|
They have rescued some people, at least. https://twitter.com/cnnbrk/status/1772578325329854936
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 12:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 06:59 |
|
|
Used to work at the base of that bridge. Hard to overstate how much traffic and shipping will be hosed by this. I can't imagine the response will be anything but an all-hands GET THAT PORT ACCESS CLEARED from the feds but the bridge itself will take years to replace no matter what
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 12:11
|
|
|
Another view showing the minute before the crash. A bunch of cars made it off of that section before it got hit, at least. https://twitter.com/uncutversion123/status/1772568496477704274 Not a Children posted:Used to work at the base of that bridge. Hard to overstate how much traffic and shipping will be hosed by this. How long does it take to install a temporary bridge to span the bay there? That's what they used when they reconstructed the Rt. 40 bridge over the Patapsco a decade ago.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 12:18
|
|
|
Fuschia tude posted:How long does it take to install a temporary bridge to span the bay there? That's what they used when they reconstructed the Rt. 40 bridge over the Patapsco a decade ago. Don't think this is an option here because it's a much longer span and I believe those temporary bridges were supported by the existing bridge structure
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 12:22
|
|
|
Not a Children posted:Don't think this is an option here because it's a much longer span and I believe those temporary bridges were supported by the existing bridge structure There are also alternative routes via the 95 and 895 tunnels and going the northern way around, you could even drive through downtown Baltimore and down to get through, They might as well tear down the remaining posts and do a whole rebuild or put in yet another tunnel to replace it and increase the size of the ships that can go through.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 12:27
|
|
|
Not a Children posted:Don't think this is an option here because it's a much longer span and I believe those temporary bridges were supported by the existing bridge structure There's still a whole lot of existing bridge structure; only the suspension section in the middle collapsed. The first step will have to be determining if they're still structurally sound though
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 13:35
|
|
|
Fuschia tude posted:Another view showing the minute before the crash. A bunch of cars made it off of that section before it got hit, at least. Ship definitely looks like it completely lost power before impact, strange.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 13:55
|
|
|
Good thing shipping companies have absolutely enormous liability coverage. I kind of doubt they'd be able to get the cost of a replacement bridge - probably they'd just get the depreciated value of the old one. Better than nothing, though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 14:31
|
|
|
cat botherer posted:Good thing shipping companies have absolutely enormous liability coverage. I kind of doubt they'd be able to get the cost of a replacement bridge - probably they'd just get the depreciated value of the old one. Better than nothing, though. Insurance is gonna ask if they’re sure the bridge just didn’t happen to fall at that exact same moment.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 14:33
|
|
|
cat botherer posted:Good thing shipping companies have absolutely enormous liability coverage. I kind of doubt they'd be able to get the cost of a replacement bridge - probably they'd just get the depreciated value of the old one. Better than nothing, though. The liability seems functionally infinite to me. What is travel across that bridge worth to Baltimore every day? How much is each lost day of traffic worth? Cost to replace may be the least of it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 14:38
|
|
|
Two things. The bridge carried ALOT of traffic daily. It's one of the major harbor crossings and a heavily used commuter line. The other is that it carried a lot of traffic(various cargo/volatiles/etc) that couldn't use the tunnel crossings instead. I'm guessing most of that traffic is now detoured a considerable distance west now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 14:56
|
|
|
Someone a lot more knowledgeable about pilots/shipping than me will need to chime in, but because the boat was under command of the harbor pilot at that point, is the shipping company even liable?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 15:07
|
|
|
fridgraidr posted:Someone a lot more knowledgeable about pilots/shipping than me will need to chime in, but because the boat was under command of the harbor pilot at that point, is the shipping company even liable? I imagine that could depend on whether the loss of power (and steering?) was caused by improper or insufficient maintenance.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 15:18
|
|
|
Speaking as an engineer, i don't really think a temporary bridge is feasible if they want to get the port re-opened and i think re-opening the port will probably be the priority. But yes it'll be years before another bridge comes up. The simple span parts held up but the reason they have a truss in the middle is because they need more room between the supports to let boats through and trusses are a lot better over long spans.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 15:20
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:The simple span parts held up but the reason they have a truss in the middle is because they need more room between the supports to let boats through and trusses are a lot better over long spans. Because otherwise you run the risk of a ship striking one of the supports, you see.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 15:24
|
|
|
Fuschia tude posted:I imagine that could depend on whether the loss of power (and steering?) was caused by improper or insufficient maintenance. Yeah, they're going to have to determine exactly what happened to the ship before they can start figuring out who's liable and who pays for it Rust Martialis posted:Because otherwise you run the risk of a ship striking one of the supports, you see. Obviously the next one should just run across the whole harbor with no supports
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 15:24
|
|
|
