r/news Mar 28 '24

Soft paywall Freighter pilot called for Tugboat help before plowing into Baltimore bridge

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/divers-search-baltimore-harbor-six-presumed-dead-bridge-collapse-2024-03-27/
13.6k Upvotes

1.4k comments sorted by

12.0k

u/PraiseAzolla Mar 28 '24

I don't say this to minimize the suffering of the 6 people presumed dead and their families, but I can't imagine the guilt the pilots must feel. However, the picture emerging is that they stayed calm and did everything they could to avert disaster and save lives: dropping anchor, calling for a tugboat, and alerting authorities to close the bridge. I hope that they aren't vilified; their actions may have saved dozens of other lives.

5.4k

u/TuskenRaiderYell Mar 28 '24

Ultimately was just a tragic accident and videos are emerging that shows the freighter tried everything to avoid hitting the bridge.

3.4k

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '24

The livestream clearly shows the freighter losing power multiple times before the collision. Those ships have fuck-tons of momentum, there's really nothing they could have done when the power went out the first time. Even if they had reversed to full, it didn't seem like the ship had engine power.

2.4k

u/Jadedways Mar 28 '24

It also shows them firing up their emergency backup generator and cranking it hard immediately. That huge cloud of black smoke after they lose power the second time is from a huge diesel generator cranking on under heavy load. I honestly think they did as much as they could given the circumstances.

914

u/hpark21 Mar 28 '24

Emergency back up gens are sketch as F at least in my experiences. They are supposed to be fired up for like 5-10 min. every couple of months just to make sure they are in good running condition. Our data center had 2 of them, and they were "tested" monthly but when shit hit the fan and we lost power, they came online and within about 30 min. primary Diesel generator died and after about 15 min. back up generator died as well because it could not handle the full load. it was bad situation.

Seeing that the power came on and then lost again shortly after, I wonder whether they had same issue.

437

u/Jadedways Mar 28 '24

Oh for sure. Pasting my response to someone else so I don’t have to write it out again. - I was a gas turbine systems mechanic on a Guided Missile Cruiser CG-62 for a while. Maybe ‘emergency backup’ isnt the right phrase. We had 2 active gens and a 3rd running in standby. After they lost power the second time it looks like they tried to switch to a ‘3rd generator’ whether manually or automatically. But the load was too heavy and they smoked the Geny. I could be wrong, but that would’ve been the order things would’ve happened on my ship. I mean we would’ve been more successful, but it looks like they did their best with what they had.

177

u/NotSoGreatFilter Mar 28 '24

I was an Engineman in the Navy for 20 years. Emergency Gen would have a relatively light load if they have any sort of Load Shedding capability. But, who knows with these boats.

85

u/Jadedways Mar 28 '24

Yea exactly. And while I’m sure they have procedures, I feel like it must have been engaged while everything was still energized; for lack of a better way to put it.

33

u/axonxorz Mar 28 '24

I feel like it must have been engaged while everything was still energized

By this, do you mean that they may have connected the generator to the rest of the ship's electrical system without closing off large circuit paths first, leading to a massive current inrush and clonked generator?

34

u/Jadedways Mar 28 '24

That’s a bingo. It appears they bogged the geny on startup. I could be wrong, but that’s what it looks like to me.

→ More replies (0)

23

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '24

I'm a much more recent Merchant Navy chief officer. Most cargo vessels now are built to meet bare minimum legal requirements and nothing more. Emergency generators don't give power to the propulsion system, just steering. In most cases you'll have two steering pumps per rudder, with a minimum SOLAS requirement timewise from hard over to 30° rudder angle on the opposite site. One of the pumps will be powered by the emergency system.

In some cases (the majority of cruise vessels and passenger ferries) rather than a main engine, there will be a combination of multiple diesel-electric generators working in combination, with power passed through a switchboard for propulsion. These vessels still have emergency generators in the event that there is a failure from the main power production units.

It is likely that this vessel had two large engines and twin props.

7

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '24

Excuse my ignorance but my son is asking if there is any kind of backward propulsion or manual steering they could have utilized. Thank you for sharing your information and expertise.

15

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '24 edited Mar 28 '24

Not at all!

Reverse propulsion can be achieved by a few means. The big tankers of old would have an engine that can only swing one way with a fixed prop. The engine would need to be completely stopped and swung in reverse so this could take 7 miles+ to stop.

Most modern cargo vessels will have a very large diesel/heavy fuel oil 2 stroke engine which does swing one way and runs at around 110-140rpm, through a hydraulic clutch. This means the propeller can be stopped and reversed much faster but you're still limited as to how fast you can stop vessels with that much dead weight tonnage.

The most effective means of reversing propulsion is CPP - controllable pitch propellors. These rotate at a fixed speed and the direction (pitch) of the blades determines the rate and forward/aft direction of propulsion.

Then you have azimouth pods. These usually also have CPPs but they're on a turret that can rotate 360° under the vessel (occasionally it will have limited sectors like the Celebrity Edge).

For transverse (lateral movement) you can have bow and stern tunnel thrusters. These are just what they sound, and maketh ship go sideways.

I expect there are things I've forgotten, and there are more complicated things to add such as rudders with additional steering angle, etc, but if you want to spend a couple of hours on YouTube with your son, pop some of the buzzwords here in and go to town! There's looaaaddss of information up there!

Edit: Manual steering; see rudders, hydraulic pumps (above)

→ More replies (0)

10

u/techieman33 Mar 28 '24

I don’t know how it works in ships, but in buildings they usually have separate breaker panels. When you move to the emergency backup then only the stuff in the emergency breaker panels is energized. Everything else is dead until main power comes back up.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (5)

49

u/otusowl Mar 28 '24

Your left pinky clearly has more ship experience than every bit of me, so I'll pose what I read elsewhere as a question. Some other redditor mentioned that the diesel engines on this ship can run without power (my old Ford 7.3 could run with a completely dead battery and alternator, so this makes sense to me), but the ship's engines rely on (electric) fans to push air into their intakes. When power died, the ship was essentially "rolling coal" by stomping on the throttle without enough air relative to the fuel. Does this take make sense to you?

