Ship struck and destroyed Baltimore bridge

[NormanS]

Complete and utter nonsense. Above a certain weight/speed no barrier is going to help.

Well, no. If collision barriers are the proper shape, and massive enough, they will deflect an off course vessel. It's a subject that has to be looked at with the development of cruise liners with extremely raked stems.
When the Forth Road Bridge was built in the sixties, it had no barriers, but massive sheet piling and concrete barriers were installed in the eighties.

 

[fisherman]

So the news is they had a mayday and managed to close the bridge to traffic, but really sad for the guys fixing the potholes, as apparently they were.

 

[doug748]

So the news is they had a mayday and managed to close the bridge to traffic, but really sad for the guys fixing the potholes, as apparently they were.

With so little time available to halt traffic, all those concerned deserve a Congressional Medal of Honour.

 

[jamie N]

I've just had a quick look at a speeded up video of it, and it's possible that once power was restored, as the lights coming back on indicate, the vessel was immediately given a full astern command, which kicked the stern to port, thus altering the heading at +/- 7kts, which in consequence directed the vessel to the point of contact with the pretty much unprotected bridge.

 

[Mistroma]

I've just had a quick look at a speeded up video of it, and it's possible that once power was restored, as the lights coming back on indicate, the vessel was immediately given a full astern command, which kicked the stern to port, thus altering the heading at +/- 7kts, which in consequence directed the vessel to the point of contact with the pretty much unprotected bridge.

I haven't really looked at any videos, just the AIS data I saw early this morning. I didn't measure anything but am pretty certain Dali left, did a U-turn to port and got up to 8-10 knots fairly quickly. I think they were aiming for the bridge and then turned to starboard, perhaps around 20 degrees or so. From that time onwards they seemed to be slowing steadily. I'm afraid that's all based on a very quick look more than 12 hours ago and AIS delays won't show the situation in detail. However, I did think the same thing about the stern kicking when looking at the track.

I doubt much could be done at that stage as draft was probably close to depth near the support. I imagine the stern would still have swung around very sharply even if they'd managed to get the bows further inshore where depth is only about 6m.

 

[LittleSister]

One of the reports from Baltimore said the ship lost power as it approached. Whether that's fact or speculation I don't know.

It was also reported that the bridge was designed to resist a strike from a ship, but that was when ships were significantly smaller. The bridge was opened in 1977, I think I read.

 

[alan_d]

Informative report here :

 

[RunAgroundHard]

The bridge was built in the 70’s and was “up to code” but there is a different code in place today, naturally.

Apparently the boat did not have a pilot, or tugs in attendance to pass under the bridge, which was a requirement, according to news in the USA.

 

[jamie N]

There were 2 pilots onboard. One for the harbour, and one for the river. On the video in post #24 it's clear that the power does go off, if the loss of lights is the correct indicator. The great show of smoke once the lights reappear would show that power is being applied, most likely to the prop. This coincides with the stern of the vessel moving to port.

 

[fisherman]

With so little time available to halt traffic, all those concerned deserve a Congressional Medal of Honour.

To be fair, just turned the red lights and bridge closed signs on.

 

[franksingleton]

The bridge was probably designed well before such large vessels were envisaged. Whoever was responsible for allowing these large vessels to go up and down stream must (should) have done a risk assessment. Did they really think that vessels would never lose power? Somebody is going to have to explain why vessels of such a size did not have to have tugs. Maybe somebody else might have to explain why there was not enough protection around the towers to cope with impact from a drifting large ship.

 

[sarabande]

I see the BBC and its 'expert' have already decided that the Dali was travelling too fast !!!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-us-canada-68671103

See the 07:36 news post.

The 'expert' also says that bodies could have travelled upstream or downstream because of the current. What a lacuna of useless information !

 

[doug748]

To be fair, just turned the red lights and bridge closed signs on.

Not for me, fair play.
Middle of the night, a situation that would not happen in a 100 lifetimes. Very easy for the people concerned to be, drinking coffee, in the rest room, looking at the internet, having forty winks.

.

 

[doug748]

I see the BBC and its 'expert' have already decided that the Dali was travelling too fast !!!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-us-canada-68671103

See the 07:36 news post.

The 'expert' also says that bodies could have travelled upstream or downstream because of the current. What a lacuna of useless information !

Indeed.

I came across this. For more nonsense, the (largely US based) Anarchy thread cannot be beaten:

Ship takes out Baltimore Francis Scott Key Bridge

.

 

[Stemar]

One of the Ukraine war commentators showed an "influencer" blaming the fact that the US was sending so much money to Ukraine for the dire state of infrastructure in the US. The mind boggles!

 

[Forum Admin Team]

Thread suspended pending review.