At least it was middle of the night. Barge hit an I-40 bridge over the Arkansas River near here around 8AM that caused it to collapse and kill most of the people on it several years ago.
Just seen the video on the news. They are saying maybe up to 20 people missing,drivers as well as some construction workers. Looks likes a long bridge ,major impact on travel.
It might, this is a really big deal. I don't know about Annapolis or whatever Navy presence in the area might be effected. Locking the Navy into their port could really upset the defense of the east coast, too. This is a big deal.
Wow, hoping for the best for the workers on the bridge. You can see maintance vehicle with their flashing lights on stopped on that bridge, and all of them went into the water.
As far as traffic, that's a major bridge that carries Interstate 695. Traffic is going to be super-fugged for a long time to come.
As far as blocking in the Navy, that's not an issue. There may be some USNS ships in that harbor for repair or for taking on fuel. But the bulk of the Navy is in Norfolk, Va and some other bases on the east coast.
Ship was leaving port, only 30 minutes or so into extended voyage. News stated there is video of the ship's lights going completely dark prior to impact. If that's true, major power failure, unable to steer ship.
The lights were on on that ship until the bridge collapsed on it and took out the front light. Only some of the lights went off for a few seconds, then came back on before impact.
Also - that bridge is the Hazmat, Oversize/Over dimensional route in/out of Baltimore harbor area. 3rd largest US Eastern Seaport - the impact on the area will be massive.
Horrible event - At that point, it would have been under control of a harbor pilot no? Lots of black smoke too - wonder if there was a catastrophic loss of motive power (lights out) creating an inability to steer and hit the pillar.
That's exactly what I was just thinking. after all, you can't get pulled over by a state trooper for a breath test when you are driving a boat in the harbor.
Just saw this. Theories abound but at 130 am some people went 185 feet down in their cars to a black, watery grave. Let’s just remember that this morning.
That's exactly what I was just thinking. after all, you can't get pulled over by a state trooper for a breath test when you are driving a boat in the harbor.
one would think the harbor pilot would have aborted the departure..............
I suspect we'll see a combo of 2 things.
1. Power loss while executing navigational maneuvers put the ship in a position without steering and adrift in the middle of a turn to starboard. 2. Power was regained, engines pushed full power (the thick smoke) and the attempt to then turn HARD to starboard to take that pilling down the port side of the boat. There wasn't enough room and it was made worse by the 2nd loss of power. No power= not enough water over the rudders to provide positive maneuverability.
They'll determine mechanical failure compounded by decision to continue/attempt a hard starboard turn rather than go port to put the pilling down the starboard side of the ship. (swing wide, instead of cut sharp)
And that's just a SWAG based off the video. I'm not an NTSB inspector at all but I've driven boats. Those that have understand that power gives you steering, lack of power SUCKS big time.
1) complete rescue/recovery 2) complete investigation. 3) get demolition crews in there and open shipping lanes through the wreckage. 4) re-evaluate and adjust use of tunnels. 5) get barges/ferries in place for land based freight transport to cross. 6) bulld a new damn bridge.
That's exactly what I was just thinking. after all, you can't get pulled over by a state trooper for a breath test when you are driving a boat in the harbor.
Before anybody reads too much into this, especially without all the facts, the ship was under the control of not one but TWO port of Baltimore pilots. There are reports of the ship going "black" minutes before the collision. What that is an indicator of is the ship probably had a catastrophic/cascading power failure and not only lost way, but steerage as well and in that case, they would not even had the means to even drop anchor. If the ship lost way, even at four of five knots, it would take a lot of time to stop. The channel there is but 150yrds wide, so lost of steerage and power, what happened is very much a probability.
The film shows the ship going dark,( power loss), then the lights come on and heavy black smoke from the stack before ship hits the bridge. Like like a terrible accident to me.
Bridges are a huge piece of our high value national infrastructure. Port cities can be crippled if they are taken out.
I sure hope drunk, and not intentional.
I know almost nothing about shipping or the channels there. But looking at the video, and a map, there is a good chance Baltimore harbor isn’t gonna be moving any freight for awhile.
My first concern was terrorists.
There are isolated railroad tunnels within a short distance of our family farm. Pap used to tell of troops guarding those tunnels during WWII. The Horseshoe Curve was also guarded.
It would be quite easy to seriously hurt us, with high reward, low risk attacks to key infrastructure.
American pilot? WTF does that mean? Does he have roots here before it was the USA? 100 years? 50? Or is he a Farsi speaker working a visa?
It might, this is a really big deal. I don't know about Annapolis or whatever Navy presence in the area might be effected. Locking the Navy into their port could really upset the defense of the east coast, too. This is a big deal.
Bridges are a huge piece of our high value national infrastructure. Port cities can be crippled if they are taken out.
I sure hope drunk, and not intentional.
I know almost nothing about shipping or the channels there. But looking at the video, and a map, there is a good chance Baltimore harbor isn’t gonna be moving any freight for awhile.
My first concern was terrorists.
There are isolated railroad tunnels within a short distance of our family farm. Pap used to tell of troops guarding those tunnels during WWII. The Horseshoe Curve was also guarded.
It would be quite easy to seriously hurt us, with high reward, low risk attacks to key infrastructure.
American pilot? WTF does that mean? Does he have roots here before it was the USA? 100 years? 50? Or is he a Farsi speaker working a visa?
Just got a notification the ship lost power.
The concern for what could happen remains
Most large merchant ships like that are foreign. A Pilot is someone who typically has an unlimited tonnage license and has a extensive experience in and knowledge of their port. They'll be a US citizen. Pilotage for a foreign vessel of that size is compulsory when operating in port. At some point before entering the port or getting underway from the port, the pilot takes control.
It does look like a power irregularity played a role in this.
I can't believe that bridge had an inadequate fendering system.
31k vehicles a DAY went over that bridge. Can't run hazmat into tunnels. Gonna be wild re-routing that traffic.
Re: hazmat....barges, ferries, no?
Theoretically - yes. But I don't know what their average tonnage for hazmat per day would be and if the barge/ferry can carry the truck/trailer to move it. Otherwise you're looking to cross dock it prior, move over water, cross dock again and go onto delivery. Adds days to transit and thousands to cost. Multiple thousands. Not counting the cost of the ferry/barge.
Bridges are a huge piece of our high value national infrastructure. Port cities can be crippled if they are taken out.
I sure hope drunk, and not intentional.
I know almost nothing about shipping or the channels there. But looking at the video, and a map, there is a good chance Baltimore harbor isn’t gonna be moving any freight for awhile.
My first concern was terrorists.
There are isolated railroad tunnels within a short distance of our family farm. Pap used to tell of troops guarding those tunnels during WWII. The Horseshoe Curve was also guarded.
It would be quite easy to seriously hurt us, with high reward, low risk attacks to key infrastructure.
American pilot? WTF does that mean? Does he have roots here before it was the USA? 100 years? 50? Or is he a Farsi speaker working a visa?
Just got a notification the ship lost power.
The concern for what could happen remains
Most large merchant ships like that are foreign. A Pilot is someone who typically has an unlimited tonnage license and has a extensive experience in and knowledge of their port. They'll be a US citizen. Pilotage for a foreign vessel of that size is compulsory when operating in port. At some point before entering the port or getting underway from the port, the pilot takes control.
It does look like a power irregularity played a role in this.
I can't believe that bridge had an inadequate fendering system.
NBC is reporting that the DALI is Singapore flagged ship outbound from Baltimore to Sri Lanka.
31k vehicles a DAY went over that bridge. Can't run hazmat into tunnels. Gonna be wild re-routing that traffic.
Re: hazmat....barges, ferries, no?
Theoretically - yes. But I don't know what their average tonnage for hazmat per day would be and if the barge/ferry can carry the truck/trailer to move it. Otherwise you're looking to cross dock it prior, move over water, cross dock again and go onto delivery. Adds days to transit and thousands to cost. Multiple thousands. Not counting the cost of the ferry/barge.
Well yeah, but what's the alternative.
What's the best drive around route and would that be more effective.
There would be lights, but I’ve never seen any other protective devices on bridge piers. I built and repaired roads and bridges for 30 years. Red and green channel marker lights are all I’ve ever seen locally.
What, exactly, from a maintenance perspective could have been done to keep this bridge standing after a strike from a 95,128 ton ship?
The 1972 FSK bridge was a minimally build structure (same era of budget building as the failed Twin Towers).
All commercial construction from that era is a mere fraction of modern construction standards.
In fairness... I have not studied the exact piles and pile caps that failed (from the impact of the vessel), but the replacements will be 500% PLUS bigger and stronger for sure.
Fox News (FWIW) just reported that no foul play was suspected. How can they maje a statement like that so soon into this event? It takes the NTSB six months or more to figure that out on most accidents.
I had the misfortune of driving through, or around, Baltimore 8 or 10 times in the Big Rig. The traffic was horrible. I hate to think of what it will be with I 695 shut down.
We can't spend our $$$$$ on bridge upkeep! Those $$$$$ must go to Ukraine!!
What, exactly, from a maintenance perspective could have been done to keep this bridge standing after a strike from a 95,128 ton ship?
A robust bridge fendering system.
A fender trying to stop a 100K plus ton ship moving at two or three knots, there isn't a fender in the world that would stop it.
I suspect that the vessel was going a bit faster than that, but there are fendering systems that will prevent direct contact with the bridge. I have seen islands of rock built around bridge support structures. Some extending over 100 yards away. That would have prevented this. That option may not be practical for that location, but I'll bet when the bridge is rebuilt, they'll find a way to substantially improve upon the previous system.
Fox News (FWIW) just reported that no foul play was suspected. How can they maje a statement like that so soon into this event? It takes the NTSB six months or more to figure that out on most accidents.
They are told what to broadcast. The best way to control the narrative is to tell the story you want told first, then repeat it often.
Fox News (FWIW) just reported that no foul play was suspected. How can they maje a statement like that so soon into this event? It takes the NTSB six months or more to figure that out on most accidents.
So it looked like he was turning into the channel. Power went out, probably overcorrected trying to steer while the power is off. Power comes back on and now all the sudden he is headed straight for the pier. Power flickers again, he tries to back up (which even anyone who has driven a bass boat knows is counterproductive but instinctive) and slams into the pier.
I don’t know schit about big ships or bridges but that looks like what happened just watching the various videos out there.
It’s Baltimore. What are the odds that the pilot was some union/DEI hire who usually slept through the transit? Once again, I know nothing about ships or bridges.
It’s Baltimore. What are the odds that the pilot was some union/DEI hire who usually slept through the transit? Once again, I know nothing about ships or bridges.
Very low odds. Pilot associations are known for nepotism and chronyism. They are nigh impossible for an outsider to crack and generally beyond outside influence.
It might, this is a really big deal. I don't know about Annapolis or whatever Navy presence in the area might be effected. Locking the Navy into their port could really upset the defense of the east coast, too. This is a big deal.
Baltimore is not a Navy Port. It is however the leading Auto Import Port to the U.S. Also deals in Coal I believe.
Anyone know where the camera was located?
Dundalk terminal?
It appears that the Dali left the Seagirt Terminal and after being released by the tugs headed for the bridge and made a slight deviation to starboard about two or three ship lengths from the bridge.
Just saw the teevee. FBI said no terrorists involved. And Brandon's been told about it. So everything is ok. Just calm down. Heroic efforts are under way.
It might, this is a really big deal. I don't know about Annapolis or whatever Navy presence in the area might be effected. Locking the Navy into their port could really upset the defense of the east coast, too. This is a big deal.
Baltimore is not a Navy Port. It is however the leading Auto Import Port to the U.S. Also deals in Coal I believe.
Correct... We also ship lots of timber overseas from B.
I know virtually nothing about ships, but don’t those big ones run giant diesel engines? Which means a power interruption would not affect the engine, but would affect the steering and control of the engines?
It’s not like they have a stop/start feature like on new cars.
It’s Baltimore. What are the odds that the pilot was some union/DEI hire who usually slept through the transit? Once again, I know nothing about ships or bridges.
Very low odds. Pilot associations are known for nepotism and chronyism. They are nigh impossible for an outsider to crack and generally beyond outside influence.
Fairly narrow channel Paul...
I used to commute to work by boat in that channel... large vessel traffic was very very straight line.
Remember the grounding near Annapolis last year? Dude got out of the channel (same company or Captain as the Suez mess IIRC).
The shipping industry as a whole have always fought the insurance industry, and pilotage rules...it costs money to charter a tug. But in this case and many others, one or two assist vessels would have saved the day. Foreign flag ownership exacerbates the problem...poorly trained officers, minimum maintenance and safety standards. When there is an incident, the foreign flag owners just declare bankruptcy, move on and start a new company...leaving a pittance in insurance to clean up the aftermath. Mandatory assist tugs from pierside to open water would take almost all the risk away...kinda handy to have 6,000 hp available to the pilot in an instant. In the case of containerships with their huge 'sail area' and tankers, 2 tugs...but oh no...it costs too much.
31k vehicles a DAY went over that bridge. Can't run hazmat into tunnels. Gonna be wild re-routing that traffic.
Re: hazmat....barges, ferries, no?
Theoretically - yes. But I don't know what their average tonnage for hazmat per day would be and if the barge/ferry can carry the truck/trailer to move it. Otherwise you're looking to cross dock it prior, move over water, cross dock again and go onto delivery. Adds days to transit and thousands to cost. Multiple thousands. Not counting the cost of the ferry/barge.
Well yeah, but what's the alternative.
What's the best drive around route and would that be more effective.
Everything will have to go around the West and North sides of the Beltway. If traffic is OK, it's not too bad. If it's rush hour it could add an hour or so.
How long do you suppose it will take to get the permits and
paperwork to build a new bridge?
No one is going to have to apply for a permit in this situation.
Correct! We once had some bad flood damaged main arteries locally. I was instructed to “Get them open!” No permits, no erosion control, nothing but “Open the damned roads!!!”
I know virtually nothing about ships, but don’t those big ones run giant diesel engines? Which means a power interruption would not affect the engine, but would affect the steering and control of the engines?
It’s not like they have a stop/start feature like on new cars.
Generally ships, like houses or anything else have interior/exterior lighting on a separate circuit. Likewise navigation, and electronics should be on their own circuits...
They still communicate with the engine room engineering spaces as bridge controls are mostly "fly by wire"
The shipping industry as a whole have always fought the insurance industry, and pilotage rules...it costs money to charter a tug. But in this case and many others, one or two assist vessels would have saved the day. Foreign flag ownership exacerbates the problem...poorly trained officers, minimum maintenance and safety standards. When there is an incident, the foreign flag owners just declare bankruptcy, move on and start a new company...leaving a pittance in insurance to clean up the aftermath. Mandatory assist tugs from pierside to open water would take almost all the risk away...kinda handy to have 6,000 hp available to the pilot in an instant. In the case of containerships with their huge 'sail area' and tankers, 2 tugs...but oh no...it costs too much.
The article linked said that they had tugs, but had released them prior to the power going out it appears.
"According to Marine Traffic the ship departed the Seagirt Marine Terminal in the Port of Baltimore at approximately 00:30 local time, sailed northwest past the Nuclear Ship Savanah then turned southeast to depart the harbor, released the tugboats, and collided with the bridge at approximately 01:38."
It’s Baltimore. What are the odds that the pilot was some union/DEI hire who usually slept through the transit? Once again, I know nothing about ships or bridges.
Very low odds. Pilot associations are known for nepotism and chronyism. They are nigh impossible for an outsider to crack and generally beyond outside influence.
There were TWO pilots on board, the fact (again) it went dark before ramming the bridge, certainly points to loss of way and steerage with no way of stopping a ship that large.
It’s Baltimore. What are the odds that the pilot was some union/DEI hire who usually slept through the transit? Once again, I know nothing about ships or bridges.
Very low odds. Pilot associations are known for nepotism and chronyism. They are nigh impossible for an outsider to crack and generally beyond outside influence.
