hmmmm....

After recent cyber attacks in USA from China, Ship loses power twice and hits a bridge resulting in its collapse with dozens of cars falling in water in #Baltimore

Detailed video shows the power loss/power recovery along with the collision resulting in #BaltimoreBridgeCollapse pic.twitter.com/wOEnjjAKK8

— INDIA NARRATIVE (@india_narrative) March 26, 2024

Sea Speed said:

---

Seriously? An engineering casualty. They lost the plant.

---

DIESEL LIVES MATTER!!

Sea Speed said:

---

Seriously? An engineering casualty. They lost the plant.

---

I haven't heard that terminology before regarding a mishap. Is that shipping terminology?

Sea Speed said:

---

Seriously? An engineering casualty. They lost the plant.

---

Power failures or plant failures are not typically referred to as a "casualty".

It's usually called, you know, a POWER FAILURE or loss of some system that allows the ship to maintain steering or propulsion.

If you car had a flat tire you would not call AAA and say "I had a tire casualty".

but maybe with ships its different.

User name checks out.

Eliminatus said:

---

New nightmare unlocked.

---

The timing of certain catastrophes are just scary. The people that just happened to be on that bridge at that exact moment. Five minutes either way of them leaving or going a different way changes the outcome of their life. Always so freaky.

I'm so sorry for those that were lost.

agracer said:

---

Sea Speed said:

---

Seriously? An engineering casualty. They lost the plant.

---

Power failures or plant failures are not typically referred to as a "casualty".

It's usually called, you know, a POWER FAILURE or loss of some system that allows the ship to maintain steering or propulsion.

If you car had a flat tire you would not call AAA and say "I had a tire casualty".

but maybe with ships its different.

---

Haha. Yeah maybe with ships that's what it's called. Maybe.

UAS Ag said:

---

Pro Sandy said:

---

Just listened to the governor's update on WCBM.

Ship alerted authorities prior to allision that they had a casualty. Traffic was stopped onto the bridge. It is believed the only victims (2 recovered, one in hospital one out, 6 being searched for) were a work crew fixing potholes.

Bridge was up to code.

All ship traffic in/out of port of Baltimore is stopped.

FBI reported no creditable threat or evidence of a terror attack.

---

They had a casualty? Someone seriously injured or dead?

---

No, propulsion casualty

Iran sank a single cargo container ship in the 80s that I am told almost caused a disaster for the global insurance market. And the ship was small by today's standards and the value of the goods was low relative to say a ship with containers full of iPhones or laptops. Peter Z talked about it in one of his videos and how sinking a modern ship would be world shaking disaster for the insurance industry.

So what will the fallout be this time considering the ship may be afloat (is it, I don't know) but the damage to the bridge, and the follow on damage would seem to be many orders of magnitude greater. Is anyone's insurance going to be on the hook for this? What will that insurance companies underwriters be on the hook for? Does the first insurance company just tap out and file bankruptcy?

agracer said:

---

Sea Speed said:

---

Seriously? An engineering casualty. They lost the plant.

---

Power failures or plant failures are not typically referred to as a "casualty".

It's usually called, you know, a POWER FAILURE or loss of some system that allows the ship to maintain steering or propulsion.

If you car had a flat tire you would not call AAA and say "I had a tire casualty".

but maybe with ships its different.

---

Complete guess.

They had some kind of accident down in the plant area that killed someone. Others panicked and somehow they lost the whole farking thing.

We're talking Indians (dot) here. As soon as you ask them to do anything outside of their little box, they are immediately lost.

The Tappan Zee bridge in NY was maybe similar size (if anything francis scott key is longer) and the that one took 6-7 years to build new, without the added time of removing the old structure.

And it cost like 7 billion dollars....

this was recent.

CDUB98 said:

---

JFABNRGR said:

---

CDUB98 said:

---

Quote:

---

yes, and it's going to be in the billions for sure. but there is no viable alternative.

---

It's impossible to do a bridge of this scale under a billion now.

---

Whats the over under on time to replace?

I am going with 5+ years after award.

---

Opinion only, but 4-5 years to bridge completion and use is not unrealistic. Money could possibly get it down to the 3-4 year time frame.

Oddly, the largest time suck will be the soil/ground investigation and piling/foundation design, likely.

---

When I-35 over the Mississippi River in Minneapolis collapsed in 2007, the replacement was opened less than 14 months later.

It can be done, it just takes more money.

GAC06 said:

---

agracer said:

---

Sea Speed said:

---

Seriously? An engineering casualty. They lost the plant.

---

Power failures or plant failures are not typically referred to as a "casualty".

