WTOP Part of Key Bridge in Baltimore collapses after large boat collision, sending vehicles into water

[NickyJ]

  

2 minutes ago, SkinsFTW said:

Surprising that they even attempted to enter the port with power issues like that. Doubtful that it just started happening right then.

They were leaving the port.

 

Edited March 26 by NickyJ

[The Evil Genius]

57 minutes ago, tshile said:

I imagine the port can’t reopen until the bridge is removed from the water… so… gonna be a while a while…

 

then they have to build a new bridge

 

 

 

47 minutes ago, Skinsfan1311 said:

Agreed.

The economic toll is going to be very high...

 

Without knowing the history of the bridge, the old planner in me thinks it probably had some structural issues to begin with if it collapsed the way it did. Probably means that the entire bridge will need a thorough safety review and EIRs will need to be done to mitigate what building a new bridge will do to the waters.

 

Edit..just looked. That bridge was approaching 50 years old. So I suspect repairs were already needed. Although they did do major projects on it as late as 1999. 

 

It also took 5 years to build back in 1972. I'd doubt it will take half of that now. But that's just an uniformed guess.

Edited March 26 by The Evil Genius

[Spaceman Spiff]

This is awful to see.  

[Fergasun]

This angers me.  Just like train derailments.  Or airplanes falling out of the skies.  No doubt we will find out that this ship was not well maintained (and the bridge probably wasn't either). So that someone on either end didn't have to pay money and could pocket the money. So that someone could keep their money. 

[SkinsFTW]

^^^Bet they start paying tug boats to operate longer distances after this as well.

[TheGreatBuzz]

26 minutes ago, SkinsFTW said:

Surprising that they even attempted to enter the port with power issues like that. Doubtful that it just started happening right then.

 

1 minute ago, Fergasun said:

This angers me.  Just like train derailments.  Or airplanes falling out of the skies.  No doubt we will find out that this ship was not well maintained (and the bridge probably wasn't either). So that someone on either end didn't have to pay money and could pocket the money. So that someone could keep their money. 

 

I would avoid jumping to too many conclusions regarding the ship. Yes it is certainly possible the ship had issues. But this also happened on a highly-maintained, billion dollar warship.

 

So there's that.

1 minute ago, SkinsFTW said:

^^^Bet they start paying tug boats to operate longer distances after this as well.

 

The tug wasn't stopping that.

[Corcaigh]

I just saw on a press conference that they are just looking for six contractors who were still on the bridge when it collapsed.

 

They said are not looking for vehicle occupants. That might suggest that they managed to stop traffic just in time as you could see cars and trucks crossing in the last few seconds leading up to the impact.

 

Edited March 26 by Corcaigh

[tshile]

45 minutes ago, SkinsFTW said:

Surprising that they even attempted to enter the port with power issues like that. Doubtful that it just started happening right then.

That’s the odd thing. The news says the boat was out of channel for a while before trying to cross. Given that being out of channel is a huge no-no, I would think they were aware they were having problems for a while. 
 

it’ll be interesting to see the final report on timeline and decision making. I have no idea where responsibility lies with all that. I would think ultimately the captain is responsible for his ship, including maintenance and issues that lead to this. 
 

it seems unlikely given what we know, that it was some act of god out of everyone’s hands. Seems more likely some bad decisions were made  

 

edit: as buzz points out - I have no idea what I’m talking about so, maybe it was a bizarre act of god and not anyone’s “fault”

35 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

Edit..just looked. That bridge was approaching 50 years old. So I suspect repairs were already needed. Although they did do major projects on it as late as 1999. 

Some of the people they are trying to rescue/find, were people doing concrete repairs on the bridge when it happened. 
 

 

Edited March 26 by tshile

[Fergasun]

8 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

 

I would avoid jumping to too many conclusions regarding the ship. Yes it is certainly possible the ship had issues. But this also happened on a highly-maintained, billion dollar warship.

The jump to conclusions mat is the best ever!  But you are also jumping to a conclusion.   A bit scary what happened to your boat...

[TheGreatBuzz]

2 minutes ago, Fergasun said:

The jump to conclusions mat is the best ever!  But you are also jumping to a conclusion.   A bit scary what happened to your boat...

 

Yes. But my conclusions are based on experience. 

 

And I was too young and dumb to be as scared as I probably should have been. 

[tshile]

3 minutes ago, Fergasun said:

The jump to conclusions mat is the best ever!  But you are also jumping to a conclusion.   A bit scary what happened to your boat...

As usual, his seems a bit more informed than the rest of us  

[balki1867]

Just for everyone's reference-- the sizes of container ships in 1970 (when the bridge was designed) versus today is different by a huge factor.  Ship sizes are measured in 'twenty foot equivalents' (TEUs) which is basically the number of containers the ship can hold.  (I am NOT a shipping expert but feel free to correct me).

 

In 1970, when the bridge was built, the typical ship was 1,000-2,000 TEUs.  Today there are ships out there that are well above 20,000 TEUs. (I'm extrapolating from this article: Evolution and Upsizing of Container Vessels (marineinsight.com)). This is having all kinds of impacts on the shipping industry and the cities and thrive off it.

 

Even if the bridge was designed for a collision with a boat, there's no way it was designed to withstand a modern container ship.

 

This is awfully horrific.  I watched the video of the last 2-3 minutes and watching all those headlights traversing the bridge made my stomach turn.

[The Evil Genius]

I do know, as of 2016 when I left that world, bridges and overpasses, in particular,  were in woeful disrepair in America. Can't imagine much has changed in the last 8 years. 

Edited March 26 by The Evil Genius

[Malapropismic Depository]

1 hour ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

 

 

I would avoid jumping to too many conclusions regarding the ship. Yes it is certainly possible the ship had issues. But this also happened on a highly-maintained, billion dollar warship.

 

 

 

Someone brought up a good point earlier that was not followed up on, regarding barriers.

But my first question is, could a barrier be engineered to stop something like that from hitting the bridge.

 

Actually I don't think the barrier would necessarily need to stop the ship from hitting the bridge support completely.

Even if it crushed through the barrier(s), is it possible it could at least slow down the momentum enough so that the

force is not enough to collapse the bridge support ?

Edited March 26 by Malapropismic Depository

[tshile]

It would be hard to survive for long in that cold water even if you have a life jacket. You’ve got a few hours at best before hypothermia takes you. 
 

trapped in a car? Yeah you’ve got minutes. You have to get out of the car. 
 

btw the best way out is via window. You cannot open the door in that situation. You should always carry a seatbelt cutter and window breaker in your car. 
 

anyone not already rescued is almost absolutely dead by now. Random weird stuff happens sometimes, so they’ll keep looking, but you’re in <1% survival probability and probably hit that point somewhere around 3 am…

[Malapropismic Depository]

deleted as a result of user error

Edited March 26 by Malapropismic Depository

[TheGreatBuzz]

Our view

[Malapropismic Depository]

10 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

Our view

 

Wow.

Seems like a cruel irony, that someone with such relevant experience to the topic (probably from a long time ago), such as yourself, is also within eyesight of the disaster.

 

Edited March 26 by Malapropismic Depository

[SkinsFTW]

53 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

 

The tug wasn't stopping that.

 

This is exactly the reason tug boats exist and tug boats move ships like this around everyday all around the world in much more rough seas than what we see here.

 

 

A good video from today:

 

 

[The Evil Genius]

 

[TheGreatBuzz]

25 minutes ago, Malapropismic Depository said:

 

Wow.

Seems like a cruel irony, that someone with such relevant experience to the topic (probably from a long time ago), such as yourself, is also within eyesight of the disaster.

 

 

This seems to happen enough that I'm starting to get concerned. 😂

 

15 minutes ago, SkinsFTW said:

 

This is exactly the reason tug boats exist and tug boats move ships like this around everyday all around the world in much more rough seas than what we see here.

 

 

A good video from today:

 

 

 

Thank you for mansplaining tug boats to me. I had no idea.

 

Tugs assist ships with their own power. It's a lot different than changing the course of a ship that size, at that speed, in that small of an area. Those tugs weren't stopping this. 

 

*the reported speed seems to be about 8 knots which is very fast for an area like that. Maybe the wind and tide also played a role? Also, I'm hearing the ship dropped anchor right before collision.

