Never let a toddler write your interview questions about a topic you haven't even bothered to self inquire about.

@dondesnoo1771

Ай бұрын

I would think some extra support center each side. Center of next sections would have Lessened damage even if not full piers

@kcstott

Ай бұрын

I think a toddler would have asked better questions. This interview sounds like it was written by the Kardashians

@user-ob3rj5eh2b

Ай бұрын

@@dondesnoo1771 k

@utubestalkerdotcom

Ай бұрын

he never mentioned that this bridge didn't have any protection barriers, like bumpers that would prevent any size ships from colliding into it's pillars

@markceaser8073

Ай бұрын

They clearly hired her for her looks, not brains.

The guy is a structural engineer. Stop asking him about the ship.

@michaeldeierhoi4096

Ай бұрын

Settle down. He was willing to offer his perspective.

@scottlewisparsons9551

Ай бұрын

He said that he had knowledge of ships as well.

@dutchman7623

Ай бұрын

'Single point of failure' in the bridge construction. If that pillar goes, everything collapses. That is a build-in disaster scenario. Pillar should have been protected by a buffer zone, but there is none. The ships in the harbor have become bigger by time, thus protection should have been increased as well. That is normal anticipation on changing circumstances.

@scottlewisparsons9551

Ай бұрын

@@dutchman7623 I agree with you. Buffer protection should have been added. The size of ships has increased enormously over the last fifty years.

@Gabbro_1

Ай бұрын

@@dutchman7623 This is silly. Do you have any comprehension of just how much force is involved in these scenarios. The structure that meets your design specifications doesn't exist. there would be so much 'buffer zone' that there wouldn't be space for a ship to go underneath.

Can hear them now: "We've investigated OURSELVES and have concluded no wrong doing." Yea, you betcha!

@kylechristofferson349

Ай бұрын

Seriously! As someone who has spent several years sailing… there’s something really odd about this whole thing. There are too many “coincidences” or things “going wrong” All the control systems go off? The steering goes out? No tug boats? They throw the anchor out? The ship makes “evasive maneuvers” in the last few minutes… and it strikes? So, if the evasive maneuvers HADN’T been made, it would have missed the bridge supports? AND… within a few hours, the federal government of the USA says they will cover all costs? Right… instead of letting the insurance company do a full investigation before they decide whether they will cover it or not “Nothing to see here!”

@judigrumm7190

Ай бұрын

And now the taxpayers of ALL the states will pay for the cleanup, and new bridge.....😡

@judigrumm7190

Ай бұрын

​@@kylechristofferson349Distribution of wealth. Millions into unknown pockets.

@khanch.6807

Ай бұрын

Even a stupid person can tell that a massive 100k ton ship hitting a bridge will make it collapse. These things are massive and can block entire canals.

@auntjenifer7774

Ай бұрын

But did you see the sparks from the phos charges !? ​@@khanch.6807

Have you ever noticed how there are concrete posts surrounding gas pumps? They protect the pumps from errant drivers. Having grown-up on the water, ever bridge I have seen have massive pilons surrounding the structural supports, to protect them from such events. Why does this bridge, that is so important in so many ways, have no structural protections?

@Snipergoat1

Ай бұрын

As a general rule the guys steering a 100,000 ton vessel in restricted waters are far more skilled than a typical guy steering his Chevy into the gas station. Also the are many orders of magnitude difference in what is required to stop a 3000 lb car moving at 15 MPH than there is to stop a 200,000,000 lb ship moving at 10 mph.

@cheryljohnson380

Ай бұрын

Kinda like it was planned. 😒

@heliotsucane5317

Ай бұрын

​​@@cheryljohnson380no. Engineer design things for worst case scenario. When that bridge was designed they made protection for ships that where around that time. Probably twice the size of them. Dali is 4X or more bigger.

Note for the reporter bridge supports are not designed to withstand hits from ships

@johnpowell2790

Ай бұрын

95,000 tons. 8 knots

@kendishman6291

Ай бұрын

They sure are.

@zzzroxyzzz

Ай бұрын

They are if they spend the money on safeguards.

@donyoung7874

Ай бұрын

Then maybe it isn't a great idea to have any bridge in the area of a major port if bridge supports aren't designed to withstand hits from a ship. It may not be a daily occurrence but if it does happen, that poses a huge problem. And it's not too far-fetched to think that a ship could possibly hit a bridge. That bridge was 50 years old. The ship was built in 2015. I bet that newer ship was bigger and capable of carrying more cargo, than any ship that was in service in 1972. Even cruise ships are getting bigger.

@magicgotaidz

Ай бұрын

@@donyoung7874damn if only you were there to prevent it with your knowledge

That cargo ship is super massive, a fully loaded ship can be well over 150,000 tons. No bridge new or old could withstand that force slamming into it.

@chrisschneiders6734

Ай бұрын

Your probably spot on but maybe it should had more protection for the piers, easy to say but because of simple but very effective design it's a bit of an accident waiting to happen, not being a person who knows anything about ships and such would tugs have been a usefull guidance to make sure this never happened..just asking the question?,

@ynwa3476

Ай бұрын

@@chrisschneiders6734 No protection would have stopped that ship. The weight and forces involved are ridiculous.

@Littlething41

Ай бұрын

@@ynwa3476 Yeah, they reported the ship was traveling at 8 knots and lost power. It's like a car on cruise control before hitting a wall. That ship no doubt completely shifted the structure and integrity of that bridge.

@raidergainzx5290

Ай бұрын

I would think sections would collapse, not the whole thing.

@Comm0ut

Ай бұрын

@@ynwa3476 100 meters of heavy concrete tetrahedrons as used on breakwaters certainly could stop a ship by grounding it well away from the bridge. Barrier methods can be DISTANT from the bridge and not connected to it. Large as it is that ship couldn't go 100 meters up a beach even at full throttle.

This guy's voice is so relaxing. The bridge didn't have safety bollards, and the ship was having major electrical problems the night before because too many refrigerators.

@Tracy77751

Ай бұрын

😂😂😂

@trentevenson8988

Ай бұрын

Magically named after a guy who did a painting about a broken bride. And America is about to collapse, and a bridge named after the writer of its anthem collapses.

@christophersauer1939

Ай бұрын

This is a bot account run by the alphabet agencies. You can't reply to it directly, that's the tell......

@snowmiaow

Ай бұрын

Oh no, all that refrigerated product ruined. In addition to the tragedy of the workers and the loss of the massive bridge.