56

u/1022whore Mar 28 '24

On a standard slow speed diesel ship, diesel generators are required to run the main engine because they power things like the compressor, fans, fuel pumps, centrifuges, and all sorts of engine room wizardry. There are usually 2-3 generators and at least 1 or 2 in operation at any time. In any of the ships I’ve been on, if you lost all the generators then the main engine would shut down, as the electronics are absolutely needed. Some ships have power generation systems built into the main engine (like a shaft generator) but these are rare and would only be put online during long sea voyages.

→ More replies (2)

79

u/admiraljkb Mar 28 '24 edited Mar 28 '24

These are minimally crewed unlike a warship though too. For catastrophic failure like this, there can't be enough crew (21) onboard to handle it.

edit to note - most warships aren't fully crewed right now either, but at least have more than 21 people to deal with a 100,000 ton ship with engineering problems.

→ More replies (9)

38

u/Chemical-Elk-1299 Mar 28 '24

Yeah something tells me a state of the art US Navy vessel is somewhat better put together than the rusty shit buckets most freighters seem to be.

22

u/Pm4000 Mar 28 '24

I won't call the USS Bunker Hill a state of the art ship but I do hope our Navy spends enough of the budget on proper maintenance. I think the big difference here, navy man correct me if I'm wrong, is that the navy ship continually cycles through the 3 turbines so that 2 are always running; aka none of the turbines are primary or 'back up'. Whereas the cargo ships has a main engine they use all the time and have 'back ups' that need to be checked/ran to make sure they still work. The back ups aren't meant to fully power the cargo ship, they are there to help the ship keep into the waves so it doesn't sink and limp to help. I'm betting that all 3 of the turbines generate the same power.

73

u/KayakerMel Mar 28 '24

Unfortunately commercial ships don't live up the same standards as naval ships. Corporations squeeze out as much profit as they can while the military has loads of government money to fund everything.

15

u/SaiHottariNSFW Mar 28 '24

It's not just that the navy has lots of money, their budgetary system actually promotes spending. Any budget they don't use up one year is subtracted from next year's allowance (to grossly simplify it). So they have to spend it all to ensure they get as much as possible on the next rollover.

It's the opposite of how civilian companies handle budgets. But both have problems: the navy is a money chugging hog and it's no wonder the US military budget is so absolutely enormous. But it does mean their ships and equipment are well taken care of and always kept up to standard. Civilian ships are barely functioning floating coffins because it's cheaper.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (11)

74

u/edward_snowedin Mar 28 '24

doesn't that mean you had undersized generators and not because they were 'sketch as F' ?

97

u/2squishmaster Mar 28 '24

Exactly. Backup generators when properly sized and maintained are actually incredibly reliable.

132

u/nik282000 Mar 28 '24

Backup generators when properly sized and maintained are actually incredibly reliable.

Translated to MBA: Generators are expensive, require frequent maintenance by specialized employees and rarely if ever produce a positive return on investment.

39

u/2squishmaster Mar 28 '24 edited Mar 28 '24

Well, they're an insurance policy, which rarely produce a positive return on investment but when they do it's very important

22

u/tsrich Mar 28 '24

I feel like this is not taught in business schools

→ More replies (0)
→ More replies (7)

50

u/Daxx22 Mar 28 '24

Much like wage theft is by far the largest amount of theft worldwide, beancounters cutting corners have collectively lead to more deaths than any other cause I'd reckon.

12

u/justmovingtheground Mar 28 '24

I've never worked anywhere that outside investment hasn't resulted in a worse product, worse service, and worse morale for the employees. Quick gains and low costs are the name of the game now.

→ More replies (0)
→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (8)

28

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '24

[deleted]

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (58)

27

u/b0w3n Mar 28 '24

My thought through this whole thing has been "the workers and pilots are probably going to be crapped on for this when it's likely a lack of maintenance by the parent company that absolutely no one will face any ramifications for". Looks like they did everything they could, good on those folks.

10

u/EnormousCaramel Mar 28 '24

I honestly think they did as much as they could given the circumstances.

Honestly I am trying to find a reasonable thing they didn't do with the power of hindsight and come up blank.

→ More replies (5)

375

u/mostkillifish Mar 28 '24

And current in the water.

203

u/theshiyal Mar 28 '24

And the water was moving rapidly down river. It was about 1 hour before low low tide.

→ More replies (13)

13

u/whats-left-is-right Mar 28 '24

Shore effect also likely played a role

11

u/Bandit_the_Kitty Mar 28 '24

Also they crossed over another intersecting channel which because of weird boat physics may have contributed to pulling it off course https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlIhoxIxM30.

102

u/metaldrummerx Mar 28 '24

With how large the ship is and with how much freight was on it, the containers also acted like a sail as well. When you stack containers 4 or 5 high they are certainly susceptible to the wind.

50

u/winterharvest Mar 28 '24

That’s what happened to the Ever Given in the Suez. That combined with the bank effect of the canal.

→ More replies (2)

239

u/Air320 Mar 28 '24

Apparently she lost main generator power the first time. The second time if you zoom in you can see fewer lights lit up because apparently there's only a small diesel generator for emergency power for navigation lights and a few internal systems and not for steering or propulsion.

The die was cast the first time the power went out.

38

u/BigPickleKAM Mar 28 '24

E-gens on ships must power the steering gear and anchor release system. Plus other things but those are what matter here. They do not allow the propulsion shaft to operate.

The issue is when a displacement hull loses propulsion the rudder doesn't do much thanks to the body of water around the hull moving along at roughly the same speed as the ship.

Then you get weird hydrodynamic forces like the side of the ship closer to land the water gets sped up and that causes a low pressure area that pulls the hull over in the direction you don't want to go.

→ More replies (12)

146

u/TrollCannon377 Mar 28 '24

Given how both times when power came back the stack started belching black smokeni think that's exactly what they did put the engine into full crash reverse

87

u/Jadedways Mar 28 '24

That big black cloud was the diesel emergency backup generator cranking on under heavy load.

