Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: srt101fan
Page: <<prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 372 next>>
Mar 28, 2024 19:39:20   #
Longshadow wrote:
Isn't it interesting that a suggested alternative is perceived as a contrary so many times?

Back to my favorite word here-
Perception....


Reread his comment, Long. It wasn't a "suggested alternative".....
Go to
Mar 28, 2024 14:18:14   #
dbrugger25 wrote:
You can be sure of several things. There will be an "investigation" that will take one to two years.

Competent people could complete it in a few days, but that is not how our government works.

The clearing of the wreckage should begin immediately but it won't. It will probably take months to clear at least one shipping channel. Again, remember that the people in charge don't care about the interrupted commerce.

The bridge could be rebuilt quickly. They already have all the engineering data. That won't happen because idiots are in charge. It will probably take years and the Democrats in charge will blame the whole thing on Republicans. If Republicans were in charge, they would blame Democrats. God forbid that they would all understand the importance of working together to just get it done.

Meanwhile, billions of dollars of commerce and inconvenience will be imposed on the thousands of commuters and businesses that rely on the use of the bridge and the port of Baltimore.
You can be sure of several things. There will be a... (show quote)


I agree with SuperflyTNT. He gave you a good response:

https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-803079-9.html#14536864
Go to
Mar 28, 2024 14:13:04   #
robertjerl wrote:
The specs I found only mentioned the bow thruster.


I was going by the markings put on the sides of a ship to show the location of thrusters. I thought I saw a photo of the Dali that showed such a marking near the stern of the ship. I can't find that picture now so I could well be mistaken.
Go to
Mar 28, 2024 12:59:12   #
pendennis wrote:
No it wouldn't. Dropping the bow anchors brings a whole new set of problems with a ship of that mass and length. An emergency anchor was dropped, but that's akin to dropping a fishing line and hook and hoping it catches on some weeds.

Dropping the anchor will require power to the winches and windlass gear. Time is also a factor.


They did drop one of the bow anchors. You can see the anchor chain on some of the photos.
Go to
Mar 28, 2024 08:45:01   #
jerryc41 wrote:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/science/2024/03/27/dirty-fuel-baltimore-key-bridge-collapse/


Of course that could have been a cause or contributing cause.

I just object to the dogmatic way some people rush to judgment. It's sadly emblematic of so much of our discourse on vitally important national issues.
Go to
Mar 28, 2024 08:26:02   #
Canisdirus wrote:
The ship lost power completely...because of...dirty fuel.

It's an ongoing racket...here at home. They fill up and get 80% good fuel and then they mix in 20% of garbage fuel...and charge the same.

Has zero to do with the crew...the ship probably choked when they dropped their rpm's...and they could not get it started again.


Oh, good! We have another expert answer. No need to waste money and time on any further investigations....
Go to
Mar 27, 2024 21:55:01   #
veralisa296 wrote:
Here's one of my florals, hope you enjoy them!


I love it!
Go to
Mar 27, 2024 20:03:04   #
robertjerl wrote:
I just found some info on the "Dali", it is a Hyundai built in South Korea and does have a powerful bow thruster but when the power failed, no thruster. in addition to no rudder control.


It also has a stern thruster. But, as you say, no power, no thruster.
Go to
Mar 27, 2024 18:37:17   #
DirtFarmer wrote:
I am not a marine engineer (my experience is limited to a plastic canoe) and all I know about this event comes from the internet. I have to believe that the pilot who was in charge was experienced (you don't get to be a pilot without experience) and did whatever (s)he could to prevent the ship from going off course. After all, (s)he is answerable to the authorities and his/her future is at stake. Answers will come from analysis of the black box and interviews with the crew as well as the videos of the ship and everything we have seen on the internet. Until then, I have to consider that it's an accident. There may be events or actions that led to the accident but this is not the forum to lay blame. That will be up to the NTSB (or maritime equivalent).
I am not a marine engineer (my experience is limit... (show quote)


Go to
Mar 27, 2024 16:55:17   #
robertjerl wrote:
Yes, even if they had dropped all anchors, fore and aft the ship would have barely slowed and depending on the grip the anchors got on the bottom would have still turned from the straight ahead course - but turned to where???

The ship was pointed to go through the channel under the bridge when the power failed and that anchor got dropped, without the anchor only the currents would have turned it, and it might have made it under the bridge or run aground without taking out the bridge.


I think the NTSB, Coast Guard and Army Corps of Engineers are all making a big mistake; they should come to the UHH forum where they will find all the answers.....
Go to
Mar 27, 2024 16:26:13   #
robertjerl wrote:
And all it did was turn the ship so instead of missing the bridge column, it hit it. Things probably would have gone better without that anchor, as the ship would either have glided under the bridge or run aground near the column instead of taking it out.

Sometimes the best action is to take no action.


Really?....🤔
Go to
Mar 27, 2024 16:19:17   #
robertjerl wrote:
Dropping the anchors would hardly have had any effect on the speed of that large a ship at that speed. It would probably have taken dragging the anchors for miles to bring it to a stop. Anchors are not for stopping ships/boats, they are for place holding when still.

Once while fishing with an uncle the anchor on our 16' John Boat running at slow with an electric trolling motor fell in shallow water, snagged in the mud and spun the boat around so we were going backward from the momentum even with the motor still going in forward. That little John Boat with two adult size men and load of fishing gear kept going until we were had gone 3-4 boat lengths and finally stopped when we came up against a 4' thick tree trunk with the motor hung up in flooded bushes several feet from the tree and dragging the bushes.
Dropping the anchors would hardly have had any eff... (show quote)


They did drop an anchor.....
Go to
Mar 27, 2024 14:39:34   #
don2b2 wrote:
Coming out of my neighborhood, I could always see the Bridge in the distance. A jolt this morning when it was no longer there. This was a photo from some 15 years ago.


Please clarify; is the photo one you took?
Go to
Mar 27, 2024 08:44:11   #
BebuLamar wrote:
The bridge on the ship is taller than all the container. So if it can go thru when empty it can go thru fully loaded.


Thank you for injecting some sanity into the discussion.
Go to
Mar 27, 2024 08:37:38   #
Wallen wrote:
I was watching the security video published last night. The ship did lost light and smoke for about a second just before it hit the bridge.
But was heading for the pillar the whole time, maybe a full 10 minutes before impact, and was moving very fast for such a small navigation space at night.
That bridge and pillars should be clearly marked on their navigation tools and the area would be time to carefully pilot. If my bells are correct, it was intentional.


The ship was apparently going at a normal speed for that area. But you know better?
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 372 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.