Enjoy 10% OFF on all Hoverpens & free shipping to most countries with code RICKY: North America & other countries: bit.ly/ricky_novium UK & Europe: bit.ly/ricky_noviumeu

@EDouble1

2 ай бұрын

Green is starboard red is port.

@Dirt-Diggler

2 ай бұрын

Need to stick to what you know, you know very little about shipping, that much is obv, very disappointed in this video 😞

@MR-ub6sq

Ай бұрын

Apparently one should still be interested in speculating "What REALLY Happened?" At least I'm more interested in why the pillars of the bridge have not been erected on sufficiently large artificial islands so that excessive forces cannot be applied to the pillars even if the freighter hits the island with its full mass? If the bridges were designed properly, this wouldn't happen and you wouldn't need to indulge in conspiracy theories. You could focus on smarter things, like how far humanity can go in fulfilling Bible prophecies in the last days: "But know this, that in the last days grievous times will be upon us. For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, braggarts, arrogant, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural feeling, unyielding, slanderers, without self-control, savage, haters of good, betrayers, reckless, puffed up, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness, but denying the power of it; even turn away from these." (2 Timothy 3:1-5)

@simon6071

Ай бұрын

Two Bit da Vinci says , "At some point the Maryland Bay Master orders to turn the rudder hard to the left and she drops her port (left) anchor to slow the ship and force it to straighten its course." At 2:37 of the video we can see that the course of the ship was very straight towards the bridge and it would have missed the pylon on its right had it not veered to its right suddenly before impact. Therefore, the ship's course did not need to be straightened out. The ship's sharp turn to its right is certainly not a maneuver for straighten out the ship's course. I don't think the ship's veer to the right is the result of water current from the left of the ship because the large patch of land on the right of the ship would not allow such a strong current to flow from the left to the right of the ship. All indications show that the ship's rudder was turned sharply to the right to steered the ship to its right to hit the pylon when the ship regained power momentarily and the strange but deadly maneuvered was done in contradiction to the order of the Maryland Bay Master to turn the ship's rudder to the left. ' I do not understand how da Vinci could come up with the conclusion of the ship being steered intentionally to its right to hit a pylon on the right being a freak accident.

@MR-ub6sq

Ай бұрын

In the harbor area, a channel has been dredged for ships with a large draft (the depth of the channel is 50 feet, but next to the channel the depth is only 11 feet) and next to the port side of the ship there is a lot of this deep volume laterally, but only a little laterally on the starboard side. When the ship travels in the channel closer to the right edge of the channel, the suction caused by the propellers causes a clearly larger tidal effect on the starboard side of the ship than on the port side of the ship when the keel divides the suction in two. Now - when the engines are turned off, where do the differences in the tidal effect on the different sides of the ship take the vessel that has traveled directly on the fairway? Does the flipping tide turn the vessel towards the edge of a nearby draft? Did the strong one-sided burst of the tidal phenomenon cause the ship to turn itself to starboard?

I think the 2 most obvious solutions in the near term are going to be 1) Upgrading the fenders and dolphins around bridge piers and pilings; and 2) Requiring all ships over a certain size to maintain tug escorts until past any vital infrastructure when entering or departing a port in the US.

@milhouse7145

2 ай бұрын

I imagine both will be implemented. It will make the ports less competive to pay for tugs in/out but think we all know now the cost is worth reducing the risk.

@ipp_tutor

2 ай бұрын

Exactly as mentioned in the video 😛

@duanesamuelson2256

2 ай бұрын

Under tug control the entire way? Ain't going to happen

@milhouse7145

2 ай бұрын

@@duanesamuelson2256 he meant until past the bridge, you don't think so?

@Glen-uy4jt

2 ай бұрын

Bridge protection from a ship of 95,000 tons traveling at 8.5 knots? That seems unlikely. Reduced speed on departure and two tractor tugs escorting the vessel past important and vulnerable infrastructure.

Think you have your Starboard and Port mixed up.. left (Port) is left side of the ship when on it, not left when looking at it. Be Posh, Port Out, Starboard Home.

@asharak84

2 ай бұрын

Yeah at best that was a horribly phrased section, I'd say it was outright wrong (though the graphic was fine). "A green port light placed on the left side when facing forward" is the green starboard light which is on the right side when facing forward. I assume that because he's looking at a picture of a ship from the front he's got muddled. (If only there way a way to tell left from right regardless of facing! Oh... :D) Green is starboard, red is port (like the drink) for the lights.

@Dadsplain

2 ай бұрын

Best way to remember is port is red like port wine. Port also has the same number of letters as Left.

@roystonboodoo7525

2 ай бұрын

Thanks, I was seriously questioning myself, being a sea scout in teens.

@publicmail2

2 ай бұрын

But What REALLY HAPPENED??

@BluBlu777

2 ай бұрын

Yep caught that immediately as did dozens of other viewers 🙂

Wasn’t the Potomac River. It’s was the patapsco River.

@jameskee2412

2 ай бұрын

Not the only thing this "Da Vinci" got wrong. He stated his Port and Starboard sides incorrectly. The editing did place the lights on the correct sides though.

@mmg8823

2 ай бұрын

You’re right. People are still confused about this. The Potomac river isn’t even in Baltimore. Yes, there is a Key bridge that crosses the Potomac, connecting DC and Virginia. That bridge is in its usual overcrowded condition. Baltimore is in Maryland, not DC or Virginia.

@chrisburnk95

Ай бұрын

Turned it off after I heard that. Do your research.

@carlthor91

Ай бұрын

@@jameskee2412 Yep, that got me for a bit.

@tommussington8330

Ай бұрын

he might as well just have said The Pocomoke River

A little insight on big ships and what happens:- Ships steer like hospital gurneys with castor wheels. The stern moves to change course (that's where the rudder / propeller is) - not the bow. If the blackout occurred when the helm was to stbd (during minor course adjustment) the steering gear freezes without power. The stern moves to port (due to the 'hospital gurney' effect). If the Port anchor is dropped as the stern moves to port during this time it will drag beneath the keel further exacerbating the turn to stbd. The helm is being constantly adjusted by the helmsman or the autopilot when is tight channels. However when the power goes out the steering pumps stop working and the rudder freezes at the last position until the emergency generator starts. Even if the helm was at a minor, say, 5 degrees to stbd momentarily when the blackout happened it will be a full minute before the power was restored. Without the propulsion engine providing enhanced flow over the rudders the ship will continue on the same course at 6 knots for some time even with the helm hard to port due to the 'sail' effect of the high containers . The emergency generator starts about 1 minute after blackout. It can power the steering gear but is not big enough to power all the propulsion engine auxiliaries. The main generators must be used. To source and correct the initial blackout problem then get the main generators back "on the board" takes time. Only then can you re-start FW, SW, LO pressure, LO scavenge pumps and fans, blowers etc etc in sequence BEFORE you even can think of starting a four deck high, MAN B&W S90ME-C8-TII, 47,000 BHP, 2 Stroke diesel in reverse. The propulsion engine likely never restarted before the crash.