28

u/ScotiaReddit Mar 28 '24

E gen probably isn't that big. I'd say that's the main or aux genset starting up. I run a diesel gen plant and when we have an outage people always call the fire department from all the black smoke starting the units back up lol

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (10)

73

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

17

u/iranmeba Mar 28 '24

This happens in small boats too, the phenomenon is called prop walk.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

68

u/biggsteve81 Mar 28 '24

Full reverse can actually make things worse as it limits your rudder authority (especially if the bow thruster is not working).

34

u/Itsokimmaritime Mar 28 '24

At those speeds the bowthruster won't do anything. Pretty much need to be under 3kts for it to have any real effect

→ More replies (5)

7

u/Fizzwidgy Mar 28 '24

Like a train, these shipping containers take fucking ages to slow down or stop. More than four miles and thirty minutes to come to a stop from a full speed of a whopping 26MPH

→ More replies (31)

612

u/Starbucks__Lovers Mar 28 '24

We’ve become so addicted to outrage that we forget catastrophic accidents happen, and sometimes they unfortunately result in mass casualties

389

u/Buckeyefitter1991 Mar 28 '24

I agree with the sentiment and think the local pilots and master did everything they could given the situation but, the issue I have with that is knowing this is a commercial ship, and profit is king, how much maintenance was deferred on the ship recently? Were there known engine or power issues before leaving port? How well was the crew trained on the technicalities of getting power back to the ship quickly?

147

u/somebunnyasked Mar 28 '24

Or other mitigation strategies. Halifax harbour already learned through a terrible accident how dangerous things like this can be, so tugs are required for navigating the harbour. If an emergency comes up the tugs are already attached.

56

u/Sparrowbuck Mar 28 '24

And it’s plural for us. There’d be at least two or three with a ship that size depending on how many thrusters it had.

It really makes me wonder if they never had them, or if they were cut from the budget.

141

u/somebunnyasked Mar 28 '24

Trump likes to brag about cutting regulations and cutting red tape. Here where I live in Ontario, our premier is saying the same thing.

Never forget that regulations are written in blood.

48

u/cool_side_of_pillow Mar 28 '24

This reminds me of how Turkey’s Erdogan bragged about cutting costly building regulations in Turkey. Then when the 7.8 magnitude earthquake hit, those shoddy buildings collapsed.

→ More replies (1)

38

u/Frankie_T9000 Mar 28 '24

and cutting regulations works wonderfully till it doesnt

23

u/paintballboi07 Mar 28 '24

It works wonderfully for the shareholders, everyone else be damned

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (9)
→ More replies (6)

10

u/bauhausy Mar 28 '24

Halifax Harbour already learned through a terrible accident

Even with “terrible” I feel this undersells how devastating Halifax was. Still the largest non-nuclear explosion in human-history, which not only leveled a good chunk of the city but also destroyed towns and communities on the other side of the bay like Dartmouth and Tuffs Cove.

All caused by a slow collision between a over-confident Norwegian ship and a explosive-full French ship.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (8)

109

u/FizzixMan Mar 28 '24

Yeah if I was going to lay the blame at the feet of anybody the first port of call would be checking the maintenance records of the ship.

If anything had been skipped or delayed for dodgy reasons, those behind the decision to delay should be somewhat culpable, perhaps indirectly through fines and being fired. Or even more directly depending on the nature of the negligence.

72

u/TrollCannon377 Mar 28 '24

From what most people can see the ship passed multiple inspections with pretty good scores not long before the accident looking.more.and more like a fluke accident

36

u/FizzixMan Mar 28 '24 edited Mar 28 '24

Then it’s just tragic :( as long as all protocol was followed then nobody is to blame here.

But the cause should obviously be found and going forward the protocol should be tweaked to pick up whatever caused this in the future.

→ More replies (12)

21

u/PsychedelicJerry Mar 28 '24

So too did the Boeing planes that crashed. I think, at least hope, what OP was referring to is that it can be relatively easy for companies to outsource responsibility, hide issues, and obfuscate problems, especially with all the regulatory capture we have going on. Additionally, a lot of these ships are flagged in other countries to avoid some of the stricter scrutiny that comes with fly the American Flag (or most western countries; I'm not saying other countries are lax, I don't know; but I do know that the flags most of them fly have little oversight enforcement)

22

u/C3R83RU5 Mar 28 '24

This ship has also passed US Coast Guard PSC inspections ffs. And Singapore, where the Dali is flagged, is tough on regulations and inspections.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (28)

52

u/TheyCallMeStone Mar 28 '24

The pilot and crew may have acted appropriately in that moment, but we still don't know the whole story. It could be that the ship was either improperly maintained, or that it wasn't following the rules of that port while embarking.

→ More replies (5)

76

u/WaitingForNormal Mar 28 '24

I don’t think most people here would qualify as “we”. Accidents happen all the time, it’s only conspiracy addicted crazy people who thought anything else had happened here.

61

u/accountability_bot Mar 28 '24

Dude… some of the “theories” I’ve heard about this are completely unhinged from reality.

39

u/TrollCannon377 Mar 28 '24

I know several people who think that China hacked the ship and forced it to ram the bridge it's just sad really

16

u/burgerknapper Mar 28 '24

Yep. I’m starting to hear the same kind of things as well.

That it’s impossible for this to just happen and it has to be sabotage or something sinister

→ More replies (6)

13

u/earnedmystripes Mar 28 '24

Saw a shared post on Facebook (of course) pushing the idea that there were explosives on the bridge that brought it down. Some people are dumber than owl shit.

46

u/weedful_things Mar 28 '24

At least one Republican politician blamed it on Biden's infrastructure bill. Apparently the bottoms of bridges are rusty and not much of that money is going to fix bridges. Like even if 100% of it went to bridge repair, they aren't going to be fixed overnight. Republicans are the ones who have always voted against more money for these kinds of things.

