Key Bridge in Baltimore collapsed

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
I saw the video, looked like a scene from a movie.
How does something like this happen? They plowed right into a support structure.
 
loss of power it looks like. Ship went dark moments before collision. Lots of unanswered questions at this point
 
Sailor of Fortune said:
loss of power it looks like. Ship went dark moments before collision. Lots of unanswered questions at this point
Click to expand...
Agree with unanswered questions, pretty rare to fully take xown a bridge but all kinds of allisions happen regularly....but for many different reasons.
 
Marine traffic shows the ship slowing 3 min prior to crash.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1200.jpg
    IMG_1200.jpg
    47.5 KB · Views: 13
The Back and possibly real story here is - is the Port of Baltimore closed?
 
Is it such that there are no assist tugs tethered to the ship while navigating in Baltimore Harbour? To me, that would seem odd.

If so, look for a procedural change soon.

My thoughts are with those who have suffered from this incedent.
 
Just a terrible situation.

We need to wait to see what really happened...........
 
luna said:
Is it such that there are no assist tugs tethered to the ship while navigating in Baltimore Harbour? To me, that would seem odd.
If so, look for a procedural change soon.
Click to expand...


Back in the day, tug assist was required in addition to the mandatory harbor pilot. Then advancements in bow thrusters and directional propulsion obviated the need for tugs. Shipowners saw a way to cut costs by foregoing the tug assist.

If this vessel had a tug on slow-steaming standby escort this accident could have been averted.
 
High Wire said:
Marine traffic shows the ship slowing 3 min prior to crash.
Click to expand...

Wow. It looks like the vessel went right towards the bridge support structure. Would a harbor pilot have been aboard?
 
Pretty sure the Fire Chief said there was a pilot aboard.

Been there enough times...that bridge and some rocky islands to the south are the hard obstacles and the shallows to the north where than large containership went aground last year I think are the last bits of the Patapsco River...so essentially it was out of the busy, constricted area of the port.

One "expert" and I saw a plume of black smoke just prior to impact suggesting a rapid increase demanded of the engine...but not confirmed.

If the ship lost steerage (as SoF pointed out in post #4) from loss of power.... and she was backing down (with a port prop walk), it may explain the slow turn to starboard and allision. But guesses are just that especially made from assumptions.
 
Had heard the vessel went dark prior to the accident indicating a loss of power.
As a former commercial shipping guy I still subsribe to international shipping news and is amazing how many accidents happen weekly in various ports around the globe due to mechanical failures, loss of power, loss of steering, etc.
Most not as severe as this thus not covered on the news. As previously stated, a tug escort could have prevented this. It is one thing to lose power and plow into a soft mudbank along the shore and quite another to take out a bridge or LNG terminal. Perhaps stationing tugs on stand-by near various vital points of infrastruce is warranted.
 
Mac G said:
Had heard the vessel went dark prior to the accident indicating a loss of power.
As a former commercial shipping guy I still subsribe to international shipping news and is amazing how many accidents happen weekly in various ports around the globe due to mechanical failures, loss of power, loss of steering, etc.
Most not as severe as this thus not covered on the news. As previously stated, a tug escort could have prevented this. It is one thing to lose power and plow into a soft mudbank along the shore and quite another to take out a bridge or LNG terminal. Perhaps stationing tugs on stand-by near various vital points of infrastruce is warranted.
Click to expand...

I've noticed that the freighters on the Great Lakes that are typically operating solo (no tugs) in and out of very confined ports typically carry a big stern anchor. I figure that's their backup plan in this kind of situation, dump it and get the thing stopped (without the issue of it swinging around 180* like if they dropped a bow anchor).
 
psneeld said:
...
One "expert" and I saw a plume of black smoke just prior to impact suggesting a rapid increase demanded of the engine...but not confirmed.

If the ship lost steerage (as SoF pointed out in post #4) from loss of power.... and she was backing down (with a port prop walk), it may explain the slow turn to starboard and allision. But guesses are just that especially made from assumptions.
Click to expand...

One can see the lights go out, then on, then out again, and during the power flickering, one could see a huge amount of black smoke. I also noticed the slow turn to starboard along with the vehicles on the bridge and wondered about prop walk. The ship is supposed to have dropped anchor as well.

Two pilots were reported to be on board.

I saw cars crossing and news reports say the ship sent out a Mayday which closed the bridge to traffic. Unfortunately there were work crews on the bridge, you can see the flashing yellow lights on some of the vehicles, and they apparently are the ones that went into the water.

The surprise to me was no protective structures for the bridge. One would have thought after the Tampa bridge disaster structures would have been built. Supposedly new bridges have to have the protective structures.
 
Last edited:
I am not familiar with procedures in the US, but where I live large ships have mandatory a tug on the stern and a tug on the bow to aid in steering inside the 'port area'.
Does this also apply in the US or is a tug not mandatory when entering a port ?

You can indeed see a double black out on the vessel, followed by an increase in engine power (black smoke arising). There will be many questions that the NTSB will address and we just have to wait for the preliminary report t get an idea of what caused this collision and black out.

When I thought about this accident I had to think of the discussion we have in another topic, about autonomous marine traffic. I don't think that anything could have prevented this accident, without power there is not a lot to do, so not all accidents can be avoided by autonomous shipping.

In any case sad loss of life last night, I feel for those families whose loved ones are not coming home anymore.
 
Not involved in this industry. But from a friend whose family owns a towing company for port ny/nj my understanding is that the towing companies do keep tow boats on call and available should need arise. Don’t know response time and given that if it would make any difference here. Can more knowledgeable people comment?
Also it looks like this was a container ship not hazmat. Have seen hazmat escorted like liquidified natural gas while coming in to harbors or going through tight spots such as canals but wonder about practicality for bridges with narrow lanes. Comments?. Would think a side tow would increase effective beam and in a cross current or strong wind a front tow might not sufficiently prevent leeway. The bridge looks old and without a large center span. Assuming the event occurred due to loss of propulsion and steerage very near the bridge can someone comment if a tow would have prevented the event and if the nature of the bridge was a contributing factor?
 
Hippocampus said:
Not involved in this industry. But from a friend whose family owns a towing company for port ny/nj my understanding is that the towing companies do keep tow boats on call and available should need arise. Don’t know response time and given that if it would make any difference here. Can more knowledgeable people comment?
Also it looks like this was a container ship not hazmat. Have seen hazmat escorted like liquidified natural gas while coming in to harbors or going through tight spots such as canals but wonder about practicality for bridges with narrow lanes. Comments?. Would think a side tow would increase effective beam and in a cross current or strong wind a front tow might not sufficiently prevent leeway. The bridge looks old and without a large center span. Assuming the event occurred due to loss of propulsion and steerage very near the bridge can someone comment if a tow would have prevented the event and if the nature of the bridge was a contributing factor?
Click to expand...


Check with your towing company friend, but would think a tug escorting along the vessel's starboard side could have moved up and pushed her bow off that bridge.
Am not familiar with that harbor, but if the next vital piece of infrastrure on their intended course is off to port, then the tug could move around to the portside, and so forth.

As Rslifkin pointed out, Great Lakes freighters now go tug-free in harbors where that was never possible before. The Cuyahoga River in Cleveland is notoriously winding and full of sharp bends (one nicknamed "Collision Bend") as freighters make their way upstream to the steel mills. Whereas they used to require multiple tugs to make that journey now some go solo.

If a harbor has vital infrastrurtre next to shipping channels it might make sense to collectively charge additional port fees to all commercial entries to fund stand-by tugs near critical points for this very reason.

Yes that would cost shipowners more and those costs would get passed down to all of us eventually; but spread among all it would be cheaper than individually requiring assistance over a certain DWT. And how much will it cost to rebuild that bridge?
 
There was a fendering system...not sure if it wasn't strong enough or what.....
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot 2024-03-26 123817.jpg
    Screenshot 2024-03-26 123817.jpg
    33.2 KB · Views: 21
dannc said:
The surprise to me was no protective structures for the bridge. One would have thought after the Tampa bridge disaster structures would have been built. Supposedly new bridges have to have the protective structures.
Click to expand...


Here's the D tower of the SanFrancisco-Oakland Bay Bridge after being struck by the Cosco Busan in 2007. Can't compare the angles of impact, but this was a significant smack. :eek:
 

Attachments

  • Delta tower 1(22a) after collision.jpg
    Delta tower 1(22a) after collision.jpg
    156.2 KB · Views: 22
Tugboat would just be dragged along, it wouldn't be able to do anything in this case, that's fun to maneuver.
I am surprised that there is no buffer for the pillars.




Mvg,

Pascal.
 
https://youtu.be/8l0Oja_rm0s?si=F2t9toSr5yq7RofL

Smit Clyde 31x11 meter throws 5000 hp into the fray here, it needs a very great distance to create something of effect.
Colossal ships of this size cannot be changed just like that, it takes time and space.

Regards,

Pascal
 
Last edited:
Interesting that it had slowed to just 1.5 knots before it hit and was still able to cause that much damage.
 
I'm wondering what the liability insurance policy would be for that kind of vessel. The president wants the federal government to build Baltimore a new bridge, but I would think the liability insurance policy would have to be in the billions to cover this kind of possibility.

Ted
 
Not much of a fender system.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1201.jpg
    IMG_1201.jpg
    93.7 KB · Views: 18
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

RT Firefly
Overturned catamaran
Replies
15
Views
2K
brian eiland
brian eiland
AlanT
This week's Sinking and Stranding.
Replies
13
Views
1K
Pete Meisinger
Pete Meisinger
Insequent
Sydney ferries being repowered
Replies
7
Views
1K
Southern Boater
Southern Boater
mvweebles
Alaska cancels snow crab season.
Replies
3
Views
1K
tiltrider1
tiltrider1
BruceK
Lithium Ion Tool Battery Fires
Replies
17
Views
2K
psneeld
psneeld

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom