BRKG Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore has collapsed

packyderms_wife

Neither here nor there.
From a local Facebook post:

If you ever go to Dubuque, you see the historic Julian Dubuque Bridge running over the Mississippi River carrying US Rt 20 traffic. It towers over the city, so you can't miss it.

This bridge is of the same design as the Francis Scott Key Bridge that collapsed in Baltimore yesterday.

With the amount of river traffic in Dubuque by barges and river cruise boats, etc, the same catastrophic events could occur without more safety features at some point. Let's hope the tragedy in Baltimore is the jump to push for better infrastructure and improvements in our nation that are many times not taken care of due to funding issues.



This topic came up after the floods of 1993 and 1995, after several bridges on the Mississippi were destroyed by rogue barges in the flood waters. The question is WHO pays for the improvements, Iowa, Illinois, or the Fed Gov?
 

mecoastie

Veteran Member
The challenge for the cleanup is the ship. They need to figure out what is compromised structurally before they do anything. She is the thing that can make this situation worse right now. If she were to sink in the channel or release a lot of fuel oil. The cargo that shifted is another issue. I can’t imagine they will lighter the whole ship but they are going to have to do some of it. It has to be so fascinating to be figuring all that out. The bridge is straightforward once the ship is cleared.
 

Warm Wisconsin

Easy as 3.141592653589..
This topic came up after the floods of 1993 and 1995, after several bridges on the Mississippi were destroyed by rogue barges in the flood waters. The question is WHO pays for the improvements, Iowa, Illinois, or the Fed Gov?
The army corps of engineers. The Reagan administration funded a national project to protect bridges from barges but Bush repurposed those funds for Iraq.

Makes you wonder what we are repurposing for Ukraine
 

packyderms_wife

Neither here nor there.
The army corps of engineers. The Reagan administration funded a national project to protect bridges from barges but Bush repurposed those funds for Iraq.

Makes you wonder what we are repurposing for Ukraine

Oh hell no! I'm so damned sick and tired of fighting other peoples wars! This explains why they didn't shore up those bridge piers going over the river.
 

SurfaceTension

Veteran Member
<snip>
...
Some bridge engineers who spoke with the New York Times questioned why the 1.6-mile-long bridge had zero deflection safety systems to protect from ship strikes.

Source: NYT
Why is that? Why did state and government officials neglect the safety of a bridge that spanned the only port exit and entry? Were they too busy focusing on woke policies?
See post 773.
I might suggest that "Some bridge engineers who spoke with the New York Times questioned why the 1.6-mile-long bridge had zero deflection safety systems to protect from ship strikes" are ignorant of history and/or attention whores. Likely the majority of bridge engineers that spoke to the Times (and the vast majority of engineers that has better sense than to speak to the Times) would explain that the [more than zero] protections system in place, common for the times, have been improved upon in the decades since the the bridge was built.
Either way, I'm looking forward to the NYT championing a shift from funding DEI concerns to infrastructure improvements and modernization.
 

Walrus

Veteran Member
Doesn't look like it to me. The front of the ship has a drastic angle on it. The lower part that got stopped by the pier, did not go past the pier. The bridge structure landed on the nose of the ship. The part that sticks out beyond the lower hull. If the ship had traveled beyond the pier than the wreckage would have landed farther back. A picture speaks a thousand words. Look at the remaining pier on the right as reference. If anything it looks like the ship may have bounced back after striking the pier. But it definitely did not go past it.


View attachment 467678
Good thoughts. We're learning about this as we go (using an all-encompassing "we") and there's lots of questions yet to be answered. The reason(s) for this crash haven't yet popped up and we like quick solutions, but this one is going to take a while longer to figure out. Those of us amateur sleuths who've been opining on this will be long gone to other adrenaline-high events before the final report on this one is completed.

We have to trust the NTSB and the USCG to dig through all this and find the truth. Then let us know. Let's hope that this investigation doesn't get sidetracked by the political elites who turn it into a fish fry. That's where the investigation finds a convenient scapegoat who's a little fish in the overall scheme of things, and FRIES that bastard for all to see.
 

medic38572

TB Fanatic
The challenge for the cleanup is the ship. They need to figure out what is compromised structurally before they do anything. She is the thing that can make this situation worse right now. If she were to sink in the channel or release a lot of fuel oil. The cargo that shifted is another issue. I can’t imagine they will lighter the whole ship but they are going to have to do some of it. It has to be so fascinating to be figuring all that out. The bridge is straightforward once the ship is cleared.
I watched a video that said there were hazardous material on board leaking into the water. I remember them saying Lithuim was one!
 

homecanner1

Veteran Member
Ok

6 hrs of Rumble with LTC Murray. He did "3" roundtable discussions this week. For those of you who are Matt Bracken fans, he is featured in the March 27th video. Hour one is devoted entirely to the bridge disaster.

Turns out Matt and his brother are from Baltimore (hence his Navy enlistment) and worked this bridge and one other. He is very emotional and fired up. Great insights into how the pylons were installed. Reminded me of Cathedral pillars 33 ft down into the ground. Matt is devastated by this and spoke for all the bridge builders of the region.

This is a 3 hr. video with two hours after the bridge topic on what's next level as a ripple effect off this.

This is the video from the 27th only


They said at the top they were going to wait on a group verdict "mechanical vs cyber" for 48 hrs

The video of the 28th something jelled in their consensus and they all agree it was intentional but not how yet. They also only covered the bridge for about 25 minutes on the 28th video and then oddly kind of clammed up on it and discussed banking situation and voting fraud.
The video on the 28th is 2 hrs 22 min long.

I am no maritime expert but my dad was a steeltoe union welder on both the disassembly of the old and construction on the new Warner Bridge on the Kankakee River. I was married to a USX Metallurgical Engineer and father in law ran Arrow Terminal at 126th and the Calumet River in Chicago, mostly barge traffic. Am grounded in blue collar/Navy background.

I still think this was nefarious and not mere human error. And listening to Bracken's angst over this was heartbreaking. Baltimore is gutted.
 

mecoastie

Veteran Member
I cant believe the
I watched a video that said there were hazardous material on board leaking into the water. I remember them saying Lithuim was one!
56 out of about 4700 containers contain hazmat. Several have been breached. Probably in that first stack on the bow that got crushed. I would be more concerned about all the fuel oil onboard but there is little sheen around the ship now so hopefully none of the tanks were damaged.
 

SmithJ

Veteran Member
Many have asked why tugs weren’t used. This is an important point and points to broader questions that will be asked of Baltimore port control about their overall safety management system, something that is every bit as relevant to this accident as the ‘loss of control’ suffered on the ship. Dali was doing about eight knots at the time of the incident which is approaching the upper speed of most tugs, certainly the upper speed at which they can have any lateral effect on a ship of that size, so a tug forward ‘pushing off’ in the traditional sense would have struggled. But there is no reason (other than time and money) why she couldn’t have had a tug attached aft or at least had one close by. This would have given the ship so many more options.

QFT
 

Macgyver

Has No Life - Lives on TB
The challenge for the cleanup is the ship. They need to figure out what is compromised structurally before they do anything. She is the thing that can make this situation worse right now. If she were to sink in the channel or release a lot of fuel oil. The cargo that shifted is another issue. I can’t imagine they will lighter the whole ship but they are going to have to do some of it. It has to be so fascinating to be figuring all that out. The bridge is straightforward once the ship is cleared.
The weight of the bridge is already pinning the ship to the ground.
 

Slydersan

Veteran Member
Here is the website version of an email I got this morning from the MD Dept of Natural Resources, including a map of the "safety zone" around the remains of the bridge.


And here is the main page for the "Key Bridge Response" - and from that page "First responders have observed a sheen around the vessel. There are 56 total containers loaded on the vessel that contained hazardous materials. 14 were impacted. The 14 that were impacted were assessed by an industrial hygienist for potential hazards."

 

Macgyver

Has No Life - Lives on TB
And here is the main page for the "Key Bridge Response" - and from that page "First responders have observed a sheen around the vessel. There are 56 total containers loaded on the vessel that contained hazardous materials. 14 were impacted. The 14 that were impacted were assessed by an industrial hygienist for potential hazards."

Stuff in the containers is not going to leak through the ship and get into the water.
I have not heard if any containers were knocked overboard. But though I do believe containers with hazardous materials need to be below deck so they can't fall overboard.

As for the sheen, there are several vehicles still on the bottom (with people possibly in them) I have not herd if there were any unoccupied construction vehicles and there could have very well been stuff like tow behind compressors, arrow boards, and light towers in the water as well. That tow-able stuff can all have 30+ gallons of diesel in each piece along with the engine oil. It only takes a little bit to make a huge sheen.

If they were getting ready to do work all that could have been on site.
 
Last edited:

SmithJ

Veteran Member
But there is no reason (other than time and money) why she couldn’t have had a tug attached aft or at least had one close by. This would have given the ship so many more options.

A tug couldn't keep up.

Not entirely true. Thats only because they emphasis was on time and money. They could have had tugs on standby at the bridge and they could have required the ships to slow to a speed where a tug could escort them through the bridge.

Even a small shift by a tug might have prevented the massive collapse of the bridge.

There's always a tradeoff between safety and money.
 

summerthyme

Administrator
_______________
Not entirely true. Thats only because they emphasis was on time and money. They could have had tugs on standby at the bridge and they could have required the ships to slow to a speed where a tug could escort them through the bridge.

