Baltimore Bridge

[Diasi]

I've only read bits but apparently the law requires there to be two pilots. Most videos start at the collision but the first I saw was from well before that. It's impossible to say if it was under power or capable of being steered but it was heading what looked to be directly for the support for quite a while. I'm aware that big ships take a long time to change direction though so can't really guess what went wrong.

On one US news channel it was reported that the ship had issued a loss of power Mayday call.

One thing's for sure, the ducking & diving will have started & your fan gif will be appropriate.

[klondike]

On one of the many videos somebody  added arrows  supposedly showing two points where power was lost. There was a big puff of smoke or steam from the side of the boat between the two which I thought very odd.

[Alex]

Why did it veer Right, into the concrete pillar?  When the lights went out it was in a straight line, if power was down how did it turn to the right and hit the concrete ?   If it's a daft question, humour me ! 

[1955vintage]

Difficult for them to blame the bridge.

[klondike]

Yep. Bit like this

March 26, 2024, 07:08:38 PM

Why did it veer Right, into the concrete pillar?  When the lights went out it was in a straight line, if power was down how did it turn to the right and hit the concrete ?  If it's a daft question, humour me ! 

It didn't suddenly veer. Huge ships can't suddenly turn anywhere. It had been heading for the bridge support for some time. I wish I could locate that first video I saw again. It was damned boring as the ship was many minutes out when it started. Everybody seems to have cropped the first bit and just cut to the chase.

[klondike]

That said this looks like it did turn into the bridge. Different angles make things look different.

[Diasi]

That said this looks like it did turn into the bridge. Different angles make things look different.

And it was going at a fair rate of knots as well.

[GrannyMac]

Horrific for anyone on the bridge.

[Ashy]

It's a tragedy, much as I hope the workmen on the bridge were rescued, I think it's highly unlikely given the debris in the water and the cold.

I agree that the supports under the bridge do look flimsy, I can't be certain but I don't think these enormous ships existed when it was designed.

[Ashy]

Some early expert analysis here.

[klondike]

With the huge central bridge span I can't understand why it was ever as close to the supports as it was when it lost power - assuming that was the problem.

[Diasi]

With the huge central bridge span I can't understand why it was ever as close to the supports as it was when it lost power - assuming that was the problem

Thanks for the video, it was really interesting.

I would have thought that the channel for the shipping traffic would have passed under the middle of the central truss span which is a good distance from either of the nearest supports.

A structural engineer has commented that many bridges have protective islands that will prevent vessels from hitting the actual support but that this bridge does not.

This incident does show one of the recognised dangers associated with a continuous truss bridge which is if any part fails it will tow the rest of the structure with it.

Also a continuous truss can't have a very long unsupported span, while a suspension bridge would have crossed the river with the only supports being on either bank, like the Humber Bridge 1.38 miles which is virtually the same length as the Baltimore bridge 1.5 miles.

As I said originally, poor planning, poor design and poor construction.

[Ashy]

Wikipedia says they were considering a tunnel but the bridge was cheaper.

March 27, 2024, 12:23:38 PM

With the huge central bridge span I can't understand why it was ever as close to the supports as it was when it lost power - assuming that was the problem.

The video shows the Dali in the correct channel up to the point when power was lost. After that it looks like currents/wind etc.

[Diasi]

Wikipedia says they were considering a tunnel but the bridge was cheaper.

Most engineering disasters have the word cheap included in the cause if you dig far enough & a continuous truss bridge is cheaper than a suspension bridge.

The collapsed bridge won't be cheaper than the tunnel or a suspension bridge now.

[Ashy]

So far, of the seven workers who were maintaining the bridge, three bodies have now been recovered.

The collapsed bridge won't be cheaper than the tunnel or a suspension bridge now.

Indeed. It seems that over the years and increased tonnage of ships, some sort of defensive barrier should have been added. Maybe nobody saw the need for it.