Francis Keys bridge hit by ship. Bridge collapses, mass casualty event.

[para bellum]

More interesting in my opinion are the two course changes to starboard depicted on the red line that must be 'course made good'.

The first one could be just propellor thrust to starboard but the second one is too much for that.

There is only one course deviation on the AIS tracking. (ignore the wiggling icon, that doesn't mean anything)

 

[Donald H]

There is only one course deviation on the AIS tracking. (ignore the wiggling icon, that doesn't mean anything)

Yours doesn't show the detail as well as one of the earlier ones that was posted by moderator, Aye Can't See you'.
It depicts a small course change to starboard at the marked point of engine start up, then the larger correction later on. As I have suggested, the first one makes sense to be prop thrust.

If you're interested, you may want to ask the mod. I don't find the first on very interesting. The second one is quite bothersome and needs an explanation!

 

[tahuyaman]

Yeah, sure it did...

It did. You're just too ignorant to catch it.

 

[tahuyaman]

You must be watching the sped of version of the video, because in a real time version of the video, it appears that time was on the side of the vessel if restart was established in time.

Vessels of that size are not going to change direction quickly. It’s not like steering a 17 foot ski boat. The ship would have needed to regain engine power probably 10 minutes prior to contact. Possibly five minutes at the latest.

 

[percysunshine]

 

[WorldWatcher]

An alternative route can be established via large ferry vessels or even large landing craft vessels that are part of our beach landing ship's for military use (once a clearing is established by removal of a section of the damaged bridge). If we were at war and the bridge was taken out, then an alternate route would be established immediately. Maybe look for crossings where a pontoon bridge could be established at a closer land to land crossing. Just thinking in a war like senario I guess.

Now you are talking about ferries (multiple) capable of carrying over 30,000 vehicles a day. Not cars, vehicles meaning tractor trailers included.

Very different the sealing the harbor with a floating bridge across the harbor blocking ship traffic to the ports.

So how many ferries at what capacity? How many "runs" per day per ferry?

WW

 

[beagle9]

Vessels of that size are not going to change direction quickly. It’s not like steering a 17 foot ski boat. The ship would have needed to regain engine power probably 10 minutes prior to contact. Possibly five minutes at the latest.

True, but at what point did the engine lose power, and then gain power back again ? The stack seems to indicate a huge surge in power based on the amount of black smoke being released from the stack it appears. Was that surge some sort of attempt being made ? If so what attempt was she making ?

 

[tahuyaman]

True, but at what point did the engine lose power, and then gain power back again ? The stack seems to indicate a huge surge in power based on the amount of black smoke being released from the stack it appears. Was that surge some sort of attempt being made ? If so what attempt was she making ?

From what I’ve read and heard, by the time the ship lost power it was too late. Also, just because it appears that the engines may have started, that doesn’t mean transmissions were engaged turning the propeller shafts.

 

[tahuyaman]

View attachment 924593

Dumb.

 

[beagle9]

Now you are talking about ferries (multiple) capable of carrying over 30,000 vehicles a day. Not cars, vehicles meaning tractor trailers included.

Very different the sealing the harbor with a floating bridge across the harbor blocking ship traffic to the ports.

So how many ferries at what capacity? How many "runs" per day per ferry?

WW

Not talking about carrying cargo, but only transports carrying human and needed supplies for those that need to work and be supplied from an opened supply line. If an opening such as the main 400' wide opening can be cleared quickly, then the cargo transports can resume through that opening.

Land alternate routes should be assessed and established for those needing to travel from area to area if no longer have the bridge to accommodate them. Two separate things going on here.

 

[beagle9]

From what I’ve read and heard, by the time the ship lost power it was too late. Also, just because it appears that the engines may have started, that doesn’t mean transmissions were engaged turning the propeller shafts.

True, so that's what investigations are for then... Hopefully we all will have answer's when they come available.

 

[Delldude]

Pretty good article on the shipping industry by a former Captain. Worth the read.


This deserves a bit more because frankly, I'm getting tired of the nuts.

Indeed this might get added to my FAQ here (go see the section on "Troofers" for what happens if you run that garbage on my forum, whether in the comment section or otherwise) because it is getting about that stupid.

Let's talk a bit about boat handling, especially single-screw vessels. Most props (unless you have twins) are what are called "right hand" screws. When going ahead the torque effect and the rotation of the water column coming off the screw tend to move the stern of the ship to starboard, and since the vessel only has applied moment (force) at the stern this means if the stern goes starboard the bow goes to port. Each vessel has an "effective" pivot center; exactly where it is varies, but it is not in the center of the vessel length-wise. With an outboard it is often at or right near the transom, which can make close-quarter handling quite a mess in snotty conditions at low speed. Gigabite, which was a Hatteras 45' Sportfish, pivoted at around her engine locations, which was roughly 10-15' or so from the transom (she had twin Detroit diesels.)

More On The Bridge

<p>This deserves a bit more because frankly, <em>I'm getting tired of the nuts.</em></p><br><p>Indeed this might get added to my FAQ here (go see the section on "Troofers" for what happens if you run that garbage on my forum, whether in the comme

market-ticker.org

 

[AyeCantSeeYou]

If you drop the anchor when the boat is moving forward, it's going to swing the boat around when the anchor bites.

How much of that affected the collision is not something I can say- just that when you watch the sped-up video, it sure gives that impression.

The port anchor is out, and the chain is in the water. The starboard anchor may also have been dropped, but the hawsepipe and surrounding hull is torn out on that side, so we don't know if that anchor was released or not.

Only the port anchor was dropped.

 

[AyeCantSeeYou]

Engine restart undoubtedly took place via the smoke coming from the stack, but was it in time to correct course ? It appears not if were the case. However, it could be something else, but the intense investigation will have to reveal it.

If politics get involved or they are involved, then we may never know the answers.

Incorrect. The ship's engines never restarted. I have posted several times links and info from NTSB about the data on the recorders and also info from the pilots.

The "black smoke" people keep referring to is from the emergency generators kicking on. The ship's engines could not restart.

The anchor was dropped in an effort to slow the ship down and also in hopes that it would pull the ship's bow to the left before it hit the bridge. There wasn't enough time since they were just seconds away from the bridge support.

 

[AyeCantSeeYou]

View attachment 924593

That's just flat out stupid. No beams were melted.

 

[para bellum]

Only the port anchor was dropped.

They may have been hoping to drag the bow to port, but it was futile.

Some reports based on the AIS data and modeling suggest that they were able to get the main started and reversed just before the hit, which would have also accelerated the swing to stb.

 

[para bellum]

That's just flat out stupid. No beams were melted.

Yeah, that's dumb. The steel melted but the paint is fine?

 

[AyeCantSeeYou]

Not talking about carrying cargo, but only transports carrying human and needed supplies for those that need to work and be supplied from an opened supply line. If an opening such as the main 400' wide opening can be cleared quickly, then the cargo transports can resume through that opening.

Land alternate routes should be assessed and established for those needing to travel from area to area if no longer have the bridge to accommodate them. Two separate things going on here.

The channel for the shipping lanes is 700' wide. I haven't heard of any plans for ferries. I seriously doubt anything like that will be used. We have 2 tunnels crossing the harbor in downtown Baltimore that most vehicles that used the bridge will divert to. Hazmat's will have to use the northern arc of I-695 to get to and from the port; they aren't allowed in the tunnels. This is how it was done before the bridge was built.

 

[Burgermeister]

Still haven't given the names of the pilots. A basic piece of the story.

 

[AyeCantSeeYou]

They may have been hoping to drag the bow to port, but it was futile.

Some reports based on the AIS data and modeling suggest that they were able to get the main started and reversed just before the hit, which would have also accelerated the swing to stb.

Yes, that is what they hoped for, but at the same time, they knew they were too close to the bridge and that they were going to hit the support.

The engines wouldn't start back up. All they had were part of the lights back on from the emergency generators. They can't even get them to start now. That's where the investigation is now - what caused the engine failure. I believe NTSB has requested all maintenance and repair records and is waiting to receive them. They're also testing the fuel.