Key bridge in Baltimore collapses after cargo ship crashes into it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Given how little we know at this point, your post is like taking an x-ray into your brain. All of your biases and world view are exposed. Just so you know…

Dp- maybe, but I wouldn’t bet against their theory. How many times in the past decade do we need to see that deregulated private industry will be the death of us?

I don't think the Port Authority is a private industry.

[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??

The cruise ships that serve Baltimore are not very large.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

Are you suggesting they remove the tolls from the tunnel? I haven't seen anything about plans to do that but it's an interesting idea.
This will also probably make Bay Bridge traffic even worse on summer weekends - people heading up to NJ/NY may divert to the bay bridge instead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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??

The cruise ships that serve Baltimore are not very large.

There’s also not that many ships. Only three lines even serve Baltimore.

[Anonymous]

I read that one person was pulled from the water with zero injuries and another was pulled and went to a trauma care center. I'm still hoping there's more like the first. The water was 48 degrees, so not freezing luckily.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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??

The cruise ships that serve Baltimore are not very large.

There seem to be two that are out at sea now, and I couldn't confirm any in port. They must have contingency plans for port closures from storm damage, earthquakes, civil insurrection etc that would apply here.

[Anonymous]

Here's another video that includes about five minutes of footage before the crash. You can clearly see the boat's lights going off then on multiple times.

It seems to be moving very slowly when it collides with bridge's support pillar. I'm guessing they were blasting the air horn violently to try to warn anyone on the bridge to evacuate.

You see cars and trucks traveling on the bridge just before collapse and you hold your breath. There's at least 12-15 vehicles that safely crossed the bridge just prior to collapse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Given how little we know at this point, your post is like taking an x-ray into your brain. All of your biases and world view are exposed. Just so you know…

Dp- maybe, but I wouldn’t bet against their theory. How many times in the past decade do we need to see that deregulated private industry will be the death of us?

I don't think the Port Authority is a private industry.

What? The Port Authority doesn't maintain the ship.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I read that one person was pulled from the water with zero injuries and another was pulled and went to a trauma care center. I'm still hoping there's more like the first. The water was 48 degrees, so not freezing luckily.

You last about 1-2 hours in that water temperature. That is really cold.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

This is a weird post, but the tunnels are not privately owned but they’re owned and operated by the Maryland Transportation Authority. And tolls don’t impede traffic anymore since Maryland has done away with tollbooths entirely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here's another video that includes about five minutes of footage before the crash. You can clearly see the boat's lights going off then on multiple times.

It seems to be moving very slowly when it collides with bridge's support pillar. I'm guessing they were blasting the air horn violently to try to warn anyone on the bridge to evacuate.

You see cars and trucks traveling on the bridge just before collapse and you hold your breath. There's at least 12-15 vehicles that safely crossed the bridge just prior to collapse.

I read that the ship pilot did radio to MTA that they were at risk of hitting the bridge, but there just wasn't time to do shut down the bridge before the collision.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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??

The cruise ships that serve Baltimore are not very large.

Yep. And they already tender thousands of passengers to ports of call regularly. This would just require additional boats for luggage, which is no small undertaking. However, if you can't go past the bridge, I'm not sure where you could tender passengers to a dock? This will likely be rerouted. Baltimore cruise ships are already much smaller than the ones in NY harbor (I believe this was due to the size limitations of fitting under the bridge)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I read that one person was pulled from the water with zero injuries and another was pulled and went to a trauma care center. I'm still hoping there's more like the first. The water was 48 degrees, so not freezing luckily.

Probably fell into the water at an on- or off-ramp to the bridge. So they didn't fall a great distance and the water is quite shallow next to the river's edge. Their car likely was not fully submerged if they were still sitting on the roadway in the water.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Given how little we know at this point, your post is like taking an x-ray into your brain. All of your biases and world view are exposed. Just so you know…

Dp- maybe, but I wouldn’t bet against their theory. How many times in the past decade do we need to see that deregulated private industry will be the death of us?

I don't think the Port Authority is a private industry.

What? The Port Authority doesn't maintain the ship.

NP. I would say that port authority is liable too. They let this ship with major electrical problems leave. They also were the ones steering the ship when this occurred.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t believe the state of our infrastructure is so bad that this would take out the WHOLE bridge. God bless the people who were driving on it at the time, there’s no way they will pull many survivors out of the river

I do not want to sound obnoxious but every single time I am traveling on a bridge over water I am always on alert and anticipate that I could end up in the water at any moment.

Same, it's a massive fear of mine. I actually wind down my window so I can get out if my car ends up in the water.
It's even worse now that I'm always driving with my toddler in her car seat in the back seat..

So sorry for those people who were on the bridge, it happened so quick

I wind up the windows and have this tool ready if we fall in the water.
I image that if you have the windows down, the water would flood the car with such force that you couldn't fight it and it would submerge the car more quickly.

Car Safety Hammer Set of 2... https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07MK2GNKD?ref=ppx_pop_mob_ap_share

NP. My understanding is that these don’t work with newer cars.