Baltimore bridge collapse

[PurpleTurtle]

Stick Legs said:

Loads of interesting stuff

I was waiting for you to join the thread. Fascinating insight!

[speedking31]

julian987R said:

BBC were at it too it seems.....

BBC Breakfast's Sally Nugent sparks fury as she makes awkward Baltimore Bridge error

https://www.express.co.uk/showbiz/tv-radio/1881651...

Not an error. ~800 m collapsed out of a total elevated length of ~2800 m = partial.

[asfault]

Stick Legs said:

808 Estate said:

Question for the shipping experts.

Regarding vessels now stuck within the harbour, would they considering unloading these and ship the containers by road/rail to another port and reload them to a different vessel? Or would they sit it out hoping they might get part of the channel cleared in a month or two even if the Dali is still stuck there.

That’s exactly what will happen.

Similarly any cargo for that port will have to go into other ports & be transhipped.

Every single person in the world will feel this event, be it via cost of goods, delays of products, cost of insurance etc etc.

Its exactly what thebgovernments of the world don't want. An inflation sustaining event.
Will shipping rates head back north on this?

[bitchstewie]

julian987R said:

BBC were at it too it seems.....

BBC Breakfast's Sally Nugent sparks fury as she makes awkward Baltimore Bridge error

https://www.express.co.uk/showbiz/tv-radio/1881651...

You really do need to stop reading that st.

People are in the water dead and what's the Express whining about?

Oh my god Sally Nugent said "partially" during a live broadcast of a live and changing situation.

[hidetheelephants]

bhstewie said:

You really do need to stop reading that st.

People are in the water dead and what's the Express whining about?

Oh my god Sally Nugent said "partially" during a live broadcast of a live and changing situation.

It's a reasonable use of the word partial, so what's the problem? Ah, I see; it's the Daily Express, the newspaper for people who find the Daily Mail too factual.

[LivLL]

808 Estate said:

Thanks.
I guess there are some in the insurance industry that are bracing themselves for a bum fking of epic proportions.

Makes a change from them doing the same to us!

[Digga]

Stick Legs said:

That’s exactly what will happen.

Similarly any cargo for that port will have to go into other ports & be transhipped.

Every single person in the world will feel this event, be it via cost of goods, delays of products, cost of insurance etc etc.

I can see changes to service, maintenance, crews and port procedures. None of which will make shipping cheaper, just (hopefully) safer.

The container ship last week in Turkey was bad enough. Three dockside cranes toppled and numerous containers and plant damaged.

[Pupp]

Another one catching up this morning; the contextual input from those with so much industry experience and insight is really appreciated. Thanks for posting.

[Byker28i]

The ship sent out a mayday, allowing them to close the bridge.

However, doesn't stop all the nutters coming out



And of course - Lara Logan, it was a terrorist attack
https://twitter.com/i/status/1772756706482647502

Edited by Byker28i on Wednesday 27th March 06:43

[biggles330d]

asfault said:

Stick Legs said:

808 Estate said:

Question for the shipping experts.

Regarding vessels now stuck within the harbour, would they considering unloading these and ship the containers by road/rail to another port and reload them to a different vessel? Or would they sit it out hoping they might get part of the channel cleared in a month or two even if the Dali is still stuck there.

That’s exactly what will happen.

Similarly any cargo for that port will have to go into other ports & be transhipped.

Every single person in the world will feel this event, be it via cost of goods, delays of products, cost of insurance etc etc.

Its exactly what thebgovernments of the world don't want. An inflation sustaining event.
Will shipping rates head back north on this?

Can't see it myself. It's not like the Suez canal is blocked, or the whole industry is re-routing around Africa to avoid pirates and missiles in the Red Sea.
Baltimore is a big port, but it is one Port in the US, and the 10th largest. There will be some short term disruption but it won't be long before freight is re-routed to alternatives. It's like suggesting the global freight in the UK would increase if Teesport was closed for a while.
Freight in the port will get shuttled off to an alternative hub by road or rail. Freight to the port will run elsewhere. Vessels in the port though, well they aren't going anywhere fast. And impact on the port itself will be very large until the blockage is cleared and a new bridge is built. I suspect it will take years for Baltimore port to recover - thats where the biggest impact will be.

