Baltimore bridge collapse
Discussion
blueg33 said:
Is this a one in a million accident or is it the result of a series of errors?
That's the same thing, an incident (there are no such things as accidents) is the culmination of a series of actions or inactions resulting in an unwanted outcome, or more rarely an unexpected positive result.sherbertdip said:
blueg33 said:
Is this a one in a million accident or is it the result of a series of errors?
That's the same thing, an incident (there are no such things as accidents) is the culmination of a series of actions or inactions resulting in an unwanted outcome, or more rarely an unexpected positive result.This disaster has reminded me of the General Rafael Urdaneta bridge that spans the neck of Lake Maracaibo, and links the city of Maracaibo (the centre of Venezuela’s oil industry) to the rest of the country. I lived in Maracaibo for a few years in the early seventies.
The bridge was built at great expense by the oil rich Venezuelan government and opened to international acclaim in 1962. About two years later it was struck by an oil tanker and a section of the bridge came down, causing seven fatalities.
The lake had previously been crossed by ferries, but these were scrapped after the bridge opened, and until reconstruction work had been completed there was no land route between Venezuela’s two major cities, Caracas and Maracaibo, save some entirely unsuitable roads through the Andes.
The bridge was built at great expense by the oil rich Venezuelan government and opened to international acclaim in 1962. About two years later it was struck by an oil tanker and a section of the bridge came down, causing seven fatalities.
The lake had previously been crossed by ferries, but these were scrapped after the bridge opened, and until reconstruction work had been completed there was no land route between Venezuela’s two major cities, Caracas and Maracaibo, save some entirely unsuitable roads through the Andes.
hidetheelephants said:
When the bridge was designed a big ship was 30k tonnes.
When the Victorians built bridges for railways they carried lighter loads. Most bridges have since been reassessed and strengthened. Similarly with Motorway bridges built in the 60s.Just because a bridge was designed 50-years ago does not mean it does not need to be reassessed to reflect the reality of changing circumstances.
Some questions need to be asked about risk assessments,
We are no better since the risk assessments done after the Marchioness sinking on the Thames showed that dredging had been within inches of striking some tube tunnels. What might have happened had the Thames got into the underground . . . .
Those interested in blackouts might want to Google Class 45 blackstart.
We are no better since the risk assessments done after the Marchioness sinking on the Thames showed that dredging had been within inches of striking some tube tunnels. What might have happened had the Thames got into the underground . . . .
Those interested in blackouts might want to Google Class 45 blackstart.
Digga said:
sherbertdip said:
blueg33 said:
Is this a one in a million accident or is it the result of a series of errors?
That's the same thing, an incident (there are no such things as accidents) is the culmination of a series of actions or inactions resulting in an unwanted outcome, or more rarely an unexpected positive result.Both incidents involved a ship hitting infrastructure, different series of events leading up to an unwanted result. All I was trying to show was that: A. nothing is an "accident" and, B. Yes it's as a result of a series of errors. I'm merely trying to help you understand how "incidents" or accidents if you wish to use that term occur.
I have no idea what wider issues you are referring to, can you expand on your thoughts about that?
Roofless Toothless said:
This disaster has reminded me of the General Rafael Urdaneta bridge that spans the neck of Lake Maracaibo, and links the city of Maracaibo (the centre of Venezuela’s oil industry) to the rest of the country. I lived in Maracaibo for a few years in the early seventies.
The bridge was built at great expense by the oil rich Venezuelan government and opened to international acclaim in 1962. About two years later it was struck by an oil tanker and a section of the bridge came down, causing seven fatalities.
The lake had previously been crossed by ferries, but these were scrapped after the bridge opened, and until reconstruction work had been completed there was no land route between Venezuela’s two major cities, Caracas and Maracaibo, save some entirely unsuitable roads through the Andes.
That’s a good point I wonder if some enterprising ferry companies will ply their trade across the water until the bridge is rebuilt?The bridge was built at great expense by the oil rich Venezuelan government and opened to international acclaim in 1962. About two years later it was struck by an oil tanker and a section of the bridge came down, causing seven fatalities.