@roystonboodoo7525

2 ай бұрын

Good info, thanks.

@roystonboodoo7525

2 ай бұрын

Wasn't it reported that the port anchor was dropped vs stbd?

@WilliamLHart

2 ай бұрын

@@roystonboodoo7525 Oops! Well spotted . A text error on my part. You are absolutely correct. However the point remains. If the port anchor is dropped while the stern slews to port the anchor may have been overrun (Anchor passed under the keel - or ships centerline) thus enhancing the turn to starboard.

@janetphillips2875

2 ай бұрын

​@@WilliamLHartthat's what I mentioned ( about the port anchor) to one of the YT channels who is a smart guy, I hate to say which one, I'll just say the soft spoken one and he said no. Maybe he didnt understand what I was suggesting.

@Kevin_McGeary

2 ай бұрын

It appeared to me that all house main deck lights returned. Yes, the bow flood light did not return and that could be various reasons. Very unusual for all house lights to be on E-bus which usually only supplies a few house lights, so possibly a main generator came on line instead of Emergency and it that took longer than SOLAS requires.. Black smoke out of the MAIN STACK could be be the crash full astern bell which kicked the stern to port making things worse. The Dali has single screw 55K HP B&W engine with three main generators. Two of the generators should have been on line in parallel for redundancy and the third should be set on stand-by for auto start when loosing plant. If they were doing generator repairs in port as reported, that redundancy protocol may have been truncated. If the Emergency generator did come on first, then only one steering gear motor is available and the Bridge would have (presence of mind) to switch to it if it was not on line previous to black out (this should be drilled). The steering gear should also be followed up prior to regaining power to avoid high amp in rush. A full ahead bell with hard left helm order would be an interesting alternate course in future simulator because the ship veering to starboard seemed to be more aggressive AFTER regaining power.

As a retired captain, when you see a blast of smoke from a ship’s stack it normally signifies a rapid increase in power application by the master. If a ship has forward momentum and you go into an emergency stop, astern propulsion application, the head of the ship will fall off dramatically and the position of the rudder would not matter. I suggest that you have never actually mastered a cargo ship but you seem to have many comments on the matter.

@mikewood8695

2 ай бұрын

smoke from the ship's stack like that is also simply an attempt to get the engines back on again - no matter what the direction

@pnwcruiser

2 ай бұрын

Indeed, the first time I saw video of the stern swinging rapidly to port I thought "prop walk". So I checked and sure enough Dali is single screw. Of course the black smoke which was near coincident could be due to restarting the engine after stopping to reverse direction (fixed pitch prop and no gearbox) then backing hard. What I don't understand is how the pilot could make the fundamental, and basic, mistake of backing hard since they must have known the ship was single screw, hence the consequences. Plus momentum would likely carry them under the bridge, or perhaps result in a glancing rather than direct collision, if they didn't back.

@Glen-uy4jt

Ай бұрын

@@pnwcruiser so true, but the pilot does not have the last word and much less can take control of a foreign flagged vessel. It will all come out in the tribunal, but that won’t repair the damage done or bring back the dead.

@mv80401

Ай бұрын

I was on a whale watch boat out of Cape Ann, MA where the captain cut power the moment he spotted whales. This caused the ship to immediately turn sideways, the ship was hit sideways by waves it had so far cut through and all seven people on the front deck were lifted into the air and crashed back on deck, several injuries, me among them.

@bobkohl6779

Ай бұрын

You have the green light on the starboard side

The word accident doesn't mean anything there's no such thing… Look for the negligent you will find it. The shortcuts to save money the lack of maintenance the lack of training. The bridge wasn't even protected so there's even more ignorance. These things mankind does a lot of times get blamed on the word accident when there's no such thing. So when our world is destroyed which is coming is it an accident?

The Dali is a single propeller ship. When put in reverse, the stern pulls to port, and the bow to starboard. Putting it in reverse therefore caused an unintended turn to starboard. Had they just let her drift, she would have sailed safely beneath the bridge.

@erikk77

2 ай бұрын

Did anybody say the ship was put in reverse? The Dali has a fixed pitch single screw (propeller).

@cruisecrazy7066

2 ай бұрын

@@erikk77 Well....They probably did not put it in Forward.

@WilliamLHart

2 ай бұрын

Power was lost for about 1 minute, During this time the main engine would run down and stop due to lack of fuel, LO and cooling water supplied by electric pumps. The emergency generator starts about 1 minute after blackout. It can power the steering gear but is not big enough to power all the propulsion engine auxiliaries. The main generators must be used. The crew would have to source and correct the initial blackout problem. Only then can they get the main generators back "on the board" this can take some time. Only then can you re-start FW, SW, LO pressure, LO scavenge pumps and fans, blowers etc etc in sequence BEFORE you even can think of starting a four deck high, MAN B&W S90ME-C8-TII, 47,000 BHP, 2 Stroke diesel in reverse. The propulsion engine likely never restarted before the crash.

@stephenoffiler8024

2 ай бұрын

@@WilliamLHart sounds like solid input. I'm a mechanical engineer with no marine experience but I know internal combustion, and the various bits of info I've been piecing together these last several days is a dead match for what you just said. Speaking of starting in reverse.... as the ship's momentum carried it forward, would the screw be backdriving the engine, or is compression so great that it stalls dead?

@WilliamLHart

2 ай бұрын

@@stephenoffiler8024 At 6 knots the engine will "wind down" longer due to the forces on the propeller. I would guess the engine would have stopped by the time they could have even solved what caused the initial blackout.