Looking at the maps, I'd suggest the bigger impact will be on the functioning of a large coal port in Baltimore, which might be more challenging to replicate.

[Vipers]

May have been mentioned but someone from the port said it was having power problems even before it sailed.

[Alickadoo]

Stick Legs said:

808 Estate said:

Question for the shipping experts.

Regarding vessels now stuck within the harbour, would they considering unloading these and ship the containers by road/rail to another port and reload them to a different vessel? Or would they sit it out hoping they might get part of the channel cleared in a month or two even if the Dali is still stuck there.

That’s exactly what will happen.

Similarly any cargo for that port will have to go into other ports & be transhipped.

Every single person in the world will feel this event, be it via cost of goods, delays of products, cost of insurance etc etc.

So, in a nutshell, we are all doomed?

[Prolex-UK]

Alickadoo said:

Stick Legs said:

808 Estate said:

Question for the shipping experts.

Regarding vessels now stuck within the harbour, would they considering unloading these and ship the containers by road/rail to another port and reload them to a different vessel? Or would they sit it out hoping they might get part of the channel cleared in a month or two even if the Dali is still stuck there.

That’s exactly what will happen.

Similarly any cargo for that port will have to go into other ports & be transhipped.

Every single person in the world will feel this event, be it via cost of goods, delays of products, cost of insurance etc etc.

So, in a nutshell, we are all doomed?

Yes Fraser

[Byker28i]

biggles330d said:

asfault said:

Stick Legs said:

808 Estate said:

Question for the shipping experts.

Regarding vessels now stuck within the harbour, would they considering unloading these and ship the containers by road/rail to another port and reload them to a different vessel? Or would they sit it out hoping they might get part of the channel cleared in a month or two even if the Dali is still stuck there.

That’s exactly what will happen.

Similarly any cargo for that port will have to go into other ports & be transhipped.

Every single person in the world will feel this event, be it via cost of goods, delays of products, cost of insurance etc etc.

Its exactly what thebgovernments of the world don't want. An inflation sustaining event.
Will shipping rates head back north on this?

Can't see it myself. It's not like the Suez canal is blocked, or the whole industry is re-routing around Africa to avoid pirates and missiles in the Red Sea.
Baltimore is a big port, but it is one Port in the US, and the 10th largest. There will be some short term disruption but it won't be long before freight is re-routed to alternatives. It's like suggesting the global freight in the UK would increase if Teesport was closed for a while.
Freight in the port will get shuttled off to an alternative hub by road or rail. Freight to the port will run elsewhere. Vessels in the port though, well they aren't going anywhere fast. And impact on the port itself will be very large until the blockage is cleared and a new bridge is built. I suspect it will take years for Baltimore port to recover - thats where the biggest impact will be.

Looking at the maps, I'd suggest the bigger impact will be on the functioning of a large coal port in Baltimore, which might be more challenging to replicate.

Biden has stated the US govt will pay for the new bridge. Surely it will take some time to design and build?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/03/26/...

[Stick Legs]

biggles330d said:

asfault said:

Stick Legs said:

808 Estate said:

Question for the shipping experts.

Regarding vessels now stuck within the harbour, would they considering unloading these and ship the containers by road/rail to another port and reload them to a different vessel? Or would they sit it out hoping they might get part of the channel cleared in a month or two even if the Dali is still stuck there.

That’s exactly what will happen.

Similarly any cargo for that port will have to go into other ports & be transhipped.

Every single person in the world will feel this event, be it via cost of goods, delays of products, cost of insurance etc etc.

Its exactly what thebgovernments of the world don't want. An inflation sustaining event.
Will shipping rates head back north on this?

Can't see it myself. It's not like the Suez canal is blocked, or the whole industry is re-routing around Africa to avoid pirates and missiles in the Red Sea.
Baltimore is a big port, but it is one Port in the US, and the 10th largest. There will be some short term disruption but it won't be long before freight is re-routed to alternatives. It's like suggesting the global freight in the UK would increase if Teesport was closed for a while.
Freight in the port will get shuttled off to an alternative hub by road or rail. Freight to the port will run elsewhere. Vessels in the port though, well they aren't going anywhere fast. And impact on the port itself will be very large until the blockage is cleared and a new bridge is built. I suspect it will take years for Baltimore port to recover - thats where the biggest impact will be.

Looking at the maps, I'd suggest the bigger impact will be on the functioning of a large coal port in Baltimore, which might be more challenging to replicate.

private fraser said:

were all doomed

Not exactly, when I say we will all feel this ships delayed will result in less tonnage int he market, so freight rates will rise. You can you bottom dollar that the insurance industry and their share holders will want to recoup their money asap. So insurance will go up across the board.
It may only be a tenner here & there, but we will all pay for it somehow.

[Vipers]

Interesting

BBC News - Fears of disruption to global supply chains after Baltimore bridge crash
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-6867237...

[Hard-Drive]

Stick Legs said:

There are a lot of comments here speculating about what has happened and why.

I'm only chipping in my 2 cents because I feel that I can at least answer some questions, and provide a little guidance until the final report comes out.
I have worked on Containerships, I have been a Pilot, I have a Master's Qualification and am a Ship's Captain.

Caveat: I have only seen the images you have all seen, it has been a VERY long time since I last worked in the US on Containerships so some things have doubtless changed.
My comments here are only designed to answer FAQ's and not to further speculation or claim that somehow 'I am right'.
If there is something I have missed or someone knows more or I am just flat wrong on procedures that may have changed since I last read the regs I will of course defer.

PILOTS-

The vessel is under pilotage, I believe 2 pilots, which is normal for a Ultra Large Container Ship (which is how ports classify anything >360m in length).

In the UK the vessel must be under the CONDUCT of a licenced Pilot. Conduct is a funny word, the Master may have the control of the vessel and be 'driving' it themselves but providing they are listening to the Pilot and complying with directions then they have not assumed conduct. This is 'the Conn'. Not as is popularly imagined 'Control'. I cannot imagine the US is different and the myth that it's Master's orders & Pilots advice is out of date.
If the Master is unhappy with the Pilot's direction they can request another Pilot and the ship will be taken to a place of safety and anchored to await another Pilot. Similarly if the Pilot feels the Captain is ignoring them they will warn the Captain and if still ignored will simply state over the Radio to Port Control that the vessel is 'No longer under my conduct'. This has the effect in the UK at least that the vessel is now no longer insured, and the Master has committed an offence under the UK Pilotage act.

Big ships (stuff >140m usually) the Pilot gives verbal orders and the bridge team operate the controls. The Captain stands with the Pilot and either translates or confirms the orders given. This Bridge team dynamic is fragile but works well and is respected the world over.

In this case the Senior Pilot would have the Conn, the Master would be monitoring the passage and working with the Bridge team.
The Junior or Second Pilot would be monitoring the actions of the First Pilot and doing things like radio comms and liaising with tugs.

In many cases, with a long passage the Pilots will swap roles half way through as Piloting really big stuff is incredibly mentally draining.

THE VESSEL-

Blackouts can occur on vessels and it's deeply unpleasant. In this case, where she appears to lose everything I suspect it's a switchboard fault.

On sea passage a ship like this will be running her main engine at constant revs so a turbo or shaft alternator will provide the electrical power for the ship.
Main engine will be in the 60-80MW range, low speed 2 stroke diesel running on heavy fuel oil. These engines are direct drive and are reversed by stopping them, changing the firing order (by moving the fuel pump cam on the old ships, electronically now) and re starting with the crank running in the opposite direction.

On approach to port she will require variable revs and as the propellor is direct drive from the engine, the engine is changed over to gas oil (what you know as diesel) and also a dedicated generator is run to provide electricity for the ship, and another generator is on standby with water & lube oil pre heated and circulating to come on the board asap in the event of a black out. These generators will be in the 4-6MW range.

There is then an emergency generator, in another space to the engine room, that provides enough power to run the winches, lights, steering gear. This should auto start within 15 seconds of a blackout.

There is also a standby 24v battery supply for things like emergency lighting & control systems.

The only engine that provides propulsion is the main engine.

Anchors can be released even when deadship by simply loosening the brake. For port arrival and departure a couple of men should be standing by forward with a radio for this sole purpose.

The length of time this vessel was blacked out suggests to me that either the engine room was set up and manned correctly and the systems failed, or that the systems were operative and the vessel had not been configured correctly for port arrival, generators on standby mode etc etc.

THE PUFF OF BLACK SMOKE / STEERING TOWARDS THE BRIDGE / TRANSVERSE THRUST -

On the video the vessel appears to steer towards the nearest bridge parapet and there is a big cloud of black exhaust smoke.
My best guess is that when the blackout occurred the Pilot ordered, or the Master decided to initiate, an astern command on the main engine to slow the vessel. Single engined ships running ahead exhibit good directional stability, they go in a straight line mostly.

When going astern that huge propellor with thousands of horsepower turning it acts like a paddlewheel. It is conventional for ship's to have 'right hand acting' propulsion, most do and these big containerships almost always do, I have never encountered one that doesn't.

Right hand acting implies that when viewed from astern the propellor turns clockwise, so when the propellor direction is reversed it will rotate anti clockwise. Without 360m of hull ahead of it to resist the side forces it causes a sideways moment, this is referred to as transverse thrust and you can use it to your advantage when manoeuvring, even with tugs if you swing the vessel bow to stbd instead of bow to port a kick astern on the main engine will help her round.

The puff of smoke and the subsequent bow to stbd motion says to me that the vessel went astern, a big engine movement, perhaps full astern, at that point. I would have to be convinced that wasn't what happened and is the only thing I am 100% confident on.

The size of the puff of smoke implies that it was the main engine, no 4MW generator is kicking that out on start up. A 60-80MW engine will.

I have a suspicion that if they had not gone astern, and had continued though the bridge and restored power that this wouldn't have been anything other than a near miss report.

ANCHORS -

One should have been released for no other reason than to allow your defence lawyer to prove you did everything in you power to stop the vessel.
In reality it wouldn't have stopped >150000 tonnes moving at 10kts.

Thank you for reading.

Edited by Stick Legs on Tuesday 26th March 17:01

Fascinating stuff, thank you for posting. As a Solent "WAFI"* who sees these things regularly I was also fairly convinced they'd gone hard astern too but I'd not thought about the prop walk/near miss element...yikes! I also had no idea that they actually stopped and reversed the engine and there's no gearbox...I guess that's why tugs are always involved in case it won't start again?

What about the big cross channel ferries I see manoeuvring so precisely in harbour, I don't think they are azimuth drive, do they have gearboxes?

Either way, I'll be giving them an even wider berth this season...thanks for the insight.

• WAFI...for the uninitiated...Wind Assisted F***ing Idiot

[Stick Legs]

Hard-Drive said:

Fascinating stuff, thank you for posting. As a Solent "WAFI"* who sees these things regularly I was also fairly convinced they'd gone hard astern too but I'd not thought about the prop walk/near miss element...yikes! I also had no idea that they actually stopped and reversed the engine and there's no gearbox...I guess that's why tugs are always involved in case it won't start again?

What about the big cross channel ferries I see manoeuvring so precisely in harbour, I don't think they are azimuth drive, do they have gearboxes?

Either way, I'll be giving them an even wider berth this season...thanks for the insight.

• WAFI...for the uninitiated...Wind Assisted F***ing Idiot

Very small ferries, like Whitelink & Red Funnel may use Voith propulsors.

Bigger cross channel ferries, small tankers, small container ships, dredgers etc etc use controllable pitch propellors connected to constant speed engines. Bow thrusters and sometimes stern thrusters too, these also usually have high lift rudders, and in many cases twin screws for enhanced manoeuvrability.

As regards recreational water users, just like cyclists it's only the inconsiderate or foolish that cause you concern when Piloting.

[aeropilot]

Byker28i said:

Biden has stated the US govt will pay for the new bridge. Surely it will take some time to design and build?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/03/26/...

They'll want the new one to be higher and have a wider span to create a larger shipping lane, so likely cable stay suspension bridge, so will be at least 3-4 years away I would have thought before a new one is open to traffic, even if the Federal Govt let the design contract asap - which they may well do (may have even already done so!)

[madbadger]

pinchmeimdreamin said:

How much would one of those spans weigh ?
Is it a case of cutting them into sections and using a floating crane ?

Biggest section we make in the UK is a 'jumbo' is 1T/m. At least equivalent of a few of them along the width + plate to join them all together. x 800m = a lot.