The lake had previously been crossed by ferries, but these were scrapped after the bridge opened, and until reconstruction work had been completed there was no land route between Venezuela’s two major cities, Caracas and Maracaibo, save some entirely unsuitable roads through the Andes.
Is it a long diversion without the bridge?
hidetheelephants said:
When the bridge was designed a big ship was 30k tonnes.
RMS Queen Elizabeth (maiden voyage 1946) - 83,000 tonsRMS Queen Mary (maiden voyage 1936) - 77,000 tons
SS United States (maiden voyage 1952) - 45,000 tons
There was lots of stuff which was over 30,000 tons. Sorry.
Roofless Toothless said:
If I worked in Baltimore, but lived on the other side of the water, I’d be thinking I was well and truly fooked.
True, but for some roles I guess employers will be flexible and allow staff to work from home some days, as the pandemic did at least prove it was possible for many.RustyMX5 said:
hidetheelephants said:
When the bridge was designed a big ship was 30k tonnes.
RMS Queen Elizabeth (maiden voyage 1946) - 83,000 tonsRMS Queen Mary (maiden voyage 1936) - 77,000 tons
SS United States (maiden voyage 1952) - 45,000 tons
There was lots of stuff which was over 30,000 tons. Sorry.
I'm not sure you grasp what 'design criteria' means.
aeropilot said:
RustyMX5 said:
hidetheelephants said:
When the bridge was designed a big ship was 30k tonnes.
RMS Queen Elizabeth (maiden voyage 1946) - 83,000 tonsRMS Queen Mary (maiden voyage 1936) - 77,000 tons
SS United States (maiden voyage 1952) - 45,000 tons
There was lots of stuff which was over 30,000 tons. Sorry.
I'm not sure you grasp what 'design criteria' means.
k it. can't be arsedRustyMX5 said:
hidetheelephants said:
When the bridge was designed a big ship was 30k tonnes.
RMS Queen Elizabeth (maiden voyage 1946) - 83,000 tonsRMS Queen Mary (maiden voyage 1936) - 77,000 tons
SS United States (maiden voyage 1952) - 45,000 tons
There was lots of stuff which was over 30,000 tons. Sorry.
270m long, 2500 containers (TEU) 35000 tonnes.
Current large container ships:
400m long, 20000 containers, 150000 tonnes.
‘Liners’ are not comparable to cruise ships, their design parameters are completely different and the size of a cruise ship is misleading due to huge wasted space so everyone gets a balcony, no steerage class etc etc.
Also those liners had a power to weight ratio far in excess of a modern Container ship, multiple propellers etc etc.
Cargo vessels on the other hand have grown exponentially in weight and size.
270m - 400m is not just about a third bigger.
Look at the doubling the volume of a cube mathematical problem.
The current crop of Ultra Large Container Carriers are too big for the global infrastructure to cope with, as demonstrated by this incident & Suez.
They are operating on the limits of most ports, but while they continue to be financially and environmentally viable they will continue.
I suspect 400m / ~20k TEU is the limit. But I thought that at 360m.
Much like with Tankers in the 1970’s they will shrink back in size, prompted as ports introduce more limits to their operation such as escort towage or hard wind limits.
Black box timeline
On Wednesday, the National Transportation Safety Board released an initial timeline of events in the tragic collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge, which was struck by a container ship and destroyed early Tuesday. The agency has received an initial tranche of voyage data recorder (VDR) information from the U.S. Coast Guard and can now sketch out a rough outline of what transpired aboard the vessel.
At about 0039 hours on Tuesday morning, the boxship Dali got under way from Baltimore's Seagirt Terminal with 21 Indian crewmembers, two local pilots and 56 hazmat containers on board. The pilots released the docking tugs shortly after, and the vessel entered the ship channel.
At 0124 hours, Dali was under way in the channel, making eight knots and steering 141 degrees. At about 0125, multiple alarms went off, and the VDR ceased recording the ship's electronic system data. Using backup power, the VDR kept recording bridge audio, and it captured the pilot's verbal rudder commands.