@christophersauer1939

Ай бұрын

This is a bot account likely operated by our 3 letter alphabet agencies. The tell is you can’t reply to it directly.

*Engineer:* "Looks like a ship mighta done it."

@Travis_22

Ай бұрын

😂🤦🏻‍♂️

@IchbinX

Ай бұрын

"So how did the structural integrity of the bridge collapse?" "Well, the ship..." "My dude. The Bridge. We're talking about the bridge. We know what happened."

@danielcastillo7882

Ай бұрын

Lol

@catdean828

Ай бұрын

This guy may know his stuff but the language he used makes himsound as if he is not sure what he saw on the time lapse video.

@455buick6

Ай бұрын

Was it a big ship?

i love how the engineer breaks it down to the level of the reporter: not a faulty bridge but a faulty ship

@davidkyle6423

Ай бұрын

Yes, also apparently the ship was too big. If you have big ships then you should have bigger bridges with stronger supports 🤣

@brad8183

Ай бұрын

Single point of failure is a faulty bridge. There should have be protections around the support pillars.

@pjmuffin

Ай бұрын

@@davidkyle6423 Homer, this bridge was built in 1977. Ships were nowhere near the size they are today. No bridge has piers designed to take the load of the Empire State Building coming at it at 9 mph.

@pjmuffin

Ай бұрын

@@brad8183 Wait till I tell you that by your definition, nearly every bridge in existence is a faulty bridge.

@davidkyle6423

Ай бұрын

@@pjmuffinExactly my point! So a bigger stronger bridge would make little difference. Surely it is the design of the bridge that is the problem.

Anyone else flabbergasted at the fact they made the reporter ask such a brain dead question and she asked it with such emotion lol

@1realtruthrightnow742

Ай бұрын

This woman is beyond stupid

@lostmotion18

Ай бұрын

Milking out news drama.

@VinnyVinceViper

Ай бұрын

After hearing her unable to say Canada (0:07), not really.

@joakos1122

Ай бұрын

@@VinnyVinceVipershe was referring to Ken the engineer

@donmcconnery5080

Ай бұрын

Lights flickering!! Lol

That ship seemed to steer right for that main support.

@corneliuselbourne1044

Ай бұрын

Exactly what I was saying, the crash was intentional, if you look closer at the video you will see explosive in some of the support that held it up.

@raidrfrk

Ай бұрын

Direct hit Supposedly there was another cargo ship that hit a bridge in Oklahoma ..... look it up

@kangacrew540

Ай бұрын

Yes the captain planned the whole event and rang up Joe rogan and said I've got a new conspiracy for ya . They won't believe what just happened

@timheavyable

Ай бұрын

​@@corneliuselbourne1044 it was a freak accident, the ships captain gave out a mayday thus saving many lives.

@davidwright8432

Ай бұрын

Move, perhaps. I don't know if it was capable of any directional control; its own momentum, and local currents/tidal conditions, would have to be taken into account.

Wasn't a bridge collapse. It was a ship wreck. Come on AMERICA.

@LoneGRoEnt

Ай бұрын

stupid

I do not understand how an interview can offer so little real information and still garner 4,100 likes.

@tunneloflight

Ай бұрын

That's because KZread doesn't show you the 150,000 dislikes.

@fabb5

Ай бұрын

@@tunneloflight correct.

@leonardodalongisland

Ай бұрын

Conformation of the level of DUMB around the world.

@superspeeder

Ай бұрын

People’s standards keep getting lower…

@ranger70

Ай бұрын

It’s fun watching idiots asking stupid questions

The ship's lights were NOT flickering. Flickering means shining unsteadily, fluctuating in brightness. The ship's lights went completely dark (off) instantaneously as a result of complete loss of electrical power for as-yet known reasons, and it happened twice.

@nelsonhelmutt5076

Ай бұрын

I saw 3 off then on's. then a final off. Yet why did it clearly turn into the Pillars ?? or why didn't it Turn to Port instead?? And if there were 2 minutes when the emergency was called in till it hit the Pillars, then why weren't the anchors instantly dropped.???

@titan1856

Ай бұрын

The off and on is different backup systems kicking in from main engine systems backups. There are multiple systems for the ship, but ultimately, they are all tied into the same electric distribution. A ship isn't like a car, I could write pages explaining, but any failure in one system can cause catastrophic issues in others, say an electrical fire etc. (Example oil 'pumps' are completely separate systems from the engine).These ships don't have azipods, maybe few thrusters(side to side, dock maneuvers)so that means that getting backup power means nothing. As for the anchors, again you can't just flick a switch, they require crew and power to function too, it doesn't matter if they dropped both, physics and inertia. It takes Miles to slow a fully ladden ship, dropping the port anchor was an attempt to create drag and swing her ass back in to the channel and hope for a minor clip, both anchors you'd just go straight if they didn't catch and hope they catch or she slows. Also the crew probably tried for the other but probably exascaped the anchor locker considering the point of impact.

@CarbonRevo91

Ай бұрын

@@nelsonhelmutt5076I take it you don’t understand how anchors work. An anchor is not meant to stop a moving vessel. It will slow one down of course just from the drag it creates but it will not drastically or suddenly slow it down given this vessel’s size. The chain on an anchor, more technically the weight of the chain, is what keeps a vessel stationary. They were never intended as failsafes but they are used as failsafes because what other options do you really have? The conditions at the bottom will also have an impact on how the anchor and anchor chain work. And even a properly sized anchor and chain can still not be enough for a vessel even with a little bit of current or a tide shift, which is why a lot of vessels have drag alarms for when they’re sitting on anchor. These guys really had no chance of avoiding this because by the time they knew an impact was imminent, it was too late to do anything about it. The forward momentum on a vessel of this size is astronomical, even at slow speeds. These cargo ships can be at cruising speed, throttle down and coast for 10 miles and still be moving at 3-4knts after 10 miles. Those anchors will hold it in place if it’s already stopped, but trying to immediately stop it is a whole different ball game

@king_has_no_clothskul8635

Ай бұрын

@@titan1856 SIMPLE SOLUTION. THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN TUGGED OUT KNOWING THAT IT IS AN OLD BRIDGE AND GAP IS VERY NARROW AND WATER IS CHOPPY. THE SIDE THRUSTERS SHOULD HAVE BEEN FIRED BUT WHO KNOWS THEY WERE WORKING OR NOT? --------------------------- IT WAS A DISASTER WAITING TO HAPPEN TO BE HONEST.

@ningtanagrey9141

Ай бұрын

Why did he change course? Is there a connection with the fact that the Ukrainian was steering the ship?

Nobody has addressed the main question: Assuming that the steering was gone/ineffective, why the hell did the captain not put the engines in reverse and drop anchor immediately?

@elonever.2.071

Ай бұрын

The story now is that one anchor was deployed and that explains why the ship made an almost U-turn to hit the piling of the bridge. If that is the case why wasn't the other anchor dropped instead which would have moved the ship away from the bridge piling?

@Darlene-zw2ki

Ай бұрын

They were on their cell phones ?

@kenlawdhammercy5804

Ай бұрын

Suspicious.

@shanghunter7697

Ай бұрын

@@kenlawdhammercy5804 Just wait until you see all the more "suspicious" activities. Hold onto your hat

@Fomoco365

Ай бұрын

It's my understanding that this ship has a single engine with a direct drive to the propeller. To go into "reverse", the engine actually runs backwards. The process to switch from forward to reverse can take several minutes.

Why haven't they addressed how the ship was steering away from the pillar and then corrected itself at the last minute to go directly into the pillar?

@winowarrior9392

Ай бұрын

No one wants to talk about that. PBD went over it on a Hometeam show. The other footage that is sped up, it just looks ridiculous... They were literally going towards the opening then, like you said, at last minute it turned hard and went directly into the pillars. I wonder, if they dropped the anchor like they said, that that could have caused it to sharply go off course, but still, why do anything at all if you are headed in the right direction. You just want to get by the bridge and then figure everything else out. Very weird...

It could have been much worse at another time of day.

@thesisypheanjournal1271

Ай бұрын

Mayday was relayed to ground based responders and they closed the bridge. However there were workers on the bridge that fell. Two were rescued, six unaccounted for.

@royreynolds108

Ай бұрын

Yes, if the time had been around 7:30 to 8:30 am or 4 to 6 pm, the outcome would have been extremely deadly.

@rupertperiwinkle4477

Ай бұрын

How so ?

@jeffiejdklads

Ай бұрын

at 1am the bridge would have little traffic, however during the rush hours of 7 to 8 and 5 to 6 would have way more traffic@@rupertperiwinkle4477

@kimmyymmik

Ай бұрын

@@rupertperiwinkle4477wdym how so 🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️

Big ship hits the main support and the bridge comes down doesn’t take a brain surgeon

@divekatdreaming

Ай бұрын

This guy obviously isn't.

@BabySpit

Ай бұрын

Like the towers right?

@Khalistan159

Ай бұрын

Whi.te ppl aren't the brightest.....

@kindlin

Ай бұрын

@@BabySpit Exactly. Tho, actually not really at all. The fire was the primary culprit there. Yes, I've had this argument many times over many years.

@thulomanchay

Ай бұрын

A brain surgeon is a wrong person to ask about ships or bridges anyway.

The lights did not "flicker" as stated, I've seen the video, there was a shipwide blackout, just as the ship veered off course & struck that pier perfectly. No port pilot could have steered that ship any better. Just as if it was a perfectly executed sabatoge job.

@istudios225

Ай бұрын

You said it!! Exactly what is going on in a LOT of people's minds.

@loripiontek

Ай бұрын

Remote controlled collision.

Let's not forget that for 2 days prior, they were trying to fix the electrical problems it had before and then leaving without the problem fixed. 😮

@shanegridley4922

Ай бұрын

That's how there story goes!!

This reporter is out of her league on this. No clue.

@RebuttalRecords

Ай бұрын

Generally all reporters are clueless. They can't even speak properly anymore.

@clairefarnell9489

Ай бұрын

They are out of their league with EVERYTHING.😂

@Richard-wl2nh

Ай бұрын

did you want her to get an engineering degree before reporting this story?

@ajcook7777

Ай бұрын

​@@Richard-wl2nhJust a 5th grade education would suffice...

@chaspfrank

Ай бұрын

He didn't do much better. If he thinks that bridge can be replaced in 2 years of less, he has no sense of bridge design and construction whatsoever! I would say that between removal of the debris, design and approval of new plans, materials acquisition and construction, anything less than 5 years would be miraculous!

I'm not really sure about the strategy of concentrating on the ship or the construction of the bridge itself. In Denmark, we are used to many drunken sailors from east and west passing through our busy waters going in and out of the Baltic Sea. There are therefore sandbars around the pillars so that any ship runs aground before reaching a bridge.

@redwingblackbirdnell

Ай бұрын

hey..great idea..crunching hull to a stop..brilliant

@exit1983

Ай бұрын

Smart!

@Recuper8

Ай бұрын

we do things quick and dirty here in the states

@leonardodalongisland

Ай бұрын

Maybe you should change the name to "Drunkbars"???

@BrokenOboeReed

Ай бұрын

I saw a KZread video where there was an interview with a person stating that other bridges in the vicinity have an impact concrete island, similar to your sandbar, that would divert a "drunken" ship from hitting the steel pillar. Not sure why this particular bridge didn't have that design. I think the journalism horrible for this tragedy. I don't know why this structural engineer didn't pick that up.

It seemed to all of a sudden go full speed and full turn into the bridge pier... It most defiantly looked like the controls were hacked to me! But that's just me.

@Snipergoat1

Ай бұрын

A ship that size doesn't do anything "All of a sudden". Whatever it does, it does slowly and ponderously.

Ship somehow managed to hit the right spot to cause entire structure to crash....

The reporter keeps missing the point, the bridge was built just fine. That bridge wasn't meant to handle the amount of point load that it took from the side

@pindapoy1596

Ай бұрын

@fieds1988 You have no idea if the bridge was built just fine. Nor do I of course but the question to ask is this. There must be a safety requirement of some sort that says that such and such bridge should be able to take a hit of such and such force. Like any foundation, you can only put that much force on it. Can I suggest that the safety codes of the1970's, when the bridge was built, did not anticipate the increase in cargo ships weight and therefore that developments in boat sizes/weights overtook the codes, like an earthquake stronger than the maximum expected in the calculations would bring down a building? Never rush to jugement.

@thetruthchannel349

Ай бұрын

@@pindapoy1596 There is a safety barrier most bridges like this have in the water so a ship cannot reach the supports if they go off course like this. Huge concrete barriers that go down into the water that are 10s of 1000s of tons.

@garetjax2768

Ай бұрын

@@pindapoy1596 Can you give me an example of a bridge in existence, anywhere in the world, at any point in Earth's history, that could survive an impact with a 100k ton ship moving at 8 knots? Better yet, do you actually comprehend the ridiculousness of that request? I think you don't, but a physics course should help explain it better than I could. That much mass, with that momentum, isn't going to stop for any bridge without causing catastrophic damage.

