Key bridge in Baltimore collapses after cargo ship crashes into it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let me guess. This is probably all the result of poor maintenance of the ship to save a few $ to minorly boost profit. The ship has an electrical failure and loses a control as a result, causing this fiasco.

It was probably consultants who prescribed reduced maintenance of the ship to save on costs that resulted in this. It's entirely their MO like the train crash disaster in Ohio where they proposed to cut staff and maintenance to the bone.

I literally watched a West Wing episode two days ago with flashbacks to when Sam was a corporate lawyer and helped a shipping company buy a crappy ship, that ended up running aground in North Carolina and leaking.

I absolutely thought of that episode as soon as I heard about the accident this morning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I live on the ESMD on the Bay and according to my navy and coast guard friends out here: the boat was experiencing repeated power failures from the short time it was released from the tugs after it left the port. Without power the navigation system won’t work and you cannot steer it and hence the boat will drift. The crew then tried to force the throttle to get it back on course and avoid a collision which is why there is thick black smoke seen coming from the boat before it gets to the bridge. The boat did contact MTA/the bridge which has its headquarters at the north end of the bridge in Dundalk to indicate they believed it would collide with the bridge but there wasn’t enough time IRT to then close the bridge to traffic before it was struck.

The ship was FULL of thousands (yes, thousands) of containers. The weight is incredible. You cannot do sharp turns or sudden stops on this. It also is so heavy it would do this to almost any bridge if collided.

Every single container ship that sails on the Bay, anywhere from Virginia Beach to Baltimore, must have a local bay captain on board while it’s on the bay to navigate the ship. There was one on this ship as well.

Ships are being re-routed to the port of Philadelphia.

Why the heck would the tugs release the ship knowing that it was having electrical issues and a huge bridge to imminently navigate?! And why isn’t that bridge considered to be within the harbor?!

I've been corresponding with my dad who is retired from the shipping industry. He said the tugs for unberthing had left before the ship started losing power. And then there was no time for them to come back.

Why wouldn't the tugs routinely stay with a ship until it had cleared the bridge and any other significant obstacles in the harbor?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does there seem to be any foul play? Terrorism that caused the power and propulsion to go out?

No.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I live on the ESMD on the Bay and according to my navy and coast guard friends out here: the boat was experiencing repeated power failures from the short time it was released from the tugs after it left the port. Without power the navigation system won’t work and you cannot steer it and hence the boat will drift. The crew then tried to force the throttle to get it back on course and avoid a collision which is why there is thick black smoke seen coming from the boat before it gets to the bridge. The boat did contact MTA/the bridge which has its headquarters at the north end of the bridge in Dundalk to indicate they believed it would collide with the bridge but there wasn’t enough time IRT to then close the bridge to traffic before it was struck.

The ship was FULL of thousands (yes, thousands) of containers. The weight is incredible. You cannot do sharp turns or sudden stops on this. It also is so heavy it would do this to almost any bridge if collided.

Every single container ship that sails on the Bay, anywhere from Virginia Beach to Baltimore, must have a local bay captain on board while it’s on the bay to navigate the ship. There was one on this ship as well.

Ships are being re-routed to the port of Philadelphia.

Thanks for posting this. Does anyone know why the ship wouldn’t just drop anchor in this case?

It wouldn't do much good. 95,000 tonnes in motion is not easy to stop

So these ships are too big to fail? Great.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where will the cruise ships go?

Is this a joke? I would think the last thing on any decent person's mind this morning would be cruise ship routes? Prayers for the victims and for strength of the rescue crews.

Why would you say that? People aren't asking about summer cruise plans, they are asking about the people current on ships that were supposed to return to Baltimore in the next few days. It's a legitimate thing to think about. Clearly not as pressing as the people in the water, but not some frivolous vacation planning.

+1. Plus it's a significant industry with a stake in this catastrophe that many people wouldn't initially think of.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even if you got out of the car, you are in the middle of a huge river! How are you swimming to safety? What about the infant in the car seat?

I was actually thinking about this. Maybe you could grab onto and climb a little up one of the collapsed pilings? I doubt you can save an infant but maybe an older child if they can swim. Has anyone that was on the bridge in a car been found alive???

The suction created by a huge bridge going into the water would make it extremely difficult to swim, let alone hang on to anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I live on the ESMD on the Bay and according to my navy and coast guard friends out here: the boat was experiencing repeated power failures from the short time it was released from the tugs after it left the port. Without power the navigation system won’t work and you cannot steer it and hence the boat will drift. The crew then tried to force the throttle to get it back on course and avoid a collision which is why there is thick black smoke seen coming from the boat before it gets to the bridge. The boat did contact MTA/the bridge which has its headquarters at the north end of the bridge in Dundalk to indicate they believed it would collide with the bridge but there wasn’t enough time IRT to then close the bridge to traffic before it was struck.

