Holy Smokes!

[Phil McCracken]

See what happened in Baltimore earlier this morning...pretty bad...

https://www.foxnews.com/us/maryland-...using-collapse

[MountainTi]

I saw that. Crazy

[elkhunter11]

It's hard to believe that incidents like this can still happen, with so many safeguards in place.

[58thecat]

Dam eh

Loss of life, damage, someone’s going to have a lot of answering to do.

[vinny]

Time lapse shows two distinct power losses and then recovery but too late by then.

[WayneChristie]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obqwnAKvnYk

[muirsy]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

It's hard to believe that incidents like this can still happen, with so many safeguards in place.

That’s why they’re called accidents! The odds of that happening must be in the ‘1 in hundreds of millions’

[Trochu]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

It's hard to believe that incidents like this can still happen, with so many safeguards in place.

I had to tell a guy how to close a rolling gate yesterday, cause he couldn't figure it out.....

[Grizzly Adams1]

That’s why they’re called accidents! The odds of that happening must be in the ‘1 in hundreds of millions’



Container ships keep getting bigger and bigger, gotta have those cheap goods from China and the infrastructure isn't designed for it. Remember the one that closed the Suez canal ?

[W921]

To heavy I suspect to drop anchor. Really no way to avoid something like this. That's how a lot of commercial fishing boats sink is lose power at wrong time close to shore

[trailraat]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

It's hard to believe that incidents like this can still happen, with so many safeguards in place.

Pretty sure that's the same thing people said when the Titanic sank...

[Albertadiver]

Saw the video, and Holy Smokes is right! Crazy that the whole bridge went down like that.

[CaberTosser]

I wonder what the biggest ships were when the bridge was designed & built? They'd have planned for some growth for sure, but perhaps not to the extent that occurred...

Seems the ships emergency declaration got traffic stopped or at least slowed getting onto the bridge, there was much less on it when it struck.

Imagine being the insurance co covering that vessels liability? eep!

[trailraat]

Originally Posted by Albertadiver

Saw the video, and Holy Smokes is right! Crazy that the whole bridge went down like that.

The bridge is a cantilever design and the base of the cantilever was pushed off of the foundation once that happened nothing was saving that bridge.

It's a tragedy for sure.

[Sundog57]

115,000 tonnes moving at 7 knots - the big smoke was 55,000 hp going full astern... and that wasn't enough to stop her.
After the Exxon Valdez, most big tankers now have escort tugs in constrained waterways - you can't help but wonder if container ships might be going that route before long

[vinny]

Originally Posted by Sundog57

115,000 tonnes moving at 7 knots - the big smoke was 55,000 hp going full astern... and that wasn't enough to stop her.
After the Exxon Valdez, most big tankers now have escort tugs in constrained waterways - you can't help but wonder if container ships might be going that route before long

I read that is had been attached to tugs, they had released and the harbour master was still on board.

[Ackleyman]

You drink six beer and try and steer that SOB

[Sundog57]

Originally Posted by vinny

I read that is had been attached to tugs, they had released and the harbour master was still on board.

Probably not exactly correct.
They would have had tugs coming away from the berth, once they hit the channel the tugs would have been let go.
The "Harbour Master" would never have been on board, he sits in an office and manages the port - there would have been a Harbour Pilot on board "to advise the Master" (in reality he navigates the vessel inside the port but for the most part bears no responsibility in casualties). In Chesapeake Bay/Baltimore, the pilots are all part of private companies,rahter than government entities, not that that makes much difference- it doesn't appear that this was a pilotage error - unlike the Ever Given in the Suez Canal.
This looks to have been as a result of a blackout.
There will be an endless investigation as to why she blacked out - mechanical failure? contaminated fuel? human error? but it also seems probable that putting the vessel full astern increased her swing to starboard and into the bridge due to something called "wheeling effect" - the correct counterintuitive action might have been hard a port and full ahead. That being said we don't really have a clear view of all of the aspects of the event - very easy to be the armchair QB when you're not standing on the bridge watching the disaster unfold.
The eventual inquiry will be full of them.

[Salavee]

Seems to be a Barge, not a container ship. Wonder where the the tow vessels are .

[vinny]

Originally Posted by Sundog57

Probably not exactly correct.
They would have had tugs coming away from the berth, once they hit the channel the tugs would have been let go.
The "Harbour Master" would never have been on board, he sits in an office and manages the port - there would have been a Harbour Pilot on board "to advise the Master" (in reality he navigates the vessel inside the port but for the most part bears no responsibility in casualties). In Chesapeake Bay/Baltimore, the pilots are all part of private companies,rahter than government entities, not that that makes much difference- it doesn't appear that this was a pilotage error - unlike the Ever Given in the Suez Canal.
This looks to have been as a result of a blackout.
There will be an endless investigation as to why she blacked out - mechanical failure? contaminated fuel? human error? but it also seems probable that putting the vessel full astern increased her swing to starboard and into the bridge due to something called "wheeling effect" - the correct counterintuitive action might have been hard a port and full ahead. That being said we don't really have a clear view of all of the aspects of the event - very easy to be the armchair QB when you're not standing on the bridge watching the disaster unfold.
The eventual inquiry will be full of them.

Sorry. Pilot not harbour master. I stick to dry land.

[Sundog57]

Originally Posted by Salavee

Seems to be a Barge, not a container ship. Wonder where the the tow vessels are .

https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais...28/vessel:DALI

115,000 tonne dwt , 55,000 hp container ship

PS aside from the loss of life, the bridge parts in the channel are going to cause a huge interruption to operations in the Port of Baltimore. Opening the navigation channel is not going to happen over night.
A massive volume of cargo normally moves through Baltimore (abt 52m tonnes as well as about 850,000 vehicles of various types) so this will have a knock on effect throughout the North American supply chain as there aren't many other East Coast ports that can handle the volume. Interestingly some of this may now divert through Halifax...

[scesfiremedic]

They’re already saying this incident will have a huge economic impact on the Baltimore Port as it’s now cutoff with the bridge in the water. It will take a long time to clear and rebuild this bridge. Looks like it was a major thoroughfare for the area as well. Major traffic delays!

I hope the 6 missing went quick without suffering! Terrible tragedy!

And now the terrorism speculation has already begun…..

[Stinky Buffalo]

Originally Posted by Sundog57

it also seems probable that putting the vessel full astern increased her swing to starboard and into the bridge due to something called "wheeling effect" - the correct counterintuitive action might have been hard a port and full ahead.

I was looking at an early analysis and that appears to be what had happened.

When you see the lights come back on (power restored) they tried to go full reverse which would cause the effect you mentioned.

They also said that at some point they dropped the port anchor.

Horrible tragedy, for sure.

[traderal]

Slow Jo down south said he traveled many times on that bridge by train and by car, except there is no railroad on that bridge. What a leader.

[Twisted Canuck]

[6.5 shooter]

Originally Posted by Sundog57

Probably not exactly correct.
They would have had tugs coming away from the berth, once they hit the channel the tugs would have been let go.
The "Harbour Master" would never have been on board, he sits in an office and manages the port - there would have been a Harbour Pilot on board "to advise the Master" (in reality he navigates the vessel inside the port but for the most part bears no responsibility in casualties). In Chesapeake Bay/Baltimore, the pilots are all part of private companies,rahter than government entities, not that that makes much difference- it doesn't appear that this was a pilotage error - unlike the Ever Given in the Suez Canal.
This looks to have been as a result of a blackout.
There will be an endless investigation as to why she blacked out - mechanical failure? contaminated fuel? human error? but it also seems probable that putting the vessel full astern increased her swing to starboard and into the bridge due to something called "wheeling effect" - the correct counterintuitive action might have been hard a port and full ahead. That being said we don't really have a clear view of all of the aspects of the event - very easy to be the armchair QB when you're not standing on the bridge watching the disaster unfold.
The eventual inquiry will be full of them.

This^^ is the "reasoning" that makes the most sense! I am a flat lander, so what I know about boats is very limited, But I did watch a guy who's Utube handle is What is Going on With Shipping? and he had exactly the same report as Sundog mentioned. Seemed the best explanation that I have heard so far.

https://youtu.be/qZbUXewlQDk?si=NKwyYjOt8mzqx7MH