the vessel. In general, giving wheel input while nothing is powered on won't "save" that input for power. The rudder order system would need to be powered up, but without looking at exactly the system on that boat it's impossible to say if that could or could not happen 100%.
But...
Is that what dogmush was saying here? "I called it: that turn was the result of rudder input, given in haste when the power came back on. They should have just steered through the opening they were already heading towards instead of ordering a hard right turn."
Sorry, but I'm just bewizzled by this complex matter.
No, that's not what I was implying. I think, and the NTSB press release seems to concur, that AFTER the power came back on the first time, they gave rudder and engine orders to attempt to abort going under the bridge. (Crash stop, and really any rudder at all. They were still lined up after the first power outage ended, at 0126:02). They were WAY to close to abort at that point, and the attempt doomed them. The "I called it" was back to me saying from the first video that that sharp turn was from control input, verified by orders and rudder commands recorded on the VDR at the time the sharp turn began.
-
Army Corps is suggesting "weeks not months" to get things open again. Probably like a month then, with the inevitable boondoggles, breakdowns, and environmental activist work stoppages. =)
https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/daunting-cleanup-of-baltimore-bridge-begins-while-investigation-into-collapse-could-last-two-years-5618612
-
dogmush: Reply # 96; Many thanks.
-
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GJv1SZxXUAA6g9e?format=jpg&name=small)
-
Why I Don't Care About the Fallen Bridge in Baltimore || Peter Zeihan
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJ2Z4ozK2b0
I post this mainly due to him mentioning the Jones Act which apparently puts some restrictions on water transport of goods within the US. I hadn't heard of that.
Often referred to as the “Jones Act” after the bill's sponsor, Senator Wesley Jones, the legislation restricted American coastwise and intercoastal trade to U.S.-flagged vessels.
A google search mostly seems to find links on a law regarding the Philippines.
-
The TL:DR on the Jones act is that it requires any goods shipped by water between two US ports to do so on ships built in the US and owned and crewed by US citizens (corps) or leagal migrants (green card holders). It was supposed to invigorate US merchant shipping after WWI, but these days it means that large ships can't make multiple US stops, unless they go to a different country in between.
Some examples: If you are coming from China, a ship can't stop in Hawaii and drop some stuff, then go to LA unless it's US built, owned and crewed. Same scenario for AK on the way to Seattle.
On the other coast, a ship can't stop in San Juan on the way to Miami, nor can one make multiple stops up and down either coast to cut the cost of transport.
In practice since there are *very* few US built, owned and crewed deep water cargo vessels, and US shipyards can't or won't build new ones at competitive prices, it means that US bound cargo is held overseas until there is a full boat's worth going to one port. It also economically incentivizes fewer large ports (so ships can come in and drop the full load) and the infrastructure bottle necks both on the maritime side and the land distribution side that that entails.
-
I think that may be the law I heard someone mention when talking about Puerto Rico. It makes it very tough for Puerto Rico to do anything with international trade or act as a transit point for international trade. May have been another law that has more specific restrictions.
-
The Bidens have been watermen in Baltimore since the 1800s.
https://twitchy.com/dougp/2024/04/06/usa-today-went-full-border-security-propaganda-in-story-about-bidens-stop-at-the-collapsed-bridge-n2394799
-
The Bidens have been watermen in Baltimore since the 1800s.
https://twitchy.com/dougp/2024/04/06/usa-today-went-full-border-security-propaganda-in-story-about-bidens-stop-at-the-collapsed-bridge-n2394799
He's still in shock, his son died as his train was crossing that bridge after all.
-
He's still in shock, his son died as his train was crossing that bridge after all.
Pretty close:
https://twitchy.com/dougp/2024/04/06/biden-comforted-families-of-those-killed-in-bridge-collapse-by-reminding-them-hes-lost-someone-too-n2394813
-
The TL:DR on the Jones act is that it requires any goods shipped by water between two US ports to do so on ships built in the US and owned and crewed by US citizens (corps) or leagal migrants (green card holders). It was supposed to invigorate US merchant shipping after WWI, but these days it means that large ships can't make multiple US stops, unless they go to a different country in between.
Some examples: If you are coming from China, a ship can't stop in Hawaii and drop some stuff, then go to LA unless it's US built, owned and crewed. Same scenario for AK on the way to Seattle.
On the other coast, a ship can't stop in San Juan on the way to Miami, nor can one make multiple stops up and down either coast to cut the cost of transport.
In practice since there are *very* few US built, owned and crewed deep water cargo vessels, and US shipyards can't or won't build new ones at competitive prices, it means that US bound cargo is held overseas until there is a full boat's worth going to one port. It also economically incentivizes fewer large ports (so ships can come in and drop the full load) and the infrastructure bottle necks both on the maritime side and the land distribution side that that entails.
It's also a handout to Canada, truckers, and railroads in practice. In other words, a classic American-style grift. Lots of stuff goes to LA, then up to Canada and trucked back across the border to the US. And the equivalent on the East Coast.
-
It's also a handout to Canada, truckers, and railroads in practice. In other words, a classic American-style grift. Lots of stuff goes to LA, then up to Canada and trucked back across the border to the US. And the equivalent on the East Coast.
I kind of thought it was just a natural result of America's growing isolationism at the time, but you put a new perspective on it. I did not see that "angle."
Biden. No Offense, Mr. President, but as my father used to say, "You ain't got no schoolhousin'." I'd say you ought to resign, but the thought of your Vice President terrifies me.
-
At the time the Jones act was adopted it wasn't a gift to anyone other than Americans.
As Terry said, it was adopted in part to bolster American shipping after WW I, in part due to the growing isolationism and in part of grabbing back part of the shipping traffic that had been freed up by the war, and which had previously been largely owned by Britain.
It certainly wasn't a gift to the trucking industry because in 1920 the trucking industry didn't exist in the form it now takes. It may have been a boon for the railroads, but I certainly don't see how given that to get cargo to a port to get it on a ship the only option was the railroads. That didn't change.
The problem is... reality has change, and the law hasn't. So yeah, a lot of stuff that would ship out of US ports now has to tranship, either to Canada or to an intermediate location.
And the US flagged merchant fleet that existed in 1920 is essentially extinct.
-
Massive container ship loses power near NYC’s Verrazzano Bridge days after Baltimore Key Bridge disaster
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/massive-container-ship-loses-power-near-nyc-s-verrazzano-bridge-days-after-baltimore-key-bridge-disaster/ar-BB1lea2y
The US Coast Guard confirmed that its Vessel Traffic Service received a report that the 89,000-ton M/V Qingdao lost propulsion about 8:30 p.m. as it traversed Kill Van Kull waterway — the shipping lane between Staten Island and Bayonne, New Jersey.
An image shared on X by John Konrad, CEO of maritime-focused news outlet gCaptain, shows the 1,100-foot Qingdao floating uncomfortably close to the span that connects Brooklyn and Staten Island.
Konrad said the Qingdao was being escorted by three tug boats, but needed three more to bring it under control.
I guess this probably wouldn't make news a few months ago.
-
(
Incidental FYI:
"...as it traversed Kill Van Kull waterway —"
As a kid living in New York City, the use of the word "kill" was a puzzle to me. Kill this, Kill that was all over the place. Fishkill was especially troublesome.
WIKI
"A kill is a body of water, most commonly a creek, but also a tidal inlet, river, strait, or arm of the sea. The term is derived from the Middle Dutch kille (kil in modern Dutch), meaning "riverbed" or "water channel".[1] It is found in areas of Dutch influence in the Netherlands' former North American colony of New Netherland, primarily the Hudson and Delaware Valleys."
I lived in Flushing, Queens, near Flushing Bay, which was another puzzle to me. My phone number was FLushing 3-nnnn. Danged furrin words.
:rofl:
)
(https://2ahawaii.com/Smileys/extended/stopjack.gif)
-
Right after I saw it was the F.S.Key bridge and knowing how the left loves to paint F.S.K. as a racist who wrote a racist poem which was then turned into a racist nation anthem I was thinking the new bridge will be the BLM Bridge or the George Floyd Bridge.
And right on cue
Civil rights groups call for collapsed Baltimore bridge to be renamed when it's rebuilt because legacy of national anthem author Francis Scott Key is 'clouded with racism accusations'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13289391/rename-francis-scott-key-bridge-rebuild-racist-history.html
-
But isn't renaming it the BLM or George Floyd Bridge racist?
I don't understand. Am I guilty of Consistency?
-
As expected...
"Key was a racist! Rename the bridge!"
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/african-american-groups-call-ditching-racist-francis-scott-key-naming-new-bridge-after-late-congressman
-
Barges break free on Ohio River in Pittsburgh; marina damage extensive, Sewickley Bridge closed as barge set to pass
https://triblive.com/local/barges-break-free-on-ohio-river-in-pittsburgh/
More than two dozen barges broke loose Friday night and floated uncontrolled down the Ohio River, causing extensive damage to at least two marinas and prompting the temporary closure of the West End and McKees Rocks bridges.
..........
Twenty-six barges broke free at about 11:35 p.m. Friday night from a location near the West End Bridge at mile marker 1 on the Ohio River, according to the U.S. Coast Guard.
Twenty-three barges were loaded with dry cargo — 22 had coal, one with fertilizer — and three were empty, said Coast Guard spokesman Eyobe Mills.
-
Reportedly the FBI has opened a criminal probe into what the crew knew about the ship's problems.
In other news the FBI has also begun to round up any known MAGA supporters who's cell phones showed them in Baltimore on Jan 6 2021.
-
Ohio River near Pittsburgh is closed as crews search for missing barge, one of 26 that broke loose
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2024/apr/15/part-of-ohio-river-near-pittsburgh-closed-as-crews/
-
A limited access channel for ships of 35ft or less draft will be open starting the 25th with restrictions including tide, wind state, and tonnage restrictions. Full access in 2+ months
Baltimore To Reopen Limited Access Channel for Ships with Drafts Less Than 35 Feet on April 25
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IxY31XlFP0
-
I'm certain that the location of the bridge and that it was a bridge, rather than a sunk ship, would get this cleared faster, but in that exercise I mentioned, with a ship sunk at the relatively narrow inlet to LA/LB, SUPSALV estimated, IIRC, a minimum of one month for partial traffic if money and resources were no object and everything went smooth.
Ben was right on the money here. Good data point.
I still say the Army Divers could have opened it quicker with...................Detcord. >:D >:D
-
Ben was right on the money here. Good data point.
I still say the Army Divers could have opened it quicker with...................Detcord. >:D >:D
Well, SUPSALV was right on the money. =)
It would have been interesting to see how fast it could have been done war zone fashion, without bureaucracy in the way. In my experience, even when someone like EPA gives a "permit waiver", you're still working under a pseudo-permitting condition, since they always want consultation on everything.