Also In The News - part 3

[st albans fox]

I’m no engineer but I’d have thought this doesn’t look like the best design whereby the whole bridge collapses when one support struck ??.

 

[ClaphamFox]

11 minutes ago, moore_94 said:

 

So it should have gone through the middle but hit the support pylon instead. All ships that sail through Baltimore Habour have to be steered by an officially-licenced local pilot, so it seems likely this was basically human error, albeit on a massive scale.

 

The only positive - if it can be called that - is that this occurred at a time when there were likely far fewer people on the bridge than would have been the case during the day.

 

 

 

Edited 26 March 2024 by ClaphamFox

[StanSP]

56 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Not bad  but perhaps a little too soon ……

Get away with it in the deathlist thread! 

[fox_up_north]

Christ. Whoever chartered that ship must be bricking the inevitable litigation coming their way.

[Guesty]

It might not be human error. You can see on the longer video all the lights on the ship go out a couple of times before it hits. They must have been having power issues.

 

No power = no steering. Which means it goes where the current and wind takes it. Even if the steering/power does come back, you can't just turn those things immediately.

 

Surprising that a 1.6 mile bridge over a river collapses so quickly when hit by a boat.

 

Edit: 29 seconds in all the lights go out.

 

Edited 26 March 2024 by Guesty

[MPH]

5 minutes ago, fox_up_north said:

Christ. Whoever chartered that ship must be bricking the inevitable litigation coming their way.

 

it appears everything was running normally until a few moments  just before they reached the bridge where it suddenly went off course and smoke started rising above it. 
 

possible engine failure?

 

 

search is underway for 7 missing people..

Edited 26 March 2024 by MPH

[Lionator]

Invasion of Singapore incoming 

[Jattdogg]

That is horrible. Hope they find anyone who fell in the water.

[Finnegan]

2 hours ago, st albans fox said:

I’m no engineer but I’d have thought this doesn’t look like the best design whereby the whole bridge collapses when one support struck ??.

 

 

I mean it's not like it got bumped by a tug to be fair. 

 

[Trav Le Bleu]

1 hour ago, Lionator said:

Invasion of Singapore incoming 

Which tinpot competition have we entered now?

[st albans fox]

1 hour ago, Finnegan said:

 

I mean it's not like it got bumped by a tug to be fair. 

 

True but elf and safety …. If cargo ships of that size are using the waterway then the bridge needs to be judged based on what could happen ???

[Detroit Blues]

What a horrible tragedy. Imagine driving on a bridge at night that suddenly collapses, plunging your vehicle hundreds of feet into icy black water. I can't imagine there's any survivors.

[Zear0]

38 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

True but elf and safety …. If cargo ships of that size are using the waterway then the bridge needs to be judged based on what could happen ???

Theoretically, the bridge could get hit by a comet and you wouldn't expect to have to demonstrate reliability through withstand assessments to consider that hazard.

 

Hazard analysis, specifically credible failure modes, is a relatively new methodology that the designers wouldn't have worried about in the 70s.  That bridge will have been designed to a structures code to justify the loads it would be expected to carry.  Also, as it got whacked from the side, lateral loads (outside of wind) are somewhat negible in the assessments so it's seen a very extreme event and that's why I'm not surprised to see it collapse like a house of cards.

 

Whilst we're bound by the ALARP principle of design, it's very very rare that "old" designs are brought up to modern standards in any industry.  "elf and safety" against "cost benefit"...guess which wins, particularly in the US?  Ed Norton's speech about car recalls in Fight Club was painfully accurate.

Edited 26 March 2024 by Zear0

[fox_up_north]

A friend works in law, specifically for some big (ish) companies and failure of product is factored in. His is mostly white goods but a lot of the time they do cursory checks of a customer before paying out. They don't bother to fight it because there's an element of "they can't all be good".

[st albans fox]

20 minutes ago, Zear0 said:

Theoretically, the bridge could get hit by a comet and you wouldn't expect to have to demonstrate reliability through withstand assessments to consider that hazard.

 

Hazard analysis, specifically credible failure modes, is a relatively new methodology that the designers wouldn't have worried about in the 70s.  That bridge will have been designed to a structures code to justify the loads it would be expected to carry.  Also, as it got whacked from the side, lateral loads (outside of wind) are somewhat negible in the assessments so it's seen a very extreme event and that's why I'm not surprised to see it collapse like a house of cards.

 

Whilst we're bound by the ALARP principle of design, it's very very rare that "old" designs are brought up to modern standards in any industry.  "elf and safety" against "cost benefit"...guess which wins, particularly in the US?  Ed Norton's speech about car recalls in Fight Club was painfully accurate.

You make reasonable points which should have led to systems being put in place such that the vessel being off course to this degree would have delivered alarms for those who may be on the bridge and signed warnings for those about to enter onto the bridge ??  Would this have been prohibitively expensive?  I wonder how the insurance liability stacks up against the operator of the bridge for those who have sadly perished 

 

 

[Super_horns]

Obviously sad if anyone has died but thank goodness this wasn't at a busier time.

[MPH]

29 minutes ago, Zear0 said:

 

 

Whilst we're bound by the ALARP principle of design, it's very very rare that "old" designs are brought up to modern standards in any industry.  "elf and safety" against "cost benefit"...guess which wins, particularly in the US?  Ed Norton's speech about car recalls in Fight Club was painfully accurate.

 

 

I think this may come across as a bit harsh.... I don't believe the U.S has developed any kind of reputation for sub standard building designs...

[Dunge]

Well, I didn’t have “North Korea censors Alan Titchmarsh’s trousers” on my daily news bingo card.

[Wymsey]

 

 

[kenny]

3 hours ago, Zear0 said:

Theoretically, the bridge could get hit by a comet and you wouldn't expect to have to demonstrate reliability through withstand assessments to consider that hazard.

 

Hazard analysis, specifically credible failure modes, is a relatively new methodology that the designers wouldn't have worried about in the 70s.  That bridge will have been designed to a structures code to justify the loads it would be expected to carry.  Also, as it got whacked from the side, lateral loads (outside of wind) are somewhat negible in the assessments so it's seen a very extreme event and that's why I'm not surprised to see it collapse like a house of cards.

 

Whilst we're bound by the ALARP principle of design, it's very very rare that "old" designs are brought up to modern standards in any industry.  "elf and safety" against "cost benefit"...guess which wins, particularly in the US?  Ed Norton's speech about car recalls in Fight Club was painfully accurate.

Disproportionate collapse was added to the Building Regulations after the Ronan Point collapse.

 

As you have identified, certain events ie planes crashing into buildings, big f*** off ships crashing into piers means a collapse is considered reasonable. Whereas a small speedboat causing the collapse would not be considered reasonable.

[David Hankey]

2 hours ago, Wymsey said:

 

 

"Every little helps",

[Wymsey]

No real surprise here..

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-68637136

 

[Parafox]

7 hours ago, Guesty said:

It might not be human error. You can see on the longer video all the lights on the ship go out a couple of times before it hits. They must have been having power issues.

 

No power = no steering. Which means it goes where the current and wind takes it. Even if the steering/power does come back, you can't just turn those things immediately.

 

Surprising that a 1.6 mile bridge over a river collapses so quickly when hit by a boat.

 

Edit: 29 seconds in all the lights go out.

 

Also, the traffic seems to have been stopped either end of the bridge some time before the collision. As if the was a pre-alert of some sort.

[RowlattsFox]

14 minutes ago, Parafox said:

Also, the traffic seems to have been stopped either end of the bridge some time before the collision. As if the was a pre-alert of some sort.

Not sure what timescale they had but it's pretty amazing bridge could be closed to traffic so quickly, even if traffic was probably minimal at this time.

 

Saw the footage earlier of the collapse and assumed it was a AI thing, couldn't believe it was real. 

Edited 26 March 2024 by RowlattsFox

[Fox in the North]

5 hours ago, Super_horns said:

Obviously sad if anyone has died but thank goodness this wasn't at a busier time.

Agreed, the loss of life would have been unthinkable had that been rush hour.