@ryanschwan2507

Ай бұрын

@@garetjax2768 It's called concrete barriers. Many bridges have them. They work.

@jefblogs3279

Ай бұрын

Was it? a bridge with large ships passing, surely someone would have thought about protecting from impact, don't you think, other bridges are. hmmm

I am a mechanical engineer and I watched the bridge collapse video. It came down exactly how one would expect. There is no mystery here.

@adonian

Ай бұрын

I’m not a structural engineer, and I can see clearly how/why it came down.

@theofulk5636

Ай бұрын

Exactly what one would expect from a DEMOLITION THAT SET IT INTO FREEFALL ? THERMITE !

@rickiecomeaux8287

Ай бұрын

The fact that Biden agrees with you is reason enough to disbelieve you.

@aisaxonawiat6484

Ай бұрын

Ask Obama the details, he knew everything in advance👍

@jasonfischer8946

Ай бұрын

Yeah, it's pretty obvious why it collapsed. The bridge had a balanced distribution of forces. Once that balance was gone, the forces were unevenly distributed over a structure not capable of handling that much additional force, and it snowballed as supports failed.

It is odd to notice that the hydro poles in the water have concrete protective rings encircling them, to protect them from passing ships, but the supports for the bridge does NOT have similar concrete protective rings.

@joeds3775

Ай бұрын

Wouldn't have made any difference

@petezahut79

Ай бұрын

It does or should I say did have 4 protective barriers- one for each support- per an Engineer who worked on that bridge for 3 years!

@thuss5162

Ай бұрын

Wow think how smart they were planning for this disaster so long ago when they built it! 🤦‍♂️

@istudios225

Ай бұрын

This bridge has had hundreds of thousands of ships of all sizes, including thousands just as large and just as loaded as this behemoth, for the past almost 50 years, and there hasn't been a SINGLE instance of a ship-rams-bridge mishap. Why? Because all other ships are seaworthy, and the master and crew followed all the rules and precautions about sailing under this bridge. It is not practical to install barriers around the supports just to prevent this one incident in 50 years. Besides, installing the barriers would narrow the width of the navigable channel under the bridge, and then the port would have to limit the size of ships which can dock here, one of the busiest and biggest ports in the world.

I recall passing under the NewLondon bridge when I was in the Navy we never had a problem. The bridge was old in 1970 and it is still there.

@istudios225

Ай бұрын

Exactly. If the ship is seaworthy, as it should be, and the master and crew follow all the rules and precautions, as they should do, there would be no problem at all.

Why didn’t the bridge have island buffers around the pillars?

@loufrank1574

Ай бұрын

The money for that went into someone's pocket a long time ago

@Cfbaccount

Ай бұрын

The money for things like that are being sent to Ukraine or funding CRT/LGBT in our schools.

@Dan-gg8fk

Ай бұрын

They were actually smart enough to put those in after the Tampa Sunshine Skyway collapse. @@Cfbaccount

@charliewatts6895

Ай бұрын

@@Cfbaccount Money Trump sent to Putin.

@michaelsutherland5848

Ай бұрын

@@charliewatts6895lol Let's just ignore the 100+ billion that were pissed away in Ukraine, because that makes YOUR side look bad.

No bridge on earth can stand a direct hit from a fully loaded 100,000 ton container ship.

@jamesallen8785

Ай бұрын

BYDENS TREANSPORTATION OFFICER SAID THE BRIDGE WAS "RACEST"....WHY DID NOT SAY BUT MY GUESS IS BECAUSE THE BRIDGE WAS NAMED AFTER THE FATHER OF OUR NATIONAL ANTHUM!!! WILL NOW BE NAMED FOR SOME LIB??

@seanmurphy2302

Ай бұрын

Thats why they build fender "islands" surrounding the piers. They work.

@leonardodalongisland

Ай бұрын

I don't know about that, I made a pretty solid/strong Lego bridge a few years ago....

@user-hj9dh6cx9o

Ай бұрын

​@@leonardodalongislandwould it survive a hit from a 10,000 Lego ship 🤔

@leonardodalongisland

Ай бұрын

@@user-hj9dh6cx9o Ten thousand Legos-yes, 10,000 pounds, maybe not. But I say, let's try!!

World Trade Center engineer is the same company that built this bridge

@JetfireQuasar

Ай бұрын

Ah that's what brought this Bridge down.. the Jet Fuel stored in the Cargo ship.

Why was there fire and explosions a half a mile away from the initial impact and collision of the bridge

Its obscene a bridge with cargo ship traffic has no protection.

@TonyTitleGuy

Ай бұрын

Kinda makes you wonder... Perhaps the most strategic bridge on the Eastern Coastal area; and it is soooo vulnerable. Wonder, if anyone else noticed this?

@Panda-gs5lt

Ай бұрын

Also add that the bridge had absolutely zero redundancy built into it.

@TonyTitleGuy

Ай бұрын

Hey? What is "redundancy" as it relates to civil engineering? @@Panda-gs5lt

@commentsarefree4311

Ай бұрын

@@TonyTitleGuy I'm sure some officials will be asking questions. Reporters, not much..

@liam3284

Ай бұрын

Probably didn't pass cost-benefit analysis.

The support pillar was critical to holding the bridge up. It was a single point of failure. Therefore it would be crucial to ensure that the likelihood of anything hitting it was minimized. There was no buffer around those supports. No redundancy. The ship was ~100,000 tons and having lost power, it was uncontrolled and drifted with the current. The captain (or local pilot) who was steering the ship tried to put it into reverse, and even dropped an anchor, but the forward momentum was too great. At least the pilot was able to signal a Mayday so that authorities on land were able to close the bridge to traffic just in time (though not for the eight construction workers).

@TheEgg185

Ай бұрын

Cars were on the bridge.

@blackrock1961

Ай бұрын

@@TheEgg185 No. Not exactly. Traffic had been stopped. The last moving vehicle made it off the bridge about 45 seconds before the ship struck it. The vehicles that were on the bridge likely belonged to the workers that were lost.

@rikardlalic7275

Ай бұрын

Interestingly, the vessel missed the bridge protective "dolphin" just right, before steering sharp right and colliding precisely where it takes to make the strongest impact on the bridge.

@seameology

Ай бұрын

The current runs sideways? Alrighty then.

@gerardacronin334

Ай бұрын

@@seameology As a matter of fact, yes, the current from the Curtis river runs from west to east, entering the main channel just in time to push the stern clockwise and orienting the direction of the rudderless Dali more in line with the bridge pylon. Sal shows that very clearly in one of his recent videos in the “What’s up with shipping?” Channel.

They "lost power" then said oops we need to steer into the pillar more, turn it back on 😢

Did the boat turn while the power was on, or off?

@purrplemane5954

Ай бұрын

🤔

The bridge has been standing since 1977, 46 years of ship traffic passed safely under this bridge with no incident. Why was the Captain navigating so close to the bridges pier when he had a large degree of open space between those piers?

@wardoc22

Ай бұрын

cause he lost power

@goldenretrieversamazingtea1585

Ай бұрын

Why did he make a hard righ turn into the bridge when power came back on?@@wardoc22

@roykliffen9674

Ай бұрын

@@UserUser-zc6fx Naah, pretty much aligning events.

@jasonedwards8910

Ай бұрын

Because it was on purpose !!!!!

@jasonedwards8910

Ай бұрын

​@@UserUser-zc6fx SABOTAGE !!!!

Ship loses engine power, ship loses steerage from no power, ship hits bridge, bridge goes down.

@denisesorchidparadise1411

Ай бұрын

well, that's what they are saying

@LokiOdinson-fz8ps

Ай бұрын

@@denisesorchidparadise1411 its what happened. low wat

@joshgross8741

Ай бұрын

Ship is on route to go directly between the two bridge supports. Ships lights go on and off. Ship steers directly into the bridge support and hits the support. This ship steered directly into the support in the last five minutes of approach. Hard turn into the bridge. PPC

@leonardogoulart3245

Ай бұрын

If i remember correctly, shipping regulations require backup generators and batteries precisely to avoid this kind of incident.

@hmcredfed1836

Ай бұрын

@@joshgross8741 the rudder of a ship like this has about 20 to 50 tons, if you lose power and need to turn it by handdriven hydralik pumps you need 10 to 15 min to just straighten it out.

I seen a video where they pointed out explosions at key points of the bridge 🌉

So did the explosions help it come down? The ones on the bridge…

Why are we talking to a Canadian Enginner about a bridge that was healthy… we need a maritime engineer to discuss why this ship had these massive double failure.

@cryora

Ай бұрын

Healthy is subjective. Clearly it's old and not designed to withstand hits by modern size ships. And with the growing economy, ships aren't getting smaller, but bigger. That's why there are military operations near Yemen.

@Schaden-freude

Ай бұрын

@@cryora There are very few things that can withstand a 100k GRT ship travelling at 8 knots hitting them. Think stuff like mountains.

@cryora

Ай бұрын

@@Schaden-freude What about an island as a buffer, as another commenter suggested? If a heavily used bridge is going to be built in the way of such ships, and can collapse from a collision then this should definitely be a safety concern.

@hccdgvvfccdgn993

Ай бұрын

Most likely the ships auxiliary engine failed during standby. Perhaps they were running too few of them or some other reason like fuel failure. The investigation will tell.

@ThePhaseShifters

Ай бұрын

@@Schaden-freudethat isn’t true. Why is there only a few supports throughout the entire bridge? Look up the sunshine skyway bridge incident and look at the modern one. It has far more independent supports. This would have been a months work if this ship hit the skyway.

There is a serious failure of risk analysis here. In Hobart Australia the Tasman bridge was collapsed by an ore carrier. When the bridge was rebuilt much was made of the improved piers supports but when you see photos it is obvious the foundations of the new piers are not much larger than the existing piers and no existing pier foundations were improved . Someone was not prepared to pay the cost of tugs guiding ships past the bridge. The piers have no ship collision protection not for the Baltimore bridge nor the Tasman bridge. Bows of ships extend many meters beyond the ship waterline and easily can smash piers so this accident was simply a question of when, not if.

@amorphousavocet1210

Ай бұрын

When it was built 50 years ago the ships were orders of magnitude smaller. At that size no buffer will stop a direct impact, all you can do is tighten regulations on maintenance to prevent those engine failures from ever happening

@francfurian8215

Ай бұрын

No ship can go under the Tasman Bridge without tugs since that incident in 1975. Tug boats are used for guiding ships under the Westgate Bridge in Melbourne Australia & should have been in Baltimore. I can pretty much guarantee this will be the norm in Baltimore from now on.

@frankkolmann4801

Ай бұрын

@@francfurian8215 Exactly. If every ship had tug boat guidance to pass the now destroyed bridge the Baltimore bridge would be still intact. I mowed lawns for a while. My insurance did not cover me unless I filled out a risk analysis form for every job I did, including steps taken to mitigate percieved risks. In the end I never claimed insurance as no damage happened. For example when cleaning mowers I always disconnected the spark plug. Should I have cut my hand by a running mower my insurance did not cover that because my risk assessment included a mitigation of disconnected spark plug.

@Stewf123

Ай бұрын

I am glad to hear that re the Tasman bridge. If it did go down, I don't even want to think about what that would be like, traffic is so bad these days.

Wait a minute.......There is no steering? No breaks or reverse thrust? Out of control? How far back in the water did they realize the boat was out of control? Too many questions unanswered here. The boat goes right into one of the most important pilings and collapses most of it. This dog don't hunt, accident or no accident.

It appears there was a malfunction with the ship and not malfunction of the bridge. Genius! Since the bridge did not run into the ship. So much to learn from the news.

Lights flickering was clearly the power being lost and being turned back on Duh

@jimrussell5016

Ай бұрын

It was Trump's fault.

@gato-grande

Ай бұрын

BARILOCHE ARGENTINA

@divekatdreaming

Ай бұрын

Nah....they were probably having a dance party. This guy wouldn't want to speculate if a dance party would have anything to do with the bridge collapsing.

@Riley_rolo

Ай бұрын

That happend 3 times?

@MirridonOnslaught

Ай бұрын

​@@divekatdreamingtitanic all over again

Would that be a human that was flickering the light? WOW just wow

@res887

Ай бұрын

Sure they could have had a dance party on the ship 😅

@tjampman

Ай бұрын

They say there are no stupid questions!

@stevenmurray7014

Ай бұрын

Hahahaha!

@rogwarrior1018

Ай бұрын

Yes, it leaves you speechless......

The seconds between on-line generators "failing" to the backup generator coming on line can cause flickering lights.

Nothing wrong with the design of the bridge. My question is why there aren't structures to protect the piers from off-course ships?

@MattMajcan

Ай бұрын

beause that costs money

Bridges designed and built in that era were NOT fail-safe but failure critical meaning that if you remove one or more points of support the remaining structure cannot hold it up.

@catgirl6803

Ай бұрын

You can’t change gravity or physics.

@PRH123

Ай бұрын

That’s true of any major bridge. Or any bridge.

@dknowles60

Ай бұрын

@@catgirl6803 wrong

@catgirl6803

Ай бұрын

@@dknowles60 troll

@smokeyjayshouse

Ай бұрын

No bridge being built today can withstand losing even just one support.

The quality of the questions from the reporter / host amazed me.

@Quast

Ай бұрын

Only the HISTORY channel could have done it better. ;)

@sussertheoriginal

Ай бұрын

Reporters are clueless about anything remotely technical

@davestratton460

Ай бұрын

Check out Redacted, completely different.

@user-lm2pm1gq9t

Ай бұрын

What quality?

@rogwarrior1018

Ай бұрын

Yes, yes, quality questions......

Why is there no mention of the Fact that the ship Master was from the Ukraine and his profile was scrubbed.

@martinap2682

Ай бұрын

Interesting! Now we are getting somewhere. Thanks for that info.

Why did the bridge collapse?... The ship was over 984 feet long and 95,000 tons empty. It has a capacity listed as over 9,500 20' shipping containers. Each of those 20' containers weighs around 5,000 pounds empty and are capable of around 67,000 pounds maximum capacity each.

It's interesting how we hear from everyone but the operators of the ship.

@rogwarrior1018

Ай бұрын

I am sure the lawyers have told them to evoke their Miranda. Let the investigators figure it out and wait for the subpoenas.

To the news reporter, bridges are not intended to be rammed by ships, only to support traffic!!!no bridges today can take a direct hit by a ship of This size!!

@jasonhaynes2952

Ай бұрын

Go to Wikipedia and type in "List of Bridge Failures". It's unbelievable how many bridges have collapsed (in just the last 40-50 years) from a ship or barge strike. It's relatively common, sadly. New bridges have islands or buffer structures around the piers to avoid such disasters because it's happened so often

@DavidJohnson-tv2nn

Ай бұрын

May I suggest that you look at images of the Sunshine Skyway bridge and it's robust pier protection. Not only do they have massive concrete dolphins.... There is a massive amount of riprap around the main piers. If a ship were to hit that it would simply run aground. They learned from their 1980 disaster. Unfortunately, the lessons weren't learned elsewhere.

@HelleKurstein

Ай бұрын

Normal bridges around the world are protected against mishaps!

@analarson2920

Ай бұрын

​@@DavidJohnson-tv2nnit's called being cheap to build things poorly and not maintain or improve.

@analarson2920

Ай бұрын

Anyone know what this ship was carrying and where it was headed? It's all foreign to me.

Ty for explaining how the bridge was to old for the times maybe we can look at other bridges that may need updates before this happens again

As a Union Ironworker I am surprised you guys never ask actual steelworkers and bridge builders their opinions on the bridge. What does a pencil pusher know about the field?

@empress_tru

Ай бұрын

Better question why don't they have KZread pages explaining it.

The Generator crapped out on this ship. No power no steering

@428Jonathon

Ай бұрын

That would be a hacking attack.

@mifphilip

Ай бұрын

@@428Jonathon No, it is quite common for ships to have engine cutouts or failures.

@peterwilson8039

Ай бұрын

@@mifphilip So this was an accident waiting to happen? I find it odd though that it struck a tower. That could indicate that there was some element of intent to this.

@ImJustVale

Ай бұрын

how tf you tryna hack a diesel generator@@428Jonathon

@topfuel29channel

Ай бұрын

Exactly the main engine is the generator.

This woman would ask why legos break when dropped

@jacobmiller5834

Ай бұрын

Why does it hurt when you step on Legos?

@stevenmurray7014

Ай бұрын

Hahahaha!

@rogwarrior1018

Ай бұрын

or an egg

@OneMan-wl1wj

Ай бұрын

😂😂😂

There is no way jet fuel heats up hot enough to make steel beams melt on a bridge!

This is what happens when you award construction contracts based on EDI, instead of real qualifications and experience.

You can see in the crash video that the ship lost electrical power twice which means it lost hydraulic steering

@firebald2915

Ай бұрын

Was it going straight when it lost power or when a ship loses power, they suddenly turn ?

@tmilholin7552

Ай бұрын

@@firebald2915 did you notice the smoke? that means the captain threw it in reverse and floored it. which means it will turn into the direction of the rudder turn

The reason it fell is that there was no emergency barriers of any kind that can be seen in the video. A ship could and did sail right into the darn bridge. You can bet that whenever this bridge is rebuilt there will be large cement and steel collision barriers so that this type thing cannot happen.

@xhandhele

Ай бұрын

no barrier is gonna stop a 150,000 ton ship

@danielgrinnell6663

Ай бұрын

The REAL problem was; there were NO signs on the bridge pier stating that ships are NOT allowed to hit the pier....

How did the "expert" miss the explosives blowing up the bridge before impact of the ship? What is in the containers the ship was carrying?

The Dali, the ship that caused the crash, has a record preceding it. The same vessel ALSO caused disruptions in Belgium back in 2016

Notice how there are little explosions at the joints on the far right!? Are these electrical lines running in the structure or are these explosions?

@istudios225

Ай бұрын

If they're electrical wires or transformers exp loding, shouldn't all the lights on the bridge go out and the whole bridge plunged into darkness as it goes down?? The street lights on the bridge are still on as it's falling. Definitely sus pic ious.

@loricarroll2531

Ай бұрын

On these bridges the power lines run down under along side not on top..

@istudios225

Ай бұрын

@@loricarroll2531 Aha! So those explosions at the top are anomalies. Of unknown cause.

Forget the Engineers report the real question is. How can a major harbour like this with a massive bridge and giant ships operate without TUG boats ?

There's been ships running into bridges a few times a decade in the last century, the bridge was built fine to carry traffic but there was no guards in place to deflect an errant ship. When they replaced the bridge in Tampa after a ship hit in 1980, they built dolphin[guard)s around its piers, and later built berms around them for more protection.

I wonder why American engineers wouldn't talk to them about this.

The ship goes completely dark for about 10 seconds, total loss of power during the turn next to the bridge. The port anchor was dropped to stop the ship but the anchor dragged. with the engines in full reverse rudder control was lost because of the sudden attempted change of direction. No rudder control in full reverse dragging an anchor, but forward momentum was to much.