It's usually called, you know, a POWER FAILURE or loss of some system that allows the ship to maintain steering or propulsion.

If you car had a flat tire you would not call AAA and say "I had a tire casualty".

but maybe with ships its different.

---

Haha. Yeah maybe with ships that's what it's called. Maybe.

---

If you lost an engine, would you declare a casualty?

agracer said:

---

Sea Speed said:

---

Seriously? An engineering casualty. They lost the plant.

---

Power failures or plant failures are not typically referred to as a "casualty".

It's usually called, you know, a POWER FAILURE or loss of some system that allows the ship to maintain steering or propulsion.

If you car had a flat tire you would not call AAA and say "I had a tire casualty".

but maybe with ships its different.

---

Loss of the ship is referred to as a casualty

UAS Ag said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

agracer said:

---

Sea Speed said:

---

Seriously? An engineering casualty. They lost the plant.

---

Power failures or plant failures are not typically referred to as a "casualty".

It's usually called, you know, a POWER FAILURE or loss of some system that allows the ship to maintain steering or propulsion.

If you car had a flat tire you would not call AAA and say "I had a tire casualty".

but maybe with ships its different.

---

Haha. Yeah maybe with ships that's what it's called. Maybe.

---

If you lost an engine, would you declare a casualty?

---

If I was on a ship, yeah

they've been trying to cancel Francis Scott Key for a long time.

CDUB98 said:

---

Sea Speed said:

---

Seriously? An engineering casualty. They lost the plant.

---

DIESEL LIVES MATTER!!

---

Shane Diesel?

I've worked around the US surface navy at times.

Yes "casualty" is a common term for an engineering issue. From a 2016 article on the USS Zumwalt

"The biggest and most technologically advanced destroyer in U.S. naval history, the 16,000-ton next generation guided-missile destroyer USS Zumwalt, has suffered an engineering casualty during preparation for at-sea trials on September 19, the U.S. Navy said in a statement to USNI News.

The repairs could take up to two weeks, according to the U.S. Navy. "The crew discovered the casualty after detecting a seawater leak in the propulsion motor drive lube oil auxiliary system for one of the ship's shafts," the statement reads."

Original article:

https://thediplomat.com/2016/09/us-navys-new-stealth-destroyer-suffers-engineering-casualty/

Look at the positive they can now rename the new bridge the george floyd but seriously prayers for those affected.

Bruce Almighty said:

---

agracer said:

---

Sea Speed said:

---

Seriously? An engineering casualty. They lost the plant.

---

Power failures or plant failures are not typically referred to as a "casualty".

It's usually called, you know, a POWER FAILURE or loss of some system that allows the ship to maintain steering or propulsion.

If you car had a flat tire you would not call AAA and say "I had a tire casualty".

but maybe with ships its different.

---

Loss of the ship is referred to as a casualty

---

Quote:

---

I learn something new every day...

Marine casualty or accident means
(a) Any casualty or accident involving any vessel other than a public vessel that
(1) Occurs upon the navigable waters of the United States, its territories or possessions;
(2) Involves any United States vessel wherever such casualty or accident occurs; or
(3) With respect to a foreign tank vessel operating in waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, including the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), involves significant harm to the environment or material damage affecting the seaworthiness or efficiency of the vessel.
(b) The term "marine casualty or accident" applies to events caused by or involving a vessel and includes, but is not limited to, the following:
(1) Any fall overboard, injury, or loss of life of any person.
(2) Any occurrence involving a vessel that results in
(i) Grounding;
(ii) Stranding;
(iii) Foundering;
(iv) Flooding;
(v) Collision;
(vi) Allision;
(vii) Explosion;
(viii) Fire;
(ix) Reduction or loss of a vessel's electrical power, propulsion, or steering capabilities;
(x) Failures or occurrences, regardless of cause, which impair any aspect of a vessel's operation, components, or cargo;
(xi) Any other circumstance that might affect or impair a vessel's seaworthiness, efficiency, or fitness for service or route; or
(xii) Any incident involving significant harm to the environment.
(3) Any occurrences of injury or loss of life to any person while diving from a vessel and using underwater breathing apparatus.
(4) Any incident described in 4.051(a).

---

Seriously had never heard that terminology regarding a mishap...but I'm in the aviation industry.

Quote:

---

Posts like this are the best part of these tragedies. People with no clue weighing in with their uneducated opinion. Glorious.

---

That's why I keep saying prefacing with "guess."

Today I learned that casualty can mean an engineering failure. Good to know.

But, the engineering side of things, I'm pretty close the mark simply because of my career.

I have heard of the terminology "casualty" used to refer to dead engines or systems before. In aircraft and in ships or vessels.

It is another way of referring to a system that is rendered out of service due to some problem that has occurred, similar to saying it is dead due to the event aboard the vessel that caused whatever problem occurred and can no longer be relied upon to solve the problem.

A lot of these big container ships have just 1-2 huge engines for efficiency and if they go, there is a near immediate loss of control without thrust in the direction of travel.

A lot of bridges are now designed and built with protection for pylons or support structures adjacent to shipping channels but this hasn't been retrofitted to many older bridges.

I think the only political angle on this is the forced fuel changes.

"Shippers Fear Engine Failures as Industry Forced to Upgrade Fuel"

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-11/shippers-fear-engine-failures-as-industry-forced-to-upgrade-fuel

Pro Sandy said:

---

Just listened to the governor's update on WCBM.

Ship alerted authorities prior to allision that they had a casualty. Traffic was stopped onto the bridge. It is believed the only victims (2 recovered, one in hospital one out, 6 being searched for) were a work crew fixing potholes.

Bridge was up to code.

All ship traffic in/out of port of Baltimore is stopped.

FBI reported no creditable threat or evidence of a terror attack.

---

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/03/26/us/baltimore-bridge-collapse

Quote:

---

. . .
The ship's crew notified authorities that they had lost power shortly before it struck the bridge, Gov. Wes Moore of Maryland said.
. . .
Officials were searching for six members of a road repair crew who had been working on the Francis Scott Key Bridge, which is part of Interstate 695, when it collapsed, said Paul J. Wiedefeld, Maryland's transportation secretary.

Two others had been rescued; one of them was in the hospital, Mr. Wiedefeld said, adding that the authorities did not think any drivers were submerged in their cars.

Mr. Moore said that after a mayday call was made ahead of the collapse, workers stopped cars from continuing onto the bridge, a rapid response that he credited with saving lives. "These people are heroes," he said.
. . .
The ship is a 948-foot-long cargo vessel named Dali. The owners of the vessel, a Singapore-flagged ship, said it hit a pillar of the bridge around 1:30 a.m. All crew members, including two pilots onboard, have been accounted for and there were no injuries on the ship, the owners said. Maryland officials said the crew was still onboard.
. . .

---

Well leave it to the local idiots to turn a very good information based thread with good learning points inseted by people who actually have direct knowledge into the ins and outs of this type of vessel, into a total crapshow as usual.....

NTSB is launching a go team to investigate the collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore. Media briefing to be held later today at a time and location TBD, which will be announced on this feed.

— NTSB Newsroom (@NTSB_Newsroom) March 26, 2024

NTSB Chair Jennifer Homendy will brief the media today at 12 p.m. ET on the NTSB investigation of the collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore. The briefing will be at the media staging area in Dundalk, Maryland. pic.twitter.com/EXigstvKPH

— NTSB Newsroom (@NTSB_Newsroom) March 26, 2024

The NTSB chair only goes with the Go Team when it is something extremely serious, although I wish they'd send someone else. She is not a very good public speaker, and the board member's job is to be the liaison between the Go Team and the media.

Foreverconservative said:

---

Well leave it to the local idiots to turn a very good information based thread with good learning points inseted by people who actually have direct knowledge into the ins and outs of this type of vessel, into a total crapshow as usual.....

---

New here?

Rapier108 said:

---

NTSB is launching a go team to investigate the collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore. Media briefing to be held later today at a time and location TBD, which will be announced on this feed.

— NTSB Newsroom (@NTSB_Newsroom) March 26, 2024

NTSB Chair Jennifer Homendy will brief the media today at 12 p.m. ET on the NTSB investigation of the collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore. The briefing will be at the media staging area in Dundalk, Maryland. pic.twitter.com/EXigstvKPH

— NTSB Newsroom (@NTSB_Newsroom) March 26, 2024

---

Oh, yeah, the gov't is here to help.

C@LAg said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

C@LAg said:

---

notice the smoke as well. it was not previously exiting the top of the boat until after the first power failure.

---

The smoke is likely just exhaust. It appears to be coming from the smoke stack on the stern.

---

that is a reasonable and logical assumption, of course, and 99.9% likely what it is.

but it was not being exhausted for the minute prior to the power outage.

there are no clips (yet) from much more than a minute before the crash to see if this is normal or abnormal based on what was going on at the time.

---

Probably a backup generator kicking on after the first power failure.

The NTSB is probably one of the few government entities I'd say still has some credibility.

somehow this will be used in the election...