Retro42 posted:Two things. The bridge carried ALOT of traffic daily. It's one of the major harbor crossings and a heavily used commuter line. The other is that it carried a lot of traffic(various cargo/volatiles/etc) that couldn't use the tunnel crossings instead. I'm guessing most of that traffic is now detoured a considerable distance west now. By mileage going the other way around the city, for traffic that is just passing through the state on 95, is actually shorter, but the general traffic congestion on the north/east sides is a lot worse.  Wasn't able to find a source that had numbers on all the harbor crossings from the same year but in 2015 the tunnels had about 193,000 average daily traffic, and the bridge had about 31,500 at an unspecified date. So it's bad but probably not as bad as it could be. Most of that 31,500 can take the tunnels instead, but for the local traffic that was just going from one side of the bridge to the other it's actually a significant detour to go up towards the city, through the tunnel, and back down. Large trucks and hazmats that are prohibited from using the tunnels are going to have to go all the way around though. Or take surface streets (40/1/2/295), which are technically an option that might even be faster in certain traffic conditions. Well, maybe not the hanover street bridge. The port is far too important for the channel to stay blocked for very long. I'd be surprised if it takes more than 6 weeks to clear the channel, and it could probably be done in half that long. There's even equipment nearby that is almost certainly going to be employed. https://www.thebaltimorebanner.com/community/transportation/baltimore-key-bridge-collapse-shuts-down-port-UWTGE4KLJ5HUXDX2OTEETMW3EY/ quote:Before shipping can resume into and out of the port, crews will need to pull debris out of the water and clear the 50-foot-deep channel that ships use, said William P. Doyle, a former director of the port who now heads the Dredging and Marine Construction Association of America. haveblue posted:Obviously the next one should just run across the whole harbor with no supports The actual channel isn't all that wide, most of the bay is like 10-15 feet deep and there wouldn't be a port at all if they didn't keep the channel dredged.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 15:28
|
|
|
haveblue posted:Yeah, they're going to have to determine exactly what happened to the ship before they can start figuring out who's liable and who pays for it The front fell off.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 15:29
|
|
|
Rust Martialis posted:The front fell off. Is that very typical? https://twitter.com/betsy_klein/status/1772629372421238927 Seems like it could've been way worse, I'd be interested to know how many cars they stopped Non-bridge related, conservative twitter is in open civil war because the Babylon Bee posted an article that was essentially the "where is your chin" joke from Preacher. https://twitter.com/paulmrenfro/status/1772627759673524567 zoux fucked around with this message at 15:37 on Mar 26, 2024 |
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 15:34
|
|
|
Trevorrrrrrrrrrrrr posted:Ship definitely looks like it completely lost power before impact, strange. It’s distressingly common. Decades ago as a cadet a containership vessel I was on lost power under the Golden Gate Bridge. The engineers onboard did not find that to be an abnormal event. The original skyway in Tampa came down from a similar collision. cat botherer posted:Good thing shipping companies have absolutely enormous liability coverage. I kind of doubt they'd be able to get the cost of a replacement bridge - probably they'd just get the depreciated value of the old one. Better than nothing, The liability policy will almost certainly have followers. I’d think all the big underwriters will have exposure. Plus I’d bet the vessel owners declaring general average too. Hieronymous Alloy posted:The liability seems functionally infinite to me. What is travel across that bridge worth to Baltimore every day? How much is each lost day of traffic worth? Cost to replace may be the least of it. Generally consequential losses are excluded by policies. Bar Ran Dun fucked around with this message at 16:33 on Mar 26, 2024 |
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 16:24
|
|
|
Bar Ran Dun posted:
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 17:05
|
|
|
zoux posted:Is that very typical? From the videos it definitely looked like traffic was slowing down a bit before the accident, there were still cars on the bridge but they seemed to be getting fewer.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 17:31
|
|
|
watch Stringer Bell start a war
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 18:04
|
|
|
"Well, it's unfair if we just give Trump a sweetheart deal. Gotta help the smaller, salt-of-the-earth crooks too!" https://www.texastribune.org/2024/03/25/ken-paxton-plea-deal-securities-fraud-felony/
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 18:23
|
|
|
That Paxton deal leaked the other day and they might as well have just dropped the charges with how much of a joke that ‘deal’ is
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 18:33
|
|
|
Yeah, I'm real mad about it myself. Especially since he's going to go out of his way to flout the requirements of the deal because apparently the guy just likes to shove his lawlessness in our faces. https://twitter.com/DylanByers/status/1772672463790547271 Good, and also, lol. Even Chuck Todd joined the rebellion. https://twitter.com/TVNewsNow/status/1771913094257594809 zoux fucked around with this message at 19:25 on Mar 26, 2024 |
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 19:20
|
|
|
Mildly amusing that this is the time people on NBC drew the line on hiring of some shithead
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 19:47
|
|
|
To be fair, "lied in furtherance of a conspiracy to overturn valid election results" seems like a reasonable place to draw a line.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 20:53
|
|
|
zoux posted:Yeah, I'm real mad about it myself. Especially since he's going to go out of his way to flout the requirements of the deal because apparently the guy just likes to shove his lawlessness in our faces. i suspect alot of people in the media(reporters, anchors/journalists/some manegment) rightfully hate the GOP and all that poo poo but the dipshits at the top keep trying because they think "this time, no no, this time, we will get fox views".
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 20:55
|
|
|
SCOTUS took oral arguments on the 5th Circuit's* ruling banning mifepristone, and everyone except the two you'd expect were baffled by it. https://twitter.com/mjs_DC/status/1772641995359457447 https://twitter.com/steve_vladeck/status/1772713200691069132 The legal commentators I follow tend to be pretty circumspect about divining things from oral argument tea leaves but today everyone is saying the case is cooked.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 21:07
|
|
|
The 5th Circuit is honestly an embarrassment to the entire judiciary
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 21:08
|
|
|
Bar Ran Dun posted:Plus I’d bet the vessel owners declaring general average too. Hoo boy there's a complex subject
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 21:31
|
|
|
zoux posted:SCOTUS took oral arguments on the 5th Circuit's* ruling banning mifepristone, and everyone except the two you'd expect were baffled by it. SCOTUS/smart GOP judges wants awful poo poo but they prefer to nibble around the edges of stuff for years/decades until either they defacto win or can finish what they want off with some support. the issue is the 5th circut are a bunch of true believer nut jobs who want to have their big revolutionary chud win from the bench and then give no cover for the poo poo at all. the 5th keeps forcing their hands because they think this poo poo is deeply supported and will just be declared the winner. Dapper_Swindler fucked around with this message at 21:41 on Mar 26, 2024 |
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 21:39
|
|
|
If the federal government threw all of its weight behind rebuilding/replacing that bridge in Baltimore, how quickly could it get done? I'm curious what the quickest possible turnaround would be with current tech. I assume in our current political landscape, it will take significantly longer if it gets done at all.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 21:53
|
|
|
In the case of the I-35 bridge collapse in MN, it happened on August 1 2007, and the replacement bridge was opened 13 months later. Seems like it was a lot smaller than the Key bridge though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 22:04
|
|
|
Seven Hackers Associated with Chinese Government Charged with Computer Intrusions Targeting Perceived Critics of China and U.S. Businesses and Politicians Defendants Operated as Part of the APT31 Hacking Group in Support of China’s Ministry of State Security’s Transnational Repression, Economic Espionage and Foreign Intelligence Objectives quote:An indictment was unsealed today charging seven nationals of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) with conspiracy to commit computer intrusions and conspiracy to commit wire fraud for their involvement in a PRC-based hacking group that spent approximately 14 years targeting U.S. and foreign critics, businesses, and political officials in furtherance of the PRC’s economic espionage and foreign intelligence objectives.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 22:13
|
|
|
Blind Pineapple posted:If the federal government threw all of its weight behind rebuilding/replacing that bridge in Baltimore, how quickly could it get done? I'm curious what the quickest possible turnaround would be with current tech. In WWII they were able to construct bridges across rivers that could handle tanks in half an hour. Granted those bridges weren't required to also allow shipping, and I doubt they're as wide as the bay span, and it was using equipment already prepared for that purpose, but stuff can be built fast. There's lots of tons of steel in a hazardous and unstable configuration with dangerous currents that need to be removed first, too. If cost was no obstacle and no effort was spared while still doing it safely I think it could theoretically be done in a few months. More likely I expect they get a survey done in a few weeks, they clear a narrow channel that allows partial operation in a month or two, and clear it out completely after a year. It'll probably take another year or two for a replacement bridge to be completed, assuming no holdups.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 22:36
|
|
|
The closest analog I can think of is the Tampa Skyway bridge collapse back in 1980. Similar incident of a ship taking out a support and collapsing a huge chunk of the span. Construction on the replacement started in January 1983 and took until the end of April in 1987 to re-open. Bizarrely enough the reopening ceremony was delayed when a shrimp boat lost control and hit the new bridge's protective bumpers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 22:46
|
|
|
Quantum Cat posted:The closest analog I can think of is the Tampa Skyway bridge collapse back in 1980. Similar incident of a ship taking out a support and collapsing a huge chunk of the span. Construction on the replacement started in January 1983 and took until the end of April in 1987 to re-open. Bizarrely enough the reopening ceremony was delayed when a shrimp boat lost control and hit the new bridge's protective bumpers. loving Forest Gump gets has to show up in everything, man.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 22:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 06:59 |
|
|
Quantum Cat posted:The closest analog I can think of is the Tampa Skyway bridge collapse back in 1980. Similar incident of a ship taking out a support and collapsing a huge chunk of the span. Construction on the replacement started in January 1983 and took until the end of April in 1987 to re-open. Bizarrely enough the reopening ceremony was delayed when a shrimp boat lost control and hit the new bridge's protective bumpers. I'm also curious what kind of timeline is there to clear the debris and reopen the harbor. Unless it's changed I'm fairly certain every major port (and all the docked ships) in the Baltimore area are locked behind that bridge debris until it's cleared.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2024 23:10
|
|