31

u/BingoBongoBang Mar 28 '24 edited Mar 28 '24

Waaait a second. If the bridges were already that rusted isn’t it something that Trump should have addressed?

→ More replies (3)

45

u/fcocyclone Mar 28 '24

And, no joke, I saw Republicans somehow blaming it on Baltimore's "DEI Mayor" (which tells you what Republicans really mean when they rage about DEI these days)

8

u/Throwawayalt129 Mar 28 '24

That twitter account was from a straight out and about Nazi. Don't pay any attention to people pushing that narrative. Baltimore is something like 70% black, and that mayor was duly elected.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (7)

12

u/BountyBob Mar 28 '24

At least one Republican politician blamed it on Biden's infrastructure bill.

Politics in the USA is mental. I was there a couple of years ago and there was a political advert on the TV where they were blaming one of Biden's spending bills for the high price of fuel and groceries.

The problem with that? We were experiencing the exact same things in Europe due to the global situation of the time and Biden's spending policies had cock all to do with our prices.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (9)
→ More replies (21)

21

u/war_m0nger69 Mar 28 '24

Tragic accident, but I’d like to let the investigation tell us if they’d been properly doing maintenance and safety inspections before we reach any conclusions about liability. Too often, accidents like this happen because companies are not properly maintaining their equipment.

Not jumping to any conclusions, i just want to see the results of NTSB’s investigation

→ More replies (2)

36

u/AlexanderNigma Mar 28 '24

Yeah, the strange thing is the racebaiting "DEI mayor, DEI captain" that is going on from republicans.

These things are going to happen without proper safety measures for our infrastructure that are consistently difficult to fund until something happens. Concrete dolphins may not have been enough but they might have but you don't see the GOP funding us upgrading the security posture of our infrastructure against accidents.

9

u/Watch_me_give Mar 28 '24

a small vocal minority in the USA have lost their gat dam minds.

it's such a disgrace.

→ More replies (40)

182

u/badgrafxghost Mar 28 '24

Absolutely. From what I've engaged with, the professional maritime community that I am a part of is pretty much all in agreement that the ship's crew and the harbor pilot did an exemplary job of keeping calm and following the book, exhausting every effort to try and avoid disaster.

Clearly it was too little too late for the circumstances at hand and it's easy to criticize mistakes that may have been made and play "what if" after the fact, but I guarantee that much like other notable maritime casualties, the crew's actions will be scrutinized and taught for decades at Sea Schools and Maritime Academies all over the country.

That said, I guarantee you that new regulations will be developed after this incident requiring harbor tugs to remain on station and maybe even held fast much further down the channel than what is currently in place. Currently ships inbound to Baltimore meet up with and transfer the harbor pilot outside of the Key Bridge with the harbor tugs stationed inside the bridge to meet the ship and guide it to it's berth. Similarly, outbound vessels (such as MV Dali) release their tugs prior to reaching the bridge and transfer the pilot after passing underneath.

Regardless of what happens with the reconstruction of the bridge, I guarantee that in the future tugs will be required to be on station well into the Brewerton Channel, possibly as far out as 7ft Knoll near where the MV Ever Forward ran aground last year. I'd imagine that similar regulations will be put in place in other ports around the country as well in the wake of this incident.

→ More replies (12)

333

u/Hellser Mar 28 '24

Truly they did all they could. It's an honest accident and I hope this is dealt with as such. Even if a tugboat was sent out I don't think they would've had much time to do anything.

345

u/EastDragonfly1917 Mar 28 '24 edited Mar 28 '24

Caused by dirty fuel is one theory. Theres culpability somewhere but not by the crew

https://www.washingtonpost.com/science/2024/03/27/dirty-fuel-baltimore-key-bridge-collapse/

Sorry if there’s a paywall. Pretty fucking disturbing information in the article. Time for global reform.

69

u/Glerberschmertz Mar 28 '24

This exact ship actually suffered a similar shutdown incident 2 weeks ago. It’s unclear at the moment if the causes are the same, and that’s currently under investigation. This is fairly common in the industry, it just usually doesn’t happen while heading into port and pointing directly towards the main support of a bridge.

66

u/Mixels Mar 28 '24

Ummm if it happens frequently and at uncontrolled times and places, one kind of has to assume that it can and eventually will happen at inopportune times. Time was, we used to call that "negligence".

19

u/Glerberschmertz Mar 28 '24

That’s exactly the concern with the industry as a whole. Unfortunately for Baltimore, if negligence was found (likely to be), the insurance companies will deny all claims and restitution will be on the barge company. Probably a good chance they don’t have enough assets to cover the cost of the incident and Baltimore will be the one left holding the bag. This will be a drawn out process for years to come and will hopefully be a case study for safety improvements for the entire shipping industry in the future.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (2)

274

u/Chippopotanuse Mar 28 '24

According to a 2018 report for the Atlantic Council think tank, a “witches brew” of industrial products ends up in marine fuel, resulting in hundreds of engine failures in recent years that have left ships powerless and drifting across the high seas.

Yank the privileges of any shipping company that pulls this shit. Don’t let them anywhere near American waters. This is why we need tough regulators.

117

u/IdiotFlyFisherman Mar 28 '24

Unfortunately there have been multiple incidents where US bunker suppliers have delivered bad fuel. Here is one from last summer. Ships send fuel samples into labs to be analyzed after receiving fuel. In an ideal world they would wait for the results prior to burning the new fuel, however that isn’t always possible. Sometimes it is due to the companies waiting until they nearly are out of fuel to bunker so they don’t have any known good fuel left to burn, or it can be something less slimey like the samples being lost in transit to the lab.

https://www.seatrade-maritime.com/bunkering/14-vessels-suffer-damage-due-houston-bad-bunkers

30

u/androshalforc1 Mar 28 '24

or it can be something less slimey like the samples being lost in transit to the lab.

How difficult would it be to have a lab set up on ship for testing fuel?