It’s Baltimore. What are the odds that the pilot was some union/DEI hire who usually slept through the transit? Once again, I know nothing about ships or bridges.
Very low odds. Pilot associations are known for nepotism and chronyism. They are nigh impossible for an outsider to crack and generally beyond outside influence.
There were TWO pilots on board, the fact (again) it went dark before ramming the bridge, certainly points to loss of way and steerage with no way of stopping a ship that large.
It’s Baltimore. What are the odds that the pilot was some union/DEI hire who usually slept through the transit? Once again, I know nothing about ships or bridges.
Very low odds. Pilot associations are known for nepotism and chronyism. They are nigh impossible for an outsider to crack and generally beyond outside influence.
There were TWO pilots on board, the fact (again) it went dark before ramming the bridge, certainly points to loss of way and steerage with no way of stopping a ship that large.
Don't tugs escort ships past obstacles?
Ships are not required to have tugboat escorts when passing under the Francis Scott Key Bridge so they have limited ability to slow down on their own when they lose power and can not put the propeller into reverse.
According to past photos, she is equipped with a bow thruster. However, these are not typically connected to emergency power systems. Even if it were engaged, bow thrusters are designed for slow-speed maneuvers and have a limited ability to push the bow into the wind when the ship’s speed exceeds 5 knots.
It’s Baltimore. What are the odds that the pilot was some union/DEI hire who usually slept through the transit? Once again, I know nothing about ships or bridges.
Very low odds. Pilot associations are known for nepotism and chronyism. They are nigh impossible for an outsider to crack and generally beyond outside influence.
There were TWO pilots on board, the fact (again) it went dark before ramming the bridge, certainly points to loss of way and steerage with no way of stopping a ship that large.
I read that the first time you posted it. I wanted to fill in some blanks for him since he said he knew nothing about it. Oddly, I answered the question he asked. LOL
It’s Baltimore. What are the odds that the pilot was some union/DEI hire who usually slept through the transit? Once again, I know nothing about ships or bridges.
Very low odds. Pilot associations are known for nepotism and chronyism. They are nigh impossible for an outsider to crack and generally beyond outside influence.
There were TWO pilots on board, the fact (again) it went dark before ramming the bridge, certainly points to loss of way and steerage with no way of stopping a ship that large.
Don't tugs escort ships past obstacles?
Yes and no. Typically they only nurse them through docking and departing. In some cases, given the whole of the circumstances, they will stay hooked up to them around other obstacles. In busier ports, it'd take a massive fleet of tugs to get all of the merchant vessels past all of the hazards.
I drove over that bridge regularly. It's only 20 minutes from where I live. This incident has done nothing for my fear of heights and tall bridges. I always say a little prayer whenever I cross any of our Bay bridges. You look down and see a ship approaching and think "Jesus Christ if that big bastard even so much as grazed a pylon...."
The Chesapeake Bay Pilots Association is, as stated earlier, a very insular but very professional organization. The knowledge required and the tests to pass is mind boggling - they are a very sharp bunch of cookies. (And paid very handsomely for it.) Ships, all ships, are commandeered far south of here on the Bay by a pilot who threads it through the narrow shipping lanes, ditto in reverse. Unless shown otherwise I gotta keep faith that a pilot was at the helm and that it had to have been caused by some sort of systems failure that he was powerless to cope with. Those guys know those channels and the Bay in general better than you know your way around your living room.
Aftermath: My fair state (fairly f*cked up state) is gonna be hard pressed to scrape together the money to rebuild it. There'll have to be Federal input. The "rainy day, budget surplus" left behind by a Republican administration was immediately frittered completely away by the incoming Democrat admin on frivolous "social programs". Betcha right now they wish they hadn't.
All I know for sure is I'll not be driving anywhere near Baltimore for a long time. Y'all have no idea how badly this is gonna bollox up traffic in my area. We're locked in by all the water that surrounds us - the Bay and its estuaries, rivers, creeks, etc. - there is a finite convoluted land mass that can be traveled upon. Destinations only three miles away typically entails a five or six mile journey because of that. Add now the re-routing off of I-95/695 and there's yet another reason I wish I could move the hell away. This once quaint charming area is now a hell of urban/suburban sprawl with attendant traffic nightmares on a good day, and good days are in the rearview mirror now.
Thankfully it wasn't rush hour, there'd be a whole lot more dead. I noticed in the videos that there were a couple of truck drivers that had God on their side this morning. Prayers go out to the souls that went down with the bridge.
I've never been across it, but I went under it on a cruise ship one time. The Port of Baltimore is huge and there's a lot of ship traffic in and out of there. My major import supplier is located there. This will screw them up and cause my prices to go up. They'll have to bring their containers in through NJ or Philly. Overseas freight rates have already been going up because of the clusterfuk in the Red Sea. There's nothing good that'll come out of this. I would imagine that they'll have the channel open in short order. But what's that, a month, 3 months, 6 months? I'm sure that the channel has some serious current, so it'll be challenging.
It’s Baltimore. What are the odds that the pilot was some union/DEI hire who usually slept through the transit? Once again, I know nothing about ships or bridges.
Very low odds. Pilot associations are known for nepotism and chronyism. They are nigh impossible for an outsider to crack and generally beyond outside influence.
There were TWO pilots on board, the fact (again) it went dark before ramming the bridge, certainly points to loss of way and steerage with no way of stopping a ship that large.
Don't tugs escort ships past obstacles?
Yes and no. Typically they only nurse them through docking and departing. In some cases, given the whole of the circumstances, they will stay hooked up to them around other obstacles. In busier ports, it'd take a massive fleet of tugs to get all of the merchant vessels past all of the hazards.
Yep. And bear in mind the shipping channels in and around B'More are crazy narrow, and not 100% stable (silting in from the couple waterways that empty out here demands constant dredging to maintain). I'll wager that the shipping channel at the choke point that the FSK bridge traversed is a lot narrower than you think - barely wide enough for two huge ships to pass each other (which means that whenever possible it's a one-way street) - further negating the optimal use of tugs. You never see tugs that far out of the Inner Harbor.
Checking my digital maps. There's another way around that island, to the East, called Kent Narrows. Appears to be about 200 yards wide. I wonder how high that bridge is? How deep is the water?
Fox News (FWIW) just reported that no foul play was suspected. How can they maje a statement like that so soon into this event? It takes the NTSB six months or more to figure that out on most accidents.
They are told what to broadcast. The best way to control the narrative is to tell the story you want told first, then repeat it often.
Fox News (FWIW) just reported that no foul play was suspected. How can they maje a statement like that so soon into this event? It takes the NTSB six months or more to figure that out on most accidents.
They are told what to broadcast. The best way to control the narrative is to tell the story you want told first, then repeat it often.
It’s Baltimore. What are the odds that the pilot was some union/DEI hire who usually slept through the transit? Once again, I know nothing about ships or bridges.
Originally Posted by Crash_Pad
Loved taking that bridge detour back in the day. That's way tall to fall in the water all of a sudden. Negligent pilot. Or drunk like Valdez.
I have no knowledge of east coast pilot assn's, but having had many opportunities to get to know pilots in the Puget Sound marine operations..they are unquestionably the best of the best. Piloting is the very pinnacle of experience, ability and cool thoughtful command under pressure. The chronyism that the bicycle cop Barnard referred to is one of the best features of the pilot hierarchy...they do not suffer fools or the incompetent for one instant...they clean their ranks long before any mishap.
Checking my digital maps. There's another way around that island, to the East, called Kent Narrows. Appears to be about 200 yards wide. I wonder how high that bridge is? How deep is the water?
I read that the controlling depth of Kent Narrows is 6 feet. The ship that hit this bridge draws ~40
Checking my digital maps. There's another way around that island, to the East, called Kent Narrows. Appears to be about 200 yards wide. I wonder how high that bridge is? How deep is the water?
I live two or three miles west from the Rt. 50 (an interstate hwy) bridge over the Bay at Kent Island, the next bridge south of the FSK bridge and far north of the next bridge to the south down by Norfolk. Our bridge is four miles long, and the shipping channel underneath it is wide and deep. What you're referring to, Kent Narrows, is the narrow shallow channel of water that separates Kent Island (a damn big island it is) from the land mass of Maryland's Eastern Shore. It isn't navigable by ships. It's the province of sport boats and fishing/crabbing boats. For years the bridge over the Narrows was a drawbridge but is now supplemented by a permanent bridge which isn't very high off the water.
Also there's the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal. I wonder how navigable that is?
35 feet I guess?
Wonder if we'll see a return to lighting ships in harbors by smaller operators then to get them inland?
I kinda doubt that...lightering is THE most expensive way of moving cargo. Ask BP, ARCO, EXXON, ALEYESKA what my company charged them to deliver everything to build the Prudhoe field and pipeline.
Also there's the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal. I wonder how navigable that is?
35 feet I guess?
Wonder if we'll see a return to lighting ships in harbors by smaller operators then to get them inland?
I kinda doubt that...lightering is THE most expensive way of moving cargo. Ask BP, ARCO, EXXON, ALEYESKA what my company charged them to deliver everything to build the Prudhoe field and pipeline.
The alternative would be to shut down the #3 eastern seaport until cleared. It's not IDEAL but Baltimore being closed isn't much of an option either.
Sure seems to be a Hell if alot of accidents now days! Trains derailing, plane problems, not to mention Fires
it kind of makes one Wonder at times that's for sure. but then again there are an awful lot of just stupid people in this world too. and a lot of them stupid people have jobs... that they probably shouldn't have
Checking my digital maps. There's another way around that island, to the East, called Kent Narrows. Appears to be about 200 yards wide. I wonder how high that bridge is? How deep is the water?
Wrong bridge - FSK is (well, was) further north than the Bay Bridge.
"This once quaint charming area is now a hell of urban/suburban sprawl with attendant traffic nightmares on a good day, and good days are in the rearview mirror now"
Here we have a local, gnoahh, chiming in on my assessment, where I talked about driving through Baltimore in the 18 wheeler, and what a traffic hell hole it was before the bridge collapse.
Fox and CNN keep reporting that two have been recovered from the water, and six are missing.
I dug around and found that there are six construction workers missing. But on top of that there are 7 cars that went in to the water, no telling how many people were in those cars.
Good God had this happened at 8am there would be 200 cars in the water.
Fox and CNN keep reporting that two have been recovered from the water, and six are missing.
I dug around and found that there are six construction workers missing. But on top of that there are 7 cars that went in to the water, no telling how many people were in those cars.
Good God had this happened at 8am there would be 200 cars in the water.
Not sure the report of cars in the water is accurate.
After we have taken care of the injured, then #1 priority is to open one of those spans of below the bridge to maritime traffic. Just move stuff out of the way and get a slot open so that ships can move between. Then the pressure will be off and we can plan the other operations like how to replace the bridge.
"Three passenger vehicles, a cement truck and another vehicle have been located in the water using infrared and sonar technology, Baltimore City Fire Chief James Wallace told CNN."
Pete Buttigieg is heading to Baltimore today From CNN's Kaitlan Collins
US Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg is heading to Baltimore today, a staff member with the agency confirmed to CNN.
Buttigieg spoke to Maryland Gov. Wes Moore and Baltimore Mayor Brandon M. Scott following the collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge, according to a post from the secretary on X.
"Rescue efforts remain underway and drivers in the Baltimore area should follow local responder guidance on detours and response," Buttigieg wrote.
Pete Buttigieg is heading to Baltimore today From CNN's Kaitlan Collins
US Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg is heading to Baltimore today, a staff member with the agency confirmed to CNN.
Buttigieg spoke to Maryland Gov. Wes Moore and Baltimore Mayor Brandon M. Scott following the collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge, according to a post from the secretary on X.
"Rescue efforts remain underway and drivers in the Baltimore area should follow local responder guidance on detours and response," Buttigieg wrote.
Mayor pete .will get to the bottom of this,and fill in the cracks .his butts on the line
Pete Buttigieg is heading to Baltimore today From CNN's Kaitlan Collins
US Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg is heading to Baltimore today, a staff member with the agency confirmed to CNN.
Buttigieg spoke to Maryland Gov. Wes Moore and Baltimore Mayor Brandon M. Scott following the collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge, according to a post from the secretary on X.
"Rescue efforts remain underway and drivers in the Baltimore area should follow local responder guidance on detours and response," Buttigieg wrote.
Mayor pete .will get to the bottom of this,and fill in the cracks .his butts on the line
Boy that gives me a warm fuzzy feeling. Not. Our Governor Wes Moore is a Joe Biden lackey and a Gavin Newsom wannabe, and the Mayor of Baltimore is a clueless twit. Don't get me started on Pete Butty-gag.
Pete Buttigieg is heading to Baltimore today From CNN's Kaitlan Collins
US Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg is heading to Baltimore today, a staff member with the agency confirmed to CNN.
Buttigieg spoke to Maryland Gov. Wes Moore and Baltimore Mayor Brandon M. Scott following the collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge, according to a post from the secretary on X.
"Rescue efforts remain underway and drivers in the Baltimore area should follow local responder guidance on detours and response," Buttigieg wrote.
Mayor pete .will get to the bottom of this,and fill in the cracks .his butts on the line
Boy that gives me a warm fuzzy feeling. Not. Our Governor Wes Moore is a Joe Biden lackey and a Gavin Newsom wannabe, and the Mayor of Baltimore is a clueless twit. Don't get me started on Pete Butty-gag.
Checking my digital maps. There's another way around that island, to the East, called Kent Narrows. Appears to be about 200 yards wide. I wonder how high that bridge is? How deep is the water?
Wrong bridge - FSK is (well, was) further north than the Bay Bridge.
I live at the intersection of Rt.50 and Rt.2/179, in the lower left quadrant of this map. I look out my 2nd floor down onto Rt.50 to the south about 200 yards away.
You can tell from this illustration how waterways (primarily the Chesapeake Bay and tributary rivers) dominate our local world. There are no straight lines "from here to there". This is the hard reality that'll dominate the coming traffic congestion due to the bridge collapse.
Fox and CNN keep reporting that two have been recovered from the water, and six are missing.
I dug around and found that there are six construction workers missing. But on top of that there are 7 cars that went in to the water, no telling how many people were in those cars.
Good God had this happened at 8am there would be 200 cars in the water.
7 people, not cars. 2 rescued And there was a mayday. Bridge was closed. Had it been 08:00 the bridge would have still been closed.
"Three passenger vehicles, a cement truck and another vehicle have been located in the water using infrared and sonar technology, Baltimore City Fire Chief James Wallace told CNN."
That would be a bad way to die.
The cement truck was probably there with the work crew. Maybe the cars were theirs also? I doubt they walked up onto the bridge to go to work.
Does anyone know if this is the first time that a major U.S. port has been blocked by debris?
For instance I know that the Coronado Bridge in San Diego is built out of box sections (I actually was able to walk through them on a tour once). The rumor is that the box sections (with dogged bulkhead doors) were so designed because in the event of a bridge failure, the sections could be towed out of the way. 32nd street Naval Base is inside the bridge.
I forget the real reason for the box sections, given on the tour, but it was not because they would float. Maybe they would break up in a way so as to not impede navigation???
When I first saw the video this morning about 5:30 am, one thing I noticed after about the third viewing was the fact that the lights went out on the ship twice before the impact... I.e., they lost power and any steering capability.. It happens..
Just thank God the traffic at that time of night was so very light.. Prayers for all those involved..
Does anyone know if this is the first time that a major U.S. port has been blocked by debris?
For instance I know that the Coronado Bridge in San Diego is built out of box sections (I actually was able to walk through them on a tour once). The rumor is that the box sections (with dogged bulkhead doors) were so designed because in the event of a bridge failure, the sections could be towed out of the way. 32nd street Naval Base is inside the bridge.
I forget the real reason for the box sections, given on the tour, but it was not because they would float. Maybe they would break up in a way so as to not impede navigation???
Likely built that way for earthquake damage mitigation. It's a whole lot easier, faster, and more economical to replace a section or two than an entire bridge.
Also there's the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal. I wonder how navigable that is?
35 feet I guess?
Wonder if we'll see a return to lighting ships in harbors by smaller operators then to get them inland?
With cars being one of the prevalent products, I don't think lightering will work very well. Same with containers. You'll likely see other ports absorb that cargo.
Clearly, the only thing to do is send another $60 billion to Ukraine.
Originally Posted by Sharpsman
ATTENTION
We can't spend our $$$$$ on bridge upkeep! Those $$$$$ must go to Ukraine!!
The Putin Pufters psychosis is on full display. Some of them blame Ukraine for evey thing wrong in their lives.
From the video it looks like they got the traffic stopped before the ship hit.
Wonder how long to get the channel open with all that metal/roadway on the bottom?
Is the ship in danger of sinking?
Is Mayor Pete back on maternity leave?
I doubt the ship is in danger of sinking. It's likely a double hull with a crash bulkhead and good compartmentalization to prevent progressive flooding.
Does anyone know if this is the first time that a major U.S. port has been blocked by debris?
For instance I know that the Coronado Bridge in San Diego is built out of box sections (I actually was able to walk through them on a tour once). The rumor is that the box sections (with dogged bulkhead doors) were so designed because in the event of a bridge failure, the sections could be towed out of the way. 32nd street Naval Base is inside the bridge.
I forget the real reason for the box sections, given on the tour, but it was not because they would float. Maybe they would break up in a way so as to not impede navigation???
Likely built that way for earthquake damage mitigation. It's a whole lot easier, faster, and more economical to replace a section or two than an entire bridge.
I think you are right. Something about how a box section handles P waves and S-waves.
Thank you Jesus. The adults are now in charge.(sarc)
Pete's running late. Some late morning spooning with his husband.
Damn shame we have a mentally ill Pete in charge of this. I feel sorry for those 2 babies they adopted their minds will be warped at and early age. Should be a law against queers adopting kids.
Does anyone know if this is the first time that a major U.S. port has been blocked by debris?
For instance I know that the Coronado Bridge in San Diego is built out of box sections (I actually was able to walk through them on a tour once). The rumor is that the box sections (with dogged bulkhead doors) were so designed because in the event of a bridge failure, the sections could be towed out of the way. 32nd street Naval Base is inside the bridge.
I forget the real reason for the box sections, given on the tour, but it was not because they would float. Maybe they would break up in a way so as to not impede navigation???
Likely built that way for earthquake damage mitigation. It's a whole lot easier, faster, and more economical to replace a section or two than an entire bridge.
I think you are right. Something about how a box section handles P waves and S-waves.
We always built box bridges in 40' sections. I don't know all the science behind it, but I was told it was because of earthquakes.
Clearly, the only thing to do is send another $60 billion to Ukraine.
Originally Posted by Sharpsman
ATTENTION
We can't spend our $$$$$ on bridge upkeep! Those $$$$$ must go to Ukraine!!
The Putin Pufters psychosis is on full display. Some of them blame Ukraine for evey thing wrong in their lives.
From the video it looks like they got the traffic stopped before the ship hit.
Wonder how long to get the channel open with all that metal/roadway on the bottom?
Is the ship in danger of sinking?
Is Mayor Pete back on maternity leave?
Originally Posted by PaulBarnard
I doubt the ship is in danger of sinking. It's likely a double hull with a crash bulkhead and good compartmentalization to prevent progressive flooding.
Thanks Coastie.
They sure seem fast to claim it was just an accident. It probably was a mishap but if someone had done sabotage would this not be a predictable result of losing steerage/power while upstream of the bridge?
Clearly, the only thing to do is send another $60 billion to Ukraine.
Originally Posted by Sharpsman
ATTENTION
We can't spend our $$$$$ on bridge upkeep! Those $$$$$ must go to Ukraine!!
The Putin Pufters psychosis is on full display. Some of them blame Ukraine for evey thing wrong in their lives.
From the video it looks like they got the traffic stopped before the ship hit.
Wonder how long to get the channel open with all that metal/roadway on the bottom?
Is the ship in danger of sinking?
Is Mayor Pete back on maternity leave?
Originally Posted by PaulBarnard
I doubt the ship is in danger of sinking. It's likely a double hull with a crash bulkhead and good compartmentalization to prevent progressive flooding.
Thanks Coastie.
They sure seem fast to claim it was just an accident. It probably was a mishap but if someone had done sabotage would this not be a predictable result of losing steerage/power while upstream of the bridge?
John, I am too far removed from that aspect of shipping to be able to give a qualified answer.
Shooting from the hip, I think it would be very hard for an outsider to sabotage the ship in a way that the sabotage wouldn't become apparent until that point in their voyage. Internal sabotage? Possible I suppose, but still shooting from the hip. I have a hunch that angle will be well investigated.
Clearly, the only thing to do is send another $60 billion to Ukraine.
Originally Posted by Sharpsman
ATTENTION
We can't spend our $$$$$ on bridge upkeep! Those $$$$$ must go to Ukraine!!
The Putin Pufters psychosis is on full display. Some of them blame Ukraine for evey thing wrong in their lives.
From the video it looks like they got the traffic stopped before the ship hit.
Wonder how long to get the channel open with all that metal/roadway on the bottom?
Is the ship in danger of sinking?
Is Mayor Pete back on maternity leave?
Originally Posted by PaulBarnard
I doubt the ship is in danger of sinking. It's likely a double hull with a crash bulkhead and good compartmentalization to prevent progressive flooding.
Thanks Coastie.
They sure seem fast to claim it was just an accident. It probably was a mishap but if someone had done sabotage would this not be a predictable result of losing steerage/power while upstream of the bridge?
Well, i you read some threads or watched some news you would know why it was an accident.
Ok the lights went out, supposedly the ship lost control, ok fine, but…
Why was this ship being steered so close to the support in the first place. Why wasn’t this ship being steered dead center between the two supports from the get go.
There was no reason for this ship to be piloted this close to the support when there was schit tons of room available.
Ok the lights went out, supposedly the ship lost control, ok fine, but…
Why was this ship being steered so close to the support in the first place. Why wasn’t this ship being steered dead center between the two supports from the get go.
There was no reason for this ship to be piloted this close to the support when there was schit tons of room available.
This was intensional
I am not familiar with the area, but I’ve rarely encountered a river channel elsewhere that ran a straight line.
Correct! We once had some bad flood damaged main arteries locally. I was instructed to “Get them open!” No permits, no erosion control, nothing but “Open the damned roads!!!”
Ok the lights went out, supposedly the ship lost control, ok fine, but…
Why was this ship being steered so close to the support in the first place. Why wasn’t this ship being steered dead center between the two supports from the get go.
There was no reason for this ship to be piloted this close to the support when there was schit tons of room available.
This was intensional
It's hard to tell from the video, but the initial power failure occurred while the vessel was still a considerable distance from the bridge. If they had a little rudder on, that could have put their trajectory into the bridge.
Ok the lights went out, supposedly the ship lost control, ok fine, but…
Why was this ship being steered so close to the support in the first place. Why wasn’t this ship being steered dead center between the two supports from the get go.
There was no reason for this ship to be piloted this close to the support when there was schit tons of room available.
This was intensional
It's hard to tell from the video, but the initial power failure occurred while the vessel was still a considerable distance from the bridge. If they had a little rudder on, that could have put their trajectory into the bridge.
And I'm sure, as reported, they also had to clear other vessel traffic prior to - means they're not dead nuts middle of the road.
I appreciate the clear headed comments and link from Teal, Gnoahh, and some others. I've been over the Key Bridge a couple of times and appreciate Gnoahh's trepidation on the crossing. As on our Mackinac Bridge (da Bridge) the driver doesn't get to admire the adjacent views.
Regardless of whether the Dali is diesel, diesel electric, or steam turbine electric powered, the propulsion, rudder, and bow thruster controls from the bridge would be electrical/electronic and subject to failure from the two apparent power outages. Both indicators and control devices for propulsion and steering would malfunction.
I just took an advanced maritime navigation/chart plotting course in addition to my USCG 100T Masters license and the charts we used in both classes are the Chesapeake Bay charts “frozen in time” by the USCG. It can be a complicated area to navigate even without vessel traffic. I first thought that the ship either lost power or it was intentional but I’m glad that it wasn’t intentional. Accidents happen unfortunately and maritime disasters often lead to better regulations in an attempt to avoid repeating the error chain that led to something like this.
Clearly, the only thing to do is send another $60 billion to Ukraine.
Originally Posted by Sharpsman
ATTENTION
We can't spend our $$$$$ on bridge upkeep! Those $$$$$ must go to Ukraine!!
The Putin Pufters psychosis is on full display. Some of them blame Ukraine for evey thing wrong in their lives.
From the video it looks like they got the traffic stopped before the ship hit.
Wonder how long to get the channel open with all that metal/roadway on the bottom?
Is the ship in danger of sinking?
Is Mayor Pete back on maternity leave?
Originally Posted by PaulBarnard
I doubt the ship is in danger of sinking. It's likely a double hull with a crash bulkhead and good compartmentalization to prevent progressive flooding.
Originally Posted by JohnBurns
Thanks Coastie.
They sure seem fast to claim it was just an accident. It probably was a mishap but if someone had done sabotage would this not be a predictable result of losing steerage/power while upstream of the bridge?
Originally Posted by RAM
Well, i you read some threads or watched some news you would know why it was an accident.
Clearly, the only thing to do is send another $60 billion to Ukraine.
Originally Posted by Sharpsman
ATTENTION
We can't spend our $$$$$ on bridge upkeep! Those $$$$$ must go to Ukraine!!
The Putin Pufters psychosis is on full display. Some of them blame Ukraine for evey thing wrong in their lives.
From the video it looks like they got the traffic stopped before the ship hit.
Wonder how long to get the channel open with all that metal/roadway on the bottom?
Is the ship in danger of sinking?
Is Mayor Pete back on maternity leave?
Originally Posted by PaulBarnard
I doubt the ship is in danger of sinking. It's likely a double hull with a crash bulkhead and good compartmentalization to prevent progressive flooding.
Thanks Coastie.
They sure seem fast to claim it was just an accident. It probably was a mishap but if someone had done sabotage would this not be a predictable result of losing steerage/power while upstream of the bridge?
John, I am too far removed from that aspect of shipping to be able to give a qualified answer.
Shooting from the hip, I think it would be very hard for an outsider to sabotage the ship in a way that the sabotage wouldn't become apparent until that point in their voyage. Internal sabotage? Possible I suppose, but still shooting from the hip. I have a hunch that angle will be well investigated.
Ok the lights went out, supposedly the ship lost control, ok fine, but…
Why was this ship being steered so close to the support in the first place. Why wasn’t this ship being steered dead center between the two supports from the get go.
There was no reason for this ship to be piloted this close to the support when there was schit tons of room available.
What a horrific nightmare for all involved! I saw three vehicles, one a semi, make it over that bridge before the collision! Terrible rescue scenario too, and the recovery is going to be ugly!
Correct! We once had some bad flood damaged main arteries locally. I was instructed to “Get them open!” No permits, no erosion control, nothing but “Open the damned roads!!!”
2010 flood the one that trashed Opryland, right?
That would be the one. I’ve seen it rain, but never saw anything like that!
Looks like it takes about 50 seconds to cross the entire bridge. And the crash happened at 2:49ish in the video. That's enough time to empty the bridge three times in just the time it took to film this video. And the ship hailed mayday and indicated a possible collision before this video. Even if it was just 10 minutes before the start of this video, that's enough time for authorities to block entrance to the bridge on both sides. While the ship is clearly at fault, I have to place additional blame on the port authority for continuing to allow vehicles to cross the bridge.
The person who asked about bridge design, some locations do require piles or other abutments in front of bridge piers, mostly for erosion/ice control, but also boats. A collision with a cargo ship of this size is significantly beyond any possible design requirement for a bridge support. The mass of the bridge and all the cars on it, probably isn't even as much as the mass of the engine, and just the engine - on the ship. The bridge didn't stand a chance.
"And the ship hailed mayday and indicated a possible collision before this video. Even if it was just 10 minutes before the start of this video, that's enough time for authorities to block entrance to the bridge on both sides. While the ship is clearly at fault, I have to place additional blame on the port authority for continuing to allow vehicles to cross the bridge."
That assumes assets in place[on the ready] to block both directions.
Ok the lights went out, supposedly the ship lost control, ok fine, but…
Why was this ship being steered so close to the support in the first place. Why wasn’t this ship being steered dead center between the two supports from the get go.
There was no reason for this ship to be piloted this close to the support when there was schit tons of room available.
This was intensional
It's hard to tell from the video, but the initial power failure occurred while the vessel was still a considerable distance from the bridge. If they had a little rudder on, that could have put their trajectory into the bridge.
And I'm sure, as reported, they also had to clear other vessel traffic prior to - means they're not dead nuts middle of the road.
Taint Steve's MO to let pragmatism, facts and experience get in the way of his beliefs.
"And the ship hailed mayday and indicated a possible collision before this video. Even if it was just 10 minutes before the start of this video, that's enough time for authorities to block entrance to the bridge on both sides. While the ship is clearly at fault, I have to place additional blame on the port authority for continuing to allow vehicles to cross the bridge."
That assumes assets in place[on the ready] to block both directions.
We're talking about a .gov entity here.
Most bridges don’t have a traffic control crew at the ready on either end a 2 in the morning.
I saw several explosions on several different videos from several different angles so I’m withholding my opinion…
Looked like tranformers poppin to my untrained eye and I bet there were a few power lines running in the bridge.
Any way, the NTSB has not yet been aboard the ship per presser a few minutes ago.
I wish I had the hind sight to start a bridge building company in Baltimore a few weeks ago. Suppressor are kinda going bonkers but I bet emergency bridge building is quite lucrative.
There will be more than one billionare made rebuilding that bridge and Biden has promised the Spice will flow.
I saw several explosions on several different videos from several different angles so I’m withholding my opinion…
Looked like tranformers poppin to my untrained eye and I bet there were a few power lines running in the bridge.
Any way, the NTSB has not yet been aboard the ship per presser a few minutes ago.
I wish I had the hind sight to start a bridge building company in Baltimore a few weeks ago. Suppressor are kinda going bonkers but I bet emergency bridge building is quite lucrative.
There will be more than one billionare made rebuilding that bridge and Biden has promised the Spice will flow.
No fuggin way I’m driving over a bridge you had anything to do with building!
I saw several explosions on several different videos from several different angles so I’m withholding my opinion…
Looked like tranformers poppin to my untrained eye and I bet there were a few power lines running in the bridge.
Any way, the NTSB has not yet been aboard the ship per presser a few minutes ago.
I wish I had the hind sight to start a bridge building company in Baltimore a few weeks ago. Suppressor are kinda going bonkers but I bet emergency bridge building is quite lucrative.
There will be more than one billionare made rebuilding that bridge and Biden has promised the Spice will flow.
"And the ship hailed mayday and indicated a possible collision before this video. Even if it was just 10 minutes before the start of this video, that's enough time for authorities to block entrance to the bridge on both sides. While the ship is clearly at fault, I have to place additional blame on the port authority for continuing to allow vehicles to cross the bridge."
That assumes assets in place[on the ready] to block both directions.
We're talking about a .gov entity here.
Yes, yes, yes, we are dealing with .gov here. So full sentiment on your thoughts. A quick thinking captain, harbor pilot, coast guard...could have called 911 and said block the bridge entrances with cop cars, fire trucks, garbage trucks, anything that a city had on the local streets that time of night. Watching it happen reminds me of the Austin Powers seen where he runs from the steamroller. Clearly this wasn't a super sudden situation and there was time to put some safety provisions in place. Geez, if the blocked just one side the bridge, that would be half as many people involved.
Clearly, the only thing to do is send another $60 billion to Ukraine.
Originally Posted by Sharpsman
ATTENTION
We can't spend our $$$$$ on bridge upkeep! Those $$$$$ must go to Ukraine!!
The Putin Pufters psychosis is on full display. Some of them blame Ukraine for evey thing wrong in their lives.
From the video it looks like they got the traffic stopped before the ship hit.
Wonder how long to get the channel open with all that metal/roadway on the bottom?
Is the ship in danger of sinking?
Is Mayor Pete back on maternity leave?
Originally Posted by PaulBarnard
I doubt the ship is in danger of sinking. It's likely a double hull with a crash bulkhead and good compartmentalization to prevent progressive flooding.
Thanks Coastie.
They sure seem fast to claim it was just an accident. It probably was a mishap but if someone had done sabotage would this not be a predictable result of losing steerage/power while upstream of the bridge?
John, I am too far removed from that aspect of shipping to be able to give a qualified answer.
Shooting from the hip, I think it would be very hard for an outsider to sabotage the ship in a way that the sabotage wouldn't become apparent until that point in their voyage. Internal sabotage? Possible I suppose, but still shooting from the hip. I have a hunch that angle will be well investigated.
Anyone know why or how a larger container ship can lose power and lose steering capabilities??
No immediate gen back up
Usually there are only 2 main generating plants, but all power is routed through the main bus ....any failure of a switch, relay, overload trip, or phase sync trip, can kill all power. The half century of automation to eliminate labor/crew has a downside. Engine crew used to have enough staff to constantly patrol and were right there...they could immediately react...perhaps holding a failed component in place manually with an insulated hotstick. Nowadays an engineering officer on watch is notified by computer or the power going off...a lot of time wasted responding...time a ship may not have.
Admittedly, I know nothing about ships, a little about river barges, quite a bit about inland fishing boats, But,I still have trouble understanding why the tow boats are not required all of the way to the ocean, with a ship that size. miles
Admittedly, I know nothing about ships, a little about river barges, quite a bit about inland fishing boats, But,I still have trouble understanding why the tow boats are not required all of the way to the ocean, with a ship that size. miles
And this my friends is the key to the whole mess...the shipowners have fought this forever, it's all about the money...within seconds the pilots could have had 12,000 hp guiding the disabled hulk through the bridge footings.
I watched both views of that impact from behind and from in front. it certainly look like it was steered into the pillar to me..
I watch twice.... perfectly lined up on the pillar... Hell even the camera was in the right spot
For most of the time - it doesn't have power or steerage. When it does, it went full astern (the smoke is this ship basically rolling coal to do so) and without steering in reverse on a single screw vessel - prop walked the boat. Stern goes to port - lining up the ship and drift forward into the pilling.
I find it amusing that some of you couldnt possibly imagine this not being an accident. There currently is not enough info out there for me to form a good opinion yet, but after all the insanity we have seen in the past few years, anything is possible. This could be cyber or lord knows what. Could just be a bad accident as well. Laughing off either possibility is very short sighted
Admittedly, I know nothing about ships, a little about river barges, quite a bit about inland fishing boats, But,I still have trouble understanding why the tow boats are not required all of the way to the ocean, with a ship that size. miles
And this my friends is the key to the whole mess...the shipowners have fought this forever, it's all about the money...within seconds the pilots could have had 12,000 hp guiding the disabled hulk through the bridge footings.
Many are going to learn that it's the companies with cargo on the ship that crashed into the bridge that will pay the damages, not the ship owner or ship operator. That's because of ancient maritime law (older than the US constitution) called "General Average" designed to prevent sailors from fighting over which cargo to toss overboard, and instead to focus on saving the ship. Per Ryan Peterson.
Admittedly, I know nothing about ships, a little about river barges, quite a bit about inland fishing boats, But,I still have trouble understanding why the tow boats are not required all of the way to the ocean, with a ship that size. miles
I sailed up through Norfolk a few times. No bridges on the Hampton end but huge ships come barreling through there in and out on their own constantly. The only tugs I saw were escorting a submarine and pushing me out of the channel.
Let's see , when those passenger rail cars always crash or they're going too fast on a corner and ends up being a gay guy arguing with his lover and in the end .. maybe the harbor pilot was pizzed at his lover... with all the diversity they could hire that female engineer crew out of Florida that built the pedestrian bridge that fell and they could get right on it and Old Pete butt plug could be in charge. Everyone go home they got this!
I find it amusing that some of you couldnt possibly imagine this not being an accident. There currently is not enough info out there for me to form a good opinion yet, but after all the insanity we have seen in the past few years, anything is possible. This could be cyber or lord knows what. Could just be a bad accident as well. Laughing off either possibility is very short sighted
The prevailing thought has been that it's anything BUT an accident. Some people, believing it's an accident, realize that it's unlikely that the engine room was "hacked" to stop ships power and then EXPERTLY rode momentum and currents to create a collision to take out a bridge at the BEST possible time of day to do so for mitigating loss of life. They did this knowing eventually power would come back on and reactions would ensure a collision after. They couldn't plan on her sinking as she only has 10 feet from keel to the bed - she's not gonna disappear under the waves....
The MAN 55,000 hp powerplant has Wi-fi and internet connectivity that opens it up for hacking - I'm sure.
They want to "attack" as retribution for whatever but not hurt anyone - makes sense.
I appreciate the clear headed comments and link from Teal, Gnoahh, and some others. I've been over the Key Bridge a couple of times and appreciate Gnoahh's trepidation on the crossing. As on our Mackinac Bridge (da Bridge) the driver doesn't get to admire the adjacent views.
Regardless of whether the Dali is diesel, diesel electric, or steam turbine electric powered, the propulsion, rudder, and bow thruster controls from the bridge would be electrical/electronic and subject to failure from the two apparent power outages. Both indicators and control devices for propulsion and steering would malfunction.
Wife took me to Northern Michigan last year. The Mackinac Bridge, much to her chagrin, was the highlight to me. That is an impressive structure! She was also pissed when visiting Las Vegas that my main interest was the Hoover Dam.
Ok the lights went out, supposedly the ship lost control, ok fine, but…
Why was this ship being steered so close to the support in the first place. Why wasn’t this ship being steered dead center between the two supports from the get go.
There was no reason for this ship to be piloted this close to the support when there was schit tons of room available.
This was intensional
Why didn't your mother insist on a condom? THAT is the elephant in the room.
Admittedly, I know nothing about ships, a little about river barges, quite a bit about inland fishing boats, But,I still have trouble understanding why the tow boats are not required all of the way to the ocean, with a ship that size. miles
And this my friends is the key to the whole mess...the shipowners have fought this forever, it's all about the money...within seconds the pilots could have had 12,000 hp guiding the disabled hulk through the bridge footings.
Many are going to learn that it's the companies with cargo on the ship that crashed into the bridge that will pay the damages, not the ship owner or ship operator. That's because of ancient maritime law (older than the US constitution) called "General Average" designed to prevent sailors from fighting over which cargo to toss overboard, and instead to focus on saving the ship. Per Ryan Peterson.
Actually - speaking with more people - to clarify, damages to the vessel and cargo are covered under “general average”—paid by the cargo owners and their insurance companies. The bridge and other external damages will be covered by the property insurance of the ship operator.
I watched both views of that impact from behind and from in front. it certainly look like it was steered into the pillar to me..
I watch twice.... perfectly lined up on the pillar... Hell even the camera was in the right spot
For most of the time - it doesn't have power or steerage. When it does, it went full astern (the smoke is this ship basically rolling coal to do so) and without steering in reverse on a single screw vessel - prop walked the boat. Stern goes to port - lining up the ship and drift forward into the pilling.
Human error.
It absolutely could be a combination of mechanical failure and human error.
At this point nobody knows and NTSB has not been aboard the ship.
Anyone, including the FBI, claiming to "know" what happened is wrong right now even if their guess turns out to be correct.
There are plenty of reasons why plenty of persons are having a very good day today.
I find it amusing that some of you couldnt possibly imagine this not being an accident. There currently is not enough info out there for me to form a good opinion yet, but after all the insanity we have seen in the past few years, anything is possible. This could be cyber or lord knows what. Could just be a bad accident as well. Laughing off either possibility is very short sighted
The prevailing thought has been that it's anything BUT an accident. Some people, believing it's an accident, realize that it's unlikely that the engine room was "hacked" to stop ships power and then EXPERTLY rode momentum and currents to create a collision to take out a bridge at the BEST possible time of day to do so for mitigating loss of life. They did this knowing eventually power would come back on and reactions would ensure a collision after. They couldn't plan on her sinking as she only has 10 feet from keel to the bed - she's not gonna disappear under the waves....
The MAN 55,000 hp powerplant has Wi-fi and internet connectivity that opens it up for hacking - I'm sure.
They want to "attack" as retribution for whatever but not hurt anyone - makes sense.
I dont know alot about shipping or ships in general. You may be absolutely correct. I just question everything these days. Too many odd things happening
Admittedly, I know nothing about ships, a little about river barges, quite a bit about inland fishing boats, But,I still have trouble understanding why the tow boats are not required all of the way to the ocean, with a ship that size. miles
And this my friends is the key to the whole mess...the shipowners have fought this forever, it's all about the money...within seconds the pilots could have had 12,000 hp guiding the disabled hulk through the bridge footings.
Many are going to learn that it's the companies with cargo on the ship that crashed into the bridge that will pay the damages, not the ship owner or ship operator. That's because of ancient maritime law (older than the US constitution) called "General Average" designed to prevent sailors from fighting over which cargo to toss overboard, and instead to focus on saving the ship. Per Ryan Peterson.
Actually - speaking with more people - to clarify, damages to the vessel and cargo are covered under “general average”—paid by the cargo owners and their insurance companies. The bridge and other external damages will be covered by the property insurance of the ship operator.
If it is an accident, does any blame or penalties fall on the captain?
I watched both views of that impact from behind and from in front. it certainly look like it was steered into the pillar to me..
I watch twice.... perfectly lined up on the pillar... Hell even the camera was in the right spot
For most of the time - it doesn't have power or steerage. When it does, it went full astern (the smoke is this ship basically rolling coal to do so) and without steering in reverse on a single screw vessel - prop walked the boat. Stern goes to port - lining up the ship and drift forward into the pilling.
Human error.
I don't doubt or disagree with what Teal is said here. just from my observation and said looks like. that video will cause conspiracy theories for the next hundred years.
Admittedly, I know nothing about ships, a little about river barges, quite a bit about inland fishing boats, But,I still have trouble understanding why the tow boats are not required all of the way to the ocean, with a ship that size. miles
And this my friends is the key to the whole mess...the shipowners have fought this forever, it's all about the money...within seconds the pilots could have had 12,000 hp guiding the disabled hulk through the bridge footings.
Many are going to learn that it's the companies with cargo on the ship that crashed into the bridge that will pay the damages, not the ship owner or ship operator. That's because of ancient maritime law (older than the US constitution) called "General Average" designed to prevent sailors from fighting over which cargo to toss overboard, and instead to focus on saving the ship. Per Ryan Peterson.
Actually - speaking with more people - to clarify, damages to the vessel and cargo are covered under “general average”—paid by the cargo owners and their insurance companies. The bridge and other external damages will be covered by the property insurance of the ship operator.
If it is an accident, does any blame or penalties fall on the captain?
I'd think like anything else, you'd have to prove impairment (drunk/drugs) or gross negligence/malpractice - ignoring all protocol etc.
I do not know if their insurance has a deductible lol.
Admittedly, I know nothing about ships, a little about river barges, quite a bit about inland fishing boats, But,I still have trouble understanding why the tow boats are not required all of the way to the ocean, with a ship that size. miles
And this my friends is the key to the whole mess...the shipowners have fought this forever, it's all about the money...within seconds the pilots could have had 12,000 hp guiding the disabled hulk through the bridge footings.
Many are going to learn that it's the companies with cargo on the ship that crashed into the bridge that will pay the damages, not the ship owner or ship operator. That's because of ancient maritime law (older than the US constitution) called "General Average" designed to prevent sailors from fighting over which cargo to toss overboard, and instead to focus on saving the ship. Per Ryan Peterson.
Actually - speaking with more people - to clarify, damages to the vessel and cargo are covered under “general average”—paid by the cargo owners and their insurance companies. The bridge and other external damages will be covered by the property insurance of the ship operator.
If it is an accident, does any blame or penalties fall on the captain?
I'd think like anything else, you'd have to prove impairment (drunk/drugs) or gross negligence/malpractice - ignoring all protocol etc.
I do not know if their insurance has a deductible lol.
Kind of what I figured. Ive heard they have not located everyone missing yet, so with water temps in the 40s, my guess is there will be a few casualties sadly. Wonder if that will impact who gets the blame for this
Step 1 - reroute surface traffic and develop a new Hazmat/OS/OD route. Step 2 - clear the river and get the docks open and going again Step 3 - rebuild the bridge, likely with precautions like dolphins (not the animal) before the bridge supports both in and outbound.
The blame game will happen concurrently to all of those I bet. Just thinking of it as a project to get through. I'm sure they have local salvage and diver crews - Roen won't be chugging out from Sturgeon Bay here...
Admittedly, I know nothing about ships, a little about river barges, quite a bit about inland fishing boats, But,I still have trouble understanding why the tow boats are not required all of the way to the ocean, with a ship that size. miles
And this my friends is the key to the whole mess...the shipowners have fought this forever, it's all about the money...within seconds the pilots could have had 12,000 hp guiding the disabled hulk through the bridge footings.
Many are going to learn that it's the companies with cargo on the ship that crashed into the bridge that will pay the damages, not the ship owner or ship operator. That's because of ancient maritime law (older than the US constitution) called "General Average" designed to prevent sailors from fighting over which cargo to toss overboard, and instead to focus on saving the ship. Per Ryan Peterson.
Actually - speaking with more people - to clarify, damages to the vessel and cargo are covered under “general average”—paid by the cargo owners and their insurance companies. The bridge and other external damages will be covered by the property insurance of the ship operator.
If it is an accident, does any blame or penalties fall on the captain?
The senior pilot is the captain during the period they are contracted for, it is very respectful, but 99 times out of 100, the ships captain keeps his mouth shut..and is often not much more than a translator when languages are a problem. I got one side of the story once working on a docking assist at Bremerton/Kitsap Naval Base, a Navy Captain countermanded the order of the pilot...the skipper on the tug I was on balked at the order of the naval captain...the pilot told my skipper he had been relieved and please enter that with the correct time in the tug's log. Very tense but polite..no voices raised on the radio. Normally the navy has their own tugs. The navy ship damaged about 60 ft of pier and a small forest of piling with some hull damage to her stern. I don't know who ended up paying, but we never docked another naval vessel while I was there. The pilot continued to dock tankers and containerships successfully for another 12 years until he retired. I suspect my company didn't think the little bit of navy work was worth the hassle.
I, as well as everyone I know here is still is still in shock. From what I understand, the pilot did get on the horn to shore authorities the instant it became apparent that the ship was going to hit. The authorities, who we locals refer to as "the bridge cops" (MTA cops responsible for all the bridges in the Bay region) who did immediately choke off traffic onto the bridge. The vehicles seen in the videos were merely stragglers who scooted through in the last second, it's unclear if any of them took the plunge. (The videos show only a couple vehicles moving on the bridge - which even at that time of night is usually damned near bumper to bumper.) The vehicles that went in the drink were seemingly work vehicles of the maintenance crew standing on the bridge, as were most if not all, of the people who went down. It would seem that the emergency response was prompt and effective, sparing a whole lot more souls from a grizzly end. You gotta remember this ship was moving at a snail's pace, a big irresistible force, but a snail's pace nonetheless.
The main question I have is why didn't the maintenance crew get the word to drop what they're doing and scoot. Maybe they did and simply didn't react fast enough, who knows - we may never know.
