Carriers that go underneath the Key Bridge also have to go under the CBB. I’m sure they did consider a taller bridge but last year decided to keep what they have. What part isn’t clear? And this ship didn’t hit the bridge because it was too tall. |
Ok, let’s see. |
Infrastructure isn’t built for our lifetimes. If you think otherwise there’s a bridge in Brooklyn I’d like to sell you. |
Lol let’s raise a bridge that is tall enough. 😜 Are u guys this stupid. |
Time for MD to think big and plan for the future. Make Baltimore truly competitive by making the port accessible to Panamax ships. Raise the clearance of the new Key Bridge to 215 ft. And since the state is already planning a third span of the Bay Bridge, design a new wider span down there (8 lanes) with the same clearance of 215 ft — rendering the old bridges unnecessary and allowing for their removal. MD won’t get another chance like this for a few generations. |
Well, it’s time for the state to revisit this and invest in a plan that would provide enormous economic opportunities for Baltimore and the entire state. |
So when there is a boat that is considered vulnerable re height there are restrictions when it can go under CBB. Each bridge that goes under needs permission and it is monitored on the AA County side. Things like such as tide come into play. 2 years ago a HUGE crane had to sit in front of my house for almost a week because the tide and water levels kept changing and it couldn't get permission to pass and make it's way to the Baltimore port. The kind of crane that is used to offload containers from ships like these. And they didn't just let it pass when there was just "enough room" . They also closed both spans of the bridge before it was allowed to go. I am just bewildered by posters on here who have no clue how this Bay system works. |
boat |
If this was China, the bridge would be rebuilt by now.
Perhaps I say this in jest (probably more like a week or two rather than a few days) but watching the rebuilding will say a lot about America's capabilities. But I do have confidence the bridge will be rebuilt much faster than many are thinking. |
Is there sufficient capacity at the port? They aren't making more land if you raise the bridge. It would also be necessary to dredge deeper channels. The draft of the Panamax is right at the current channel depth. |
Hahahha. Waaayyyy too many lawyers in this area and on this board. Just let it go and stop being a lawyer for a few minutes. Search for your own link, maybe? |
I don't think people are suggesting they raise or rebuild the bay bridge.
But it's reasonable to think long-term with the bridge and perhaps build the key bridge taller. Then, at some point in the future when the bay bridge does need to be replaced, the new key bridge will already be higher. If you keep building to the lowest height, it will just be a vicious circle that will never increase. |
Were. Subjunctive. |
When I-95 in Philadelphia collapsed everyone here was sure the incompetent government would take years to fix it. It ended up being about 3 weeks. Bridges are obviously projects that take years, not weeks, but so far it seems like all of the right people and organizations are dedicated to rebuilding this as efficiently and effectively as possible. Sometimes it's OK to not assume the worst. |
That's a half-truth. It wasn't fixed. They backfilled the underpass to get it open quickly. The real fix will take much longer. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/heavily-traveled-i-95-is-set-to-reopen-less-than-two-weeks-after-deadly-collapse-in-philadelphia |