[ixcuincle]

 

[Dan T.]

Yeah, apparently the ship put out a Mayday signal, giving officials a bit of time to limit vehicular traffic on the bridge.

[ixcuincle]

 

[TheGreatBuzz]

38 minutes ago, SkinsFTW said:

 

This is exactly the reason tug boats exist and tug boats move ships like this around everyday all around the world in much more rough seas than what we see here.

 

 

A good video from today:

 

 

 

Some additional credentials of mine, I was working on the flight deck when this happened. I've seen first hand what tugs can and can't do.

 

Quote

accident marred Samuel B. Roberts’ voyage, however, as she began to wrap up the deployment and entered the harbor of Puerto Belgrano, Argentina, at 1332 on 11 May 2007. The ship, Cmdr. J. Marc Weeks in command, set the sea and anchor detail and eased into the port, but the 1A and 1B gas turbine engines surged and then suddenly lost power—possibly due to overspeed. The frigate drifted dangerously out of the channel, and Weeks ordered his crew to rotate the auxiliary power units (APUs) to 350° and turn them on, while engineering sailors also attempted to restore the engines to power. The Argentinean pilot directed a pair of made up tugs to render assistance, the forward one of which tried, at full power, to pull the ship ahead, while the aft tug pulled her stern fair at best power. All of these efforts could not counter set the strong winds off the port quarter, however, and Samuel B. Roberts ran aground onto some soft mud in the harbor’s approaches.

 

The frigate continued to stop engines while she engaged the shaft brake, used the APUs, deballasted aft, and as the tugs attempted to pull her fair. The ship’s company and the Argentineans concentrated their recovery efforts on pulling Samuel B. Roberts free toward the port side of the marked channel, in order to prevent her from exiting the starboard side of the channel. The combined attempts finally succeeded in breaking the ship free of the mud at 1432, and the tug and the ship’s APUs enabled her to move back into the charted channel and moor port side outboard Spanish frigate Santa María (F.81).

 

Argentinean naval divers resolutely battled visibility issues that night because of the silt in the basin and nighttime conditions while they inspected the ship’s hull, screw, rudder, APUs, and sonar dome. The divers carried out a second inspection the following day, and determined that she escaped damage. The Argentineans removed by hand soft mud that had caked onto the blades, and did not detect any oil leaks or anything wrapped around the screw, propeller, or strut. The divers also took video footage of the ship, but the murky water hindered the clarity of the video, though it clearly showed the sharp edges of the blades, hardware, and running gear. The Argentineans dived a third time on the afternoon of the 14th, but they were delayed and multiple vessels entered and stood out of the harbor, churning the water, and together with sunset again interfered with the visibility. The divers returned for a fourth dive on the morning of the 15th during high tide, and, following a fifth dive completed their inspections. Six different divers verified that Samuel B. Roberts emerged from the grounding without any visible damage, and the ship meanwhile successfully tested various systems and Weeks considered her seaworthy. Samuel B. Roberts shaped a course out to sea and visited Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, en route her return home.

 

Unrelated but I got an award from the Chief of Naval Operations for my actions here. This was after we back to Mayport, got repaired, and redeployed. 

 

Quote

Hurricane Felix devastated northeastern Nicaragua on 4 September 2007. United States-led international relief forces, including Wasp and Samuel B. Roberts, played a major role in the relief operations. Wasp airlifted more than 125,000-pounds of relief supplies and medically evacuated 34 people. Joint Task Force Bravo coordinated efforts by the two SH-60B Seahawks from HSL-48 Detachment 7, embarked on board Samuel B. Roberts, and Army, Navy, and Marine helos including Sikorsky MH-53E Sea Dragons, Boeing Vertol MH-47 Chinooks, and UH-60 Black Hawks, while they flew dozens of missions into an airfield at Puerto Cabezas. A USAF Lockheed C-130 Hercules from Homestead Air Reserve Base, Fla., and a USMC Hercules arrived later with additional supplies. The relief efforts continued until 18 September.

 

https://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/ship-histories/danfs/s/samuel-b--roberts--ffg-58--iii.html

 

Edited March 26 by TheGreatBuzz