Francis Scott Key Bridge (Baltimore) hit by Cargo Ship and Collapsed
- Thread starter ctechbob
- Start date
Owen Lucas
$100 Site Donor 2023
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2021
- Messages
- 2,585
Wow, side question. Did the insurance companies go after her personal finances or was her policy just maxed out?
I read that there are military 4 sea lift ships or something stuck in the harbor.
What we know for sure is that the bridge will be repaired as quickly as it can be and that the responsible party will pay the cost along with compensation to the spouses and families of those lost in this accident. This will not be the case if and only if no entity associated with the owners intends to operated into any first world port ever again and if they have no first world assets that our federal government can seize.
ls1mike
$50 Site Donor 2024
At 8 knots? I doubt it.
Gravity
Tells you how large and heavy the ship is relative to the weight of parts of this bridge.
I suspect that in the future, tugs through the bridge might be required for large ships....though it's debatable if they
could do anything to change ship's course within 1-2 minutes. Those on the ship manning key control stations may need to be reinforced....esp. emergency controls where hydraulics, elec power or other systems are lost.
Sure would have been nice to have the back up generator/turbine up and running in the event
you need it for back up power/propulsion. US Navy ships have twin propulsion engines and twin turbine generators.
If these large merchant ships have them, why not test or run them during initial underway so they are ready and warmed up?
I'm sure it costs the owner's extra money to do that. But, it also costs a lot less than loss of life, loss of a bridge, and loss of part
of the region's economy. What good is a back up or second engine or generator when it's not ready when you absolutely need it?
could do anything to change ship's course within 1-2 minutes. Those on the ship manning key control stations may need to be reinforced....esp. emergency controls where hydraulics, elec power or other systems are lost.
Sure would have been nice to have the back up generator/turbine up and running in the event
you need it for back up power/propulsion. US Navy ships have twin propulsion engines and twin turbine generators.
If these large merchant ships have them, why not test or run them during initial underway so they are ready and warmed up?
I'm sure it costs the owner's extra money to do that. But, it also costs a lot less than loss of life, loss of a bridge, and loss of part
of the region's economy. What good is a back up or second engine or generator when it's not ready when you absolutely need it?
The ship was staffed with Indians, presumably because the boat owners want to pay as little as possible for wages. What makes you think that they are going to maintain a potential backup generator? Clearly, they didn't maintain their engines because that costs money too, and would require competent employees that would cost more.
It is resting on the bottom of the channel, hopefully no damage to the hull. There’s not usually a lot of space under a fully loaded ship in many ports.
Baltimore Bridge's Weight is Pinning Container Ship Dali to the Bottom
In a reversal of the usual order for a major marine salvage operation, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and its contractors will make the firs...
www.maritime-executive.com
The Chesapeake Bay itself is not deep like a Great Lake. Ships have to be careful the whole trip from the ocean to stay in the dredged channels. One got stuck in the middle of the Bay a year or two ago.
I'm sure there was a risk vs. cost scenario and again it based on the fact that it would impede traffic in the harbor which now is a moot point. The cost to rebuild was also a factor. Not easy to retrofit in certain scenarios, I'm am sure.
Adding fenders isn’t that hard a retrofit. Here’s the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge (the image is from a government website and in the public domain). Over the years they reinforced the tower supports with additional concrete, and also out in fenders. There’s not quite the same traffic as the Oakland-San Francisco Bay Bridge, but there is a tanker dock, and Mare Island Naval Shipyard was previously operating. There’s other shipping traffic there including for a sugar factory. I don’t think they get mega sized container ships though. A cantilever bridge might be able to stay up if one of the smaller supports is destroyed. But the main supports are protected with lots of concrete and big fenders.
I can't understand why wouldn't have it on standby in the harbor. Once out at sea sure switch it off. Sounds like a prudent plan to me.
It may not have been for that particular span, but I would certainly argue it could be for the Baltimore one based on space available, harbor floor, etc...Adding fenders isn’t that hard a retrofit. Here’s the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge (the image is from a government website and in the public domain). Over the years they reinforced the tower supports with additional concrete, and also out in fenders. There’s not quite the same traffic as the Oakland-San Francisco Bay Bridge, but there is a tanker dock, and Mare Island Naval Shipyard was previously operating. There’s other shipping traffic there including for a sugar factory. I don’t think they get mega sized container ships though. A cantilever bridge might be able to stay up if one of the smaller supports is destroyed. But the main supports are protected with lots of concrete and big fenders.
I lot of factors go into play especially if you need adequate clearance for the mega container ships and also want to stop them at the same time.
It’s too late now, but it was a wide span under the central truss section of the bridge. They apparently had four “dolphins” near the supports, but not the beefy fenders or rock islands that similar bridges had. The ship just bypassed the dolphins. It’s pretty obvious (now) that fenders would have been a viable means to protect the bridge. But obviously we’re looking at this after the fact.
How Fenders Might Have Protected Against Bridge Collapse
The Francis Scott Key Bridge did not have an obvious fender system, or protective barriers, to redirect or prevent a ship from crashing into the bridge piers.
Was the ship off course? It should have been aiming for the center of the bridge. When the power loss happened wouldn't it continue straight? Of course, I don't know the winds or currents, but if they knew they were that strong a tug would/should have been planned?
Bad fuel could take out the main and gensets if they pulled from the same tank. Just some questions.
Bad fuel could take out the main and gensets if they pulled from the same tank. Just some questions.
It worked when the Cosco Busan ran into the Oakland-San Francisco Bay Bridge. However, that was a little over half the tonnage of the MV Dali. There's no way of knowing for sure, but it wouldn't surprise me if well-constructed fenders might have prevented direct contact with the bridge supports.
It seems like they may have been steering to try and avoid a power line emplacement between the ship and the bridge and either over-corrected or weren't able to straighten out the rudders or adjust prop speed once they lost power again, going by drone footage. I don't think wind or current was a factor.
at ~40 seconds.
When you're about to crash, aim at the least expensive thing that you see. It would have been better to hit the power line and have a chance to slow or stop before reaching the bridge.