One minute later, at 0126, the VDR was able to resume recording the ship's electronic data. Shortly after - at 0126:39 - the pilot made a general VHF call for tug assistance. This was the first distress call from the vessel.
At about this time, a dispatcher at the pilot's association contacted the duty officer at the MDTA, the state authority that operates the Francis Scott Key Bridge. This gave the MDTA enough early warning to begin shutting down the bridge to traffic, an action that officials have credited with saving many lives.
At 0127:04, two minutes before contact with the bridge pier, the pilot gave the order to drop Dali's port anchor. He also gave additional steering commands.
At 0127:25, the pilot made a general radio call over VHF to warn that the Dali had lost all power and was approaching the Key Bridge. By this time, MDTA's duty officer had dispatched units to shut down all lanes of traffic.
The ship was still making seven knots at 0129:00, the moment that the VDR began recording the audible sounds of the allision. The noise continued until 01:29:33, and the pilot made a VHF call to report the bridge's collapse a few moments later.
On Wednesday, the National Transportation Safety Board released an initial timeline of events in the tragic collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge, which was struck by a container ship and destroyed early Tuesday. The agency has received an initial tranche of voyage data recorder (VDR) information from the U.S. Coast Guard and can now sketch out a rough outline of what transpired aboard the vessel.
At about 0039 hours on Tuesday morning, the boxship Dali got under way from Baltimore's Seagirt Terminal with 21 Indian crewmembers, two local pilots and 56 hazmat containers on board. The pilots released the docking tugs shortly after, and the vessel entered the ship channel.
At 0124 hours, Dali was under way in the channel, making eight knots and steering 141 degrees. At about 0125, multiple alarms went off, and the VDR ceased recording the ship's electronic system data. Using backup power, the VDR kept recording bridge audio, and it captured the pilot's verbal rudder commands.
One minute later, at 0126, the VDR was able to resume recording the ship's electronic data. Shortly after - at 0126:39 - the pilot made a general VHF call for tug assistance. This was the first distress call from the vessel.
At about this time, a dispatcher at the pilot's association contacted the duty officer at the MDTA, the state authority that operates the Francis Scott Key Bridge. This gave the MDTA enough early warning to begin shutting down the bridge to traffic, an action that officials have credited with saving many lives.
At 0127:04, two minutes before contact with the bridge pier, the pilot gave the order to drop Dali's port anchor. He also gave additional steering commands.
At 0127:25, the pilot made a general radio call over VHF to warn that the Dali had lost all power and was approaching the Key Bridge. By this time, MDTA's duty officer had dispatched units to shut down all lanes of traffic.
The ship was still making seven knots at 0129:00, the moment that the VDR began recording the audible sounds of the allision. The noise continued until 01:29:33, and the pilot made a VHF call to report the bridge's collapse a few moments later.
RustyMX5 said:
aeropilot said:
RustyMX5 said:
hidetheelephants said:
When the bridge was designed a big ship was 30k tonnes.
RMS Queen Elizabeth (maiden voyage 1946) - 83,000 tonsRMS Queen Mary (maiden voyage 1936) - 77,000 tons
SS United States (maiden voyage 1952) - 45,000 tons
There was lots of stuff which was over 30,000 tons. Sorry.
I'm not sure you grasp what 'design criteria' means.
k it. can't be arsede600 said:
After a similar incident 40 years ago in Florida the replacement bridge supports were protected by concrete islands. I wonder why this was not considered SOP for all such bridges given the potential for severe consequences if struck.
You know about the many years of a lack of investment in us infrastructure - it's why Biden recently signed and passed the $1.2tn infrastructure bill.But yup concrete traffic bollards for ships look good
rdjohn said:
hidetheelephants said:
When the bridge was designed a big ship was 30k tonnes.
When the Victorians built bridges for railways they carried lighter loads. Most bridges have since been reassessed and strengthened. Similarly with Motorway bridges built in the 60s.Just because a bridge was designed 50-years ago does not mean it does not need to be reassessed to reflect the reality of changing circumstances.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff