[NomadSK]

Originally Posted by Gansan

But still, that bridge went down like a pack of cards. Won't there be protection around the pillars when bridges are built across shipping lanes?

I had the similar question going on and I found out that the pylons of the bridge were actually protected by the dolphins.

Looks like the container ship still found the "maze way" to hit those pylons. Interesting to know how different scenarios can happen during an accident.

PC - Google.

[Rodie09]

Originally Posted by navigator_ravi

2. Anchors were deployed before the collision which reduced the speed to 7-8 kts. Normal harbour transiting speed is usually 10-12 kts of container ship.

That speeds you mention as normal look too high to me. As an ex marine engineer on VLCCs, I have done many passes in such channels - specially golden gate bridge. I am not a navigator but for VLCCs 13 knots is ocean going speed, 16-18 is max speed. If you are saying ships ply at 10-12 knots under pilotage through such channels, that's quite a risky thing in first place and I still doubt. But you being a navigator, I won't debate on that further. Alot can go wrong at that speed. If my memory serves right from 15-17 years back, a cautious speed in such channels would be 5 knots or less.

[Old_Salt]

I see a lot of queries regarding the speed. Adding some screenshots from one of the videos. She attained a max speed of 8.7kts in the channel and around 1.5kts just prior collision.

The 4 dolphins protecting the structure of the bridge are visible on the chart and Dali managed to miss them.

There are submarine cables on either side of the bridge and luckily the anchor which was dropped has not damaged any cable, else communication /power would have also been affected.

[navigator_ravi]

Originally Posted by NomadSK

Joe Biden hails Indian crew for Mayday warning.

I know in our industry, for SPM's (Single Point moorings) anchored to the sea bed, VLCC's arent allowed to come closer to the structure and are moored to SPM with mooring lines far away from the port structure. Due to this, The ship gets adequate draft and the structures at the port are safe in worst case scenarios, also oil spill in case of any disaster can be timely controlled. Even tug boats are readily avilable, Fail to understand what was the fail-safe concept being utilised for such bridge crossings. Why no pilot tugs escorted the ship till bridge crossing was done, this should have been a regular/normal procedure if a comprehensive "risk analysis" was done.

Any inputs from mariners .

Availability and assistance by tugs are enforced by port administration. Don't know the exact maritime regulations of Baltimore port. Along with this, shipping is very high cost business with tugs facility costing between 7k-15k$(approx) even more in developed nations and during night time. So if a ship wants tug services in an area where they are usually not enforced, quite a lot of eyebrows will be raised. Its a double edged sword for the Master and these are decisions for which he earns his bread & butter. Hope you get the gist.

Risk assessment was surely carried out on the ship and the risk of collision with bridge must have been low with the application of safe measures and counter measures out of which the most important would have been proper functioning of the critical navigation and machinery equipments. A proper pre-departure checking and testing should have been carried out along with regular maintenance as per manufacture/company standards. At the end of the day, these are machineries which may fail even after doing all the maintenance. I just pray that the crew onboard followed all the procedures and did their duties efficiently as its usually the ship's crew were the buck stops. I would dread to be in shoes of the Captain and Chief engineer of MV Dali in the current scenario.

[bhp-obsessed]

With so much damage to the ship's hull, and the impact it took, I am amazed at how the ship is still stable and floating. The engineering of the ship is a modern marvel.

[Thad E Ginathom]

I noticed the cable areas on the chart, and immediately thought of anchors! But looking at the photos, the upstream cables seem to be overhead, and those structures at water level seem to be part of the protection for their poles. Navigators: do the markings on the chart indicate submerged cables or overhead ones?

Here's one for you guys too. There is a missing dimension that we are never going to find in the world's land-based media. Do you guys have access to the tidal/set/drift information for that time? Would you very kindly check it out and publish it here?

People are suggesting protective barriers. With what does one stop a hundred thousand tons? Solid rock, itself embedded in the earth is the only thing I can think of. I don't think it can be done in concrete and steel without being impractically enormous.

[MyLife_MyCar]

I’m wondering what might have happened before the first blackout? We are just looking at the footage between the first blackout and the moment the vessel hit the bridge.

Were there problems with the vessel before that?? If no, how’s it possible for authorities to stop the traffic on the bridge so quickly after the pilot declared a mayday. Kudos to the crew and the people who were able to stop the vehicle movement on the bridge on time.

[navigator_ravi]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

I noticed the cable areas on the chart, and immediately thought of anchors! But looking at the photos, the upstream cables seem to be overhead, and those structures at water level seem to be part of the protection for their poles. Navigators: do the markings on the chart indicate submerged cables or overhead ones?

Here's one for you guys too. There is a missing dimension that we are never going to find in the world's land-based media. Do you guys have access to the tidal/set/drift information for that time? Would you very kindly check it out and publish it here?

People are suggesting protective barriers. With what does one stop a hundred thousand tons? Solid rock, itself embedded in the earth is the only thing I can think of. I don't [i]think/I] it can be done in concrete and steel without being impractically enormous.

1. The upstream cables are submarine power cables and the downstream are submarine oil/gas pipelines.
2. The Baltimore port had ebb tide during the collision time as could only access the tidal information from internet. So most probably the current was from astern( can only speculate)
3. Anchors used in conjunction with astern propulsion are the only way to stop the vessel quickly in emergency provided the vessel speed is not high(less than 5-6 kts)

[BlackBeard]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

I noticed the cable areas on the chart, and immediately thought of anchors! But looking at the photos, the upstream cables seem to be overhead, and those structures at water level seem to be part of the protection for their poles. Navigators: do the markings on the chart indicate submerged cables or overhead ones?

Here's one for you guys too. There is a missing dimension that we are never going to find in the world's land-based media. Do you guys have access to the tidal/set/drift information for that time? Would you very kindly check it out and publish it here?

The symbols adjacent to the bridge on either side are of submarine power cables & pipelines (gas/oil).

Will this suffice? Times are in LT not UTC (Z)


Are you sure you aren't an active/ex-employee of the NTSB or MAIB-UK or a subject matter expert?

[maddy42]

Originally Posted by inner_roadster

The cargo ship responsible for the fall of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore had a history of mishaps, one of which occurred in the port of Antwerp, Belgium, in 2016.When it struck a wall in Antwerp's harbor, the construction workers were thrown into the water.

Independent experts should investigate how a ship leaves the port once trained professionals have determined that it can sail safely.

Other aspects of the bridge's safety, such as the lack of pier protection to withstand the crash, must also be investigated. In addition, it is vital to reevaluate and assess the structure of such types of bridges in order to determine the hazards and the engineering evaluation.

The 2016 incident is almost a decade ago and would have had a totally different crew on board it, so we are just equating one incident to another.

A detailed investigation will definitely be carried out in this case as it involves a major damage to both the ship and the bridge and someone will have to pay a lot for this incident as its a lot of loss of life too.

[Naztone]

So my 2 cents

1) A container ship this size will have between 3 to 6 Aux Engs (Power Generators).

2) Systems are designed and maintained such that, even if 1 generator fails another will start and come online automatically
(However systems do fail both on ships and on land, am sure we have experienced even the best maintained car or bike suffering gremlins at times).

3) Incase this does not happen and there is a complete blackout, the emergency generator will come on load within 45 secs and supply power to only the critical equipment.

4) From videos posted online, the Emergency genny did its job well, unfortunately she lost power again. Which points to a issue in the power distribution and balance system - just a wild guess.

5) The containers loaded on deck act as a sail and effect of wind is amplified due same. Further there will also be currents.

6) It is possible that a rudder command was given to keep the vessel in the channel - if power was lost just after this it would be impossible to center the rudder and in the 45 secs she would begin to develop a strong turn.

7) With big ships once they begin to turn it takes an equal amount of time to stop the turn. Handling such monsters is a art in itself which is also why 2 pilots, at least 1 of whom will be a very senior and experienced pilot.

8) Being a container she would also be equipped with thrusters - but these are not usually powered by the emergency generator and are effective at only speeds less than 5kns.

9) Also allow some crucial seconds for the guys in charge to communicate, know the cause and take action.

10) Anchors are always ready during such transits, but like someone here correctly said they are only designed to stop a stopped ship from moving in moderate weather conditions.
It's is commendable that the team onboard could drop the speed to 1.5kn,but that's still a whole lot of momentum.

10) Usually all harbours and river transits have established safety protocols that are almost always complied with especially in US, Europe and the better developed parts of the world. This is based on the experience of what has gone wrong in the past and not just in that port. IMHO Here it is surprising that standby or escort tugs were not mandated - it is a question that will now be asked in a lot of ports with bridges.

11) Only the investigation will give the whole story and the US transport board usually does a petty decent unbiased job.

12) Saving grace is that the Mayday call went out and saved lives.

13) The guys onboard especially the senior management are in a very difficult place now.

14) Since the managers and staff are Indian let's say a prayer that they followed due process. As everything is going to be checked super thoroughly.

[Turbanator]

Per WSJ, there were local harbor pilots in command.

The Dali was less than half an hour into a 27-day journey to Sri Lanka under the direction of a pair of local harbor pilots when it lost power and went completely dead, according to an officer onboard.

https://www.wsj.com/us-news/baltimor...test_headlines

[adi.mariner]

Originally Posted by NomadSK

I don't want to digress here, but wanted to know, if our own recently inaugrated Mumbai Trans harbour link (Atal Setu) allows for the VLCC's or large carriers to cross underneath it.

As far as I know, the JNPT Jetties are on the other side of the Atal Setu. The ships do not need to cross under the Atal Setu. However quite a lot of Offshore Supply Vessels, other small vessels transit below the Atal Setu. I am sure this requirement would have been considered prior to building the Bridge. I am not sure about any protection to the legs of the Bridge in case of a collision (nothing is visible in the water near the pillars).

[Thad E Ginathom]

Originally Posted by BlackBeard

Are you sure you aren't an active/ex-employee of the NTSB or MAIB-UK or a subject matter expert?

That might be the nicest thing anybody ever said about my efforts at amateur seamanship!

I think I mentioned "never sailed anything bigger than 44 ft." I was a yachtsman only, and that only in coastal waters. ie my "navigation" would be more correctly termed pilotage. I never owned a boat: friends and I used to charter, a couple of times a year for a week or two, and weekends. I did, in the end, get promoted to skipper! I also sailed weekends with a friend who lived on his boat at Ipswich, and crossed the North Sea with him a couple of times, visiting Jeroen's mother country.

My longest passages as skipper were Falmouth to Channel Islands. I used to row, at Richmond, River Thames, hiring a wooden skiff. Most people go out for an hour or two: I would go for half a day. Just pottering, no sporty stuff, but a friend and I once did 22 miles round trip in a full day!

No, absolutely no expert at all. Just a guy who loved messing around in boats, and who sometimes dreamt of bigger stuff. And all this was in 1980s, so I am very, very rusty.

I dropped it because of a period of ill health that lasted a few years. When the health was fixed, I'd found other ways of spending weekends.

I am awed, spending time with you professionals and learning from you all.

[Earthroamer]

Originally Posted by mygodbole

On a different issue, why so much of brouhaha on an incident on a distant shore?

Drive safe

Because of the sequence of the incidents related to international politics. ISIS attack on Russia, now this are something viewed as proxy attacks on superpowers by many. These sort of incidents would make many nations take much more polarized stance which would lead to something like cold war or maybe even WW3.