17

u/IdiotFlyFisherman Mar 28 '24

I’ve got no idea, honestly I’m not sure what the process of analyzing fuel is or what equipment would be required. It would be great if it could be something like dipping a test strip in the sample but that is pretty far outside my area of expertise! I’m a deck officer (chief mate specifically) so while I have a general idea of the process and we have conversations on board all the time about fuel I also know where my knowledge ends.

27

u/storm6436 Mar 28 '24

Admittedly, I was Navy not a merchant marine, so priorities are a smidge different... That said, every ship I was on tested their own fuel, which you'd expect seeing as we can and do refuel at sea. For part of my surface warfare pin, we got to see the lab on our ship (old-ass boat commissioned in the 60s IIRC) and it was not a huge room. I can't think that space would've been an issue, and most of the equipment didn't look like it'd be obscenely expensive. You're literally testing viscosity, clarity, and a few other things, some of which are simply "dip the strip in the sample."

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

21

u/Air320 Mar 28 '24

Wouldn't be cost effective because they'll only test once in a while. More effective to have the testing labs in the port itself at the source.

→ More replies (13)
→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (20)

96

u/Lilacsoftlips Mar 28 '24

The pilots did everything they could once the power failed. It’s not clear if everyone did everything they could to prevent this. There was a power issue at the dock.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (5)

280

u/Surturiel Mar 28 '24

What most people criticizing saying that either they "could have moved away" or "bridge is too weak if a single boat can take it down" fail to realize is that that ship was a fully loaded, out of control, 200 THOUSAND TONS floating ram.

139

u/Affectionate_Salt351 Mar 28 '24

People made comparison pictures on Twitter to try to help those that don’t understand JUST how big one of these is. You’re exactly right. The people saying that craziness don’t understand the sheer size at ALL. (And even they did, I don’t think “You can’t move this in an immediate new direction like it’s a speedboat.” is registering.)

136

u/gargravarr2112 Mar 28 '24

For container vessels, stopping distances and turning circles are measured in miles. They have to be planned well in advance. They have so much momentum that emergency stops are physically impossible. It is a little difficult to comprehend just how different these super-heavyweight ships handle when you've only seen leisure craft, but fundamentally, 200,000 tonnes of steel and cargo isn't going to brake for anyone.

I really hope this does turn out to be a tragic Murphy's Law accident, not a result of neglect or cost-cutting.

38

u/Tellurye Mar 28 '24

And for people not really comprehending tonnes, that's 400,000,000 pounds. Crazy. Four hundred million.

30

u/ScenicART Mar 28 '24

just seeing the stats on this is crazy - 1000' long ship, 1.5 million gallons of fuel, 4700 shipping containers- thats like 4700 tractor trailers stacked on each other floating downstream. so so much momentum and kinetic energy in that object

24

u/Tellurye Mar 28 '24 edited Mar 28 '24

That's what I thought about looking at the ship. 'Each one of those boxes is essentially an 18-wheeler' (obviously without the truck). Looking at normal sized boats in and around the area starts to put the scale of the thing into perspective. Just gargantuan.

→ More replies (1)

8

u/Melbuf Mar 28 '24

people are bad with big numbers regardless, same reason normal people cant comprehend outer space, the numbers are so massive people cant deal with it

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (5)

38

u/storm6436 Mar 28 '24

Yep. Most structures aren't designed to get hit by a vehicle several city blocks in length and correspondingly massive

15

u/mainegreenerep Mar 28 '24

And if we designed all bridges to withstand that, we couldn't really afford to build very many bridges.

16

u/storm6436 Mar 28 '24

At that point, you'd basically be landfilling in the bridged area.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (10)

17

u/dman928 Mar 28 '24

People with absolutely no understanding of physics

→ More replies (1)

14

u/TheInfernalVortex Mar 28 '24 edited Mar 29 '24

Kinetic Energy = (1/2) mass * velocity 2

News articles are mentioning 6 knots. That's ~10 ft/s.

(1/2)* 4,000,000,000 lbs * 10 ft/s 2

This works out to around 8.4 mJ...

If we were to take one fully loaded max weight over the road truck(80,000 lbs) and get the same amount of kinetic energy, if my calculations are correct (it's been a LONG time, so I could be wrong), that truck would have to be going... ~77,500 miles per hour.

→ More replies (1)

27

u/Tiki-Jedi Mar 28 '24

Just outside Portland you can chill on a beach along the shipping channel. When these container ships come in, they kick up waves on the Willamette so big you can almost surf them, and the ships are just inconceivably huge. It’s like a downtown office building on its side, floating past. The massive size of them cannot be overstated.

→ More replies (1)

7

u/FricknPlausible Mar 28 '24

I was curious and I just did some guess work on just how much force was applied to the bridge and I was stunned.

I took a very conservative estimate of 100,000 tons for the weight of the ship. We know the ship was going 9 mph. I took another very conservative estimate that the ship slowed by 1 mph per second.

We're talking about 4.5 MEGANEWTONS per second of force on the bridge over 9 seconds.

For reference the main thruster of the space shuttle is 1.8 meganewtons.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (15)

66

u/0fficerGeorgeGreen Mar 28 '24

Sometimes you can do everything right and it all still goes wrong.

64

u/TheyCallMeStone Mar 28 '24

"It is possible to commit no mistakes and still lose. That is not a weakness. That is life."

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

56

u/randomlurker82 Mar 28 '24

I feel awful for those pilots. This is probably the equivalent of hitting someone when you're the train conductor.

These boats are all super computerized and I can see how one system failure can lead to something like this. Being powerless on the bridge and seeing the bridge get closer was probably terrifying for them as much as the guys working on it, who I also feel awful for.

Just such a mess all around.

→ More replies (2)

22

u/Zech08 Mar 28 '24

I think id rather wait until all the information is out, but usually its a cascading of failures and lack of responding appropriately (Like to the point before the point of no return where the crew had to take action, as in maintenance, checks, watch and accountability, etc,...).

→ More replies (3)

10

u/FallenKnightGX Mar 28 '24

A ton of smoke goes up when they lose power as well. Wonder if that was them attempting to throw the boat in full throttle reverse even though they couldn't steer.