I knew when this thread started that the conspiracy theorists and "Chicken Littles" would jump to conclusions and start promulgating wild ideas based entirely on gut feelings, scant information, and prejudices. Hell, they may well be right at the end of the day but it bears keeping quiet about it until the facts are in - if for no other reason than to honor the poor bastards who lost their lives.
Gnoahh, My first guess would be the workers were overlooked. In an extreme emergency the traffic would be the first though. Someone may have nightmares for years over that normal oversight.
Gnoahh, My first guess would be the workers were overlooked. In an extreme emergency the traffic would be the first though. Someone may have nightmares for years over that normal oversight.
Yep - I'm sure some will be up nights. Might be they also assumed the workers would "see the ship coming!" and bail. But that's not likely, I mean, they've got mind/hands on task - no over the side.
Admittedly, I know nothing about ships, a little about river barges, quite a bit about inland fishing boats, But,I still have trouble understanding why the tow boats are not required all of the way to the ocean, with a ship that size. miles
And this my friends is the key to the whole mess...the shipowners have fought this forever, it's all about the money...within seconds the pilots could have had 12,000 hp guiding the disabled hulk through the bridge footings.
Many are going to learn that it's the companies with cargo on the ship that crashed into the bridge that will pay the damages, not the ship owner or ship operator. That's because of ancient maritime law (older than the US constitution) called "General Average" designed to prevent sailors from fighting over which cargo to toss overboard, and instead to focus on saving the ship. Per Ryan Peterson.
Actually - speaking with more people - to clarify, damages to the vessel and cargo are covered under “general average”—paid by the cargo owners and their insurance companies. The bridge and other external damages will be covered by the property insurance of the ship operator.
If it is an accident, does any blame or penalties fall on the captain?
The senior pilot is the captain during the period they are contracted for, it is very respectful, but 99 times out of 100, the ships captain keeps his mouth shut..and is often not much more than a translator when languages are a problem. I got one side of the story once working on a docking assist at Bremerton/Kitsap Naval Base, a Navy Captain countermanded the order of the pilot...the skipper on the tug I was on balked at the order of the naval captain...the pilot told my skipper he had been relieved and please enter that with the correct time in the tug's log. Very tense but polite..no voices raised on the radio. Normally the navy has their own tugs. The navy ship damaged about 60 ft of pier and a small forest of piling with some hull damage to her stern. I don't know who ended up paying, but we never docked another naval vessel while I was there. The pilot continued to dock tankers and containerships successfully for another 12 years until he retired. I suspect my company didn't think the little bit of navy work was worth the hassle.
My tensonal Lebel bees sumwhut esxepsonal sxasperated cuz of dish hapsunal ebent! Butt us Kant spen no $$$$ on da bride upket ft cuz wee got sen dem $$$$$ to urbankane!
I, as well as everyone I know here is still is still in shock. From what I understand, the pilot did get on the horn to shore authorities the instant it became apparent that the ship was going to hit. The authorities, who we locals refer to as "the bridge cops" (MTA cops responsible for all the bridges in the Bay region) who did immediately choke off traffic onto the bridge. The vehicles seen in the videos were merely stragglers who scooted through in the last second, it's unclear if any of them took the plunge. (The videos show only a couple vehicles moving on the bridge - which even at that time of night is usually damned near bumper to bumper.) The vehicles that went in the drink were seemingly work vehicles of the maintenance crew standing on the bridge, as were most if not all, of the people who went down. It would seem that the emergency response was prompt and effective, sparing a whole lot more souls from a grizzly end. You gotta remember this ship was moving at a snail's pace, a big irresistible force, but a snail's pace nonetheless.
The main question I have is why didn't the maintenance crew get the word to drop what they're doing and scoot. Maybe they did and simply didn't react fast enough, who knows - we may never know.
I knew when this thread started that the conspiracy theorists and "Chicken Littles" would jump to conclusions and start promulgating wild ideas based entirely on gut feelings, scant information, and prejudices. Hell, they may well be right at the end of the day but it bears keeping quiet about it until the facts are in - if for no other reason than to honor the poor bastards who lost their lives.
And damn good for them to get it shut off so fast. I'm sure one of those cars was a 'f'k it, I'm going'. I'm glad they did their job well and that it wasn't 8am.
I find it amusing that some of you couldnt possibly imagine this not being an accident. There currently is not enough info out there for me to form a good opinion yet, but after all the insanity we have seen in the past few years, anything is possible. This could be cyber or lord knows what. Could just be a bad accident as well. Laughing off either possibility is very short sighted
The prevailing thought has been that it's anything BUT an accident. Some people, believing it's an accident, realize that it's unlikely that the engine room was "hacked" to stop ships power and then EXPERTLY rode momentum and currents to create a collision to take out a bridge at the BEST possible time of day to do so for mitigating loss of life. They did this knowing eventually power would come back on and reactions would ensure a collision after. They couldn't plan on her sinking as she only has 10 feet from keel to the bed - she's not gonna disappear under the waves....
The MAN 55,000 hp powerplant has Wi-fi and internet connectivity that opens it up for hacking - I'm sure.
They want to "attack" as retribution for whatever but not hurt anyone - makes sense.
I dont know alot about shipping or ships in general. You may be absolutely correct. I just question everything these days. Too many odd things happening
Democrats keep introducing legislation to put government controlled kill switches in new vehicles. Why couldn't a foreign government hack a kill switch into the ship?
Multiple intel sources: Baltimore bridge collapse was an “absolutely brilliant strategic attack” on US critical infrastructure - most likely cyber - & our intel agencies know it. In information warfare terms, they just divided the US along the Mason Dixon line exactly like the Civil War.
Second busiest strategic roadway in the nation for hazardous material now down for 4-5 years - which is how long they say it will take to recover. Bridge was built specifically to move hazardous material - fuel, diesel, propane gas, nitrogen, highly flammable materials, chemicals and oversized cargo that cannot fit in the tunnels - that supply chain now crippled.
Make no mistake: this was an extraordinary attack in terms of planning, timing & execution.
The two critical components on that bridge are the two load-bearing pylons on each end, closest to the shore. They are bigger, thicker and deeper than anything else. These are the anchor points and they knew that hitting either one one of them would be a fatal wound to the integrity of the bridge.
Half a mile of bridge went in the river - likely you will have to build a new one. Also caused so much damage to the structural integrity of the bottom concrete part that you cannot see & won’t know until they take the wreckage apart. Structural destruction likely absolute.
Attack perfectly targeted.
“They have figured out how to bring us down. As long as you stay away from the teeth of the US military, you can pick the US apart. We are arrogant and ignorant - lethal combination. Obama said they would fundamentally change America and they did. We are in a free-fall ride on a roller coaster right now - no brakes - just picking up speed.”
The footage shows the cargo ship never got in the approach lane in the channel. You have to be in the channel before you get into that turn. Location was precise/deliberate: chose a bend in the river where you have to slow down and commit yourself - once you are committed in that area there is not enough room to maneuver.
Should have had a harbor pilot to pilot the boat. You are not supposed to traverse any obstacles without the harbor pilot.
They chose a full moon so they would have maximum tidal shift - rise and fall. Brisk flow in that river on a normal day & have had a lot of rain recently so water was already moving along at a good pace.
Hit it with enough kinetic energy to knock the load-bearing pylon out from under the highway - which fatally weakens the span and then 50 percent of the bridge fell into the water.
All these factors when you look at it - this is how you teach people how to do this type of attack and there are so few people left in the system who know this. We have a Junior varsity team on the field.
Tremendous navigational obstruction. Huge logistical nightmare to clean this up. Number of dead is tragic but not the whole measure of the attack.
That kind-of bridge constantly under repair - always at night because there is so much traffic and they cannot obstruct that during the day. So concern is for repair guys who were on foot (out of their vehicles) working who may now be in the water - 48 degrees at most at this time of year.
When you choke off Baltimore you have cut the main north-south hazardous corridor (I95) in half. Now has to go around the city - or go somewhere else.
To move some of that cargo through the tunnel you may be able to get a permit but those are slow to get and require an escort system that is expensive and has to be done at night.
For every $100 dollars that goes into the city, $12 comes from shipping. Believe this will cripple the city of Baltimore at a time when they do not hav e the resources to recover.
" 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.
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?
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.
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."
Quote
I’m talking to people who are on the inside, some who are on active duty, some who are retired. And everyone, literally, from critical infrastructure in the Department of Homeland Security to the intelligence agencies, they know there’s no other… This is a cyber attack on a critical infrastructure corridor for the United States.
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.
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.
Those that knew it was an attack before the damage was done, didn’t want to stop it.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
How many times do you think that pilot did that work while losing power 2x in the middle of maneuver?
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.
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.
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.
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.
I seem to remember an assassination several decades ago where our Intel agencies said “there is no proof”, “anyone that claims otherwise is a conspiracy nut” and poof like magic they lied.
I also seem to remember just a few short months ago that 50+ former US Intel operatives signed a letter stating that The Hunter Laptop was 100% Bullschit and Russian Disinformation, and poof like magic, there is proof and proof they lied.
So, you do you and believe our Deep State and our Intel Community is honest and chucked full of integrity.
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.
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.
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.
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.
This from some Navy guys I talked to yesterday and some local guys here who made a living on the Great Lakes. I'm 90 and 30 minutes from Fincantierti Marine's 2 shipyards here. We've got a lot of boat people in the area.
All of our theories and speculation are fun, but I would bet on much more simple and common mechanical failure. There is one thing that I would bet will be looked at by the investigating agencies...did the Dali take on fuel while in Baltimore? Of course we have no way of knowing, but there are many grades of marine diesel (Not like your diesel, it's a blend of diesel #2 and heavy fuel oil))...and moneywise of course, the owners buy the lowest grades and prices. It's up to the ships engineers to make the fuel work, by filtering, settling and or centrifuging. It's nasty stuff, often containing the dregs of the refinery or at least sediments from the bottoms of dirty storage tanks. Fuel contamination for a dollar Alex.
I seem to remember an assassination several decades ago where our Intel agencies said “there is no proof”, “anyone that claims otherwise is a conspiracy nut” and poof like magic they lied.
I also seem to remember just a few short months ago that 50+ former US Intel operatives signed a letter stating that The Hunter Laptop was 100% Bullschit and Russian Disinformation, and poof like magic, there is proof and proof they lied.
So, you do you and believe our Deep State and our Intel Community is honest and chucked full of integrity.
Absolutely not. I don’t believe anything coming from them, but that doesn’t require me to believe something different from what I saw with my own eyes.
All of our theories and speculation are fun, but I would bet on much more simple and common mechanical failure. There is one thing that I would bet will be looked at by the investigating agencies...did the Dali take on fuel while in Baltimore? Of course we have no way of knowing, but there are many grades of marine diesel (Not like your diesel, it's a blend of diesel #2 and heavy fuel oil))...and moneywise of course, the owners buy the lowest grades and prices. It's up to the ships engineers to make the fuel work, by filtering, settling and or centrifuging. It's nasty stuff, often containing the dregs of the refinery or at least sediments from the bottoms of dirty storage tanks. Fuel contamination for a dollar Alex.
I've heard this a lot too - fuel explains the loss of power/mechanical failure that some people just are completely unable to understand DOES happen without a "cyber attack", while simultaneously bemoaning how expensive it is to fix their Ford in the driveway and Mercury OB on the bass boat. Never making the connection.
I seem to remember an assassination several decades ago where our Intel agencies said “there is no proof”, “anyone that claims otherwise is a conspiracy nut” and poof like magic they lied.
I also seem to remember just a few short months ago that 50+ former US Intel operatives signed a letter stating that The Hunter Laptop was 100% Bullschit and Russian Disinformation, and poof like magic, there is proof and proof they lied.
So, you do you and believe our Deep State and our Intel Community is honest and chucked full of integrity.
Funny - you don't believe that intel community because of what you posted above but you DO believe that intel community telling some journalist exactly what you want to hear, possible or not. Because what NO ONE can explain is how a 55k hp engine got "hacked via cyber. They just claim it did.
I live at the intersection of Rt.50 and Rt.2/179, in the lower left quadrant of this map. I look out my 2nd floor down onto Rt.50 to the south about 200 yards away.
You can tell from this illustration how waterways (primarily the Chesapeake Bay and tributary rivers) dominate our local world. There are no straight lines "from here to there". This is the hard reality that'll dominate the coming traffic congestion due to the bridge collapse.
I hear ya...
I used to live aboard my ketch in Pasadena (Maryland Yacht Club)... traffic in your zone is gonna be a double fiasco for a long time I suspect.
I seem to remember an assassination several decades ago where our Intel agencies said “there is no proof”, “anyone that claims otherwise is a conspiracy nut” and poof like magic they lied.
I also seem to remember just a few short months ago that 50+ former US Intel operatives signed a letter stating that The Hunter Laptop was 100% Bullschit and Russian Disinformation, and poof like magic, there is proof and proof they lied.
So, you do you and believe our Deep State and our Intel Community is honest and chucked full of integrity.
Funny - you don't believe that intel community because of what you posted above but you DO believe that intel community telling some journalist exactly what you want to hear, possible or not. Because what NO ONE can explain is how a 55k hp engine got "hacked via cyber. They just claim it did.
Do t believe everything you think
I'll do me and be happy, you do you and blame the world for your inadequacies.
I find it interesting that exactly ZERO of my former intelligence co-workers, who continued working at the 3 letter agency that doesn't get named after I left said work - don't buy the cyber attack at all.
Ok the lights went out, supposedly the ship lost control, ok fine, but…
Why was this ship being steered so close to the support in the first place. Why wasn’t this ship being steered dead center between the two supports from the get go.
There was no reason for this ship to be piloted this close to the support when there was schit tons of room available.
This was intensional
VERY NARROW and specific channel.
Once again... you are talking out of your ass Stevie Wonder...
I seem to remember an assassination several decades ago where our Intel agencies said “there is no proof”, “anyone that claims otherwise is a conspiracy nut” and poof like magic they lied.
I also seem to remember just a few short months ago that 50+ former US Intel operatives signed a letter stating that The Hunter Laptop was 100% Bullschit and Russian Disinformation, and poof like magic, there is proof and proof they lied.
So, you do you and believe our Deep State and our Intel Community is honest and chucked full of integrity.
Absolutely not. I don’t believe anything coming from them, but that doesn’t require me to believe something different from what I saw with my own eyes.
What did we see? It’s hard to say without knowing what went on. I mean if you look, the first turn towards the support happened immediately before the power went out the first time. Then the big one came immediately after it came back on. It looks to me like if the power had stayed off, it would have slid right under that bridge.
Once again, I don’t know what happen and an accident is the likeliest thing but looks can be deceiving and are heavily influenced by what you decide to believe. For instance, if you were in a car and someone hacked it and you couldn’t control the steering, what would you do? You know what you would do, you would try to put it in neutral or turn off the engine. So, what if the ship were hacked and the crew tried to turn off the power? Then, when the auxiliary power came back on, the hacker still had control and steered it into the pylons. I’m not saying that happened, but if it had, it would probably look like what we saw in that video.
I don’t know that any of this happened, but it could. We have the strongest military on earth but we are so vulnerable in so many ways. And as for a hacker knowing exactly what would happen or how the ship and crew would react, who says he did if it happened? I suspect that to the extent there is cyber frickery going on with our infrastructure, a lot of it is pretty random to just see it any damage can be done. For all we know, this could have been the fifteenth time in the last year something similar had happened but nothing bad happened until now. With our current government, I wouldn’t rely upon the to tell us or fix the problem.
I seem to remember an assassination several decades ago where our Intel agencies said “there is no proof”, “anyone that claims otherwise is a conspiracy nut” and poof like magic they lied.
I also seem to remember just a few short months ago that 50+ former US Intel operatives signed a letter stating that The Hunter Laptop was 100% Bullschit and Russian Disinformation, and poof like magic, there is proof and proof they lied.
So, you do you and believe our Deep State and our Intel Community is honest and chucked full of integrity.
Absolutely not. I don’t believe anything coming from them, but that doesn’t require me to believe something different from what I saw with my own eyes.
What did we see? It’s hard to say without knowing what went on. I mean if you look, the first turn towards the support happened immediately before the power went out the first time. Then the big one came immediately after it came back on. It looks to me like if the power had stayed off, it would have slid right under that bridge.
Once again, I don’t know what happen and an accident is the likeliest thing but looks can be deceiving and are heavily influenced by what you decide to believe. For instance, if you were in a car and someone hacked it and you couldn’t control the steering, what would you do? You know what you would do, you would try to put it in neutral or turn off the engine. So, what if the ship were hacked and the crew tried to turn off the power? Then, when the auxiliary power came back on, the hacker still had control and steered it into the pylons. I’m not saying that happened, but if it had, it would probably look like what we saw in that video.
I don’t know that any of this happened, but it could. We have the strongest military on earth but we are so vulnerable in so many ways. And as for a hacker knowing exactly what would happen or how the ship and crew would react, who says he did if it happened? I suspect that to the extent there is cyber frickery going on with our infrastructure, a lot of it is pretty random to just see it any damage can be done. For all we know, this could have been the fifteenth time in the last year something similar had happened but nothing bad happened until now. With our current government, I wouldn’t rely upon the to tell us or fix the problem.
I agree with you about our vunerabilities and about our dishonest government and press. All I’m saying is that if you’ve ever operated a boat, what we see happen in the video makes perfect sense for an equipment malfunction.
The Biden Administration claimed there was no evidence of foul play, or terrorist activity, within a few hours of the collision.
That be some quick top notch investigators there, that God Biden and his Administration are that good.
Biden is an idiot, but:
He spoke more than 11 hours after the incident; said that it appeared to be an accident; and said that "there is no other information that it was intentional."
He didn't say that everyone was 100% certain that it was not intentional at that point. He simply said that there was no information to suggest that it was intentional at that point. Without any information suggesting that it was intentional, most people are going to assume that a collision is accidental. Of course, just because green space aliens killed JFK, you can assume, if you want, that they also caused an unfortunate allision where the ship obviously had lost power.
I seem to remember an assassination several decades ago where our Intel agencies said “there is no proof”, “anyone that claims otherwise is a conspiracy nut” and poof like magic they lied.
I also seem to remember just a few short months ago that 50+ former US Intel operatives signed a letter stating that The Hunter Laptop was 100% Bullschit and Russian Disinformation, and poof like magic, there is proof and proof they lied.
So, you do you and believe our Deep State and our Intel Community is honest and chucked full of integrity.
Absolutely not. I don’t believe anything coming from them, but that doesn’t require me to believe something different from what I saw with my own eyes.
What did we see? It’s hard to say without knowing what went on. I mean if you look, the first turn towards the support happened immediately before the power went out the first time. Then the big one came immediately after it came back on. It looks to me like if the power had stayed off, it would have slid right under that bridge.
Once again, I don’t know what happen and an accident is the likeliest thing but looks can be deceiving and are heavily influenced by what you decide to believe. For instance, if you were in a car and someone hacked it and you couldn’t control the steering, what would you do? You know what you would do, you would try to put it in neutral or turn off the engine. So, what if the ship were hacked and the crew tried to turn off the power? Then, when the auxiliary power came back on, the hacker still had control and steered it into the pylons. I’m not saying that happened, but if it had, it would probably look like what we saw in that video.
I don’t know that any of this happened, but it could. We have the strongest military on earth but we are so vulnerable in so many ways. And as for a hacker knowing exactly what would happen or how the ship and crew would react, who says he did if it happened? I suspect that to the extent there is cyber frickery going on with our infrastructure, a lot of it is pretty random to just see it any damage can be done. For all we know, this could have been the fifteenth time in the last year something similar had happened but nothing bad happened until now. With our current government, I wouldn’t rely upon the to tell us or fix the problem.
I agree with you about our vunerabilities and about our dishonest government and press. All I’m saying is that if you’ve ever operated a boat, what we see happen in the video makes perfect sense for an equipment malfunction.
Originally Posted by gregintenn
Originally Posted by JoeBob
Originally Posted by gregintenn
Originally Posted by steve4102
I seem to remember an assassination several decades ago where our Intel agencies said “there is no proof”, “anyone that claims otherwise is a conspiracy nut” and poof like magic they lied.
I also seem to remember just a few short months ago that 50+ former US Intel operatives signed a letter stating that The Hunter Laptop was 100% Bullschit and Russian Disinformation, and poof like magic, there is proof and proof they lied.
So, you do you and believe our Deep State and our Intel Community is honest and chucked full of integrity.
Absolutely not. I don’t believe anything coming from them, but that doesn’t require me to believe something different from what I saw with my own eyes.
What did we see? It’s hard to say without knowing what went on. I mean if you look, the first turn towards the support happened immediately before the power went out the first time. Then the big one came immediately after it came back on. It looks to me like if the power had stayed off, it would have slid right under that bridge.
Once again, I don’t know what happen and an accident is the likeliest thing but looks can be deceiving and are heavily influenced by what you decide to believe. For instance, if you were in a car and someone hacked it and you couldn’t control the steering, what would you do? You know what you would do, you would try to put it in neutral or turn off the engine. So, what if the ship were hacked and the crew tried to turn off the power? Then, when the auxiliary power came back on, the hacker still had control and steered it into the pylons. I’m not saying that happened, but if it had, it would probably look like what we saw in that video.
I don’t know that any of this happened, but it could. We have the strongest military on earth but we are so vulnerable in so many ways. And as for a hacker knowing exactly what would happen or how the ship and crew would react, who says he did if it happened? I suspect that to the extent there is cyber frickery going on with our infrastructure, a lot of it is pretty random to just see it any damage can be done. For all we know, this could have been the fifteenth time in the last year something similar had happened but nothing bad happened until now. With our current government, I wouldn’t rely upon the to tell us or fix the problem.
I agree with you about our vunerabilities and about our dishonest government and press. All I’m saying is that if you’ve ever operated a boat, what we see happen in the video makes perfect sense for an equipment malfunction.
Sure it does. But wouldn’t you like to hear from the pilot? Wouldn’t you like an actual explanation?
I seem to remember an assassination several decades ago where our Intel agencies said “there is no proof”, “anyone that claims otherwise is a conspiracy nut” and poof like magic they lied.
I also seem to remember just a few short months ago that 50+ former US Intel operatives signed a letter stating that The Hunter Laptop was 100% Bullschit and Russian Disinformation, and poof like magic, there is proof and proof they lied.
So, you do you and believe our Deep State and our Intel Community is honest and chucked full of integrity.
Absolutely not. I don’t believe anything coming from them, but that doesn’t require me to believe something different from what I saw with my own eyes.
What did we see? It’s hard to say without knowing what went on. I mean if you look, the first turn towards the support happened immediately before the power went out the first time. Then the big one came immediately after it came back on. It looks to me like if the power had stayed off, it would have slid right under that bridge.
Once again, I don’t know what happen and an accident is the likeliest thing but looks can be deceiving and are heavily influenced by what you decide to believe. For instance, if you were in a car and someone hacked it and you couldn’t control the steering, what would you do? You know what you would do, you would try to put it in neutral or turn off the engine. So, what if the ship were hacked and the crew tried to turn off the power? Then, when the auxiliary power came back on, the hacker still had control and steered it into the pylons. I’m not saying that happened, but if it had, it would probably look like what we saw in that video.
I don’t know that any of this happened, but it could. We have the strongest military on earth but we are so vulnerable in so many ways. And as for a hacker knowing exactly what would happen or how the ship and crew would react, who says he did if it happened? I suspect that to the extent there is cyber frickery going on with our infrastructure, a lot of it is pretty random to just see it any damage can be done. For all we know, this could have been the fifteenth time in the last year something similar had happened but nothing bad happened until now. With our current government, I wouldn’t rely upon the to tell us or fix the problem.
I agree with you about our vunerabilities and about our dishonest government and press. All I’m saying is that if you’ve ever operated a boat, what we see happen in the video makes perfect sense for an equipment malfunction.
Originally Posted by gregintenn
Originally Posted by JoeBob
Originally Posted by gregintenn
Originally Posted by steve4102
I seem to remember an assassination several decades ago where our Intel agencies said “there is no proof”, “anyone that claims otherwise is a conspiracy nut” and poof like magic they lied.
I also seem to remember just a few short months ago that 50+ former US Intel operatives signed a letter stating that The Hunter Laptop was 100% Bullschit and Russian Disinformation, and poof like magic, there is proof and proof they lied.
So, you do you and believe our Deep State and our Intel Community is honest and chucked full of integrity.
Absolutely not. I don’t believe anything coming from them, but that doesn’t require me to believe something different from what I saw with my own eyes.
What did we see? It’s hard to say without knowing what went on. I mean if you look, the first turn towards the support happened immediately before the power went out the first time. Then the big one came immediately after it came back on. It looks to me like if the power had stayed off, it would have slid right under that bridge.
Once again, I don’t know what happen and an accident is the likeliest thing but looks can be deceiving and are heavily influenced by what you decide to believe. For instance, if you were in a car and someone hacked it and you couldn’t control the steering, what would you do? You know what you would do, you would try to put it in neutral or turn off the engine. So, what if the ship were hacked and the crew tried to turn off the power? Then, when the auxiliary power came back on, the hacker still had control and steered it into the pylons. I’m not saying that happened, but if it had, it would probably look like what we saw in that video.
I don’t know that any of this happened, but it could. We have the strongest military on earth but we are so vulnerable in so many ways. And as for a hacker knowing exactly what would happen or how the ship and crew would react, who says he did if it happened? I suspect that to the extent there is cyber frickery going on with our infrastructure, a lot of it is pretty random to just see it any damage can be done. For all we know, this could have been the fifteenth time in the last year something similar had happened but nothing bad happened until now. With our current government, I wouldn’t rely upon the to tell us or fix the problem.
I agree with you about our vunerabilities and about our dishonest government and press. All I’m saying is that if you’ve ever operated a boat, what we see happen in the video makes perfect sense for an equipment malfunction.
Sure it does. But wouldn’t you like to hear from the pilot? Wouldn’t you like an actual explanation?
Sure. Why not? Until then, I’m not going around raving about some nutty conspiracy theory when a logical explanation fits better.
I don’t know. You if this happened in the 1930s, therewould have been 200 reporters waiting on the pilot as soon as he set foot on the dock. We’d already have a statement from him and know at least what he said caused it. But now? Maybe if there are lawsuits we’ll get a deposition in five years IF the government decides it isn’t national security.
People decry conspiracy theories. Well, official secrecy breeds them.
I seem to remember an assassination several decades ago where our Intel agencies said “there is no proof”, “anyone that claims otherwise is a conspiracy nut” and poof like magic they lied.
I also seem to remember just a few short months ago that 50+ former US Intel operatives signed a letter stating that The Hunter Laptop was 100% Bullschit and Russian Disinformation, and poof like magic, there is proof and proof they lied.
So, you do you and believe our Deep State and our Intel Community is honest and chucked full of integrity.
Absolutely not. I don’t believe anything coming from them, but that doesn’t require me to believe something different from what I saw with my own eyes.
What did we see? It’s hard to say without knowing what went on. I mean if you look, the first turn towards the support happened immediately before the power went out the first time. Then the big one came immediately after it came back on. It looks to me like if the power had stayed off, it would have slid right under that bridge.
Once again, I don’t know what happen and an accident is the likeliest thing but looks can be deceiving and are heavily influenced by what you decide to believe. For instance, if you were in a car and someone hacked it and you couldn’t control the steering, what would you do? You know what you would do, you would try to put it in neutral or turn off the engine. So, what if the ship were hacked and the crew tried to turn off the power? Then, when the auxiliary power came back on, the hacker still had control and steered it into the pylons. I’m not saying that happened, but if it had, it would probably look like what we saw in that video.
I don’t know that any of this happened, but it could. We have the strongest military on earth but we are so vulnerable in so many ways. And as for a hacker knowing exactly what would happen or how the ship and crew would react, who says he did if it happened? I suspect that to the extent there is cyber frickery going on with our infrastructure, a lot of it is pretty random to just see it any damage can be done. For all we know, this could have been the fifteenth time in the last year something similar had happened but nothing bad happened until now. With our current government, I wouldn’t rely upon the to tell us or fix the problem.
I agree with you about our vunerabilities and about our dishonest government and press. All I’m saying is that if you’ve ever operated a boat, what we see happen in the video makes perfect sense for an equipment malfunction.
Originally Posted by gregintenn
Originally Posted by JoeBob
Originally Posted by gregintenn
Originally Posted by steve4102
I seem to remember an assassination several decades ago where our Intel agencies said “there is no proof”, “anyone that claims otherwise is a conspiracy nut” and poof like magic they lied.
I also seem to remember just a few short months ago that 50+ former US Intel operatives signed a letter stating that The Hunter Laptop was 100% Bullschit and Russian Disinformation, and poof like magic, there is proof and proof they lied.
So, you do you and believe our Deep State and our Intel Community is honest and chucked full of integrity.
Absolutely not. I don’t believe anything coming from them, but that doesn’t require me to believe something different from what I saw with my own eyes.
What did we see? It’s hard to say without knowing what went on. I mean if you look, the first turn towards the support happened immediately before the power went out the first time. Then the big one came immediately after it came back on. It looks to me like if the power had stayed off, it would have slid right under that bridge.
Once again, I don’t know what happen and an accident is the likeliest thing but looks can be deceiving and are heavily influenced by what you decide to believe. For instance, if you were in a car and someone hacked it and you couldn’t control the steering, what would you do? You know what you would do, you would try to put it in neutral or turn off the engine. So, what if the ship were hacked and the crew tried to turn off the power? Then, when the auxiliary power came back on, the hacker still had control and steered it into the pylons. I’m not saying that happened, but if it had, it would probably look like what we saw in that video.
I don’t know that any of this happened, but it could. We have the strongest military on earth but we are so vulnerable in so many ways. And as for a hacker knowing exactly what would happen or how the ship and crew would react, who says he did if it happened? I suspect that to the extent there is cyber frickery going on with our infrastructure, a lot of it is pretty random to just see it any damage can be done. For all we know, this could have been the fifteenth time in the last year something similar had happened but nothing bad happened until now. With our current government, I wouldn’t rely upon the to tell us or fix the problem.
I agree with you about our vunerabilities and about our dishonest government and press. All I’m saying is that if you’ve ever operated a boat, what we see happen in the video makes perfect sense for an equipment malfunction.
Sure it does. But wouldn’t you like to hear from the pilot? Wouldn’t you like an actual explanation?
Sure. Why not? Until then, I’m not going around raving about some nutty conspiracy theory when a logical explanation fits better.
Who is raving? I merely pointed out that what you “saw” could be explained differently.
I don’t know. You if this happened in the 1930s, therewould have been 200 reporters waiting on the pilot as soon as he set foot on the dock. We’d already have a statement from him and know at least what he said caused it. But now? Maybe if there are lawsuits we’ll get a deposition in five years IF the government decides it isn’t national security.
People decry conspiracy theories. Well, official secrecy breeds them.
You do make a good point. I expect the shipping company wants to get his story straight before putting him in front of a camera and microphone. Hell, he may have been injured.
I don’t know. You if this happened in the 1930s, therewould have been 200 reporters waiting on the pilot as soon as he set foot on the dock. We’d already have a statement from him and know at least what he said caused it. But now? Maybe if there are lawsuits we’ll get a deposition in five years IF the government decides it isn’t national security.
People decry conspiracy theories. Well, official secrecy breeds them.
You do make a good point. I expect the shipping company wants to get his story straight before putting him in front of a camera and microphone. Hell, he may have been injured.
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.
Current, tide, and wind can individually or jointly work to point the ship somewhere different than you want it to go, most especially after you lose propulsion. I'm recalling one time going out the channel to sea (maybe Kings Bay, not sure) and we had Standard rudder on just to crab in a straight line.
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.
Current, tide, and wind can individually or jointly work to point the ship somewhere different than you want it to go, most especially after you lose propulsion. I'm recalling one time going out the channel to sea (maybe Kings Bay, not sure) and we had Standard rudder on just to crab in a straight line.
There are so many possible variables at play that it's simply not possible for us to draw any conclusions based on the information that we have. A transit is a continuous series of rudder corrections.
Merchant marine captain on the news explained that these ships have emergency generators that run off better fuel and can run the auxiliary items but cannot run the propulsion system.
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.
Current, tide, and wind can individually or jointly work to point the ship somewhere different than you want it to go, most especially after you lose propulsion. I'm recalling one time going out the channel to sea (maybe Kings Bay, not sure) and we had Standard rudder on just to crab in a straight line.
There are so many possible variables at play that it's simply not possible for us to draw any conclusions based on the information that we have. A transit is a continuous series of rudder corrections.
I think it would be fun to be on the inside investigating, just because of the complexity, but yeah, hardly worth guessing at this point, there's so much hasn't been revealed.
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.
Current, tide, and wind can individually or jointly work to point the ship somewhere different than you want it to go, most especially after you lose propulsion. I'm recalling one time going out the channel to sea (maybe Kings Bay, not sure) and we had Standard rudder on just to crab in a straight line.
There are so many possible variables at play that it's simply not possible for us to draw any conclusions based on the information that we have. A transit is a continuous series of rudder corrections.
I think it would be fun to be on the inside investigating, just because of the complexity, but yeah, hardly worth guessing at this point, there's so much hasn't been revealed.
The NTSB amazes me with how thorough they are with their investigations. Some years back a Coast Guard boat struck a recreational boat in the San Diego area, killing an 8 year old boy. I read the full NTSB report and was awed by how much they learned about not just the incident but CG culture and culture at the unit.
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.
Current, tide, and wind can individually or jointly work to point the ship somewhere different than you want it to go, most especially after you lose propulsion. I'm recalling one time going out the channel to sea (maybe Kings Bay, not sure) and we had Standard rudder on just to crab in a straight line.
There are so many possible variables at play that it's simply not possible for us to draw any conclusions based on the information that we have. A transit is a continuous series of rudder corrections.
I think it would be fun to be on the inside investigating, just because of the complexity, but yeah, hardly worth guessing at this point, there's so much hasn't been revealed.
Not really.
Investigator, “Mr, Pilot, what happened?”
From there, you’re going to get a pretty good idea. The whys and the wherefores concerning certain things might be complex, but the basic happenings should be pretty easy to tell pretty quickly.
As far as I know there has been no official release of any info, right? We don’t even know that the power went out. Everyone is just assuming since the lights went out correct?
By now they have a basic understanding of what happened. They should release some preliminary details. Everyone knows that there is a lot of investigation to go, but by now they at least know what the pilot and crew say happened.
As far as I know there has been no official release of any info, right? We don’t even know that the power went out. Everyone is just assuming since the lights went out correct?
By now they have a basic understanding of what happened. They should release some preliminary details. Everyone knows that there is a lot of investigation to go, but by now they at least know what the pilot and crew say happened.
What is the likelihood of a lawsuit or two stemming from this incident?
As far as I know there has been no official release of any info, right? We don’t even know that the power went out. Everyone is just assuming since the lights went out correct?
By now they have a basic understanding of what happened. They should release some preliminary details. Everyone knows that there is a lot of investigation to go, but by now they at least know what the pilot and crew say happened.
Not sure if there is an official statement, but Maryland Governor Wes Moore has stated in interviews that the power went out on the ship.
As far as I know there has been no official release of any info, right? We don’t even know that the power went out. Everyone is just assuming since the lights went out correct?
By now they have a basic understanding of what happened. They should release some preliminary details. Everyone knows that there is a lot of investigation to go, but by now they at least know what the pilot and crew say happened.
What is the likelihood of a lawsuit or two stemming from this incident?
People died, insurance companies are going to pay billions, there will be a dozen at least.
All of our theories and speculation are fun, but I would bet on much more simple and common mechanical failure. There is one thing that I would bet will be looked at by the investigating agencies...did the Dali take on fuel while in Baltimore? Of course we have no way of knowing, but there are many grades of marine diesel (Not like your diesel, it's a blend of diesel #2 and heavy fuel oil))...and moneywise of course, the owners buy the lowest grades and prices. It's up to the ships engineers to make the fuel work, by filtering, settling and or centrifuging. It's nasty stuff, often containing the dregs of the refinery or at least sediments from the bottoms of dirty storage tanks. Fuel contamination for a dollar Alex.
You have a very good point, flintlocke. Naturally, they will get a tankful there in Baltimore. Five minutes after the fill-up, the boat conks out. Quite the coincidence.
Our distinguished leader has informed us that the 'Government' will pay the entire cost!
The 'Government'........has NO MONEY!!
It's in the Government and public's interest to have this bridge rebuilt ASAP. Waiting on the insurances to figure things out for 8 years and THEN start a rebuild - doesn't make sense.
.Gov steps in - pays, gets the bridge replaced ASAP and then takes the money from the insurance.
That's the preferred event. Will that happen? Dunno.
All of our theories and speculation are fun, but I would bet on much more simple and common mechanical failure. There is one thing that I would bet will be looked at by the investigating agencies...did the Dali take on fuel while in Baltimore? Of course we have no way of knowing, but there are many grades of marine diesel (Not like your diesel, it's a blend of diesel #2 and heavy fuel oil))...and moneywise of course, the owners buy the lowest grades and prices. It's up to the ships engineers to make the fuel work, by filtering, settling and or centrifuging. It's nasty stuff, often containing the dregs of the refinery or at least sediments from the bottoms of dirty storage tanks. Fuel contamination for a dollar Alex.
You have a very good point, flintlocke. Naturally, they will get a tankful there in Baltimore. Five minutes after the fill-up, the boat conks out. Quite the coincidence.
Pure speculation on my part, it may be even simpler than I suggested. Dirty fuel is the norm. It is customary to draw fuel from the ship's storage tanks, double bottoms, to what is called a 'day tank'...nothing more than a small tank quantity (maybe 40,000 gal) sufficient to operate for 36 hours, the day tank fuel is then drained of water, sediment and may be centrifuged, but always strained and filtered before it goes to the engines. That's normal...it's what they do. But, because of the solitary nature of seagoing life, crew is desperate to get off the ship for a few hours, and a good skipper and chief engineer make sure that happens whenever possible. In the confusion of juggling schedules, the ever present possibility that some crew will return to the ship unfit for duty (Exxon Valdez)....sometimes important schidt doesn't get done, or done by someone impaired. It happens. This is where I venture into fantasy...it's entirely possible the day tank was pumped full, but the fuel was not cleaned, and that was not noted in the engine room log...or was noted and missed by the engineer who had the duty when Dali departed. Big gulps of water or sediment overwhelmed the first filter bank, the engines (generator or main or both) died, the filter system was frantically shifted to the second redundancy bank, which promptly plugged and the second failure was the kill shot. This literally can happen in minutes. It has happened to me as chief engineer on a tug, when a split weld opened in the hull in a double bottom tank and all I could get was seawater into the day tank. Fortunately we had a cool head for a skipper, and he prepared for worst scenario immediately...no damage to vessels, crew other than embarrassment. And finally, my original assessment at the first hours, complete failure of the electrical system...whether at the main bus or switchgear. Rare but it happens.
Our distinguished leader has informed us that the 'Government' will pay the entire cost!
The 'Government'........has NO MONEY!!
It's in the Government and public's interest to have this bridge rebuilt ASAP. Waiting on the insurances to figure things out for 8 years and THEN start a rebuild - doesn't make sense.
.Gov steps in - pays, gets the bridge replaced ASAP and then takes the money from the insurance.
That's the preferred event. Will that happen? Dunno.
That’s how it works. Been there, done that. The contractor makes bank on these projects!
Our distinguished leader has informed us that the 'Government' will pay the entire cost!
The 'Government'........has NO MONEY!!
It's in the Government and public's interest to have this bridge rebuilt ASAP. Waiting on the insurances to figure things out for 8 years and THEN start a rebuild - doesn't make sense.
.Gov steps in - pays, gets the bridge replaced ASAP and then takes the money from the insurance.
That's the preferred event. Will that happen? Dunno.
That’s how it works. Been there, done that. The contractor makes bank on these projects!
Contractor actually does something resembling work, the kickbacks to politicos is where the real bucks are.
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.
Exactly as I said - full reverse on a single screw prop walks the ship's stern to port - pushing the bow starboard in perspective.
They dropped the port anchor which would also cause a veer. If the 55000 hp figure is correct there is still a lag. A drag boat this ain't. Anyone know the winddirection?
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.
Exactly as I said - full reverse on a single screw prop walks the ship's stern to port - pushing the bow starboard in perspective.
They dropped the port anchor which would also cause a veer. If the 55000 hp figure is correct there is still a lag. A drag boat this ain't. Anyone know the winddirection?
Dropping anchor ain't gonna stop it dead in it's tracks.
As far as I know there has been no official release of any info, right? We don’t even know that the power went out. Everyone is just assuming since the lights went out correct?
By now they have a basic understanding of what happened. They should release some preliminary details. Everyone knows that there is a lot of investigation to go, but by now they at least know what the pilot and crew say happened.
The lights and engine stopped when the power went out twice
The Baltimore FBI office determined that is was an accident 6 hours after the incident with no investigation
All of our theories and speculation are fun, but I would bet on much more simple and common mechanical failure. There is one thing that I would bet will be looked at by the investigating agencies...did the Dali take on fuel while in Baltimore? Of course we have no way of knowing, but there are many grades of marine diesel (Not like your diesel, it's a blend of diesel #2 and heavy fuel oil))...and moneywise of course, the owners buy the lowest grades and prices. It's up to the ships engineers to make the fuel work, by filtering, settling and or centrifuging. It's nasty stuff, often containing the dregs of the refinery or at least sediments from the bottoms of dirty storage tanks. Fuel contamination for a dollar Alex.
You have a very good point, flintlocke. Naturally, they will get a tankful there in Baltimore. Five minutes after the fill-up, the boat conks out. Quite the coincidence.
Pure speculation on my part, it may be even simpler than I suggested. Dirty fuel is the norm. It is customary to draw fuel from the ship's storage tanks, double bottoms, to what is called a 'day tank'...nothing more than a small tank quantity (maybe 40,000 gal) sufficient to operate for 36 hours, the day tank fuel is then drained of water, sediment and may be centrifuged, but always strained and filtered before it goes to the engines. That's normal...it's what they do. But, because of the solitary nature of seagoing life, crew is desperate to get off the ship for a few hours, and a good skipper and chief engineer make sure that happens whenever possible. In the confusion of juggling schedules, the ever present possibility that some crew will return to the ship unfit for duty (Exxon Valdez)....sometimes important schidt doesn't get done, or done by someone impaired. It happens. This is where I venture into fantasy...it's entirely possible the day tank was pumped full, but the fuel was not cleaned, and that was not noted in the engine room log...or was noted and missed by the engineer who had the duty when Dali departed. Big gulps of water or sediment overwhelmed the first filter bank, the engines (generator or main or both) died, the filter system was frantically shifted to the second redundancy bank, which promptly plugged and the second failure was the kill shot. This literally can happen in minutes. It has happened to me as chief engineer on a tug, when a split weld opened in the hull in a double bottom tank and all I could get was seawater into the day tank. Fortunately we had a cool head for a skipper, and he prepared for worst scenario immediately...no damage to vessels, crew other than embarrassment. And finally, my original assessment at the first hours, complete failure of the electrical system...whether at the main bus or switchgear. Rare but it happens.
Interesting. Quite the speculation.
It could also be that the captain is a deep state operative, trained and placed by the CIA 3 decades ago.
I have watched this for two days now, every angle and video blown up to close, don’t know how many props this ship has, if all power to all props went out , but what a few have said on here about tugs could have maybe straighten this container ship out and got it passed bridge without endangering anything is probably true, why do all ships travel without tugs until they are past this bridge ??? All I hear is how important this bay is to the country, make all ships pay for the tugs until open water, mandatory!!
All of our theories and speculation are fun, but I would bet on much more simple and common mechanical failure. There is one thing that I would bet will be looked at by the investigating agencies...did the Dali take on fuel while in Baltimore? Of course we have no way of knowing, but there are many grades of marine diesel (Not like your diesel, it's a blend of diesel #2 and heavy fuel oil))...and moneywise of course, the owners buy the lowest grades and prices. It's up to the ships engineers to make the fuel work, by filtering, settling and or centrifuging. It's nasty stuff, often containing the dregs of the refinery or at least sediments from the bottoms of dirty storage tanks. Fuel contamination for a dollar Alex.
You have a very good point, flintlocke. Naturally, they will get a tankful there in Baltimore. Five minutes after the fill-up, the boat conks out. Quite the coincidence.
Pure speculation on my part, it may be even simpler than I suggested. Dirty fuel is the norm. It is customary to draw fuel from the ship's storage tanks, double bottoms, to what is called a 'day tank'...nothing more than a small tank quantity (maybe 40,000 gal) sufficient to operate for 36 hours, the day tank fuel is then drained of water, sediment and may be centrifuged, but always strained and filtered before it goes to the engines. That's normal...it's what they do. But, because of the solitary nature of seagoing life, crew is desperate to get off the ship for a few hours, and a good skipper and chief engineer make sure that happens whenever possible. In the confusion of juggling schedules, the ever present possibility that some crew will return to the ship unfit for duty (Exxon Valdez)....sometimes important schidt doesn't get done, or done by someone impaired. It happens. This is where I venture into fantasy...it's entirely possible the day tank was pumped full, but the fuel was not cleaned, and that was not noted in the engine room log...or was noted and missed by the engineer who had the duty when Dali departed. Big gulps of water or sediment overwhelmed the first filter bank, the engines (generator or main or both) died, the filter system was frantically shifted to the second redundancy bank, which promptly plugged and the second failure was the kill shot. This literally can happen in minutes. It has happened to me as chief engineer on a tug, when a split weld opened in the hull in a double bottom tank and all I could get was seawater into the day tank. Fortunately we had a cool head for a skipper, and he prepared for worst scenario immediately...no damage to vessels, crew other than embarrassment. And finally, my original assessment at the first hours, complete failure of the electrical system...whether at the main bus or switchgear. Rare but it happens.
Interesting. Quite the speculation.
It could also be that the captain is a deep state operative, trained and placed by the CIA 3 decades ago.
Curious, isn’t it? It’s not like Singapore does much international trade with container ships.
The .gov has priced US Flagged ships out of the industry - be it ocean going or due to Jones Act. Great Lakes fleet is really the only one making that work I'm aware of.
TWIC cards too aren't helping. Expense and red-tape. I have mine so I can do what I want and need unescorted but I'm betting most foreigners haven't done the work and simply get escorted everywhere.
Poorly trained crew, not well maintained equipment. Foreign flagged and staffed ships are often actually owned by US companies, but this is how they get past compliance with US safety regulations. So what if it takes out a major bridge from time to time, or spills a gazillion barrels of oil on our beaches, my iphone got here cheap!!
I'm sure this was pure accident. About the only thing that bothers me about this whole thing...in the news reports, eyewitness accounts...I have not seen one single mention of the ship sounding it's horn when it became apparent that the situation became irretrievable. Maybe the videos I looked at just didn't have audio. Even though I don't think it's covered specifically in COLREGS, the pilots should have sounded the horn constantly until impact. Would it have saved lives? doubtful, with so many span sections falling, but it should have been done. When I was working on crane barges, if we should have one or more anchors break loose or pull under high tension...anyone, crane operator, tug, rig tenders, workboats... was encouraged to sound the alarm by repeated short blasts of a horn...hold fast boys, immediately lower suspended loads, get out of the way of unsecured cargo, get away from anchor cables and deck fairleads.
All of our theories and speculation are fun, but I would bet on much more simple and common mechanical failure. There is one thing that I would bet will be looked at by the investigating agencies...did the Dali take on fuel while in Baltimore? Of course we have no way of knowing, but there are many grades of marine diesel (Not like your diesel, it's a blend of diesel #2 and heavy fuel oil))...and moneywise of course, the owners buy the lowest grades and prices. It's up to the ships engineers to make the fuel work, by filtering, settling and or centrifuging. It's nasty stuff, often containing the dregs of the refinery or at least sediments from the bottoms of dirty storage tanks. Fuel contamination for a dollar Alex.
You have a very good point, flintlocke. Naturally, they will get a tankful there in Baltimore. Five minutes after the fill-up, the boat conks out. Quite the coincidence.
Pure speculation on my part, it may be even simpler than I suggested. Dirty fuel is the norm. It is customary to draw fuel from the ship's storage tanks, double bottoms, to what is called a 'day tank'...nothing more than a small tank quantity (maybe 40,000 gal) sufficient to operate for 36 hours, the day tank fuel is then drained of water, sediment and may be centrifuged, but always strained and filtered before it goes to the engines. That's normal...it's what they do. But, because of the solitary nature of seagoing life, crew is desperate to get off the ship for a few hours, and a good skipper and chief engineer make sure that happens whenever possible. In the confusion of juggling schedules, the ever present possibility that some crew will return to the ship unfit for duty (Exxon Valdez)....sometimes important schidt doesn't get done, or done by someone impaired. It happens. This is where I venture into fantasy...it's entirely possible the day tank was pumped full, but the fuel was not cleaned, and that was not noted in the engine room log...or was noted and missed by the engineer who had the duty when Dali departed. Big gulps of water or sediment overwhelmed the first filter bank, the engines (generator or main or both) died, the filter system was frantically shifted to the second redundancy bank, which promptly plugged and the second failure was the kill shot. This literally can happen in minutes. It has happened to me as chief engineer on a tug, when a split weld opened in the hull in a double bottom tank and all I could get was seawater into the day tank. Fortunately we had a cool head for a skipper, and he prepared for worst scenario immediately...no damage to vessels, crew other than embarrassment. And finally, my original assessment at the first hours, complete failure of the electrical system...whether at the main bus or switchgear. Rare but it happens.
This is being reported now. Pretty good speculation on your part it seems.
“Dirty fuel” is one of several possible factors that may have caused the cargo ship Dali to lose power in the moments before it smashed into the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore on Tuesday, according to shipping industry experts.
The investigation by federal, state and local authorities into what went wrong on the Dali is just beginning. But the deadly events on the Patapsco River in the dark of night have shined a light on the travails of the global shipping industry, including a long-standing problem with dirty fuel.
According to a 2018 report for the Atlantic Council think tank, a “witches brew” of industrial products ends up in marine fuel, resulting in hundreds of engine failures in recent years that have left ships powerless and drifting across the high seas.
The Dali went dark as it lost electrical power just before the bridge disaster, and the pilot lost the ability to control the ship as it veered toward the support structure of the bridge. That power loss could have been caused by dirty fuel clogging filters that lead to the ship’s main generator, said Gerald Scoggins, a veteran chief engineer in the oil and gas industry and the CEO of the Houston company Deepwater Producers.
He noted that ships use different fuels for different portions of their cruise. While inside a port, as the Dali was before the collision, ships typically run on a relatively light diesel fuel. That also could have been contaminated. Common contaminants include water, dirt and algae, Scoggins said.
Ian Ralby, the CEO of I.R. Consilium, a maritime and resource security consultancy, said heavy marine fuel loaded onto ships in port is mixed with what is called cutter stock, and is prone to being loaded with contaminants and is not closely regulated. Such dirty fuel could have “gummed up all of the fuel lines on the ship.”
Ralby, who co-authored the 2018 Atlantic Council report, said that waste products from refineries and other industrial operations have made their way illegally into shipping fuel, known as bunker fuel.
“The supply chain for bunker fuel is long, and relatively opaque,” the report states. “As a result, bunker fuel has become a final destination for the leftovers of the refining process.”
Merchant ships, the report states, then effectively function as incinerators for the refining industry. Inspectors have found bunker fuel contaminated with “used motor oil and by-products from the manufacture of plastics, rubber, cosmetics, fertilizers, and even paper goods.”
In the case of the Dali, Ralby said the possibility of a cyberattack should not be dismissed. It’s also possible that the ship had a purely mechanical failure in one of its critical systems.
The dirty fuel conjecture comes from observers with limited direct information about the ship, its fueling history and other potential mechanical problems that could have contributed to the loss of power and steering control.
Whatever the cause, the shipping industry has been roiled by the Baltimore disaster and other troubling developments, including attacks on Red Sea cargo ships by Houthi militants and low water in the Panama Canal. With those major shipping routes imperiled, the entire global supply chain has been rerouted, Ralby said — and that could exacerbate the dirty fuel problem.
“We may be in a situation where ships are going to be taking on fuel in places where they can’t guarantee the quality or caliber of fuel,” he said.
All of our theories and speculation are fun, but I would bet on much more simple and common mechanical failure. There is one thing that I would bet will be looked at by the investigating agencies...did the Dali take on fuel while in Baltimore? Of course we have no way of knowing, but there are many grades of marine diesel (Not like your diesel, it's a blend of diesel #2 and heavy fuel oil))...and moneywise of course, the owners buy the lowest grades and prices. It's up to the ships engineers to make the fuel work, by filtering, settling and or centrifuging. It's nasty stuff, often containing the dregs of the refinery or at least sediments from the bottoms of dirty storage tanks. Fuel contamination for a dollar Alex.
You have a very good point, flintlocke. Naturally, they will get a tankful there in Baltimore. Five minutes after the fill-up, the boat conks out. Quite the coincidence.
Pure speculation on my part, it may be even simpler than I suggested. Dirty fuel is the norm. It is customary to draw fuel from the ship's storage tanks, double bottoms, to what is called a 'day tank'...nothing more than a small tank quantity (maybe 40,000 gal) sufficient to operate for 36 hours, the day tank fuel is then drained of water, sediment and may be centrifuged, but always strained and filtered before it goes to the engines. That's normal...it's what they do. But, because of the solitary nature of seagoing life, crew is desperate to get off the ship for a few hours, and a good skipper and chief engineer make sure that happens whenever possible. In the confusion of juggling schedules, the ever present possibility that some crew will return to the ship unfit for duty (Exxon Valdez)....sometimes important schidt doesn't get done, or done by someone impaired. It happens. This is where I venture into fantasy...it's entirely possible the day tank was pumped full, but the fuel was not cleaned, and that was not noted in the engine room log...or was noted and missed by the engineer who had the duty when Dali departed. Big gulps of water or sediment overwhelmed the first filter bank, the engines (generator or main or both) died, the filter system was frantically shifted to the second redundancy bank, which promptly plugged and the second failure was the kill shot. This literally can happen in minutes. It has happened to me as chief engineer on a tug, when a split weld opened in the hull in a double bottom tank and all I could get was seawater into the day tank. Fortunately we had a cool head for a skipper, and he prepared for worst scenario immediately...no damage to vessels, crew other than embarrassment. And finally, my original assessment at the first hours, complete failure of the electrical system...whether at the main bus or switchgear. Rare but it happens.
This is being reported now. Pretty good speculation on your part it seems.
“Dirty fuel” is one of several possible factors that may have caused the cargo ship Dali to lose power in the moments before it smashed into the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore on Tuesday, according to shipping industry experts.
The investigation by federal, state and local authorities into what went wrong on the Dali is just beginning. But the deadly events on the Patapsco River in the dark of night have shined a light on the travails of the global shipping industry, including a long-standing problem with dirty fuel.
According to a 2018 report for the Atlantic Council think tank, a “witches brew” of industrial products ends up in marine fuel, resulting in hundreds of engine failures in recent years that have left ships powerless and drifting across the high seas.
The Dali went dark as it lost electrical power just before the bridge disaster, and the pilot lost the ability to control the ship as it veered toward the support structure of the bridge. That power loss could have been caused by dirty fuel clogging filters that lead to the ship’s main generator, said Gerald Scoggins, a veteran chief engineer in the oil and gas industry and the CEO of the Houston company Deepwater Producers.
He noted that ships use different fuels for different portions of their cruise. While inside a port, as the Dali was before the collision, ships typically run on a relatively light diesel fuel. That also could have been contaminated. Common contaminants include water, dirt and algae, Scoggins said.
Ian Ralby, the CEO of I.R. Consilium, a maritime and resource security consultancy, said heavy marine fuel loaded onto ships in port is mixed with what is called cutter stock, and is prone to being loaded with contaminants and is not closely regulated. Such dirty fuel could have “gummed up all of the fuel lines on the ship.”
Ralby, who co-authored the 2018 Atlantic Council report, said that waste products from refineries and other industrial operations have made their way illegally into shipping fuel, known as bunker fuel.
“The supply chain for bunker fuel is long, and relatively opaque,” the report states. “As a result, bunker fuel has become a final destination for the leftovers of the refining process.”
Merchant ships, the report states, then effectively function as incinerators for the refining industry. Inspectors have found bunker fuel contaminated with “used motor oil and by-products from the manufacture of plastics, rubber, cosmetics, fertilizers, and even paper goods.”
In the case of the Dali, Ralby said the possibility of a cyberattack should not be dismissed. It’s also possible that the ship had a purely mechanical failure in one of its critical systems.
The dirty fuel conjecture comes from observers with limited direct information about the ship, its fueling history and other potential mechanical problems that could have contributed to the loss of power and steering control.
Whatever the cause, the shipping industry has been roiled by the Baltimore disaster and other troubling developments, including attacks on Red Sea cargo ships by Houthi militants and low water in the Panama Canal. With those major shipping routes imperiled, the entire global supply chain has been rerouted, Ralby said — and that could exacerbate the dirty fuel problem.
“We may be in a situation where ships are going to be taking on fuel in places where they can’t guarantee the quality or caliber of fuel,” he said.
When the bridge is rebuilt, I predict it will NOT be the Francis Scott Key bridge any longer. I can guarandamntee that it will be renamed the Martin Luther King, Jr. memorial bridge.
When the bridge is rebuilt, I predict it will NOT be the Francis Scott Key bridge any longer. I can guarandamntee that it will be renamed the Martin Luther King, Jr. memorial bridge.
Discover more from Clusterfuck Nation James Howard Kunstler’s Clusterfuck Nation blog is updated Mondays and Fridays. The KunstlerCast is a monthly podcast. Look for new Eyesore of the Month entries early in the month.
Oh Say Can You See? “A modern nuc can fit in the trunk of a car. When millions of people can walk across our border with impunity what do you think the chances are we would catch something that size?” — Sam Faddi
JAMES HOWARD KUNSTLER MAR 29, 2024 That’s Sam Faddis, retired CIA (quote didn’t quite fit in block).
Who among you was not impressed seeing the sudden and total collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge after getting its pylon bonked by the container ship Dali a few hours before the dawn’s early light in Baltimore harbor? In America’s ongoing death-of-a-thousand-cuts, that one literally severed a major artery, but it may take a while to know how badly the wounded colossus known as the USA is bleeding out.
“Joe Biden” emerged from his crypt pronto to state that the federal government would pony-up the cost of building the bridge back better, meant to reassure the public, you’d suppose. But perhaps the real reason was to obviate an otherwise requisite investigation of the crash by ship-owner Grace Ocean's insurance company — since legal wrangling over responsibility would add more years to the already years-long estimated bridge replacement time-frame. And Gawd knows what else they might discover about how the darn thing came to pass. . . rumors of a Ukrainian captain at the Dali’shelm. . . stuff that the ruling intel blob might not want to get out there, especially given the still-murky role of the joint USA-UK black-op blobs in the Moscow Crocus Theater Massacre just a week earlier.
The Crocus op, you understand, was probably the worst clusterfuck qua Three Stooges blob operational procedure in memory, since four of the six surviving Tajiki shooters were nabbed in a car enroute to the Ukraine border (where they would’ve been whacked into silence, since they failed to martyr themselves at the scene-of-the-crime), and by now had surely sung their hearts out to persuasive interrogators of Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) — the take-away being that President VV Putin has got to be mighty pissed-off and itching for revenge. Was the FSK Bridge take-down the first repayment for that, lots of people inside and outside Blob Central were probably wondering?
You’d also have to wonder, qua the bridge disaster itself, about the implied reverberations through the insurance industry. Consider that the insurance industry is a major cog in the machinery of finance and banking, since insurance company reserves are traditionally allocated in supposedly safe sovereign treasury bonds. Liquidations anyone? Maritime insurance was already groaning under the burden of all that monkey-business in the Red Sea, thanks to Houthi rocket and drone attacks on the shipping of Western Civ. Are the banks quaking harder now? Many across Western Civ were already trembling before the FSK Bridge job.
While the awesome spectacle of the bridge collapse traumatized the country, it also brought to mind the fantastic flow of ten-thousand illegal border crossings a day, stage-managed by the “Joe Biden” Homeland Security team. Did you kind of wonder how many in that 10K-a-day flow might be the same species of Central Asian mutts who volunteered to slaughter over 150 (so far) Russian concert-goers? Nobody is checking who they are, you realize. They just step on US soil, get issued smartphones, loaded debit cards, walking-around cash money, airplane and bus tickets and, voila, there they are in your home town tomorrow, looking for something to occupy themselves. Thanks a bunch, Alejandro Mayorkas! Are you wondering what sort of mayhem they might be capable of unleashing any place from Bangor to Burbank in the weeks and months ahead? (And, while you’re at it, think about all the food processing plant fires, train wrecks, and other mysterious tribulations around the country the past couple of years.) Consider that this very week alone, following the SSK Bridge disaster, absolutely nothing has been done by our government to stem that flow of countless potential saboteurs into the country. The news media isn’t even talking about it (of course).
The prospects might look a bit unnerving, wouldn’t you agree? Things catching fire, blowing up, and falling down here, there, and everywhere. . . more of those thousand cuts adding up. Just maybe, the dazed-and-confused (possibly hypnotized) American public, a.k.a., the “voters,” might put together that “Joe Biden” and the Party of Chaos that owns him, are actually responsible for the on-going take-down of our country. After a certain point — now apparently passed — sheer incompetence is no longer a plausible explanation for what you are seeing.
Oh, one other thing, look out for on-the-ground economic reverberations from the FSK Bridge disaster. For instance, Baltimore is the USA’s top port for importing and exporting automobiles. Also, earth-moving and large farm equipment, fertilizer, lumber, coal, and steel. Other arrangements must be made, for years ahead, considering the trucking links. It’s especially an interruption for trucking between the mid-Atlantic / New England states and much of Dixieland. It will affect the transport of fruits and vegetables to the Washington-Boston corridor. Things are going to cost more and we are already in an inflationary trouble-zone. How will this thunder elsewhere through an economy which, despite the japes of “Joe Biden’s” statisticians, is actively disintegrating? The fluttering wings of this black swan already throw a chill on spring’s incoming zephyrs.
I have watched this for two days now, every angle and video blown up to close, don’t know how many props this ship has, if all power to all props went out , but what a few have said on here about tugs could have maybe straighten this container ship out and got it passed bridge without endangering anything is probably true, why do all ships travel without tugs until they are past this bridge ??? All I hear is how important this bay is to the country, make all ships pay for the tugs until open water, mandatory!!
Mandatory Tugs? More Government Regulation? You sound like on of them communists.