Baltimore bridge collapse
Discussion
av185 said:
WestyCarl said:
fatboy18 said:
As for the Vehicles on the bridge, many of us know that if a car goes into water the electrical systems fail and you can't get doors open! Add to that the steel structure of the bridge falling on top of vehicles its going to be a grim task for divers to retrieve bodies.
my thoughts and prayers to the families affected.
Minor point but all cars have a backup manual handle to exit in case of power failure. I think the big thing is the water pressure on the outside of the doors make it virtually impossible to open them.my thoughts and prayers to the families affected.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@39.2174783,-76.5276...
tvrolet said:
Hammersia said:
There's really no such thing as redundancy for structures like that, it will be the same result if a ship crashes into the right part of the Forth rail bridge.
The possible weak point / unluckiness in this case is that the deck level on these massive recent cargo ships protuded out far enough to catch the steel upright pillars (rather than the hull hitting the concrete abutment first).
(Example of Forth bridge with small cargo ship to give an idea)
Sitting at home looking out at the Forth Bridge, it’s my view. Some of the big stuff has precious little clearance - the Queen Elizabeth aircraft carrier was under it the other day. But the big stuff also goes under with tugs attached. And a few years ago they added buffers/bumpers/fenders round the supports to the Forth Road Bridge. And it looks like the Queensferry Crossing was built that way. Maybe we have higher safety standards here? You can always tell if there’s something particularly big going to go under the bridge as there’s rugs milling about. The possible weak point / unluckiness in this case is that the deck level on these massive recent cargo ships protuded out far enough to catch the steel upright pillars (rather than the hull hitting the concrete abutment first).
(Example of Forth bridge with small cargo ship to give an idea)
I recall quite a few of the bridges around San Francisco collapsed in an earthquake a few years back. Would ‘our’ bridges have stood up any better? To the untrained eye a lot of the US steel/girder bridges do look fairly fragile.
Dreadful for those working on the Baltimore bridge though…and by a coincidence I was watching something about Baltimore on TV last night.
Edited - just seen the photos of the ship that hit the bridge - it's huge, and loaded! Not a lot would stay standing after that I guess...
Edited by tvrolet on Tuesday 26th March 11:14
Abbott said:
In a port area like this who has ultimate authority of the vessel, the captain or one of the pilots?
As far as I'm aware the pilot is purely to provide guidance, the Captain always has full authority for his ship so could in theory override the Pilots direction, but he'd be stupid to do so.Zetec-S said:
At that height I doubt it makes any difference, is it really that likely anyone would survive the impact?
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@39.2174783,-76.5276...
No chance from that height my post related to general flood water ingress through the windows to relieve external water pressure preventing doors being opened and escape.https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@39.2174783,-76.5276...
Zetec-S said:
At that height I doubt it makes any difference, is it really that likely anyone would survive the impact?
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@39.2174783,-76.5276...
BBC are reporting at least two people have been rescued from the water, one seriously injured and another apparently completely unharmed.https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@39.2174783,-76.5276...
Port of Baltimore listed as the 8th largest in the US, and handles 25% of US coal exports - there are going to be some major longer-term consequences of this.
sherbertdip said:
Abbott said:
In a port area like this who has ultimate authority of the vessel, the captain or one of the pilots?
As far as I'm aware the pilot is purely to provide guidance, the Captain always has full authority for his ship so could in theory override the Pilots direction, but he'd be stupid to do so.Is it too soon to blame either China or the Russians?
av185 said:
WestyCarl said:
fatboy18 said:
As for the Vehicles on the bridge, many of us know that if a car goes into water the electrical systems fail and you can't get doors open! Add to that the steel structure of the bridge falling on top of vehicles its going to be a grim task for divers to retrieve bodies.
my thoughts and prayers to the families affected.
Minor point but all cars have a backup manual handle to exit in case of power failure. I think the big thing is the water pressure on the outside of the doors make it virtually impossible to open them.my thoughts and prayers to the families affected.