Even a small shift by a tug might have prevented the massive collapse of the bridge.

There's always a tradeoff between safety and money.
It is, but its also simply the odds. The bridge is almost 50 years old. At this time, I can't find the number of ships that passed under it annually... but I'm sure it's in the thousands.

And in all that time, there's never been an accident. Yes, the ships have gotten (much) bigger, and I'm guessing more dependant on electricity for steering and control. But there is a strong tendency to go along with the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" school of thought.

I do agree that it would have been wise to install some bollards or other protection of some kind...

Summerthyme
 
I'd guess they are working on getting a gimongous crane on site.

Snatch the big chunks of bridge up and get that waterway open.

You don't just call them like a wrecker tho.

May have to come from the oil patch in the gulf.


OIP.twULPzuwUwcqeu2Hf8QYFAHaGV
Kinda interesting it’s so tall it needs the aerial hazard paint job.
 

Kayak

Adrenaline Junkie
I don't think the yellow crane is really big enough to lift any major sections.

Might be, but it looks kinda light.
I've seen news articles saying it's one of the biggest cranes on the east coast, and if that's the case, I'm thinking they're going to need to look farther out for something bigger. Unless they're going to cut the bridge up to move it, I don't think this crane's going to do it.
 

bw

Fringe Ranger
Sal says they should hook up a bunch of tugs and just drag the sucker.

We had a floating bridge in trouble near Seattle a few years back. Hooked up some tugs and they sat there for a couple weeks, pulling on it in place of missing anchors. Kind of interesting.
 

Wildweasel

F-4 Phantoms Phorever
Why would the Emergency Generator be running as they transited?

Ships emergency generator would not be tied to the reefer boxes. It is required to be on a seperate circuit and only powers critical loads such as a steering pump, emergency bilge pump, firefighting and basic nav and comms. Not cargo.
Why wouldn't it be engine running/generator offline until clear of the last major obstacle in the harbor the same was airliners have their APU running during takeoff and landing? Both cases you'd want them immediately if main power failed, having them already running eliminates startup delay. As this accident shows, momentary delays for generator startup time can allow a ship to travel and turn on its own in unwanted ways.

But for ships having the emergency power up and running during transit is not a requirement like airliners running APUs. However that might be a change to procedure after this accident. And battery backup for bridge systems might become a requirement as well.
 

hiwall

Has No Life - Lives on TB

US Approves $60 Million in Urgent Funds for Baltimore Bridge​


The Dali container vessel after striking the Francis Scott Key Bridge.Photographer: Al Drago/Bloomberg

By Brendan Case and Nacha Cattan
March 28, 2024 at 2:57 PM MST
Updated on
March 28, 2024 at 5:53 PM MST

The US Department of Transportation is providing $60 million in immediate funding for emergency work following the collapse this week of Baltimore’s Francis Scott Key Bridge.

The funds will serve as a “down payment toward initial costs” as the Maryland state government works on emergency repairs, design and reconstruction of the bridge, the federal agency said in a statement Thursday. Additional money will become available as the project continues.

 

mecoastie

Veteran Member
Why wouldn't it be engine running/generator offline until clear of the last major obstacle in the harbor the same was airliners have their APU running during takeoff and landing? Both cases you'd want them immediately if main power failed, having them already running eliminates startup delay. As this accident shows, momentary delays for generator startup time can allow a ship to travel and turn on its own in unwanted ways.

But for ships having the emergency power up and running during transit is not a requirement like airliners running APUs. However that might be a change to procedure after this accident. And battery backup for bridge systems might become a requirement as well.
Because it is currently not a requirement for it to be running during transit as far as I know.

It may become a requirement as part of the fall out from this incident.
 

energy_wave

Has No Life - Lives on TB

Pennsylvania agriculture industry scrambling after indefinite closure of Baltimore port​

Looks like a massive disruption of farm fertilizer just as they are going into growing season.


Rt 2:15

 

Wildweasel

F-4 Phantoms Phorever

US Approves $60 Million in Urgent Funds for Baltimore Bridge​


The Dali container vessel after striking the Francis Scott Key Bridge.Photographer: Al Drago/Bloomberg

By Brendan Case and Nacha Cattan
March 28, 2024 at 2:57 PM MST
Updated on
March 28, 2024 at 5:53 PM MST

The US Department of Transportation is providing $60 million in immediate funding for emergency work following the collapse this week of Baltimore’s Francis Scott Key Bridge.

The funds will serve as a “down payment toward initial costs” as the Maryland state government works on emergency repairs, design and reconstruction of the bridge, the federal agency said in a statement Thursday. Additional money will become available as the project continues.

$60 million? That'll be used up before this weekend is over.
 
Top