Many people have already pointed out the inaccuracies of this video. Here's another one. Prior to the ship losing power, the bow was being illuminated by a deck (work) light. These lights are very bright and can outshine the navigation lights. These lights are always on for docking/undocking at night. And, it's common for the Captain to leave them on while the deck crew is stowing lines and getting the ship ready for sea. When the power went out, everything lost power. Including both the navigation lights and the deck lights. Plus, steering and propulsion also. When power was restored, the navigation lights turned back on, including the fwd range light that you claim didn't turn on. I'm a 25 year senior deck officer and I can spot it right away along with the aft range light and the stbd nav. light. What didn't turn back on (right away), is the bow deck light. You mistakenly thought the deck light was the fwd range light. It is not. Both range lights and the stbd nav light are on after power was restored. Also, you're friendly hacker is misinformed. It is a Coast Guard requirement that all of the ship's vital systems be segregated from the internet. I worked on oil tankers. I had to use a computer that was isolated from the internet to plan the load and discharge of the ship. That computer also monitored the stresses, drafts, bending moments of the ship while loading and discharging. But, I had another computer that had internet service to update maintenance plans, purchasing, etc. These two computers could not be linked. If a hacker hacked into that computer, they could have some fun, but they could not gain access to the controls or any vital systems of the ship. Any problem that we had with a vital equipment, if we couldn't fix it, we had to call a tech. to come down and fix it. Now, they could have slipped some bug into the system, but they still wouldn't be able to take control through that bug.

@juditrotter5176

Ай бұрын

My husband and I have a 45ft pleasure craft. It is called a trawler and a former owner had added a pilot house. Our Nav system has the same kind of internet security for upgrades. We have to get the new software from the Company that creates it and then transfer it to a mobile device and finally install the new software on the nav system on the boat, up in the pilot house.

@MrMinnesotaMac

Ай бұрын

@@juditrotter5176 Yup, same procedure on the bigs. System updates, nav. chart updates, etc. all have to be downloaded onto a general computer, transferred onto a thumb drive and then installed onto the vital systems computers.

@ottavva

Ай бұрын

1:52 you said it all wrong - an intolerable mistake - the text an the image do not concur how can you make such a stupid mistake ?? you talk right and show wrong

@Corsair37

Ай бұрын

Thank you for the detailed explanation - I had heard that the control systems and such were air gapped (meaning no connectivity to the internet or other systems), but it's nice to see it broken down in detail.

@jebaranidavid2217

Ай бұрын

Happy to see many experts joining to know the cause of this accident . From Chennai, India.

KEY QUESTION: WHY didnt this bridge have pillar guards to deflect ships about to hit the bridge pillars. They are fairly common and overbuilt to prevent even a big containership like this from hitting the bridge support itself. A mere million dollar investment to protect the bridge would have saved 6 people and all the economical fallback from this bridge failing. Even more pressing is how nobody came up with this idea eventhough its "the 9th most busy port" in the USA. It reeks of negligence.

@user-jg6bd7se8u

2 ай бұрын

Same reason 16,000 other bridges don't have protection in the US. You will complain if they raise taxes though right? Maybe this is a one off incident. Maybe 99.99% of the time... it's not an issue. We must run out and panic! Calm down.

@BSFJeebus

2 ай бұрын

BECAUSE THE MODERN SHIPS ARE MASSIVE, you can engineer enough safety into a bridge, but eventually something big enough won't be phased by any safety systems

@ICDeadPeeps

2 ай бұрын

So, for those who are not familiar with or from Baltimore, the local government there is completely incompetent and corrupt. Just look at their public education system, which is extremely well funded and financially supported at the state level, and yet has managed to rank as one of the worst in the nation.

@ipp_tutor

2 ай бұрын

Because it was built before the 1980 collapse in Florida that changed bridge construction codes.

@roystonboodoo7525

2 ай бұрын

​@user-jg6bd7se8u ... Would appreciate if you could indicate approximately how many bridges do have such protection at present, Thank-you.. if known.

the navigation lights are green for the starboard side which is right side, red for port side which is left and the white aft light

I live in Hobart (Tasmania), we had a huge bridge collapse in 1975 (Tasman Bridge) and all of us old enough to remember it were seriously triggered by this disaster in Baltimore. We know the disruption and recovery efforts.

@carlthor91

Ай бұрын

Evidently the replacement is too low.

@MatthewHarrold

Ай бұрын

@@carlthor91 no, they made it slightly higher, but the Port Authority won't let cars on the bridge when large ships pass under. Not sure if it's paranoia or what.

@carlthor91

Ай бұрын

@@MatthewHarrold The ice breaker that serves the Aus stations in Antarctica is not allowed under at all. Not suitable for purpose. Best wishes from Northern Manitoba.

@JoyPeace-ej2uv

Ай бұрын

Sympathy May 9, 1980 the Skyway bridge in Florida USA was similarly hit by a tanker. I was no longer living there but I was always nervous when my parents drove us over the span that eventually went down. The other one was untouched. I went to look at the wreckage when my new husband and I visited my family there the following year.

I'm really surprised that a ship that big didn't have mandatory tug escorts to fully clear the bridge

@toddtheisen8386

Ай бұрын

That would cost money. Corporations do not want to surrender profits for safety.

@jaycarver4886

Ай бұрын

​@@toddtheisen8386But a bridge collapse is surely going to impact profits. And be just a little costly to rebuild. 😉

@stevenkerwin4041

Ай бұрын

​@@jaycarver4886Penny wise, pound foolish.

@Buckyboyincanada

Ай бұрын

It’s not necessarily for tugs to tow a ship all the way to the bridge. There is plenty of room for a ship that size to maneuver.

@Kriss_L

Ай бұрын

It is pretty rare to have tugs escorts ships once they are in a shipping channel.

The crash was caused by their port and starboard lights being on the wrong sides.

@quirquinchumisitu4211

Ай бұрын

black humour lol

@Robbo8

Ай бұрын

I noticed that lol

@BrainFix000

Ай бұрын

I went looking for this post and love the sarcasm

Click Bait "What REALLY Happened?" - Exactly the same info available elsewhere days ago, to help sell Hoverpens?

@christerry1773

Ай бұрын

Next he’ll name it “what really happened, seriously”

Given the engine issues days before departure, an escort tug would have been prudent.

@jamest-mk4qu

Ай бұрын

Believe the ship was experiencing issues with the main generators not the main engine. If repairs had been effected while at the berth in Baltimore who certified the effectiveness of the repairs?

@Kriss_L

Ай бұрын

Many large merchant ships have a single gear on the main engine, and no neutral. So there is no way to "idle" the main engine, so the main engine can't be run while at the pier. Any power issues the ship had in port would have been with a generator.

This ship has 3 main generators 2 should have been on line and synchronized together and sharing the total load. One generator can carry the total load. The 4th generator is the emergency generator is not in the engine room and runs on its own fuel #2 diesel it is large enough to run the steering but not the bow thruster or the main engine .The main engine needs fuel pumps water pumps and many other motors to operate. So I think this ship was under way with only one generator if it fails for any reason total loss of power. Retired tug boat captains opinion.