@lilimai4066

Ай бұрын

Why this remind me of the Obama movie "Leave The World Behind"

@thefpvlife7785

Ай бұрын

Once the Captain radios MAYDAY both ends of the bridge should have been shut down. No vehicles should have plunged into the bay. Poor Baltimore contingency planning.

@georgehill3087

Ай бұрын

It went dark for one minute, then power came back for 1:10 and went out again. And half minute later, power came back and was on until it struck the bridge.

@MG-bs5mr

Ай бұрын

​@@thefpvlife7785my understanding is that they had only just closed it. So it was shut. Sadly the construction workers were parked on it.

@amorphousavocet1210

Ай бұрын

@@thefpvlife7785Since you're copying this idiocy everywhere I'll copy my response. "For having about two minutes to respond they did really goddamn well. Traffic was cut and the only ones on it were a roadwork crew, without radio contact or time to drive out and tell them then get back before impact"

What happened? Mountain of a ship collided with bridge, bridge lost. But I am no engineer.

@krispy1k

Ай бұрын

Though with that kind of knowledge you certainly couldn't be a news anchor. This event has certainly brought out some of the dumbest questions in history of television.

@russelfernandes8483

Ай бұрын

can you play one on TV, do you want to? these are the questions of the hour;

A METAPHOR OF A Bridge over Troubled Waters!

We know "What Happened", it's on film. What they need to know is "HOW" and "WHY" it happened.

My father was the Project Engineer when the bridge was built. I spent time with him on the bridge before it was finished and I take this personally because of his major role. Until a thorough investigation of the ship is done everything related to the power failure is speculation.

@andante005

Ай бұрын

Don't worry. That is just TOO much uncontrolled weight and speed to withstand anything.

@adrianbradshaw4956

Ай бұрын

Cool story bro

@thefpvlife7785

Ай бұрын

Once the Captain radios MAYDAY both ends of the bridge should have been shut down. No vehicles should have plunged into the bay. Poor Baltimore contingency planning.

@TH-wp7ye

Ай бұрын

right, send out an AMBER alert or something

@macforme

Ай бұрын

@@thefpvlife7785 I am guessing the vehicles on the bridge were the crew's....who were working on potholes. So they were probably empty and the workers went flying into the water.

REPORTER: “How does a bridge come down like a pile of dominoes?” EVERYONE WATCHING: “Because it was hit by a 150,000 ton cargo ship.” *CASE CLOSED.*

@steventhury8366

Ай бұрын

Cased is not closed. How does such a large ship get so far off course that it would even come close to the pier? The veering off of the ship began well before the flickering of the lights. Why would the anchor not be deployed much sooner? To not question that this could be deliberate is what's most frustrating.

modern journalism in a nutshell

It's a continuous span truss bridge. Truss bridges are used in this application because you can span wider channels with less bridge. Essentially, you don't need as many piers and less reinforcing in the bridge members. The downside to a truss bridge is that it's defined as "frature critical." All members rely on each other for support. There's little redundancy in truss bridges compared to other style bridges. The pier wasn't needed to be heavily reinforced since the truss bridge is lighter than a typical concrete bridge. The continuous span truss bridge was used for this application, but the continuous span truss bridge is the reason it collapsed. I would see it replaced with a cable stay bridge. Dolphins will most likely be placed around the piers. The NTSB investigation may result in a federal law requiring dolphins or other protection around bridge piers.

How does it come down?! That was a major support! You think the bridge could just levitate on it's own after that?!

@physetermacrocephalus2209

Ай бұрын

Im suprised it didnt float either. I thought things floated on water.

@robertleonard4995

Ай бұрын

Simple physics, 150,000 ton ship Hits support for bridge, bridge falls down..

@lspdfrgod

Ай бұрын

@@physetermacrocephalus2209. Are you a special ed? IT IS A HEAVY ASS BRIDGE plz go back to science class and physics

@drtaz2012

Ай бұрын

The leg which collapsed was a structure holding bridge up. With a massive ship hitting that old or new won't last a massive impact

@goldensun7702

Ай бұрын

Look at that monstrosity of a ship. I'd have been surprised if the bridge didn't fall after that massive hit.

This reporter is asking a structural engineer about the ship losing power is like asking doctor what kind of car he drives.

@johng4093

Ай бұрын

Very likely an expensive car.

@ceasetheday87

Ай бұрын

@@johng4093Actually, being in the parking decks of hospitals, a lot of doctors drive modest cars. My guess is it may have to do with massive student debt.

@daves.9479

Ай бұрын

@@ceasetheday87 Unca Joe'll fix that!

What an attack, what a cover up , what an unpunished crime!

This reporter keeps implying structural damage as if the physics of a cargo ship hitting the support of the bridge isn’t enough

@Etatdesiege1979

Ай бұрын

This is what happens when you are cleaning pipes during Physics class.

@queenofzenk

Ай бұрын

sometimes I think they try to ask questions from the pov of an ignorant person so that if such a person is watching, they might become a bit less ignorant.

@frogery

Ай бұрын

@@queenofzenk that's exactly right.

@kindlin

Ай бұрын

@@queenofzenk The way she phrased it tho, her tone, it came off as very obtuse.

@stevengriffin7873

Ай бұрын

Everything has to be blamed on the previous government,standard practice these days.

Wasn't a "Bridge" issue... The Ship ran off course and took out a Main Support leg causing the Entire structure of the Bridge to collapse. Cargo Ships are Massively Heavy. Once set in motion, it will stay in Motion even after the Power is Shut off, a Ship will coast for Miles. Even dropping the Anchors, the ship will Drag them for a long, long time or possibly snap the chains should the anchor snag of something. Think about a Train Engine. They are massive right, 400,000 lbs. 200 tons A loaded cargo ship weighs as much as 1000 Locomotives combined. 400,000,000 lbs that's 400 million pounds or 200,000 tons The weight of 1,000 Train Engines crashing into the Bridge..

With that little margin of error you'd think they would have tugs on it.

do not understand why there were not any ram protections around the bridge piers

@dknowles60

Ай бұрын

the State of Maryland had the Money as it was a toll bridge but the need for better welfare i guess was greater

@joeds3775

Ай бұрын

Wouldn't make any difference

Wonderful we now know nothing more from this interview. 😮

I DO know a little about ships. The reports of the lights going out tells me that either the main or the backup generator failed. Without the generators providing 415vac power, there is no navigation or engine control. You couldn’t raise or lower the anchor either. The radios work on 12vdc so would not be affected. I suspect a faulty generator or associated electrical issue for the loss of control.

1:56, what intrigues me is that many large bridges have their main piers set in heavy duty stone 'mini island 'supports. This bridge does not.

@PRH123

Ай бұрын

What’s interesting is that those electrical transmission towers near the bridge have really substantial protection around their base, it’s visible in the video. But I can’t see any around the piers of the bridge.

@MrowEsor

Ай бұрын

a really old bridge

@Giliver

Ай бұрын

There isn't a bridge on this planet that would survive a 150k ton cargo ship hitting it.

@MNcit

Ай бұрын

But could one be built so that it would?

@kevin-gs7jn

Ай бұрын

I'm sure that the new bridge will have a bumper system around the bases of each support.

It's pretty simple physics, that ship is around 5x heavier than the bridge.

@deanosaur808

Ай бұрын

What is the weight of the bridge? Kilogrammes please! 😅

@ABC1701A

Ай бұрын

Then be grateful it was only a small container ship that hit it. What would have happened if it had been hit by a LARGER MODERN container ship, presumably it would have wiped out the entire bridge instead of just half. When you design and build something like that bridge you ASSUME THE WORST, name that something WILL hit it and you design it so that when that happens the damage done is minimal. They obviously ignored that lesson in engineering school (and dad WAS an engineer, he always said you think of the worst that might happen and design with that in mind - look at Sydney Harbour Bridge, that was designed by an engineer (or group of) who KNEW WHAT THEY WERE DOING and they designed it to largely withstand such a collision - but seems the team designing this bridge either didn't listen or ignored that bit of civil and structural engineering wisdom.

@rexwave4624

Ай бұрын

@@ABC1701A maybe they did, then the bean-counters told them to cut the cost in half.

@larie22

Ай бұрын

​@@ABC1701Aor you could listen to the video... It was designed and built in the 70s when cargo ships were much much smaller...

Current running theory on the Baltimore Bridge disaster; Just prior to impact, an increase in exhaust gasses (thick smoke) was observed; indicating a heavy increase in power and engine loading; likely as the ship was put 'hard-astern'. With single propped propulsion, there is always a yaw component to the ship's course, as the prop causes a 'paddle-wheel' effect, which in turn will cause the ship to yaw clockwise if put hard astern... This effect is useful when manoeuvring alongside the dock/wharf. In this instance, going hard-astern likely caused a yaw to port at the stern, with corresponding yaw to starboard at the bow and directly putting the ship on course for the bridge pylon.

@empress_tru

Ай бұрын

Why would it be doing it in this instance?

There's already a video a guy made showing that that same type boat will still turn even with the lights "flickering".

Obviously a faulty mechanical failure of the ship, but the bridge itself should and could have better protection at the base with more wider support. Also why don't they have tugboats to guide the ship?

@Schaden-freude

Ай бұрын

Tugboats are for alongside berthing and jetty departure. They usually aren't required for exiting the harbor.

@mauriceharting5877

Ай бұрын

@@MaryDurica-kp6wtThat is all fine and well until you have an engine failure.

@geoffreyday7193

Ай бұрын

Normally a pilot who is knowledgeable of the area will come on board to help with navigation through the channels and tugs would be only used for berthing

@mauriceharting5877

Ай бұрын

@@geoffreyday7193As was evident in this case no pilot would be helpful as the engine failed. And get an anchor down would not have given enough time to stop. A couple of tugboats would have saved the bridge! Now they will have to spend millions of dollars to fix the bridge and bridge commuters will have to wait at least 2 years before the bridge reopens.

@davedixon2068

Ай бұрын

one problem in 50 years the risk analysis would say tugs arent needed

The complete collapse after losing one of its legs wasn't such a surprise to me, what was surprising was the initial reporting of a "partial collapse".

@hypsyzygy506

Ай бұрын

The central spans collapsed, most of the approach spans didn't.

@telmas7183

Ай бұрын

Struggle with correct definitions then?!

I could listen to the engineer all day .

The bridge appeared to be made of tinker toys.

We know what happened. The fuggin ship ran into it. Case closed.

@tb45g

Ай бұрын

Well hold on there - how do we know for sure it wasn't the bridge that crashed into the ship??? Did the bridge maybe have alcohol in its system? I'm waiting for the autopsy report before coming to any conclusions...

@dougle03

Ай бұрын

We can all see that the impact directly led to the structural failure, what we need to know is how that structure failed; and we need to know this because there will be other bridges that may also be at risk. HAving one bridge downed by an out of control large ship is poor luck, having another one is verging on negligence.. Lessons will have to be learned, other at risk bridges may have to have strengthening works completed to make them more robust to impacts. So no, not case closed, far from it.

@Vespertilio-Homo

Ай бұрын

I just want to know who I can direct my anger at There must be an evil culprit somewhere. Tell me NOW and don't make it too complicated. /s

@Evan124a

Ай бұрын

@@tb45glmaoooo

@leroy6343

Ай бұрын

Reporter is acting like al-Qaeda blew it up or something

The kinetic energy of a fully laden container ship traveling at 8 knots is more than double the energy of an a320 aircraft flying at cruising speed. It’s a powerful force!

I know nothing about bridges or ships and I think that I could have provided the same answers to these questions. I’m not sure who was less interesting, the interviewer or the interviewee.

Let’s interview a structural engineer and ask him questions about the operations of cargo ships.

You don’t need an engineer to explain this.

@cryora

Ай бұрын

He was only on air for 5 minutes. Pay an engineer, and they might do a full simulation of what happened, and be able to tell you the distribution of forces and stresses on the bridge caused by the ship.

@jetcrews97

Ай бұрын

The great thing is tht this didn’t happen during Rush hr

Gotta love the over the top mock interest the host is showing with her stupid question!

@deanosaur808

Ай бұрын

How do you know it was her question? They normally have earpieces in and are feed questions from her team. It's so easy to blame the person you see on the screen

Dali is propelled by a single low-speed two-stroke crosshead diesel engine coupled to a fixed-pitch propeller. Her main engine, a 9-cylinder MAN-B&W 9S90ME-C9.2[11] unit manufactured by Hyundai Heavy Industries under license, is rated 41,480 kW (55,630 hp) at 82.5 rpm.[2] Her service speed is 22 knots (41 km/h; 25 mph).[5] For maneuvering in ports, Dali has a single 3,000 kW (4,000 hp) bow thruster. Electricity is generated onboard by two 3,840 kW (5,150 hp) and two 4,400 kW (5,900 hp) auxiliary diesel generators.[4]