Stupide question? Did the bridge really need to collapse? (Page 6): Maybe... Totally different scenario though.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

robertjerl wrote:

In this case, probably, but what if a ship under power just had a rudder failure? Now, many ships in that situation could reverse the screws to help slow faster. But would it be slowed and stopped in time to prevent a collision???

Maybe... Totally different scenario though.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

DaveO wrote:

The bridge was built with the technology available in the 1960's...

Construction began in '72 and it opened in '77, three years before the Tampa Bay bridge collapse due to a ship hitting supports in fog.

Charles Whittier

Anchors drop without power.

RKastner Loc: Davenport, FL

SteveR wrote:

Why weren't there protective concrete pylons in front of each bridge support that would have brought any ship to a stop before actually hitting the bridge supports? Granted, I'm not an engineer, but it seems like common sense.

Actually a Florida structural engineer who's familiar withe Tampa Bay Bridge wondered the same thing. He had mentioned they have concrete diverters that protect the bridge in Tampa and wondered why this wasn't the case in Baltimore, stating "that this shouldn't have happened."

dustie Loc: Nose to the grindstone

robertjerl wrote:

In this case, probably, but what if a ship under power just had a rudder failure? Now, many ships in that situation could reverse the screws to help slow faster. But would it be slowed and stopped in time to prevent a collision???

That, and if that sort of emergency arose without enough space available to swing bow and stern by use of the thrusters, it may still not be possible to avoid contact.
The thrusters' main intent is for positioning into the berth at the dock, for instance, not for primary steering while in forward motion.

These floating, multi-acre man-made bergs of immensity are not able to be turned and stopped like Uncle Remus' weekend party boat on Podunk Puddle Pond.

I'm beginning to think people who have not been around heavy equipment of any sort, see the aerial wide angle photos of Dali at the Key Bridge, and have no idea what the scale of size, weight, maneuvering characteristics are, because the Dali doesn't look like much more than Baby Bobby's bathtub boat in the long range, wide angle views.

dustie Loc: Nose to the grindstone

RKastner wrote:

Actually a Florida structural engineer who's familiar withe Tampa Bay Bridge wondered the same thing. He had mentioned they have concrete diverters that protect the bridge in Tampa and wondered why this wasn't the case in Baltimore, stating "that this shouldn't have happened."

If little concrete stems sticking out of the water were a conclusively, fail-safe solution, only the most demented engineer in the universe would say it is inadequate.

Wal-Mart, Costco, the Sheriff Office, the Courthouse, whoever, has concrete pylons, bumpers, barriers, protectors, whatever, outside the entry/exit doors.
Are those going to prevent every and any possible heavy mass momentum from going right on in through the doors?

kufengler Loc: Meridian, Idaho 83646

RKastner wrote:

Actually a Florida structural engineer who's familiar withe Tampa Bay Bridge wondered the same thing. He had mentioned they have concrete diverters that protect the bridge in Tampa and wondered why this wasn't the case in Baltimore, stating "that this shouldn't have happened."

Do these types of huge cargo ships even go into Tampa Bay?

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

SteveR wrote:

Construction began in '72 and it opened in '77, three years before the Tampa Bay bridge collapse due to a ship hitting supports in fog.

Right, the history is well documented. So 1960's technology was used in the design of the bridge.

kufengler Loc: Meridian, Idaho 83646

DaveO wrote:

Right, the history is well documented. So 1960's technology was used in the design of the bridge.

Check out what cargo ships were like in the 1960's...

https://greekshippingmiracle.org/en/general-cargo-ships-1960-1969/

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

kufengler wrote:

Check out what cargo ships were like in the 1960's...

https://greekshippingmiracle.org/en/general-cargo-ships-1960-1969/

Technology from the 40's and 50's.

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

SteveR wrote:

The Sunshine Skyway bridge incident which killed 3... (show quote)

Those “islands” around the Sunshine Skyway Bridge are great, but it was built after Key Bridge. I wouldn’t be surprised to see a similar design for the replacement since there are similarities, especially both having a 1200’ central span.

BobHartung Loc: Bettendorf, IA

SteveR wrote:

Why weren't there protective concrete pylons in front of each bridge support that would have brought any ship to a stop before actually hitting the bridge supports? Granted, I'm not an engineer, but it seems like common sense.

Every bridge I have ever seen on the Mississippi River has large concrete abutments to prevent them being damaged by wayward barges. The concrete on the collapsed bridge had some concrete but the films clearly show the ship hitting the metal stanchions well above the concrete. Bad design IMHO.

Canisdirus

DaveO wrote:

Amazing how knowledgable half armed (Haha) arm chair quarterbacks can be, particularly with the speculative information available.

You're as uninformed as he is...

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/why-investigators-are-looking-into-dirty-fuel-in-baltimore-bridge-collapse/ar-BB1kEfs8

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

Canisdirus wrote:

You're as uninformed as he is...

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/why-investigators-are-looking-into-dirty-fuel-in-baltimore-bridge-collapse/ar-BB1kEfs8

Lol, you're essentially arguing that all of the speculation on the forum is fact based!

Yeah, you're really informed.

I realize that the internet and news media are all reliable sources. This is frequently commented on.

twowindsbear

MrBob wrote:

Can any Physics gurus here tell us what would stop that much moving mass at the prevailing speed ? I don't think anything short of solid land would do the trick... Your thoughts ?

Solid land would work. Or, an equally massive, equally moving object straight into it ==> <==. Both objects would be damaged, leaving a really BIG mess of broken bits of object. Quite a bit of heat & noise would most likely be released, too. The ship had about 2.7^9 lb/ft of energy at the moment of impact. Irresistible force meets immovable object?

Another post mentioned the added weight of the wrecked bridge forced the bow of the ship lower, causing it to ground itself, stopping its movement. I wonder how BIG the 'hole' in the river bed actually is. Had the ship NOT grounded, the 'roots' of the bridge pier probably would have ripped open the ship's hull, spilling the ship's fuel. What sort of problem would THAT have made?

Sad, too, about the highway construction workers that died. But, what if this had happened at 8:00am or another time when the bridge was full of traffic?