@parkerholden7140

2 ай бұрын

Cood comment.... The load may have been pretty high as it is reported that there were a bunch of reefer containers on board. Good load sharing is critical See my comment about 2 hours after yours/

@kennethchristensen7457

2 ай бұрын

I would like to add. The bow thrusters will do nothing to help steer a ship when it is underway even powerful tugs on the bow will not help .Ships steer from the rear .2 of the new 2,000 and 3,000 HP tractor tugs at the rear might help . Im not sure Tractor tugs came after I retired.

@terrybaird9532

Ай бұрын

The ship has 2 4k main generators & 2 emergency generators from what i read about the ship.

Hey there’s a few errors in this: - Navigation lights - colors correct but you messed up what you describe as port and starboard. - Fuel: Diesel is not a gasoline. - Ship acceleration - you make it sound like the ship was out of control as it sped up to 8 knots but that’s a typical speed for that size ship in the channel.

@tjampman

Ай бұрын

For a ship in the channel heading out to sea, I would actually say 8 knots was slow. I wonder if they had the blackout after increasing speed to half or full ahead? Although I would not know what mechanism causing the main engine to cut out why that wold have an affect on the aux engines.

@rickdeckardbladerunner2049

Ай бұрын

So, if the ship power goes out, you can't keep it going straight? Would the waves in the river move a ship weighing 100,000 tons hard right in 3/4 of a mile?

@Kriss_L

Ай бұрын

@@rickdeckardbladerunner2049 Correct. The thrust of the water from the propeller across the rudder is most of the ship's steering ability. Even if they had rudder control, with the main engine down, it would not have been effective.

The amount of experts here is awe inspiring.

@victorspresence1263

Ай бұрын

You are welcome my friend.

Rudder control helps, but in something that big, if you’re not under power, it’s not going to over power the wind. I imagine something this big would have bow thrusters as well?

Here's the thing...tugboats are not an easy fix to solve the problem. Tugs are incredible, and very useful in ports, but they have their limits, one of which is _speed._ In 2022, a tug at Corpus Christi ran aground and suffered serious damage while trying to manoeuvre at around 8.2 knots. To safely use tugs, you'd have to reduce the speed of ships to something more like 4-6 knots. The distance from Port of Baltimore to the Chesapeake Bay is around 10 nautical miles, so we're talking about staying under tug for an additional two hours, and at the same time halving the capacity of the channel, since ships would have to take that much longer to transit. If you wanted to keep ships under tug until they'd cleared _all_ bridges, that's 21 nautical miles. Can you imagine how many tugs you'd need to bring in to service that kind of distance? To be clear, I'm not claiming to be an expert on harbour logistics, but people who _are_ experts, who operate tugs, say that it's not practical, for the reasons above. I'm going to take their word for it.

The Francis Scott Key Bridge does not connect Baltimore and Washington. It is a path for truck traffic across the harbor to the east, completes the loop of the Baltimore Beltway on the southeastern side, connects the eastern to the southern near-suburbs, and most importantly, allows access for trucks to the port.

@mysteryachiever

Ай бұрын

Thank you!

NOTE: Green = Starboard (RIGHT side facing forward) Red = Port (LEFT side facing forward)

@RaymondHng

Ай бұрын

Always remember the sentence "If we drink all of the wine, will there be any port left?"

You started out suggesting nefarious reasons for the collision and then said “I don’t believe that.” Then you attack the structure of the bridge in current times vs when it was built. Your 20-20 hindsight is amazing.

@rickdeckardbladerunner2049

Ай бұрын

We all know that ship hit the bridge on purpose. No 100,000 ton ship makes a hard right in just 3/4 of a mile and blames the current in a river. BS!!!

@Kriss_L

Ай бұрын

@@rickdeckardbladerunner2049 You have obviously never sailed on any type of larger ship. And the ship did not make a hard right turn - it drifted. And any sailor knows how much effect wind and current have.

The issue I have is they ruled a lot out within the first hour and they had not talked to any of the crew or the captains. No one in an investigation ever rules anything out right away. And with the coincidence of other bridges, train accidents can make the public suspicious!

@mercuryshadow09

2 ай бұрын

They ruled out a cyber attack because the ships systems are air gapped.

I think it's crazy there wasn't dolphin barriers installed to protect the main pillars a long time ago.. It's such a busy cargo traffic lane. These barriers redirect a ship, similar to things they use around docks.. They gotta do something going forward to guide ship traffic under bridges like this. And protect the main load barring pillars

@1972Ray

2 ай бұрын

47 years, thousands of ships got by, no problem. But yes, new requirements will be in place with the new bridge.

@_PatrickO

2 ай бұрын

It is even simpler than that. A giant metal cylinder set in front of the pier could have been placed into the water and filled with concrete. It isn't complex. You size the giant concrete cylinder to completely stop a fully loaded supertanker. Maybe it has to be the size of a house, but its just money that someone in government chose not to spend. This is what happens when we let republicans cut regulations. Buttigieg just announced returning a rule that forces trains to have two operators onboard, not just one due to all the derailments. This is common sense stuff republicans have consistently opposed. Now we need a federal regulation that requires piers to be able to withstand a hit from a fully loaded supertanker and make the rule retroactive on all existing bridges in active shipping lanes.

@_PatrickO

2 ай бұрын

@@1972RayShips were smaller when this bridge was made. Regulations in the 90s addressed this, but only for new bridges and not existing ones. That is the mistake, this kind of thing needs to be required on existing bridges in shipping lanes too.

@jameshisself9324

2 ай бұрын

@@_PatrickO Almost, they need the shape of the dolphin to completely surround the bridge piers. The angle that the Dali or any other ship might come in at makes the inner side of the pier vulnerable too so it needs protected all through there.

@_PatrickO

2 ай бұрын

@@jameshisself9324They likely do not need them on the sides if the one in front and behind are large enough. I expect them to be huge if they can handle the heaviest fully loaded large ship in existence.

The green light is the starboard or right side running light. The red is the port or left side running light. You have it backward. If you're going to tell people "what really happened" at least get the basic facts straight.

@RaymondHng

Ай бұрын

Always remember the sentence "If we drink all of the wine, will there be any port left?"

Most likely cause was loss of electrical power, due to poorly functioning load share circuity that causes the electric load to drift onto one generator and then consequential trip out of one or both generators. This is sometimes called cross current (electrical) compensation. Rather complex and frequently not understood by the engine room crew. I am a retired Westinghouse field service engineer and worked on this problem many times on ships.