Experienced a similar situation to this about 15 years ago on an oil refinery terminal. A tanker carrying fuel lost power to both engines and was drifting towards another jetty berth loading a few hundred tonnes an hour of gasoline.
Quick thinking by the operator stopped the loading of the gasoline and by sheer luck a pilot boat was passing at the time and managed to get hold of the drifting tanker and stop it hitting. The tugs wouldn’t have made it in time.
Quick thinking by the operator stopped the loading of the gasoline and by sheer luck a pilot boat was passing at the time and managed to get hold of the drifting tanker and stop it hitting. The tugs wouldn’t have made it in time.
I have senior experience in maritime, and this troubles me deeply.
The sequence of things to have to go wrong for this accident to happen is not small.
The investigation will eventually find the root cause, but if the vessel lost power more than 1 minute before the bridge, it should have dropped anchors there and then. It didn't. it restored power and lost it again, before regaining it too late.
1 minute is easily 150/200m, which with anchors, would allow at least a massive speed reduction.
Incredible. Literally incredible.
Events like these - up to 30 seconds to the "interaction" - are rare but do happen. there is an enormous amount of literature on what to do.
The sequence of things to have to go wrong for this accident to happen is not small.
The investigation will eventually find the root cause, but if the vessel lost power more than 1 minute before the bridge, it should have dropped anchors there and then. It didn't. it restored power and lost it again, before regaining it too late.
1 minute is easily 150/200m, which with anchors, would allow at least a massive speed reduction.
Incredible. Literally incredible.
Events like these - up to 30 seconds to the "interaction" - are rare but do happen. there is an enormous amount of literature on what to do.
stuckmojo said:
I have senior experience in maritime, and this troubles me deeply.
The sequence of things to have to go wrong for this accident to happen is not small.
The investigation will eventually find the root cause, but if the vessel lost power more than 1 minute before the bridge, it should have dropped anchors there and then. It didn't. it restored power and lost it again, before regaining it too late.
1 minute is easily 150/200m, which with anchors, would allow at least a massive speed reduction.
Incredible. Literally incredible.
Events like these - up to 30 seconds to the "interaction" - are rare but do happen. there is an enormous amount of literature on what to do.
Thanks.The sequence of things to have to go wrong for this accident to happen is not small.
The investigation will eventually find the root cause, but if the vessel lost power more than 1 minute before the bridge, it should have dropped anchors there and then. It didn't. it restored power and lost it again, before regaining it too late.
1 minute is easily 150/200m, which with anchors, would allow at least a massive speed reduction.
Incredible. Literally incredible.
Events like these - up to 30 seconds to the "interaction" - are rare but do happen. there is an enormous amount of literature on what to do.
I have zero knowledge of maritime matters. I should know more, my paternal grandfather was a captain in the merchant navy and his son, my great uncle, was chief pilot in Rangoon before WW2 broke out.
I assume, were the vessel towed by tugs, then this would not happen?
stuckmojo said:
The investigation will eventually find the root cause, but if the vessel lost power more than 1 minute before the bridge, it should have dropped anchors there and then. It didn't. it restored power and lost it again, before regaining it too late.
I have no idea how these things are arranged, but can these vessels drop anchor on command from the bridge in the event of a power failure, or would you need someone to be already up at the bow to hit something with a large hammer to release the anchor chain? Would you typically have someone stationed up there as a part of standard procedure when leaving port?stuckmojo said:
I have senior experience in maritime, and this troubles me deeply.
The sequence of things to have to go wrong for this accident to happen is not small.
The investigation will eventually find the root cause, but if the vessel lost power more than 1 minute before the bridge, it should have dropped anchors there and then. It didn't. it restored power and lost it again, before regaining it too late.
1 minute is easily 150/200m, which with anchors, would allow at least a massive speed reduction.
Incredible. Literally incredible.
Events like these - up to 30 seconds to the "interaction" - are rare but do happen. there is an enormous amount of literature on what to do.
There appears to be an engine/s running at full tilt if the smoke coming out of the funnel is anything to go by. The sequence of things to have to go wrong for this accident to happen is not small.
The investigation will eventually find the root cause, but if the vessel lost power more than 1 minute before the bridge, it should have dropped anchors there and then. It didn't. it restored power and lost it again, before regaining it too late.
1 minute is easily 150/200m, which with anchors, would allow at least a massive speed reduction.
Incredible. Literally incredible.
Events like these - up to 30 seconds to the "interaction" - are rare but do happen. there is an enormous amount of literature on what to do.
Several explanations for this come to mind.
Diesels can go into runaway if lubricating oil leaks into the pistons via the piston rings, turbocharger seals, etc. The switching off of the electrics might have been a futile attempt to kill the engine.
Alternatively, command of the engine was lost and they were trying to reset the controls, or the controls failed because there was an electrical fault and left the engine at high speed.
Or it was an engine in reverse because they’d lost steering but they couldn’t stop in time.
Hitting the pylon was unlucky as usually these situations end up with driving the ship into open water or onto the banks of the waterway.
Digga said:
Thanks.
I have zero knowledge of maritime matters. I should know more, my paternal grandfather was a captain in the merchant navy and his son, my great uncle, was chief pilot in Rangoon before WW2 broke out.
I assume, were the vessel towed by tugs, then this would not happen?
Tugs would only nudge it into place - and you need some big beasts to shift that. I have zero knowledge of maritime matters. I should know more, my paternal grandfather was a captain in the merchant navy and his son, my great uncle, was chief pilot in Rangoon before WW2 broke out.
I assume, were the vessel towed by tugs, then this would not happen?
Normally, a pilot would be on board from the port unless the vessel visits frequently and the captain + CO has a Pilot Exemption Certificate, which is unlikely in this case.
It may well be that the pilot was unfamiliar with the ship, panicked, listened to whoever was in the chair and they tried to manoeuvre under power when restored. We'll see.
What a mess.
Digga said:
There are a few variables in this, but my thoughts on the size of contrainerships echo yours. Only the other week, three dock cranes in Turkey were demolished by an errant container ship.
See here: https://www.seatrade-maritime.com/ports/yang-ming-...
Also, accounts of the Baltimore incident speak of the lights and power cutting on the vessel, before the crash. So whether the ship suffered a critical failure is unclear. The state of maintenance etc. of these large ship is pretty critical when they are arriving/leaving port. If they have failure at sea, it's general less troublesome. The stopping distance from full speed on these things is in tens of miles.
My experience is limited to smaller boats but it's easy to underestimate how quickly you can end up in the sSee here: https://www.seatrade-maritime.com/ports/yang-ming-...
Also, accounts of the Baltimore incident speak of the lights and power cutting on the vessel, before the crash. So whether the ship suffered a critical failure is unclear. The state of maintenance etc. of these large ship is pretty critical when they are arriving/leaving port. If they have failure at sea, it's general less troublesome. The stopping distance from full speed on these things is in tens of miles.
t when you've lost power, just through the gentle but insistent nudge of currents and the wind.I know that a container ship has got a lot more inertia to get moving than a smaller boat but it's also got a lot more surface area to be pushed along and more inertia to stop once it's moving.
eharding said:
I have no idea how these things are arranged, but can these vessels drop anchor on command from the bridge in the event of a power failure, or would you need someone to be already up at the bow to hit something with a large hammer to release the anchor chain? Would you typically have someone stationed up there as a part of standard procedure when leaving port?
you can have a "dead ship" - It happened to some of my fleet when I ran one - and you can always drop the anchor. When it happened to "me" it was always away from harbour.
Power loss near infrastructure and close to quay = anchor.
in simple terms
https://www.marineinsight.com/guidelines/9-points-...
Edited by stuckmojo on Tuesday 26th March 12:05
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff