Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Baltimore Bridge Collapse

dis what FJB be saying

" We'll just use the current to propell us down river and start the engines after we heat up the water jacket. It' ll be a piece of cake and we can shove off early."

At least two previous episodes of loss of control- - - -backed into a dock, and hit something else, with damage to the ship both times. Either the crew sucks, or the thing is an unreliable floating junk heap- - - -maybe both!

I watched a show once that showed a different pilot was always brought aboard to navigate through channels as the ship came into harbor. Was this the case here?

The ship was only drifting because it lost power.
That's not unheard of, it was just at a bad time and place.



Ships don't "have crews".
Crews are employees, but also kind of free agents.
Individually, they sign contracts for a period of time. 90 days...ish.
They fly in wherever they are gonna meet the ship, and relieve the outgoing member.
Who then flies home.
Crew members constantly rotate. In small numbers, so that there is never a new
crew. Or an old one.

Mariners, work through a union or a big company. They aren't attached to a ship
for any longer than a contract. A 20 year old guy could work a lifetime and never end up on his first ship again. Or, could see it often.

There is a very good chance that there were completely different crews on the ship for every incident. Just one of the reasons sailors believe in bad ships.



It had tugs were normally needed.
It had two pilots.
Tugs along side may have saved it, 10 pilots can't re-power a drifting ship in two minutes.
I'd bet tugs will be required near certain Baltimore bridges in the future.

This ain't hard.
Unless poor maintenance is found, this was an accident.








If you belive everything we see and hear.

Go fist yourself.

Not wanting to pour cold water on your fun but my professional civil structural engineering experience of over 20 years indicates a mixture of

Ignoring procedures , method statements / cutting corners

Poor maintenance

Poor training / inexperienced people "at the coal face"

Bad luck : several bad things happen together or closely spaced : Swiss Cheese concept but should be planned for.

Any vessel that size is not suddenly going to stop or turn / change direction even if it had full power - conservation of linear momentum.

Take away power, hence steerage capability they are going to be stuffed: everyone / thing else needs to get out of their way.

I am a believer in cick up theory until no reasonable doubt exists for malign, external influences.

That's standard procedure in most ports in the world. It's been that way for a long time. Big ports are just too complicated and conjested to be navigated by someone who isn't very familiar with them.

Lara Logan with video.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/03/lara-logan-francis-scott-key-bridge-collapse-everyone/

The critical thinker says "If you knew, within minutes it was a cyber attack of a boat - why didn't you stop it? You had to have been able to see it happen to know and also to have, somehow or for some reason been monitoring the Dali specifically and didn't stop it? Is that what you're admitting to? Or is it more likely that it wasn't a cyber attack because what we saw - can't be done via "cyber" and you're simply a hack journalist looking for the boogey man at every turn."

Those that knew it was an attack before the damage was done, didn’t want to stop it.

It’s apparent that if you watch the video that the ship made a pretty damned dramatic hard turn to hit that support. Why? I’m not saying it was on purpose or terrorism, but why? I mean if the ship was in the channel as alleged and from all the videos and diagrams I’ve seen it looks like once you are in the channel it’s a straight shot out. So, if you’re going straight in the channel and the power goes out, you’re likely to coast through and under the bridge if you do nothing. Presumably, the current in that spot is running out with the river, so it shouldn’t have caused that hard turn.

So for me, I would like to know why the hard turn? Because, it’s there if you watch.

Because when you go full astern on power with a single screw vessel - there's no steering but the prop walks the stern to port. Physics. Pilot/helm panicked, went full aft to avoid what they saw was coming and made it worse. Drift forward then into the support.

That's per a Navy helmsman and other sea guys I talked to yesterday.

I love how everything and everyone keeps ruining your life with absolutely zero proof.

Have you EVER in any respect worked in or for a .gov intelligence agency? Any experience at all? Critical thinking isn't on display with you very often, why I ask.

Okay, maybe. But what did he see coming and why did he panic? I mean they hit that pillar square in the middle of the bow. That means that if they had done nothing they would have slid right under that bridge.

I mean the pilots are all professionals who have made this run thousands of times most likely right? They are the best trained people on earth with regard to this sort of thing and know that port and harbor better than you know your living room, right? I’m not saying it’s not an accident, but I would like to hear from the pilot in charge what happened and why, if he panicked, he did so in a way to make sure the damage was the absolute worst it could be.

Apparently, Baltimore is a uniquely important port with regard to bulk and industrial shipping on the east coast.

And by the way, if port is left and starboard is right, then thatvbow went to the starboard side as giewed from the perspective of the pilot.

How many times do you think that pilot did that work while losing power 2x in the middle of maneuver?

As I mentioned at the start of this - tried to cut it short and inside instead of going wide and around and got hang chow. PROBABLY thought that was better and concerned about becoming a wide block in the channel like the Evergreen was. Made a choice - made the WRONG choice - it happens. The choice wasn't executed the way they thought - again, single screw is less than ideal for such a maneuver.

They likely thought that if he's going to become a problem, he wanted to be a problem on the side not in the middle. No one expected to take the entire bridge out - don't care what steve says.

Exactly as I said - full reverse on a single screw prop walks the ship's stern to port - pushing the bow starboard in perspective.

Interesting Teal. Just so I understand better:

“Full astern” mean full reverse?

If so, why does that walk the stern to the left side? Is it because of the location of the prop, the direction it is spinning, or something else?

Also, was the steering out, but the prop was functioning? I haven’t seen any clear reports on that.

Just trying to understand better.

That's what I was thinking too. The pilot might be a pretty good helmsman and knows where to maneuver in those particular waters, but that doesn't mean that he skillfully knows how to steer that particular ship when some of it is not working.

They lost power - putting them in a drift, power comes on, smoke goes out as they slam full astern (roll coal) but that doesn't provide steering.

Yes - full astern means full reverse. The prop spins the other direction but doing so doesn't push any water over the rudder for steering. The spinning prop then spins the stern of the boat to port because of it's spin direction.

A twin screw boat can steer in reverse because one engine in reverse, one is forward - causing a pivot like a tank and one side IS pushing water over a rudder for control.