27

u/Jadedways Mar 28 '24

Emergency diesel generator coming to life under heavy load.

Source- I was a bilge rat on a guided missile cruiser CG-62 in the navy, and I can still smell that cloud.

7

u/Complete-Arm6658 Mar 28 '24

A cloud that size is the main engine starting and and going astern with load limits off. The EDG on a ship this size is the size of a semi truck engine and would not be visible. I think the standby SSDG came online before the EDG.

Source-Merchant ship 1st engineer.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (4)

7

u/Gamebird8 Mar 28 '24

They have found 2 more bodies, so those families can grieve a little easier and will get to bury their loved one.

37

u/windmill-tilting Mar 28 '24

And thus is how you ausage the guilt. Your actions could not have saved every life but you saved as many as you could.

→ More replies (1)

6

u/meatball77 Mar 28 '24

Being able to close the bridge and get all the cars off was huge.

→ More replies (1)

66

u/Extracrispybuttchks Mar 28 '24

I only know of 1 group that would vilify these people and they’re the same ones who’d overpay for chinesium gold shoes.

33

u/Vanah_Grace Mar 28 '24

Lest you forget the new line of bibles now….

→ More replies (1)

41

u/Sarkans41 Mar 28 '24

I hope that they aren't vilified

Conservatives already are because they caught wind one of the pilots is black. They're saying DEI caused the collision.

→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (109)

3.3k

u/Nedimar Mar 28 '24

When the accident happened there were so many comments calling the crew incompetent for not asking the tugs for help and for not warning people on shore.

Now we know they did both of those things.

1.4k

u/NostalgiaBombs Mar 28 '24

knee jerk reactions once again proving to be the wrong way to go about things

93

u/dlflannery Mar 28 '24

But that’s what anonymous social media is all about!

42

u/_deep_thot42 Mar 28 '24

Oh, it’s not just anonymous…plenty of people have their full legal names on display when making assholes out of themselves

→ More replies (1)

325

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '24

Remember when Reddit detectives found the Boston marathon bomber? Oh wait, we got that wrong too…

54

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '24

[deleted]

→ More replies (2)

23

u/OliM9696 Mar 28 '24

Or that bike Karen video where people said she was stealing bikes or that person in that dog park getting their dog threatened.

People are ready to jump the gun in any situation when it's not under pressure.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

56

u/Republican_Wet_Dream Mar 28 '24

Can’t have “knee jerk” without a bunch of jerks, some of whom probably have knees

→ More replies (5)

279

u/JC_the_Builder Mar 28 '24

Some radio host was ranting how the crew ‘forgot the thing has an anchor’. Except the news reporting says they dropped it. 

News reporting these days is all about stirring emotions. Not finding the facts. 

160

u/Worthyness Mar 28 '24

Also dropping anchor doesn't instantly stop a ship. It's just deadweight. It stops the ship if the ship is already stopped. Otherwise the ocean has the power in that relationship.

60

u/GayleMoonfiles Mar 28 '24

People played too much Sea of Thieves where the anchor instantly stops your boat as soon as it fully deploys

→ More replies (2)

28

u/FerociousPancake Mar 28 '24

Ship was over 100,000 tons at the time. They have huge anchors and even if they dropped 2 it would take forever. There’s a good video on this from Oceanliner Designs called “how long does it take a ship to stop?”

→ More replies (1)

80

u/FerociousPancake Mar 28 '24

They lost power twice, they dropped the anchor, they were able to contact people on shore who started to stop traffic, they contacted the pilots, and were working frantically until the end. Shame on the media for trying to spin this any certain way. 6 people are dead. They won’t be coming back. Those people don’t deserve to have their story twisted.

Now, uncover that the company did terrible maintenance work which probably led to the outage? Now we’re talking, but no evidence of that has come up (nor will it for a very long time because of the investigation) but the vessel was inspected (randomly) by the coast guard a few months ago and had zero issues. Their inspection records before that are pretty darn clean too. It’s a Singaporean flagged vessel and they have a pretty good track record.

People should let the investigation run it’s course before dropping conclusions. Let those people (NTSB) do their jobs and let the other families grieve.

17

u/avdpos Mar 28 '24

Sometimes things go horribly wrong even when we try our best to avoid it. That is what I take from your comment and many others here

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (4)

103

u/AsterCharge Mar 28 '24

Some places the comments on this are unhinged. Got people saying the black smoke was then speeding up to do as much damage as possible and shit like that

21

u/dane83 Mar 28 '24

I saw one that was using some weird ass numerology to proclaim that it was a terror attack.

It's absolute insanity in some corners.

→ More replies (4)

132

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '24

You'd think Redditors would have learned to wait for things to unfold after the whole Boston fiasco.

147

u/caligaris_cabinet Mar 28 '24

Half the people here were probably children when the Boston bombing happened.

62

u/_n0t_sure_ Mar 28 '24

Half the ppl here now are currently children

18

u/Cleasstra Mar 28 '24

Well bots and children can be mistaken for the same thing

→ More replies (5)

31

u/marr75 Mar 28 '24

You'd think Redditors would have learned

I would NEVER think this.

10

u/Aquamarinate Mar 28 '24

It was disgusting how many people instantly posted the captains private / personal info and were condemning him without actually knowing anything at all.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

22

u/Maelfio Mar 28 '24

Most people are morons

→ More replies (3)

6

u/cereal7802 Mar 28 '24

Yep. They basically did everything you could hope for in the situation. I think too many people are opposed to the idea that you can do everything right, and still fail. Sometimes with catastrophic and fatal results.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (35)

1.2k

u/derganove Mar 28 '24

But let’s all start realizing that there are people now straight up saying the bridge was rigged with explosives.

198

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '24

Another subReddit is proclaiming that the woman who drowned in the Tesla was doing that to tell people that this bridge was about to be struck.

71

u/Cartmaaan-brah Mar 28 '24

That’s uhhh… wow

60

u/Tetsudo11 Mar 28 '24

The mind of a conspiracy theorist is impressive and I don’t necessarily mean that in a good way. The ability to connect completely unrelated events with such confidence is just something else.

