Francis Scott Key Bridge collapse

[XXX-er]

How many of the people hurt/ killed in this were hispanic ?

Times have changed

[Toadman]

Build a floating bridge - Just make sure you close up all the vents on the pontoons.

https://www.facebook.com/KING5News/v...3281508336476/

[2nd mate]

To add to the very nice explanation of how safety is dictated in the shipping world….. the company pays the classifications society for their services…..to certify their ship are safe to operate…..[emoji848]. Let that sink in.

These are the same types that said the el faro was in great shape and safe to operate with a cargo securing manual that my 11 year old dentist in training would have seen as a major safety issue. Lashing multiple vehicles to a single chain, so if the single chain fails all the cargo is now free.

The days of the USCG having the knowledge and people power to oversee the US Maritime industry went out the window years ago. The whole licensing and credential process is a complete clusterfuck and has been since they tried to consolidate issuing credentials 15 years ago.

[LongShortLong]

The Talmadge needs new cables so what the Port is going to do is hang new cables and then turn them 2 inches a day for 2 years which will raise the deck of the bridge over the Channel 24 feet over those 2 years. Coolest part is that they aren’t even going to stop car traffic while they do this. The height difference is apparently the difference between getting the world’s biggest container ships in the Port and not.

As always, the answer is $.

Might want to check the math on that bridge project. 2 inches a day works out to over 100 feet in common core math. Same with the new math if they're old school. That said, an extra 100 feet should be tall enough for a few decades worth of bigger ships. Though not if they switch to green energy extra tall tall ships.

Thinking about math, when the power went out, they were 3 ship lengths away, in a channel narrower than Dali is long, travelling at a normal speed. This is like losing control skiing tight trees. Not really time to do anything. Sure, it was four minutes instead of four seconds but I think the analogy works, since there's no stopping in time with 3 boat (or ski) lengths.

Also I compared the traffic on the 4 lane Key bridge to some 4 lane freeways near me. 35,000 a day vs 70,000 a day. Looks like the bridge was under-utilized. If the traffic report is correct, maybe they should improve the port infrastructure by removing the bridge.permanently. (My initial thought before checking usage is this is an opportunity to rebuild with 6 or 8 lanes). With no bridge, future cargo ships can sail right in with their 1000 foot masts. Well, except there's a couple other bridges also blocking port access to the ocean.

[skibrd]

Might want to check the math on that bridge project. 2 inches a day works out to over 100 feet in common core math. Same with the new math if they're old school. That said, an extra 100 feet should be tall enough for a few decades worth of bigger ships. Though not if they switch to green energy extra tall tall ships.

Thinking about math, when the power went out, they were 3 ship lengths away, in a channel narrower than Dali is long, travelling at a normal speed. This is like losing control skiing tight trees. Not really time to do anything. Sure, it was four minutes instead of four seconds but I think the analogy works, since there's no stopping in time with 3 boat (or ski) lengths.

Also I compared the traffic on the 4 lane Key bridge to some 4 lane freeways near me. 35,000 a day vs 70,000 a day. Looks like the bridge was under-utilized. If the traffic report is correct, maybe they should improve the port infrastructure by removing the bridge.permanently. (My initial thought before checking usage is this is an opportunity to rebuild with 6 or 8 lanes). With no bridge, future cargo ships can sail right in with their 1000 foot masts. Well, except there's a couple other bridges also blocking port access to the ocean.

I believe the bridge was mainly used as a bypass for trucks getting around Baltimore. I don’t know the % but if you are adding 35k more vehicles to I-95 through downtown Baltimore, that’s going to be an issue.

Classification societies know who pays them, but having multiple friends who work for American Bureau of Shipping, aka ABS, the America classification society, I firmly believe they have morals. I bet you’ll hear a lot about ABS as the investigation goes on.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[LongShortLong]

I believe the bridge was mainly used as a bypass for trucks getting around Baltimore. I don’t know the % but if you are adding 35k more vehicles to I-95 through downtown Baltimore, that’s going to be an issue.

So, the simple solution may not work. As it often doesn't.

To restate the problem - cargo ships keep getting bigger, so rebuilding the Key bridge may cause its own problem by blocking future port growth. We need both higher bridges and deeper shipping channels to handle the future's bigger ships (and the present biggest ships for many ports). Perhaps the long term answer is new ports outside the bridges and in naturally deeper water.

eta: "what is going with shipping" episode references a bunch of sources with info about shipping and this accident
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rxKQ8Tr94s

[dunfree]

So, the simple solution may not work. As it often doesn't.

To restate the problem - cargo ships keep getting bigger, so rebuilding the Key bridge may cause its own problem by blocking future port growth. We need both higher bridges and deeper shipping channels to handle the future's bigger ships (and the present biggest ships for many ports). Perhaps the long term answer is new ports outside the bridges and in naturally deeper water.

eta: "what is going with shipping" episode references a bunch of sources with info about shipping and this accident
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rxKQ8Tr94s

there’s a huge brown field on the other fucking side of the bridge they want to turn into a cargo terminal, sparrow’s point. And anything going to Baltimore has to go under the Chesapeake bay bridge (same air draft). Most of the good harbors are already taken, populated, connected to infrastructure like roads and rail, unless you want to crazy Cold War and start using nukes to excavate a new one?

[BmillsSkier]

Might want to check the math on that bridge project. 2 inches a day works out to over 100 feet in common core math. Same with the new math if they're old school. That said, an extra 100 feet should be tall enough for a few decades worth of bigger ships. Though not if they switch to green energy extra tall tall ships.

Not my math by any means. The AP article I posted subsequently states the 2” daily turns (twists of the cable) equals 20+ vertical feet. The Port Master told us 24’. YMMV.

[skibrd]

So, the simple solution may not work. As it often doesn't.

To restate the problem - cargo ships keep getting bigger, so rebuilding the Key bridge may cause its own problem by blocking future port growth. We need both higher bridges and deeper shipping channels to handle the future's bigger ships (and the present biggest ships for many ports). Perhaps the long term answer is new ports outside the bridges and in naturally deeper water.

eta: "what is going with shipping" episode references a bunch of sources with info about shipping and this accident
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rxKQ8Tr94s

Sal makes awesome videos and always has. He’s one of the best at giving you just the facts.

You are spot on, now go find waterfront land to build a said terminals. In Los Angeles, you can’t not expand the terminal, if you want to add 500 acres in one direction you need to turn 500 acres into wilderness/wildlife land. There is no where in the NYC area to build/expand the port with out taking the land from someone. Same in Oakland and Seattle.

You also need to look at the train and interstate routes. Why were cities built where they were? Why were highways and railroads built to certain spots? LA is simple, it’s an oil town (look it up if you don’t believe me but LAs money comes from oil). SF/Oakland because it’s the only safe harbor between LA and Seattle. So what you are suggesting is rerouting trillions of dollars of infrastructure. I’m not against it, but let’s maintain and upgrade what we have currently? When security experts and engineers say build dolphins and upgrade bridges, maybe listen?

I bet when the Key Bridge is rebuild the state of Maryland will raise the Bay bridge too. She’s getting old and expanding the port of Baltimore is huge.


I’m trying to not have the sarcasm come through, and I have to remember that just because some of these things that I think are common knowledge, are actually not because not everyone has spent their career in transportation. Sorry.

Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[ötzi]

there’s a huge brown field on the other fucking side of the bridge they want to turn into a cargo terminal, sparrow’s point...

Yeah at one point (through the '60's) that was the biggest steel mill in the world, Bethlehem Steel's Sparrows Point Works, then it was a giant brownfield. But because of the steel mill, highway, rail, power and ocean transport all converge right there. Now there's quite a bit of new stuff there, including a huge Amazon facility, a big FedEx hub, Under Armour's main distribution hub, and VAG's biggest facility on the East Coast (maybe the country, I don't know), among others.


"Among recently announced additions is Niagara Bottling, one of the nation’s leading private beverage manufacturers, which will complete a 600,000 square foot manufacturing facility; McCormick & Company’s plans for a 1.8-million square foot distribution center; BMW’s announced opening of its vehicle distribution center; and United Safety Technology’s plans for a $350 million facility designed to increase healthcare supply chain resiliency and creating a projected 2,000 jobs."

With all that and the fact that almost all North/South hazmat traffic on the East Coast goes through there, they kinda need a bridge there.

[sb]

[LongShortLong]

NTSB preliminary report is out. Here's one take:



tldr: crew wasn't drunk, no fuck ups identified. No mechanical failure identified. Fuel ok. Breakers tripped and were reset and other breakers tripped, and emergency gen started, and backup gen kicked in. Main engine shuts down automatically if either high/low voltage trips. They were adrift with limited or no steering depending what's tripped or off. No conclusions yet on why the breakers tripped (repeatedly). Unclear if a faster electrical recovery would have helped or they were doomed once the main engine shut off.

The early story about electric failures in port appear due to maintenance and unrelated to the incident.

---
Looks like swiss cheese to me. Unprotected bridge. Very large ship. Electrical failure at bad time. Ship redundancies inadequate. Once the engine stopped a crash was likely. No port/ship procedures to compensate for crashing ships.

Worth fixing? Depends how much the fix costs versus cost * likelihood of occasional failure.

[LongShortLong]

Chief Makoi's take. Someone who actually works in a ship's engine room.



tldr: same, it broke.

[Toadman]

In conclusion, shit happens.

[MultiVerse]

FWIW, at around the ten minute mark in the second vid Chief MAKOi says he thinks the loss of power might have been caused by a fuel problem with the big diesel generators, not the main propulsion engine itself. Whether any fuel problem was caused by the fuel or more likely an electrical fault is still undetermined.

The crew is apparently still onboard the ship and have remained onboard this entire time. Their visas expired in the aftermath of the accident and the NTSB has their cell phones. Not fun.

[skibrd]

They were given new cell phones.

It’s not uncommon for crews to stay on board for long stints.

The USA won’t sign giving mariners longer visas. I forgot the details, I’m sure someone will remind me.

[XXX-er]

I watched a life on a container ship thing and they can unload/ load and be motoring back in < 24hrs and they would have been working thru that time at the dock so no time off

[skibrd]

I watched a life on a container ship thing and they can unload/ load and be motoring back in < 24hrs and they would have been working thru that time at the dock so no time off

That was my life for 6 years. I’ve been all over the Pacific, have not been ashore anywhere. Well went out for dinner once in Naha, Japan. I’ve probably been to Yokohama a dozen times for work, had to fly there for a ski trip to finally be a tourist. Same story with a few stops in China and Korea. If I’m not working my required 8 hours, I’m either eating, sleeping, or working overtime cause I’m on a ship to make money. That’s just how life is on board for a lot of us.

Two exceptions were both on car carriers. First when we were at the dock in Busan, South Korea for 2 weeks doing a project for the US Government. Then I was able to get ashore for a bit each day. The second assistant engineer was nearly married to a buy me drink hooker after two weeks of blowing his paycheck at the bar every night. Second was when we took a load of cars to Australia. The captain made sure we all went ashore for a bit to explore because who knew when we would make it back there. That was super cool. He was extremely demanding, but working for him was easy because he knew to look out for his people and get them time off when needed. I always brought him back bags of Starbucks coffee, which surprised him when he realized I didn’t drink coffee. Took him 3 months to figure that out hahah, it was well worth the $20 to keep him happier than normal.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[PB]

That was my life for 6 years. I’ve been all over the Pacific, have not been ashore anywhere. Well went out for dinner once in Naha, Japan. I’ve probably been to Yokohama a dozen times for work, had to fly there for a ski trip to finally be a tourist. Same story with a few stops in China and Korea. If I’m not working my required 8 hours, I’m either eating, sleeping, or working overtime cause I’m on a ship to make money. That’s just how life is on board for a lot of us.

Two exceptions were both on car carriers. First when we were at the dock in Busan, South Korea for 2 weeks doing a project for the US Government. Then I was able to get ashore for a bit each day. The second assistant engineer was nearly married to a buy me drink hooker after two weeks of blowing his paycheck at the bar every night. Second was when we took a load of cars to Australia. The captain made sure we all went ashore for a bit to explore because who knew when we would make it back there. That was super cool. He was extremely demanding, but working for him was easy because he knew to look out for his people and get them time off when needed. I always brought him back bags of Starbucks coffee, which surprised him when he realized I didn’t drink coffee. Took him 3 months to figure that out hahah, it was well worth the $20 to keep him happier than normal.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Respect.