@kennethchristensen7457

2 ай бұрын

If we find out that they had 2 generators in parallel as they should have. I think you may be correct about cross current compensation . Back in my days at sea we just added a little more fuel to the generator with the lower load or reduced the fuel to the one with more load. We didn't worry if the cycles were off by + - 1 cycle But today with everything controlled by computers Keeping the cycles precisely at 50 or 60 the load may drift with out correction. Good call on this complex subject.

@victorspresence1263

Ай бұрын

Interpretation; "Russians". My source; Joe Bo Clintons.

Thanks for the info. It is concerning that many happen in part or whole from greed. I hope you get to report on this again.

Port, Red, Left....(shorter words that go together) compared to Starboard, Green, Right (longer words that go together)

@froglaps40

Ай бұрын

I always use the fact starboard has 2 r's for the right side...

@RaymondHng

Ай бұрын

@@froglaps40 Always remember the sentence "If we drink all of the wine, will there be any port left?"

Two excellent KZread channels with videos about the bridge collapse and ongoing activity there are: "What is Going on With Shipping?" and "eSysman SuperYachts"

This is why I watch your channel. Concise, measured discussion on subjects. It was nice meeting you and Robert on Friday at Everything Electric Show. And to answer Dan's question, your channel is best. 😊

They ruled out hacking quickly because, it's almost completely electro-mechanical, mannual, non-computerised operation - only navigation is computerised and connected, and this is isolated from the rest of the systems ... you can't hack it remotely, except to send it off course

@Kriss_L

Ай бұрын

It was not a cyber attack, as nothing that controls large ships can be hacked. They are almost totally under manual control, and even the automatic controls are local onboard the ship- there is nothing connected to the internet. Even the bridge can not directly control the engineering plant.

You can't say what happened if you don't know port from starboard... 🤨

@RaymondHng

Ай бұрын

Always remember the sentence "If we drink all of the wine, will there be any port left?"

dude, rightside of a ship is called starboardside with a green light while the leftside of a ship is the portside with a red light.

Every shipping expert has stated that ship's control systems are not connected to the Internet. If it was "hacked," by a USB drive that was uploaded in, that would be different. But this was not a "cyber" attack.

@Kriss_L

Ай бұрын

It was not a cyber attack, as nothing that controls large ships can be hacked. They are almost totally under manual control, and even the automatic controls are local onboard the ship- there is nothing connected to the internet. Even the bridge can not directly control the engineering plant.

Helpful analysis. Thanks.

Many ships rely on prop wash over the rudder to assist in maneuvering. If that's lost, even the backup steering systems will be hampered. Also, currents and winds have a HUGE effect on a ship of this size, and loss of propulsion OR steerageway can quickly lead to them being off course.

@tjampman

Ай бұрын

The speed the ship was going should be enough to steer, if they had steering gear pumps running. However as can be seen in the video the ship is already turning to starboard. - to stop that turn and then start turning left is gonna be slow.

WRONG this man has his port & Starboard lights crossed over.....leave him ashore next time

@RaymondHng

Ай бұрын

Always remember the sentence "If we drink all of the wine, will there be any port left?"

Great video! Thank you for the explanation. I saw it when it happened online and a thousand questions went through my mind. Many of which you answered. Thanks for explaining the ship's lighting and the timeline. I thinks its awful that the tugboats don't stay with these giants past all bridges.

@1972Ray

2 ай бұрын

It's a straight shot to the bay. It sounds odd, but in 47 years, thousands of ships got by with no issues.

I read articles that some other bridges have Safety Bollards for ships, Baltimore Bridge however, doesn't have one to minimize the impact but take the full force of it.

The key to the crash lies in the ship veering to the right towards the post of the Bridge as it was approaching it, , before which black smoke was emitted by the funnel , and the anchor dropped to stop the ship , The two crucial mistakes after emergency power was restored to the steering , The black smoke was due to the astern propulsion that caused the head to veer to the st bd (right) towards the bridge pillar It should be understood that the heading of the vessel is not depend on the propulsion but on the momentum hat was at 8 knots & stern or bow thrust would have no effect on a ship moving at 8 knots other than swinging the head to the st bd towards the pillar What should have been done after emergency power to the steering was restored, that came in a minutes time after the black out , was not to try & stop the vessel but navigate it under the bridge using the momentum.of 8 knots , Moreover the conditions for departure were ideal with a low 0,2 knots current & light winds that have would have no adverse effects, The truth of the crash may never come out lest insurance/compensation be denied for the erraneous action of the pilot/officals , whose focus changed from the contracted safe navigation to saving the bridge , only to end up crashing on the pillar , Man let hair grow on your bald head, you speak not of the veering to the right

@rickdeckardbladerunner2049

Ай бұрын

Could light winds and a light current turn the ship hard right in less then 3/4 of a mile? I find it hard to believe and it points to this being anything but an accident.

@Kriss_L

Ай бұрын

@@rickdeckardbladerunner2049 Absolutely. The density of water is much greater than air, so a water current will have way more effect than the same speed of wind. And the sail area of a ship that size is huge, so even a light breeze will have a noticable effect. And it did not make a hard turn - it drifted out of the channel.

The black smoke to me looks like a Semi or old farm tractor that had been sitting for a long period. That leads me to believe it was a 'cold' start of a backup unit or a very rough emergency start of another power source.

@brettrace

2 ай бұрын

Funny you mention this. I had this exact problem on my farm this winter where i needed my backup diesel generator that i just never got around to servicing (funny how that happens). Between a summer diesel blend and an unprimed engine, it took half a can of ether to get it going, and it was not happy. Backup generators need to be run every once in a while, which becomes painfully obvious in an emergency.

the port light is on the left hand side of a vessel "there is always some red port left on the ship".

Thanks to make thèse facts clearer to us.

Initial NTSB report says the "black box" stopped recording at 1:24am. This is not an accident.

@qua7771

Ай бұрын

What a coincidence. And none of the critical equipment on back-up power. Is that a thing?

@user-ce5nn5bc4u

Ай бұрын

Everybody has definitely been saying this you are absolutely right 👍

@Kriss_L

Ай бұрын

Wrong. The recorder continued to operate as it has battery back-up and it continured to record audio on the bridge. But most of the sensors that send the "black-box" data would not have had any data to send if the main engine was not running.

@qua7771

Ай бұрын

@@Kriss_L Like you know. People who begin sentences with "wrong" come off like a 5 year old having a fit. They usually are wrong.

@Kriss_L

Ай бұрын

@@qua7771 So do your own real reseach. Then let me know how "wrong" I was.

Great content, really enjoyed your last 8-9 videos.

1. This ship has MANY Aux Diesel generators. The Main engine does NOT power " All" the lights in ports. There are MANY REFERS on board, some of which which require 24/7 aux generators to keep those containers Cold. I have seen PLASTIC in the fuel a few times cause the same type situation at the dockside and at sea. Most the Empties are on the Bow area, then haz mat containers. Ricky, you do do a deep dive into the refineries dumping a byproduct of plastic into marine fuels.

One of the main reasons of collisions at sea, is that landlubbers forget if the red light is on the portside or on the starboard side. May be the bridge thought, that the ship was going to opposite direction, if it had it’s navigation lights placed as is teached in this documentary.

Why no Insurance investigation ? Within hours the Resident said You All will pay for it.

@alancoldicott391

Ай бұрын

I assume those investigations are ongoing especially since it was admitted that there were electrical problems before starting out. The ship was insured in Britain and there would be no payout if it can be proved that maintenance was at fault. Having said that, no insurance company could afford to compensate for such a high loss and like it or not, everyone including people worldwide will end up paying one way or another.

@Kriss_L

Ай бұрын

Maritime law is vastly different than. If it wasn't for the cargo, the ship never would have been there to have the allision with the bridge.

Thank you for the details and points you mention. Im not sure why but I think it would be prudent to seize the ship for as many reasons as the accident is unexplained. The very fact that is currently causing the disruption in global shipping industry is a substantial reason to impound it. The NTSB inquiries can almost tell us what each passenger ate before the plane crashed. This type of forensic examination is what the shipping and world needs to know about. Time is the measure of this rehabilitation for City of Baltimore and Port. It also will be the example of how transportation hubs are influenced by mishaps that can be prevented. I do believe the DALI is an asset now, should it be floated, off loaded, docked in USA waters the ability of companies all associated with it's ownership be responsible for the clean up and restoration of the FSK bridge. When I first heard about this The Only thing I thought was not another 9 11. I'm sure that shipping companies around the world are concerned about the safety of ships and crews. America is learning how dependant we are on many types of goods from around the globe. This accident in 2024 will give us a peek of why we should be self-sufficient. America needs to take care of Americans, not ship our Navy and assets to Gaza to build a pier for a problem half way around the world! Amen

I was a merchant mariner for half my life and have been at the helm of many different vessels over the years including container ships such as the Dali so I thought I'd give my unsolicited two cents. I see a lot of comments talking about various theories as to why she went to starboard in her final moments. Was it prop walk? Was it because they went into crash astern? Was it because they dropped the port anchor? No, no, and no. These vessels don't react on a dime. It takes a long time to get these suckers moving in any direction and just as long to stop their swing once they get moving. Had the vessel gone into crash astern the effects of that action wouldn't have been felt for a few minutes. Even without power a vessel going 7 to 8 knots still has a lot of water rushing by the rudder. I read another comment regarding Bank cushion and bank suction. Neither would have factored in because there was plenty of space between them and the bank. I've experienced this effect on many occasions but always in very narrow channels such as when coming out of the locks and into the channel on the Caribbean side of the Panama canal. While passing the convoy of ships entering the canal there's a very noticeable turn towards the incoming vessels as you pass each other port to port that you must counteract with stbd rudder. Also, looking at the chart there is a channel entering the river that would have been in line with the ships starboard quarter just prior to the collision. The tide was going out at the time of the crash so all that water leaving the channel into the river would have pushed the Dali's stern to port thus turning the bow to starboard. How much effect this had I have no idea but definitely could have contributed but in reality the real culprit was time. There just wasn't enough time to make any significant course corrections. The helmsman appears to have been holding starboard rudder when power was lost and even if the rudder returned to midships the vessel would continue on it's starboard turn if left unchecked. I feel sorry for that crew and pilot. That must have really sucked. I would like to hear the VDR some day or at least read the transcript. No shortage of four letter words to be sure. My heart goes out to the people whom lost their lives on the bridge as well. RIP

Thank you. This is much more efficient than watching TV.

Very speculative lets see what conclusion the professionals with the facts reach

Accidents almost always have multiple reasons and ways to prevent them.

Thanks for the vid. Nice to get an overview not cut to three minutes like on the news. I'm sure I'm the end there was a confluence of circumstances. No less a tragedy for it, but big is always dangerous.

If you notice the smoke coming out of the funnels was being blown in the direction of the support the Dali hit. When a vessel loses steerage way it is much more susceptible to wind drift. The Dali probably was blown into the bridge support. Also, there is no way of stopping such a large ship in a short distance. Even with tugs, it would have been very difficult to do anything while 100k tons is moving at 8knots. It is not sure dolphins and fenders would have prevented anything, either. The Dali might have still crushed through everything or been so damaged, it might have sunk.

@ChrisTietjen_00

Ай бұрын

The wind was not a factor. It was approx 4kn and blowing straight up the channel. This was accurately reported elsewhere taken from buoy data adjacent to the channel near the location of the bridge.

It is a combination of corporate deliberate neglect (failing to fix the ship), a corporate culture of money over safety (firing people who try to blow the whistle), and Americas long time culture of neglecting infrastructure so we can give these corporations more tax breaks or incentives.

@roystonboodoo7525

2 ай бұрын

What's on the one $ bill ? Who/ what really is the god referred to therein ?

@davidjones-vx9ju

Ай бұрын

don't blame the bridge

Great video. Your objectivity on this is appreciated.

@roystonboodoo7525

2 ай бұрын

Normally quite objective.

@jarbuthn

Ай бұрын

@@roystonboodoo7525 Agreed, although not everyone covering this story is as calm and insightful.

@roystonboodoo7525

Ай бұрын

@@jarbuthn ... Benefits of Engineering training.

*- All commertial shipping does Not connect their ship's computers to the internet.* *- Any hacking would have to be done manually on board the ship.* *- As mentioned, the ship had serious electrical problems because of the refigerated containers on board.* *~ ~ ~ ~ ~* *- Going foreward, Ships' probellers rotate clockwise and turn/push the bow to the ship's left.* *- Going backward, Ship's propellers rotate antii-clockwise and turn/push the bow to the ship's right.*

Hey Ricky, I love your videos man, but just wanted to let you know that you have your Starboard and Port mixed up. Maybe you might want to edit the video! Keep up the great work I thought it was just really funny !

*What happened was Americans blamed Indians who were the ones who saved lives of people by issuing a MAYDAY CALL but racism against Indians is ok somehow*

@hiteshadhikari

2 ай бұрын

@@fgerv there is nothing to repeat except the fact that racism against Indians is very acceptable to west

I’ve seen videos of ships sailing around the wreckage this week. The ports aren’t closed. Sure it will slow traffic on the water, but people saying the ports are closed for years to come are fear mongering IMO

@low-daddy

2 ай бұрын

As far as I know, the secondary channels they have opened at this time are only 10-15ft deep. Main channel is 50-60ft deep. While not entirely closed, that shallow access lane leaves a lot of boat traffic that cant pass.

@jondilly1974

2 ай бұрын

@@low-daddythat video said they have a dredge working on that issue. Again second hand knowledge and all but they were optimistic about keeping the shipping lanes open. However the height above that lane is shorter than optimal so they can’t stack ships as high. It might get removed during demo anyways, so it could be a short term issue as well.

Money in my opinion is why we lost the Space Shuttle and this bridge. This presentation is well balanced and thoughtfully presented. Time will tell us what really was the root cause, I believe.

Thank you i love your presentation.

Hi look up (WHATS GOING ON WITH SHIPPING?)

@Kriss_L

Ай бұрын

Yes. Sal has accurate info.

This is the main concern about aging infrastructure in the US. At the time many of our bridges were built cars, trucks, semi trucks and cargo ships were a lot lighter as well as the amount of traffic. I fear you will see a lot of bridge failures in the future if we don't upgrade our infrastructure. When I lived in Southern California there were many bridges where you could see erosion cracks around the base of the bridges.

@RoadTripTravel

2 ай бұрын

And yet every President for the past several administrations have allocated massive amounts of money to this, and yet nothing ever gets done. Plus, our gas tax is supposed to be for this stuff. All the money gets siphoned off to political donors and pet projects. It's an abomination!

@davidjones-vx9ju

Ай бұрын

don't blame the bridge

I like these investigative videos 👍

Very good engineering dad. May you prosper and be in health.

I think how folks have noted that the ship seems to suddenly veer to the pillar after regaining power. I initially believed this to be a horrible accident, but after seeing more videos of the accident itself (not the opinion pieces) I am conflicted. After Biden quickly announced it as only an accident and that the government would pay for everything, I became suspicious. These ships have huge insurance / liability coverages, not sure why that would not, at least in part, cover the cost of damage. As some other folks have noted, was there something other than an accident at play here, and is the government’s funding a way to side step an insurance investigation? Trust nothing, and let investigators gather evidence … which we see is already veering to a narrative just like the ship suddenly veered to that pillar.

@robertkirchner7981

2 ай бұрын

The government funding is about TIME. The insurance companies will inevitably start suing each other as they dispute liability, and the court cases will take years. Eventually the insurance companies will reimburse the taxpayers, but in the meantime the economic damage is accumulating and the cleanup and reconstruction needs to move forward. Only the federal government has the resources to front the funding for that sort of endeavour.

@Kriss_L

Ай бұрын

The ship did not suddenly veer - it drifted out of the channel. And as far as insurance goes, maritime law is very different than typical land based laws.

Built in the 70s it conformed to code of he time. Ships were much smaller

@katiegreene3960

2 ай бұрын

There is a quick visual of this in the video

@Sekhmmett

2 ай бұрын

We are in 2024

@robertlittlehawk7713

2 ай бұрын

@@Sekhmmett unless you have a time machine or p recognition that is irrelevant

@robertlittlehawk7713

2 ай бұрын

Unless of course you know away to get the congress to allocate enough funding to go back and retrofit all the bridges of this type. .....fat chance

Thanks for being the first to essentially acknowledge the one horror shipping has to deal with: "the road moves". The outgoing tide dragged that ship into the bridge; nobody on board was involved.

@Kriss_L

Ай бұрын

Multiple shipping channels on YT have covered this, and in more acurately.

The last part of the trajectory was either incredibly bad luck, or amazing piloting skills.

One question I still have is if there were too many refer boxes on-board. Part of their problem in port could be explained by rearranging the connections to spread out the load evenly but if there was too much on there... It would be impossible for the generators to maintain this, which would allow for a short period of usage before failure. The ship's mains would also be able to hold the load while in port but when the work of moving the ship is added would allow for overload. Another source had mentioned this and it could really make sense of exactly why or how this slipped through. Although, if this were the case, there is a 0% chance rules were followed regarding (electrical) capacities on the ship and a 99.99% chance money was the root cause.

@kennethchristensen7457

2 ай бұрын

The ships generators have automatic load shedding for overload protection . the least important load first Etc .Etc. Etc.

The GREEN light is on the STARBOARD side of the ship, red is on the PORT side. The most likely cause is a loss of electrical generator (which I'm sure is a focus of the investigation). This will loose auxiliary equipment for the main engine which then shutsdown. The black smoke is the main engine being restarted in reverse (after emergency generators restored limited power). With the propeller in reverse, the rudder is ineffective since water isn't flowing over it. A tragic accident. Hopefully a new bridge will have much better collision protection around its supports.

@patrickwhittington

2 ай бұрын

Diesel engines don't need electricity to run

@kennethchristensen7457

2 ай бұрын

@@patrickwhittington BIG ONES DO and they use a lot . Big marine engines rely on electric power to run all auxiliary equipment.

@royreynolds108

2 ай бұрын

@@patrickwhittington Once started. But these kind of engines rely on electric pumps for fuel, cooling water, lubrication, etc.

@mikefochtman7164

Ай бұрын

@@patrickwhittingtonLARGE engines often have auxilliary systems. Cooling water pumps circulating seawater, fuel transfer pumps, others. Safety circuits designed to shutdown the engine when you lose something like that.

Great overview as always! Is that a hospital band? Everything alright Ricky?

Imagine been on a Navy ship with 6 engines and it goes Dead on the water. 4 main engines and 2 back up engines. Yeah this happened out at sea multiple times. The question is how old is the ship and what it’s life expectancy. Our Navy ship was passed its life expectancy and it was its last deployment for obvious reasons.

Thanks for offering this no nonsense view of the recent tragedy. Appreciate your adherence to facts, and creating this oasis for reliable information.

We are so paranoid about terrorist attacks these days, and rightly so. However I do believe this was a freak accident.

@victorspresence1263

2 ай бұрын

Biden loves that answer tooo! Here's a check for your collaboration.

@maxpunkin3128

Ай бұрын

@@victorspresence1263 why would terrorists strike in the middle of the night they would want to strike in the middle of the day so they could take out as many people as possible, think

@MrLuisamartinez

Ай бұрын

Remember the paranoia about Russia dynamiting their own two gasoducts! US did it but accused Russia of it!😂

@jaynederp5236

Ай бұрын

@@victorspresence1263 Better Biden than a fucking traitor to democracy. But you confederate flag waving cons do *love* yourselves a traitor.