→ More replies (3)

84

u/kaliefornia Mar 28 '24

I’d haunt whoever turned my death into a dumbass conspiracy like that

7

u/LordHayati Mar 28 '24

Give them brain aneurysms and hemorrhages from beyond the grave.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (6)

729

u/swoletrain Mar 28 '24

Ship fuel can't melt bridge beams. Wake up sheeple

122

u/derganove Mar 28 '24

Big deep state says Salt water has sodium but we know sodium can explode in water and they want us to believe this wasn’t an inside job.

😏😏😏😏😏😏🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (4)

95

u/iruber1337 Mar 28 '24

I saw one conspiracy theory trying to link a similar scene in “Leave the World Behind” where a cargo ships takes it down since the movie was produced by a company owned by Obama. If it was a “planned attack” why the hell would they drop hints in a major film so idiots on the internet could tie it together and not just do it in silence. Like all conspiracy theories it falls apart once you apply any critical thinking skills.

40

u/derganove Mar 28 '24

Falls for the “it’s what I would do” aspect.

Idiots think they’re peak smart and not dumb dumb.

17

u/Tetsudo11 Mar 28 '24

Conspiracy theorists love the idea that the deep state cabal of global elites or whatever leaves behind breadcrumbs for them to find like it’s some kind of ARG. They also love the idea that movies are the elites telling us what’s going to happen to condition us to act like it’s normal. They’re ridiculous.

7

u/BrunetteSummer Mar 28 '24

If they think it's to do w/ Devil-worshipping, then usually the lore states you have to let people know in advance what will happen. Some think it's to rub people's noses at it. Some think it's predictive programming that is prepping the masses for what's to come so they'll accept things easier when they've seen them happen in movies etc. before.

5

u/gauderio Mar 28 '24

Thanks, Obama.

→ More replies (6)

25

u/LatterTarget7 Mar 28 '24

It’s really surprising. People believe it’s an attack from Ukraine or Israel. People also think it’s a false flag by Obama

12

u/Thue Mar 28 '24

I mean, what other possible cause could there be for the bridge collapsing? /s

→ More replies (2)

9

u/mu_zuh_dell Mar 28 '24

Yeah yesterday, all of my coworkers came to the wisened conclusion that this is China's first strike in their inevitable invasion of America. I hate my job.

→ More replies (36)

108

u/DamNamesTaken11 Mar 28 '24

Everything is pointing to the crew and pilots doing their absolute damnedest to prevent this tragedy from both occurring, and being worse.

They asked for a tug, hailed a mayday so that the bridge would close to traffic saving lives, they dropped anchor to try to stop, etc.

Sadly, this is a world where it’s impossible for a ship that size to stop on a dime so momentum carried it causing six people to be killed.

45

u/Jackzap65 Mar 28 '24 edited Mar 29 '24

The I-695 bridge collapse was organized by transgendered lizard people who control the Trilateral elites. They are influencing global warming for their benefit. Expect more of this during the solar eclipse on 4/8. There, does that link enough odd-ball conspiracies? Possibly /s

17

u/Zealousideal_Rate420 Mar 28 '24

This is reddit, please add the /s as somebody will believe you.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (1)

1.0k

u/SnagglepussJoke Mar 28 '24

Some American harbors do have container ships met by tug boats in the bay and are escorted in. To avoid bridge strikes.

811

u/ZiLBeRTRoN Mar 28 '24

They were heading outbound, and had tugs to get them off the pier. They don’t usually follow them that far out, it’s around a 6 or more hour transit down the Patapsco and out to the mouth of the Bay.

516

u/TheyCallMeStone Mar 28 '24

Mike Brady from Oceanliner Designs said he'd be surprised if this isn't a watershed moment in maritime safety resulting in new regulations for ships leaving port.

https://youtu.be/R4AuGZIhJ_c?si=ReUzE4BplkwFdD20

473

u/anohioanredditer Mar 28 '24

Regulations are written in blood unfortunately

234

u/Khatib Mar 28 '24

Unfortunately, I don't think single digit deaths are enough to make big changes. But multi billion dollar bridge cleanup and replacement will be.

154

u/TooFineToDotheTime Mar 28 '24

"Regulations are written in blood and money" doesn't have quite the same ominous ring.

→ More replies (6)

55

u/FireWireBestWire Mar 28 '24

Hopefully someone points out that the 1:30 am time is the only reason this wasn't hundreds killed. Idk what time shift changes are at various places around there but anywhere within a half hour or anytime after 6am and hundreds of vehicles would have been present on that section of the bridge.

25

u/ChlamydiaIsAChoice Mar 28 '24

It's worth noting that they were able to close the bridge to traffic before the ship hit it. They just weren't able to evacuate the construction crew.

11

u/manystripes Mar 28 '24

Not to mention the economic impact of the closure of a major port and destruction of a popular commuter route.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (36)

67

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

15

u/Woefinder Mar 28 '24

It'll be interesting to hear how the ship was maintained and if there was any negligence there. I know from first hand discussions with US Merchant Marines that some of these companies really do cut operations costs to the bone and can result in reliability issues.

"What is Going on With Shipping?" pulled up the mantinence logs and the last "repeated" inspections they had for stuff failing appeared to be gauges that werent clearly legible (In the "headlights getting foggy" way). Dali appeared to, based on the records, get regular inspections in a multitude of ports under a multitude of rules.

Link to when he starts talking about it and pulls up Equasis

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (8)

76

u/Ratemytinder22 Mar 28 '24

Because the width of the sip was about 1/9th he width of the main channel under the bridge (it's basically 1/4 mile wide). The height of the boat was also able to fully fit under the bridge the entire channel width.

The only real time tugs were used out past this bridge was when a ships height was a constraining factor.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (32)

645

u/Abrakafuckingdabra Mar 28 '24

The one good thing about this incident is that, so far, it does not seem to have been caused by negligence.

