Bridge collapse in the US

[ERIC ALLTORQUE]

The ship looses electrical power if you watch footage it goes dark and they get the power back but its too late to steer,apparently it dropped the anchor but was too late.

[melmerby]

Apart from the human tragedy, that mess is going to take some clearing up and is the only access to Baltimore's port.

 

I saw this fairly early on the TV news and immediately looked on a ship tracker program.

The course shows the ship did not seriously change heading at the last minute and was on course to hit the pier from furthe back.

 

https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/centerx:-76.537/centery:39.234/zoom:14

 

EDIT you can watch the track in real time.

Edited March 26 by melmerby

[Legend]

I must admit to being surprised there were no tugs . I’ve been on cruise ships with triple bow thrusters azipods etc which means they can turn in their own length . However there are certain ports where the use of a tug is compulsory even though the ship really doesn’t need them . Given that this was a tricky manoeuvre , ie a 180 degree turn close to critical infrastructure I’m surprised they weren’t required . I’m only a cruise person, I know there are lots of master mariners on here that will know the regulations 

[Mol_PMB]

I think it would normally be the Pilot’s decision as to how many tugs to use (if any). 

[MichaelE]

No one in a vehicle on the bridge or the maintenance workers would have ever heard the Mayday call...unless they happened to be monitoring the harbor frequencies on a scanner or receiver.

[melmerby]

Apparently the authorities did manage to shut the bridge before the ship hit but there were already a few vehicles crossing it, 5 they think.

Edited March 26 by melmerby

[Siberian Snooper]

29 minutes ago, Legend said:

I must admit to being surprised there were no tugs . I’ve been on cruise ships with triple bow thrusters azipods etc which means they can turn in their own length . However there are certain ports where the use of a tug is compulsory even though the ship really doesn’t need them . Given that this was a tricky manoeuvre , ie a 180 degree turn close to critical infrastructure I’m surprised they weren’t required . I’m only a cruise person, I know there are lots of master mariners on here that will know the regulations 

 

 

Most cruise ships have at least two engines and props, but an awful lot of merchant ships have asingle massive engine. I don't know what particular ship has. If you have two engines you have a chance to retain some control if you loose one, but if you have only one and loose the lot.

[Siberian Snooper]

28 minutes ago, Mol_PMB said:

I think it would normally be the Pilot’s decision as to how many tugs to use (if any). 

 

The pilot advises the skipper on what tugs he should use and not following that advice is usually foolhardy, but ultimately it's the skippers responsibility.

 

I watched a cruise programme where the skipper refused the tug(s), because the pilot had no experience of the type of ship and was awestruck when the skipper berthed the ship in virtually a single move, with azimuth engines and a number of bow thrusters.

 

 

[Darius43]

2 hours ago, eastglosmog said:

Sadly not the first and unlikely to be the last case of a bridge being demolished by a passing ship.  Need hefty barriers around the pillar bases to protect them.

 

Close up of bridge pier showing the treatment at the water level.  I doubt that it would be practicable to install fenders (as such barriers are called) that were independent of the bridge piers, so as to stop the impact load being transferred directly to the pier, in 50’ of water that were capable of absorbing the immense kinetic energy of a ship like that striking them.

 

Darius

[pH]

43 minutes ago, Legend said:

I must admit to being surprised there were no tugs .

I’ve just listened to a radio interview about this that just reinforced the stereotype of reporters knowing nothing about ‘technical’ subjects.

 

Earlier reports said that the ship was under the control of port pilot(s), which would almost certainly be true. The ‘field’ reporter and the studio anchor in this case managed to interpret ‘pilot’ as ‘tug’ and the report became almost surreal as a result.

[JeremyC]

28 minutes ago, Siberian Snooper said:

 

 

Most cruise ships have at least two engines and props, but an awful lot of merchant ships have asingle massive engine. I don't know what particular ship has. If you have two engines you have a chance to retain some control if you loose one, but if you have only one and loose the lot.

Two engines wouldn't have helped if, as some are reporting, the ship had an electrical blackout, because all the engine auxiliary services (e.g. lub oil pumps, cooling water pumps, fuel booster pumps etc.) are electrically driven so the engines would shutdown on the safety systems when they failed. This is why in confined waters you always run multiple alternators so a single failure doesn't cause a power loss.

Edited March 26 by JeremyC

[eastglosmog]

36 minutes ago, Darius43 said:

 

Close up of bridge pier showing the treatment at the water level.  I doubt that it would be practicable to install fenders (as such barriers are called) that were independent of the bridge piers, so as to stop the impact load being transferred directly to the pier, in 50’ of water that were capable of absorbing the immense kinetic energy of a ship like that striking them.

 

Darius

Depends how much money you are prepared to throw at it.  The Sunshine Skyway Bridge over Tampa Bay (depth 47ft) has pier base platforms 55ft wide by 99feet long.  They were built for the new bridge, which replaced the old one which had been brought down by the MV Summit Venture in 1980, killing 35 people.

[New Haven Neil]

29 minutes ago, JeremyC said:

Two engines wouldn't have helped if, as some are reporting, the ship had an electrical blackout, because all the engine auxiliary services (e.g. lub oil pumps, cooling water pumps, fuel booster pumps etc.) are electrically driven so the engines would shutdown on the safety systems when they failed. This is why in confined waters you always run multiple alternators so a single failure doesn't cause a power loss.

 

Indeed - you can't just turn them back on - I have spent half my day explaining this to folk, as well as the fact the Pilot is not in charge up there with the star gazers!  Been in a similar situation years ago, in Hong Kong - almost hit a Russian cruise ship, the frantic double rings astern and panic from the bridge on the phone as we got the gennies back on and started the main engine astern will stay with me all my life!  Bl**dy Doxford engine didn't want to co-operate either. It was close.....

[Darius43]

26 minutes ago, eastglosmog said:

Depends how much money you are prepared to throw at it.  The Sunshine Skyway Bridge over Tampa Bay (depth 47ft) has pier base platforms 55ft wide by 99feet long.  They were built for the new bridge, which replaced the old one which had been brought down by the MV Summit Venture in 1980, killing 35 people.

Easier to do that with a new build than a retrofit.  The main protection for the Sunshine Skyway Bridge appears to be a series of massive concrete dolphins marking the main channel.

 

I suspect the replacement for the Francis Scott Key bridge, if and when it is constructed, will have similar protection to the main piers.

 

Darius

[Oldddudders]

47 years of safe operation tells me the system employed for outbound and inbound vessels is essentially safe. The power-loss at a critical point that caused this awful event is a very one-off one-off. 

[PhilJ W]

2 hours ago, Siberian Snooper said:

 

 

Most cruise ships have at least two engines and props, but an awful lot of merchant ships have asingle massive engine. I don't know what particular ship has. If you have two engines you have a chance to retain some control if you loose one, but if you have only one and loose the lot.

The vessel has a single engine/prop.

[J. S. Bach]

2 hours ago, eastglosmog said:

Depends how much money you are prepared to throw at it.  The Sunshine Skyway Bridge over Tampa Bay (depth 47ft) has pier base platforms 55ft wide by 99feet long.  They were built for the new bridge, which replaced the old one which had been brought down by the MV Summit Venture in 1980, killing 35 people.

Part of the reason for the high fatality count was one of the vehicles was a Greyhound bus.

[PhilH]

3 hours ago, Darius43 said:

 

Close up of bridge pier showing the treatment at the water level.  I doubt that it would be practicable to install fenders (as such barriers are called) that were independent of the bridge piers, so as to stop the impact load being transferred directly to the pier, in 50’ of water that were capable of absorbing the immense kinetic energy of a ship like that striking them.

 

Darius

When you look at rake of these ships' bows wouldn't the damage have been done in this case before the ship actually hit a fender like this?

[Classsix T]

What I found particularly odd in terms of protection of the supporting structures, was that there appears to be two islands constructed each housing one extremely tall electricity pylon.

 

I very much doubt the US is as finicky about "spoiling" it's engineering landmarks as the UK is, but I was left wondering why perhaps more substantial maritime traffic protection wasn't incorporated at the actual bridge supports that could have included pylon bases.

 

I perhaps should point out both the islands are on on one side of the bridge, and not the side the ship collided with iirc.

 

C6T.

[Classsix T]

2 hours ago, Oldddudders said:

47 years of safe operation tells me the system employed for outbound and inbound vessels is essentially safe. The power-loss at a critical point that caused this awful event is a very one-off one-off. 

I'd not debate you on that Ian, but aren't one-offs why we have risk assessment, fail safe and worst case scenario consultation?

 

C6T.

[Night Train]

Some good footage of the aftermath from the NTSB.

 

 

I expect various figures within the insurance industry will be stocking up on industrial grade vaseline in preparation for the financial rogering they are about to receive.

Edited March 26 by Night Train

[melmerby]

1 hour ago, Classsix T said:

 

I perhaps should point out both the islands are on on one side of the bridge, and not the side the ship collided with iirc.

They are the same side the ship collided with , they are on the Baltimore side and the "islands", actually look rather flimsy.

This is a Ggogle Earth view, from the road about the position of the struck pylon, Baltimore is the distance:

Ship on the right heading for the main span.

 

Interestingly Baltimore is about 150 miles from the sea!

Edited March 26 by melmerby

[kevinlms]

8 hours ago, Reorte said:

Sounds like the ship got a mayday out and traffic was stopped as a result, so a quick response there probably saved lives.

No I have heard a recording of the police calls, about closing the bridge and then less than a minute later, the call changed to one that the bridge is down. So while they had closed the bridge, it was too late to save vehicles already crossing.

[melmerby]

6 hours ago, ERIC ALLTORQUE said:

The ship looses electrical power if you watch footage it goes dark and they get the power back but its too late to steer,apparently it dropped the anchor but was too late.

It's also belching black smoke out of the stern end as if something serious had happened.

[kevinlms]

2 minutes ago, melmerby said:

It's also belching black smoke out of the stern end as if something serious had happened.

Absolute maximum revs, maybe?