The ship was FULL of thousands (yes, thousands) of containers. The weight is incredible. You cannot do sharp turns or sudden stops on this. It also is so heavy it would do this to almost any bridge if collided.

Every single container ship that sails on the Bay, anywhere from Virginia Beach to Baltimore, must have a local bay captain on board while it’s on the bay to navigate the ship. There was one on this ship as well.

Ships are being re-routed to the port of Philadelphia.

Thanks for posting this. Does anyone know why the ship wouldn’t just drop anchor in this case?

It wouldn't do much good. 95,000 tonnes in motion is not easy to stop

There are also innumerable cables and pipelines that run across the bottom. Dragging an anchor would cause tremendous additional damage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does there seem to be any foul play? Terrorism that caused the power and propulsion to go out?

No.

There is no way they can credibly rile out terrorism at this early point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even if you got out of the car, you are in the middle of a huge river! How are you swimming to safety? What about the infant in the car seat?

I was actually thinking about this. Maybe you could grab onto and climb a little up one of the collapsed pilings? I doubt you can save an infant but maybe an older child if they can swim. Has anyone that was on the bridge in a car been found alive???

The suction created by a huge bridge going into the water would make it extremely difficult to swim, let alone hang on to anything.

I'd image that you would get knocked unconscious by a steel beam on the way down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Regarding cruise ships- I imagine they'll be anchored and tender into the harbor. While I think that would be a nuisance, I don't think it's going to stop cruise ships. Supplying them (food, garbage) will be hard, but there are other stops at other ports that this could potentially happen.

Container ships on the other hand need all the infrastructure of a harbor with cranes. They'll have to be rerouted elsewhere.

Tender thousands of passengers and their luggage to shore??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope Wes Moore calls Gavin Newsom and ask him how they got the freeway in LA re-opened in record time after last fall's devastating fire.

Biggest priority right now is to clear the debris ASAP and get the shipping lanes re-opened. That can probably happen in a week or two by commandeering recovery equipment from Norfolk, Philly, and Newark.

I am incredibly impressed with what both Newsom and Josh Shapiro were able to accomplish after their respective interstate disasters but this is a hundred times more complicated and I hesitate to compare them.

Agree. These cases both give hope that the long-term effects to shipping and traffic can be mitigated.

I hope so. It took five years to build the original bridge.
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/uaRZrS8Le9X44DXS/?mibextid=WC7FNe

[Anonymous]

Incredibly sad—there was a construction crew working on the bridge when it was hit, six workers are missing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Regarding cruise ships- I imagine they'll be anchored and tender into the harbor. While I think that would be a nuisance, I don't think it's going to stop cruise ships. Supplying them (food, garbage) will be hard, but there are other stops at other ports that this could potentially happen.

Container ships on the other hand need all the infrastructure of a harbor with cranes. They'll have to be rerouted elsewhere.

Tender thousands of passengers and their luggage to shore??

I was on a cruise boat years ago that started leaking oil. They considered flying those of us continuing on the boat back home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I live on the ESMD on the Bay and according to my navy and coast guard friends out here: the boat was experiencing repeated power failures from the short time it was released from the tugs after it left the port. Without power the navigation system won’t work and you cannot steer it and hence the boat will drift. The crew then tried to force the throttle to get it back on course and avoid a collision which is why there is thick black smoke seen coming from the boat before it gets to the bridge. The boat did contact MTA/the bridge which has its headquarters at the north end of the bridge in Dundalk to indicate they believed it would collide with the bridge but there wasn’t enough time IRT to then close the bridge to traffic before it was struck.

The ship was FULL of thousands (yes, thousands) of containers. The weight is incredible. You cannot do sharp turns or sudden stops on this. It also is so heavy it would do this to almost any bridge if collided.

Every single container ship that sails on the Bay, anywhere from Virginia Beach to Baltimore, must have a local bay captain on board while it’s on the bay to navigate the ship. There was one on this ship as well.

Ships are being re-routed to the port of Philadelphia.

Thanks for posting this. Does anyone know why the ship wouldn’t just drop anchor in this case?

It takes at least 20 min to drop an anchor on a container ship. And likely it was already too close to the bridge.

[Anonymous]

Is the tunnel privately owned? I would imagine the fed govt would cover the lost income from tolls in order to keep all the additional traffic flowing as quickly as possible.