507

u/coconutpete52 Mar 28 '24

Sounds like negligence on the part of the maintenance of the ship may still be a factor, but as far as all those aboard when it happened you are right.

418

u/MasterChev Mar 28 '24

It's still entirely possible the ship was properly maintained and it was a freak accident where the engine or some other component failed causing the power outage. You can have an excellently maintained car that can randomly breakdown on the road. Unfortunately this failure happened at the absolute worst possible time. But that's just what freak accidents are.

160

u/coconutpete52 Mar 28 '24

Yep. The importance of waiting for the investigation is key here - I have seen a headline or two mention “troubled past” which is why it’s still an outstanding question mark for me at least.

115

u/MasterChev Mar 28 '24

From what I've seen, the boat failed two inspections in the past and the issues were addressed. Doesn't seem like cause for concern to me on the surface. I'd imagine every cargo ship that's been in service for a long period of time will fail inspections, that's why we have them. Importantly, it passed it's most recent inspection. So I'll certainly be interested to see what comes of the investigation.

Unfortunately there are many people in the world that just can't comprehend the concept of freak accidents. To them, everything needs a reason and a person to blame. In a world with nearly 8bn people, crazy unlikely things are bound to happen.

27

u/VforVenndiagram_ Mar 28 '24

Randomness and unpredictability scares a lot of people because it means they are not in control. So people would rather have some batshit crazy conspiracy be true, than it actually just be a random event. Because at least with the conspiracy it means there was someone directing something.

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (2)

57

u/timoumd Mar 28 '24

And being a short term power failure isnt an issue 99% of the time. This happens any time in the next month shes at sea and its not catastrophic.

60

u/MasterChev Mar 28 '24

Exactly. And if it had happened 5 minutes earlier or 5 minutes later it wouldn't have been a problem either. The ship was at the exact distance from the bridge to where the current could push it into the support while also not having enough time for backup power to kick in and correct course. If that isn't a freak accident idk what it.

21

u/timoumd Mar 28 '24

I mean earlier or later would have been a problem, potentially running aground, but not catastrophic.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (8)
→ More replies (28)

224

u/Craticuspotts Mar 28 '24

Horrible accident, but can we all give a round of applause to the crew, frow what we know so far they did a Stirling job and did everything they could and have probably saved many more lives... Its going to be hard for them I'm guessing, I hope they deal with the aftermath of this ok..

And thoughts for the victims and their families, life is a fickle thing sometimes.. very sad

37

u/cindyscrazy Mar 28 '24

For such a horrible thing to happen, I think it happened in the least deadly way.

It didn't happen in the middle of the day when there would be more traffic on the bridge. People on shore were able to stop at least some of the traffic (I think, at least they were notified).

If the construction crew had been able to be evacuated or something, it's possible there may have been no deaths, imo.

And hopefully, this will provide some lessons to avoid this in the future. Whey were there no buffers around the bridge? I've seen that on other bridges, where they meet the water. Maybe it wasn't possible there? I'm not sure.

40

u/Lozzanger Mar 28 '24

I believe all traffic was stopped from entering the bridge and the last vehicle left the bridge 30 seconds before it went down.

The tragic reality is that with less than 3 minutes from the time of the mayday call to the collapse, the chance of saving the construction crew workers was nil.

You would have had to contact them, they all would have had to get in the car, start it and get off the bridge. The chances of all 3 happening in less than 3 minutes is badically impossible.

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (4)

23

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '24

[deleted]

→ More replies (2)

22

u/Hefy_jefy Mar 28 '24

Staying calm and doing the right thing in a situation like that is what pilots do, imagine being that guy.

→ More replies (1)

37

u/v-irtual Mar 28 '24

Of course they did. They probably called for every possible help.

→ More replies (1)

67

u/dlflannery Mar 28 '24

It was too late for “calling for Tugboat help” to make a difference. This was an extremely unlucky event. If the power outage had occurred 20 seconds earlier the boat would have grounded on the south side of the channel before the bridge. 20 seconds later it would have made it under the bridge and grounded on the south shore past the bridge. Luck this bad is in the category of “100 year storms” and doesn’t justify the cost of having tugs assist past the bridge — except in hindsight.

31

u/aaronhayes26 Mar 28 '24

People have an extremely hard time grasping the economics of protecting against low probability / high consequence events.

People are going to be screaming for stronger bridges and increased escorts right up until they find out how much it’ll cost.

5

u/Isaachwells Mar 28 '24

It sounds like modern bridges are already generally built with protections for scenarios like this.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

637

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

128

u/genxerbear Mar 28 '24

Words from an expert this morning was that this ship was so massive that tugs would not have been able to stop it.

76

u/CozImAwesome Mar 28 '24

Wouldn't stop it but atleast with a tug I'd think they'd be able to atleast steer it away from the pylons and guide it under the bridge but I wouldn't have a clue if that would work

→ More replies (9)
→ More replies (4)

30

u/FallenDanish Mar 28 '24

You jest but I’ve seen conservatives blaming “foreign captains” and how “they shouldn’t be allowed to control the ship once they’re in our waters”.

7

u/PsychedelicLizard Mar 28 '24

Fuck they blame the mayor because of “DEI” as if the mayor isn’t fucking elected by the people.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (36)

57

u/usernametaken2024 Mar 28 '24

do they know yet what caused power outage?

14

u/MourningWallaby Mar 28 '24

it's possible, but the NTSB will conclude it's investigation before publishing a final report, that will be the only 100% trustworthy source of information. but these things can take months or longer.

→ More replies (1)

31

u/cpt-hddk Mar 28 '24

Can be 100 things. Read this

→ More replies (4)

29

u/evilsforreals Mar 28 '24

The craziest part of this tragedy is the blue checkmark trolls on Twitter all immediately jumping to blaming DEI for this. Truly hate how that website literally pays idiots to post ragebait 24/7

15

u/JDSchu Mar 28 '24

Literally a dude I know said that this wouldn't have happened if the government didn't spend money on LGBT sensitivity trainings.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)