|
Looking forward to California’s newest lawyer, John Beastman.
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 01:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 07:22 |
|
|
Nick Soapdish posted:https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1773098902272573471?t=11krTLYWniYza_k6F6AqWw&s=19 RIP in piss, bozo
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 02:23
|
|
|
His last act of bipartisanship: bringing the country together to dunk on him one last time
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 02:48
|
|
|
Milo and POTUS posted:His last act of bipartisanship: bringing the country together to dunk on him one last time
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 03:35
|
|
|
How do you even begin to un-gently caress something like this? Send people up with welding torches to start hacking off sections? Giant cranes to drag the wreckage away?
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 07:15
|
|
|
Nuclear Tourist posted:How do you even begin to un-gently caress something like this? Send people up with welding torches to start hacking off sections? Giant cranes to drag the wreckage away? It's the only way to be sure.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 07:22
|
|
|
Nuclear Tourist posted:How do you even begin to un-gently caress something like this? Send people up with welding torches to start hacking off sections? Giant cranes to drag the wreckage away? Ctrl + z.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 08:25
|
|
|
It really is an awesome picture in the ye olde sense. Just unbelievable to see
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 08:53
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:Crossposting an informative post from the OSHA thread on the bridge and protections thereof. Sweet, I was hoping someone was going to do this. Pier protection systems are not my area of expertise.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 09:48
|
|
|
Man you know port procedures post-impact are absolutely going to have triple tugs excorting every cargo vessel through that narrows and into the actual bay from now on. I'm kinda a bit shocked that they indeed just let the ships go once they got into the beginning of the channel, with how narrow the passage between the bridge pylons was. Safety regulations are written in blood.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 10:00
|
|
|
SquirrelyPSU posted:Sweet, I was hoping someone was going to do this. Pier protection systems are not my area of expertise. A retired former chief engineer on these types of ships for this company also weighed in on. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 12:22
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:A retired former chief engineer on these types of ships for this company also weighed in on. Yikes
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 14:27
|
|
|
Very unlikely that they tried to use the thruster at that speed. They only work up to three knots or so, I’d expect it would have been offline by that stage of the transit. There’s other things that can cause a blackout, but lightpole can probably expand on that better than I. Edit: shipowner confirms crew members are all Indian (plus the American pilots) so yeah, the rumours the captain is Ukrainian are false. https://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/2024/Mar/27/baltimore-bridge-collapse-racist-online-attacks-on-indian-crew-of-mv-dali FrozenVent fucked around with this message at 15:43 on Mar 28, 2024 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 15:25
|
|
|
Usually the mates leave the thruster on for awhile even if it won't do anything but if it was on they would have hit it I would guess. Theres an interlock on them though that requires x # of generators for it to come online and certainly not with the EDG so it would have tripped at the first loss of power and they wouldn't be able to get it back without probably 3 DGs. Root cause is like throwing darts at a wall and I don't really feel like speculating plus NTSB will have a very clear idea of what happened soon. Im assuming they have Kongsberg and it will have a list of alarms and events that should be pretty traceable even if the crew try to stonewall. My friends are currently speculating that going astern caused the bow to kick over and if they had just maintained an ahead been they would have cleared the bridge. I'm not critical of anyone in that situation making the decisions they did though, there was no time for anything except pure panic and fear. In that harbor its protocol to drop the tugs before the bridge. lightpole fucked around with this message at 15:48 on Mar 28, 2024 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 15:45
|
|
|
One of my friends wrote this up: So, some thoughts on this mega disaster in Baltimore, from a Marine Engineer (me) who worked on ships very similar to this one. This is written for those of my friends who don't have any knowledge of this industry and how a ship like this works, and what happens when they lose propulsion. What we know from the video (webcam video going around) is that the ship lost power completely once, some lights came back on and then it went black again. Not a good sign, means they had a major problem in the engine room that was taking a lot time to rectify. This could have been human error or equipment error, the USCG/NTSB/CLASS-NK investigation will show. 2 things to understand about a ship like this (containership with a slow speed diesel engine). 1. When the ship goes totally BLACK, they lose propulsion completely. The main engine is a large, slow speed diesel with 55,000+ horsepower, it is directly coupled to the shaft, meaning if it turns, the shaft and propeller turn. This engine (MAN-B&W 9S90ME-C9.2) is a massive thing, 3 stories tall, 9 cylinders, 90 centimeter (35 inches) bore per cylinder This engine has 3 shutdown parameters: 1. Low Lube Oil Pressure 2. High Cooling Water Temperature 3. Overspeed When the main electrical bus loses power, the main lube oil pumps shut down, and the main engine shuts down AUTOMATICALLY to protect it from catastrophic failure. There is no workaround, it does this automatically. So, when the power went out, all propulsion was lost. The steering gear, i.e. the big huge rudder, is operated by a hydraulic power pack system, with 2 redundant hydraulic pumps. 1 of these pumps is powered from the main electrical panel, and the other is powered by the emergency switchboard which in turn is powered by the Emergency Diesel Generator. 2. When the power was initially lost, steering was likely also shut off at least momentarily. Once power is lost to the main bus, the Emergency Diesel starts up automatically and then puts power to the Emergency Switchboard, which would in turn give power to the Emergency steering pump. This COULD allow the bridge to operate the rudder in an emergency, provided all of that worked as designed and the bridge watch was cognizant of this and did everything they were supposed to do. HOWEVER, with the main engine shut off, and the ship slowing down, the rudder would offer less and less actual steering. See, the rudder relies on water flow over it's surfaces in order to swing the rear end end of the ship from side to side. Think of it as a huge airplane wing, vertically in the water. When water flows over the rudder, it "lifts" the rear end end of the ship whichever direction it's pointed away from. No propeller spinning, no water flow over the rudder, no "lift", no steerage. So, as the ship lost main propulsion, the bridge watch may have been operating the rudder, but without the propeller spinning, they might not have had any actual way to steer the vessel, and the ship would then be at the mercy of the elements: water currents and wind. In the Engine Room, the Engineers were frantically trying to restore power to the Main Switchboard so that they could restart the Main Lube Oil Pumps, and other equipment and get the Main Engine started immediately. There was likely a cascading effect of equipment failures that they were dealing with, and they simply couldn't restore power in time for whatever reason. So the ship was completely at the mercy of the elements, did not have a tug escort, and just so happened to ALLIDE (a collision is between two moving ships or boats, an allision is between a moving ship and a stationary object) with one of the two main pylons of this bridge which was, for reasons I don't yet understand, built like a house of cards. The main pylons have no shear support to speak of, and are not protected by these large wooden fendering structures which are designed to protect the bridge support from being destroyed by an allision by a ship. I do not understand why this bridge didn't have the fendering built around them, like all SF Bay Area bridges have installed. Photos: 1. MV Dali 2. My photo of the FSK Bridge taken 2022 from a ship passing underneath 3. photo of the SF/Oakland Bay Bridge concrete and wood protective fendering structure which has saved the bridge from collapse multiple times. M/V DALI Flag: Singapore Built: 2015 Length 299.92 m (984 ft 0 in) Beam 48.2 m (158 ft 2 in) Draft 15.03 m (49 ft 4 in) Depth 24.8 m (81 ft 4 in) Main Engine: Qty (1) MAN-B&W 9S90ME-C9.2; 41,480 kW (55,630 hp)
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 15:53
|
|
|
Yeah that could be (re propeller walk turning them into the pillar) but I’m not sure it would have that marked an effect at that kind of speed. The lateral impact is greater the lower your longitudinal speed. NTSB already made a release of a timeline based on the VDR so it looks like they’re moving pretty fast.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 15:53
|
|
|
lightpole posted:In that harbor its protocol to drop the tugs before the bridge. Yeah I know it's protocol to drop the tugs before the bridge, but, that protocol will likely change in the future for traffic flowing through that part of the channel. Sure it's more expensive to have the tugs supporting further out, but if it prevents another bridge collapse in the future, it's likely worth the tugs. The damage done to the national economy due to blocked ships and increased difficulty of getting hazmat to the port is huge next to the price of the tugs escorting a vessel an extra mile or so. orange juche fucked around with this message at 16:49 on Mar 28, 2024 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 16:46
|
|
|
SBF got 25 years for the FTX poo poo, feds wanted 40-50. Should hold up on appeal so he ain't going anywhere for a long time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 16:51
|
|
|
orange juche posted:Yeah I know it's protocol to drop the tugs before the bridge, but, that protocol will likely change in the future for traffic flowing through that part of the channel. Sure it's more expensive to have the tugs supporting further out, but if it prevents another bridge collapse in the future, it's likely worth the tugs. The damage done to the national economy due to blocked ships and increased difficulty of getting hazmat to the port is huge next to the price of the tugs escorting a vessel an extra mile or so. FV would know better but I'm uncertain how much a tugs can do. Maybe enough to avoid that strike. Most of the emergency actions available like possibly using the bow thruster or dropping the anchor are simply performance at that point. The real solution is not to have that failure at that point. Before departure I've done full check on steering gear, EDG, main engine, rolled all the DGs and have spare capacity online etc. Trying to control the failure or plan for it at that point is a losing game because it shouldn't get close to that point. Its literally too late to act, it probably takes more time just to get in position than they had. Edit: I've freely admitted to being extremely uptight and there are good reasons for it. lightpole fucked around with this message at 17:10 on Mar 28, 2024 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 17:03
|
|
|
lightpole posted:FV would know better but I'm uncertain how much a tugs can do. Most a tug might have been able to do, if it was a real big tug, would have been to turn the ship a bit and slow it down. To keep slower they would have had to have multiple tugs tow her deadship through the span and uh… that’s a whole other set of complications. At some point, you’ve got 120k metric tons going at 7.5 knots, it’s going to keep going. Edit: to give an idea of scale, the ship is 300 meters long, at 7.5 knots it’s going to take 78 seconds to go past a point. So imagine trying to turn that as it’s going by. FrozenVent fucked around with this message at 18:11 on Mar 28, 2024 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 18:07
|
|
|
I take umbrage with the way he seems to blame the bridge. The bridge was designed adequately for the time it was built. That ship is much larger than the bridge was planned for, and uh, wtf do you think is gonna happen?
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 18:53
|
|
|
bulletsponge13 posted:I take umbrage with the way he seems to blame the bridge. The bridge was designed adequately for the time it was built. That ship is much larger than the bridge was planned for, and uh, wtf do you think is gonna happen?
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 19:40
|
|
|
TBH the bridge science is the part of the NTSB report I’m most looking forward to.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 19:47
|
|
|
0125 to 0129.30, 4.5 minutes. Thats not enough time to do anything.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 20:00
|
|
|
lightpole posted:0125 to 0129.30, 4.5 minutes. Thats not enough time to do anything. poo poo yourself, slam buttons frantically, punch the deck officer
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 20:17
|
|
|
Disagree, if the bridge is continuously being exposed to substantially greater than the expected hazards then someone has hosed up and a reevaluation of safety and retrofit is necessary. If it was reevaluated and found safe then either a standard needs to be changed or someone needs to lose their stamp. If it was found too expensive to retrofit then budget allocations need fixing and maybe some politicians should be made to wear that albatross. There's no case where the bridge side of the equation doesn't deserve some fault and scrutiny.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 20:39
|
|
|
Sweden made an odd choice of music for the ceremony in Brussels. https://twitter.com/TheTrekCentral/status/1773327617694847309
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 20:43
|
|
|
pygmy tyrant posted:Disagree, if the bridge is continuously being exposed to substantially greater than the expected hazards then someone has hosed up and a reevaluation of safety and retrofit is necessary. If it was reevaluated and found safe then either a standard needs to be changed or someone needs to lose their stamp. If it was found too expensive to retrofit then budget allocations need fixing and maybe some politicians should be made to wear that albatross. There's no case where the bridge side of the equation doesn't deserve some fault and scrutiny. I want to live in this hypothetical world
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 20:44
|
|
|
i feel it's somewhat important to remember that this bridge opened in 1977. it was nearly 50 years old
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 20:48
|
|
|
Zamujasa posted:i feel it's somewhat important to remember that this bridge opened in 1977. it was nearly 50 years old This is my big point I've been making on Social Media. It's an antique. It was built state of the art and for boats like 40% smaller. I doubt many contemporary bridges bridges built at the same time could take a similar hit, but I'm not a bridgeologist. This is one of those weird things for me, because I used to stare at that bridge and day dream, watching ships from far away instead of paying attention to class.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 20:55
|
|
|
The golden gates bridge is 86 years old.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 20:56
|
|
|
Zamujasa posted:i feel it's somewhat important to remember that this bridge opened in 1977. it was nearly 50 years old im sure all the public officials from 1977 are very concerned about the impact that skimping on the river crossing will have on their ongoing political careers
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 20:57
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:The golden gates bridge is 86 years old. Brooklyn Bridge is still slaying at one hundred and forty.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 21:00
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Brooklyn Bridge is still slaying at one hundred and forty. I'm sure they built it to withstand being rammed by a sailboat.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 21:05
|
|
|
facialimpediment posted:SBF got 25 years for the FTX poo poo, feds wanted 40-50. Should hold up on appeal so he ain't going anywhere for a long time. But the man who is too smart for chess told me that this exact thing would not happen. https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1591822387267665921
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 21:18
|
|
|
pmchem posted:im sure all the public officials from 1977 are very concerned about the impact that skimping on the river crossing will have on their ongoing political careers I was thinking more that someone should check if MDOT ever sent Hogan a memo about bridge safety but it's also worth pointing out that a public official in 1977 with an ongoing political career is the current president. I am also aware that I have totally unrealistic standards
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 21:31
|
|
|
psydude posted:I'm sure they built it to withstand being rammed by a sailboat. River monitors are no match for the brooklyn bridge
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 21:32
|
|
|
The Brooklyn Bridge could withstand anything that Robert Fulton threw at it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 21:35
|
|
|
IMPORTANT NEWS: Uganda made wrestling great again. Lord White got what was coming to him. https://x.com/SGWug/status/1773081312158449865?s=20 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4ztrdCBIOU
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 21:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 07:22 |
|
|
pygmy tyrant posted:I was thinking more that someone should check if MDOT ever sent Hogan a memo about bridge safety but it's also worth pointing out that a public official in 1977 with an ongoing political career is the current president. Hogan's not going to win the Senate race, but at the same time even the most hardened MD Democratic partisan will begrudgingly admit that he ran a perfectly cromulent administration.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2024 23:45
|
|