@Corsair37

Ай бұрын

@@victorspresence1263 it was a pretty poor attack then. 1. Very little loss of life. 2. Temporary disruption to one of the busiest ports in the US, but there are other ports on the East Coast. To really be a terrorist attack, I would think it would have needed to be on the scale of 9/11, and involve multiple ports in roughly the same time frame. The disruption to the port and the surrounding businesses is real, but not crippling.

My wife and I have been over that bridge almost 100 times as her parents lived 3 minute from there. At one time both of our lively hoods were tied to the port as we worked in intermodal. Personally it has put us in shock. The rearview look has me wondering why "fenders" or some kind of buffer system wasn't installed decades ago, seems like a relative cheap solution. Thanks for your video. I've been watching for a long time now as your normal subject matter interests me.

Yes the ship should never been allowed to leave until all major engineering problems resolved or if it was minor problems they should have kept the tugboats next to the ship even without the mooring lines attached to the ship just because of the problems the ship had before they left the pier.

All about the $. Profit motive + anti-tax zealotry + outdated infrastructure = catastrophe. We’ll be irate-but only for a while. We’ll rebuild but won’t spend the $ to rehabilitate the thousands of other structurally deficient or outdated bridges and designs. Tampa Bay, 35W, I40, Queen Isabella.: the list goes on and on.

Great video, impressed by how quick it was released

In 1974 a ship took out the main bridge in Hobart Tasmania, due to the difficulty and depth of the river under it the ship was left there. All ships now going under have to be under a certain size and all need a local pilot onboard either for entering or exiting. I would agree tugs and dolphins should be a requirement particularly for places like this and for key infrastructure.

Apparently, it was originally thought that a tunnel should be built there instead of a bridge, but the route carries a lot of hazardous material that is not allowed in a tunnel.

@1972Ray

2 ай бұрын

Those with hazardous material or propane can also go around the beltway.

3 bridges in 2 weeks lets not pretend what it is. This will continue all the way through the end of the year and ramping up. If you don't get it I'm sorry for you and you best open your eyes to the agenda

@RoyalFlush7096

2 ай бұрын

And all the train crashes…

@theproffessional9

2 ай бұрын

Do you mind explaining?

@Sekhmmett

2 ай бұрын

Explain if you are so enlightened

@harlengineering6589

2 ай бұрын

So, they took out a bridge but made sure to call ahead so no one was injured…. I mean, it’s not the fact that in the U.S. over 47K (yes thousand) bridges are “structural deficient”. I’m not gonna even get into it. I can bet a whole crisp $100 bill you voted for trump just from the way you act EVERY single thing is a conspiracy, and probably think he was cheated out of reelection lol. Stop with the tin foil man. Shit happens.

@ronallens6204

Ай бұрын

Not to mention the ship last month in turkey running into the dock at over 10 knots !!

This type of ship has four generators, three in operation and an emergency unit. One handles the steering alone, one the engine and bridge controls and navigation lights and one the other power demands for refrigerated containers etc. These generators are only used in the port and port approach with the main generator used at sea and run off the propeller shaft. The emergency generator supplies power to the backup steering controls in the engine room and on the bridge that only send the rudder to port or starboard but if that fails the rudder can be turned by hand from a lever in the engine room. The sudden turn the ship made at the last moment suggests that the wrong button was pressed on the emergency rudder unit was. It has been reported from the terminal that the Dali was having power problems whilst docked. If so then the question is why was she allowed to leave without the assistance of tugs at least to beyond the bridge. Ships controls are not connected to the internet and so cannot be hacked, the GPS unit feeds directly to the ships navigation computer.

You provided the solution: ships should be no larger/heavier than the bridge was designed to accommodate. Same issue occurs on roadways with trucks. Trucks are too large/heavy for current surface infrastructure. What agency approves this mismatch?

*What really happened was racists in America targetted Indians for this accident which happened due to a mechanical failure while american port captain was at helm* *It was Indian crew who issued SOS & MAYDAY call which saved lives of several people but then media still blamed Indians*

@brettrace

2 ай бұрын

Wtf are you on?

@hiteshadhikari

2 ай бұрын

@@brettrace the truth on how indians are being attacked in US by racists, multiple indian student have been killed in months yet no action by biden

Just two comments from me.... Once the propeller stops turning, it becomes a three bladed rudder, which will cause the rear of the ship to move either left or right, depending upon the direction of rotation of the prop. The bridge metal lattice structure was the only bit to fail. The concrete on and off ramps withstood the impact. This is most likely because they are supported by roller bearings, which will be resistant to the shock loading...

@royreynolds108

Ай бұрын

The metal lattice structure is a continuous structural form that is the truss part and is supported at both ends and the pylons by the channel. All of the structures on each side leading up to the truss are simply supported deck-girder steel spans with a concrete deck. They are supported on one end by rollers and bolts on the other for stability. The main truss was supported by bolts on one pylon and rollers for all of the other supports to accommodate expansion and contraction.

Sorry to say this out loud--this is ten minutes of stuff that's already widely known. And red is left.

As you know all disasters of any size are more likely a cascade of failures and not just one. So expecting one single point of failure is extremely unlikely. A ship losing power in the open ocean is just as scary if not more so. The reason that they ruled out hacking so quickly is that none of the power systems are accessible from off the ship so you would need physical access.

fortunately, I 95 was not cut off. there is the Ft. McHenry tunnel and the Annapolis tunnel. also hazmat trucks can still go around on the I 695 west side. longer but still doable. so motor vehicle traffic can still move around. slower but still moving. the main problem is shipping is stopped their till the debris is removed.

Technically, MV was headed toward main ship channel under the bridge.

Note all the lessons have already been learnt : protect the bridge with buffers/dolfins, tow ships until they are out of the port completely, don't let ships navigate in harbour until they are seaworthy But all these cost money....

They won't build a tunnel - they will replace the bridge. Tunnels can't take trucks with hazardous materials, and they need that route for those vehicles in the freeway system there. My personally guess is they will build a large cable stay replacement bridge there.

@1972Ray

2 ай бұрын

There's always the beltway.

The funny thing is, now we will learn an engineering. Yet there are buildings for hundreds of years that have been constructed and there was no problem

Never seen a statement from the Captain who was in charge that night?

@Corsair37

Ай бұрын

The NTSB has already done interviews with the Captain and Chief Engineer (and a couple of others, I think) - these were done within 2 days of the accident. I'm sure we'll see it in the final report.

When I saw that thumbnail with that yellow arrow pointing at something I JUST HAD TO WATCH IT, WOW!

A common cause of losing power soon after sailing is that the engine ready use fuel tanks are not being replenished.