March 28, 2024: NTSB B-Roll of investigators aboard the Cargo Ship Dali inspecting hazardous materials and downloading the vessel voyage data recorder in Baltimore, Maryland.
Forth coming? I don’t think you know what transparency looks like. Terrorism was ruled out long before the investigation was even started. Red flag wake up
I am a retired Electrical Engineer with lots of marine generation troubleshooting experience It is pretty clear that the electric blackouts on the Dali will be key to this investigation. The problem with the ships generation is exactly what one would expect from two generators running in parallel ( a USCG requirement in this case) having trouble with their load share setup between the two generators. This load share problem led to the tripouts observed just before the crash. Load share problems are not uncommon in the industry. I have worked on a couple dozen of them. Load sharing is rather complex as both real and reactive load must be shared reasonably equally. To get stable load division both voltage regulators and speed governors must have precise droop curves. Older designs do this electro mechanically but it can be done with digital electronics. Shipboard knowledge is often limited as most ships prefere to run single generator when at sea. This is somewhat long winded but it is a complex subject!
i don't beleive these were tripouts, the main (propulsion and generationg) engine failed. it take a bit to start and transfer over to a backup generator
Ok, back to bed old man! Lol jkjk.. that was a great comment, i know nothing of the subject so its refreshing hearing about it from someone with actual experience .. thanks!
Dont think this is a loadsharing problem as there usually is one large main engine in these cargo ships, it could have been a HT/LT pump not running correctly and tripped off the engine from overheat, there could be fuel problems, there could be lubrication pressure problems and there could be some load problems that caused it to hit overspeed, this is hard to know what actually happened and maybe its a clutch problem as well, there is many systems hanging together and many sensors and backup that usually keeps things in order, but if one of these backup systems or a main fault happens that does not have or has weak backup shuts down it will end in a blackout and the emergency generator kicks in within 30 seconds, the restart happened a few minutes after the blackout and that sounds reasonable and the light flickered again after they switched the power to the main engine(s) from the backup so i think it either is a maintenance problem or a faulty part (mechanical problem) that could not been foreseen.
Agree with Parker who sounds like he been round the block with load sharing !. If the ships 6.3kV had a fault trip then the m/d board is dead and the gen's are doing their own thing, resynchronising the gen sets and getting back on the board without clearing the fault would be unsuccessful as the control system would not accept the fault condition as being safe. Which is what we see. The Chief tried it once and it tripped. If the ship had a bow thruster then that is possibly the cause either insulation or imbalanced loads you don't mess with HV disconnects that say no.. The Chief would then isolate everything prioritising engine control and steering hoping the Critical services board stays up giving him time to re route power around the fault. From what I see he acted smartly. I doubt if the Gen sets were on bunker fuel.
The NTSB are very busy with several investigations happening recently, both in aviation accidents and now this. The 470 people working in the NTSB are not going to get much vacation time this year. Unsung heroes of the industry, making sure these events don't happen again.
It says something about America’s decline. Boeing forgets to tighten the bolts on door plugs and this lousy bridge didn’t even come with a crash barrier at the base of the support towers. This isn’t an “accident”, this is obscene NEGLIGENCE!
@@christopherp.hitchens3902Our congress needs to really make our country great again by fixing and replacing our infrastructure instead of engaging in endless political theater only intended to get re-elected. That goes for the D's, R's and I's all around.
With the thousands of hours of content that has been produced on by many a RU-vid creator, based in large part on NTSB reports, one would think that the NTSB should have well over 100k subscribers and their Silver play button by now. When YT creators base a significant portion of a video off one of the NTSB's reports, they should tell folks to go to the NTSB's channel and give them a thanks or a subscription.
... Now that said, the NTSB needs to step up their content about their reports and follow the examples of the US Chemical Safety Board in providing some really sweet animated summaries of their reports.
@@jeffdragna316 Thumbs up. They deleted my comment because i referenced the HOLOCAUST of WW2. And " what went wrong and who is responsible " ???? Clearly that's always a sensitive issue. Bring on the blame game.
In case anyone is wondering, that "1993" sticker on the chemical container means it could be some unspecified combustible material, some sort of weed or tree killer, or diesel fuel.
Yup, I also looked the code up. The description reads a bit like a catch all, but all the materials described sound unhealthy. It's unlikely it's Diesel fuel, since that has its own code, IIRC 1203. Gasoline is 1202, IIRC. But anything from weed killer to industrial solvents could be in there. (Funny enough, ethanol isn't in that code - it specifies a fairly low mixability with water). Edit: funny: the app I used to look up the code doesn't say anything about Diesel, a web site I checked a bit later does. Sorry for contradicting you.
And so it begins. The long road to answers. The NTSB and the Coast Guard, documenting the damage, and recovering data. The MV Dali is a massive ship. When she lost power, and began to drift out of the channel at around 7 knots, that bridge pylon didn't stand a chance. Her loss of power is the core issue, and that will be explained by this investigation.
Reminds me of the question often asked by many folks after the HOLOCAUST of WW2. *HOW COULD SUCH A THING HAPPEN?* Even though Germany offered its Jews to other nations before beginning to exterminate them. But most of them said NO THANKS. Clearly someone needs to be held accountable . . . both here in reference to the DALI . . . and there back in time.
If it wasn't this ship it would be another. The reason the bridge fell was negligence by the Port Authority in not providing sufficient protection from collision.
And now it has because it was inadequately protected...... Like the others that collapsed in the US from collisions and when they were rebuilt they had protection. Seems someone was rolling the dice and lost and it is going to cost tens of billions to sort but jobs and business will be lost. The Port authority fell short of their responsibility to protect critical infrastructure. @@robertbeacham4314
Even as being an NTSB investigator or member of the U.S. Coast Guard actually onboard the Dali, they still has to be in awe of what they’re looking at…a massive bridge on the bow. I’d still be like wow 😮 Doh !
A big thank you to NTSB for this video. One regret I could use another 30 mins of it. Thank you so much . Thus is going to be the fastest bridge clean up in the history of water cleanup. That bridge held together pretty good. A big crane and some barges tied together hoist all of it out of the wate.. 1 to 2 weeks.
It looks like they will be clearing the port side of the channel first to allow passage to marine traffic while they clear the center and starboard portions. If so, then they might have limited port access within a few weeks. However, the entire cleanup operation will take months not weeks, several very large floating cranes and at least 30 (3 shifts of 10 to run 24/7) highly trained and very expensive demolition divers to cut that huge pile of twisted metal into manageable pieces. That will be very dangerous and painstaking work and the total world labor force of qualified divers is not very large. I wish them safety and success because this is neither easy, safe nor quick work. If the full cleanup is done by the end June I would be amazed.
@@JamesTK As soon as they pull those pieces off the ship and stabilize it, it will be towed back to port. It should be gone in about three weeks. But here's the deal with the bridge debris; just the portion draped across the bow weighs about 400 tons. The largest floating crane on the east coast, arriving tomorrow, has a max load of 100 tons. It will take hundreds of lifts to remove the pieces, and many thousands of man hours to cut it apart into all those pieces. I have known a couple of those demolition divers and they don't make a move till all precautions are in place and conditions are acceptable. They will be the real heroes of this operation and without them it simply cannot be done. They will set the pace and get paid very very well to do so.
I wonder if the VB -10000 will be called in. It has a 6,000 ton lift capability and can cut the bridge into pieces. The VB-10000 was the salvage barge that cut the car carrier (MV Golden Ray) that capsized in Brunswick GA into 8 pieces and lifted those pieces onto barges.
My main take away from this video is that government employees plugged a USB stick into a potentially hostile computer, then plugged it into a government issued laptop. Then dot gov wonders why their stuff is getting hacked all the time, brilliant.
@@ShowNoMercy234 How is that not obvious to you? It is unknown. Therefore, it is potentially hostile and should not be connected to until tested and deemed safe. (Unless that is built in to the laptop's operating system.)
@@mre6227-uk4zo actually no it is not. They usually put it in sealable holds, so that in the event of an emergency they can flood the hold with inert fire fighting gasses and water, then seal the hold to deal with any other problems
I can just see people now…”oh the ship wasn’t up kept. There’s rust everywhere.” Unless the ship is brand new or CONSTANTLY being tended to like cruise ships. Ocean going vessels will have some degree of rust. It’s unavoidable. Sea spray is extremely corrosive and causes the rust you see. It’s just like cars in northern states. They’re extremely rusty because of the road deicing salt that’s put down.
Hopefully those in the confined spaces were using gas monitors, to detect any flammable and other gas concentrations, just in case of a sealed compartment that has either CO or CO2 levels that are high, or a flammable gas leaking in it.
I hope the harbor Pilot, will be more helpful, cause in my ship collision, in New Orleans 1978, the NTSB report blamed the "River Pilot"! We hit an Oil Tanker.
Did your ship lose power? It is very different responsibility for a power failure leading to collision and and a vessel still under control colliding with something.
Why do the NTSB investigators go in there more or less unprotected (without respirators or masks) when there have evidently been chemical spills and possibly releases of hazmats near the bow of the ship?
There seem to be talk on social media, about this Container Ship, having circle breaker issues? Directly because of the number of "Reefer - Boxes" onboard, keep tripping the vessels electric circuit breakers. That is all the time, plus this has been going on for some time too, maybe since before the Container Ship arrived in the Port of Baltimore too! Or it is to do with the high number of Refrigeration Shipping (10ft, 20ft, 30ft and 40ft long) Containers, that have been loaded onboard this Container Ship too, more than this vessel's electrical system can or could handle maybe safely? So has been tripping the vessel's onboard electrical Circuit Breakers, all the time and for at least 48 hours before. The Container Ship left the Container Terminal dockside, in the Port of Baltimore too? Also not only was the Container Ship Captain and Chief Engineer, plus all the crew onboard aware of this, so was the Ship's Owners and Shipping Operators too! As well as the Port of Baltimore Authorities Officials, also the Container Terminal Management too. Were equally aware of this information too, with some asking and the suggesting now too. This Container Ship, should not have been allowed, or given official permission to sail. Until this Circuit Breakers issue, had been fully addressed and resolved plus corrected and repairs had been officially sign off on too. The Container Ship was safe to go to sea, that is under her own power too? Which makes you wonder if anyone told the NTSB investigators about this, or has these NTSB investigators found this out for themselves too. Or the NTSB officials, will now be looking into this Electric Circuit Breakers issues onboard this Container Ship too? Because if there is a Circuit Breaker issue on this Container Ship, also proper repairs have not been carried out too? Then there should still be a Circuit Breaker Issue, onboard this Container Ship now happening as well? If the "Reefer's" onboard were causing the Electric Circuit Breakers to trip, then someone trip to share the loading across different Ship's electrical supply Circuits. All they could have done is expose other onboard electrical supply circuit breakers, to equally start tripping too. There by causing a ship wide electrical blackout, as seem to have happened on this Container ship. Before the Container Ship colliding with this bridge piers and support columns, or caused the collision to happen! As a direct result of a ship wide blackout, from these tripped Circuit Breakers connected to "Reefer's" onboard. So causing total loss of power to ship's propeller, also the Ship's rudder plus the Ship's bow side thrusters too!
@ 1:44 Thermal imaging shows 90 degrees. @ 2:34 and 2:52 Can anyone read the label on the black drum? @ 2:48 Badly damaged drum. @ 3:27 Something flammable in the tank. @ 4:37 and 5:03 to 5:41 Leaking liquid.
2:34 some number+letter code ; can't make it out though enough (MW4 [...] 2[]1) 2:54 I think it's "MW26(orB?)26L 7&(or2?)1" "U CT Shaghai 7 of 8C) [...] USA"
I have a difficult time understanding and believing that they are surveying leaking haz mat containers without wearing haz mat protective clothing. There are chemicals such as organophosphates where a few drops on the skin can be fatal. Earlier videos corrosives and flammables were mentioned as being among the cargo. Also, they are going into confined spaces and not wearing filter respirators or self-contained-breathing-apparatus.
But they're carrying detectors that are supposed to warn them if anything is in the air. Edit: I do agree with you. That 1993 substance code shown at 3:26 indicates required PPE including independent air supply and chemical resistant outer garb in case of a spill.
The fact that the Dali is still afloat and not resting on the bottom of the shipping channel is a testament to Korean shipbuilding. I wonder where the crew is? Are they still onboard? Did they evacuate them and put them up in a hotel during the investigation? Is anyone remaining silent as not to incriminate themselves?
As a container ship, it is carrying everything imaginable, and in an accident situation it is absolutely in danger of fire that destroys everything The law says: 49 CFR § 176.76 - Transport vehicles, freight containers, and portable tanks containing hazardous materials. [....] (3) For a flammable cryogenic liquid being transported in a cargo tank, the elapsed time between the loading of the cargo tank and the subsequent unloading of the cargo tank at its final destination may not exceed the marked rated holding time (MRHT) of the cargo tank for the cryogenic liquid being transported, which must be displayed on or adjacent to the specification plate. (4) Portable tanks, cargo tanks, and tank cars containing cryogenic liquids must be stowed “on deck” regardless of the stowage authorized in § 172.101 of this subchapter. Cargo tanks or tank cars containing cryogenic liquids may be stowed one deck below the weather deck when transported on a trailership or trainship that is unable to provide “on deck” stowage because of the vessel's design. Tank cars must be Class DOT-113 or AAR-204W tank cars. [....] (i) A cargo transport unit packed or loaded with flammable gas or flammable liquid having a flashpoint below + 23 °C transported on deck must be stowed “away from” possible sources of ignition. In the case of container ships, a distance equivalent to one container space athwartships away from possible sources of ignition applied in any direction will satisfy this requirement.
Surprised how there is almost zero rust on those bridge beams. With the state of bridges in this country, looks like this might have been one of the few really well-maintained ones. The ship however. Barely 10 years old, and it's got lots of rust and bubbling paint. They clearly weren't keeping it well maintained.
Thanks for sharing, if you could post more daily it woukd be appreciated. Also, if you cannot include the sound for security reasons, could you at least edit in some soft background music? Thanks again!
So, the NTSB's roll in this accident is to only investigate and publish its findings of why the ship collided with the bridge pier. The structural failure of the Key Bridge investigation will be conducted by the US DOT or MD DOT then, correct?
It's a bunch of bureaucratic red red tape with all these government agencies dilly-dallying and dragging their feet. Other countries would have that ship moved out of there by now and rebuilding the bridge. I'm calling it now, it will be 8-10 years before a new bridge is built.
Not sure how deep a dive NTSB will do on bridge. The bridge was built to the code in 1970 and hasn’t been updated since. Incident is similar to Sunshine Skyway Bridge collapse in Tampa Bay Florida that was hit by a freighter. The building standards were updated in 1980s to include protection of bridge footings, apparently Baltimore didn’t see a need or didn’t have funds to retrofit the bridge with a protection scheme. New bridge will take advantage of over 40 years of advancements in the industry. Assume new bridge foundation will be well away from shipping channel. Take a look at the new bridge that was opened last year in port of Long Beach, CA
@@fullraph Seems the major contributing factor is lack of adequate protection for the bridge piers. The adjacent transmission lines have better protection. Also, a tugboat escort out would have helped greatly.
I just love NTSB don't mess around thay take care of business.ijust love how that used there there phone to take pictures.looks like everyone's taken pictures theses days.
It's very likely they were skipping on backup generator maintenance and monthly scheduled generator load test events, to save money. Then the power fails and whoopsie, the untested and unprepared emergency generator is unable to do its job. Such a shocking development, who could have foreseen this, etc.
Well there's your problem The ship was made by Hyundai no wonder the engine shut off. 😂 But in all seriousness you guys are doing a great job keep up the good work
Hyundai has been making ocean-going ships for a long time. I bet they're pretty good at it. That they also make cars and refrigerators is a quirk of Korean industrial history. I remember when LG was Lucky Goldstar and made the cheapest TVs and appliances, and now they make the best TVs. Moral: you can't do linear thinking when Koreans are involved. They'll blindside you with world-class performance when you're laughing about their intentionally disposable stuff.
@@colchronic "Hyundai Beats Everyone as Value Impacts Perceived Quality, According to Strategic Vision's 2023 Total Quality Awards" It appears the anecdotes aren't borne out by the statistics. PS that 709 next to the (Hyundai) Genesis in the table is its TQI score and is the highest on the page by a lot. It's not a prestige brand, but it probably should be.
The amount of just dumb, unserious, shallow, ignorant, and useless comments under this NTSB B-Roll is embarrassing. I get irritated reading many of them…
This is going to take months, or years, to clear up.Having other vessels either stranded in port, or waiting to enter port, and perhaps without enough fuel to reach an alternative destination, is not good for any operator. And the pilots will be unemployed during this period.
In bound ships will be diverted to other ports. Cargo on ships that are stuck there will likely get offloaded and transferred to another port where it can be reloaded onto other ships. The port will be closed for as long as it takes to clear the shipping channel, but hopefully that can happen fairly quickly. I'll agree this will put a hurt on everyone who's job is related to port operations, but the longer term impact will be on everyone who regularly used that bridge until it can be rebuilt.
That's what I thought while watching this video. They look like amateurs to me. This is a forensic investigation. I would think there would be lots and lots of high-resolution images of everything that could be seen, not just snapping photos as you walk around with a flashlight. It is better to have the images and not need them than to need them and not have them.
Probably used hazard ⚠️ materials detection equipment first-possibly drones and/or robots etc to determine if such was needed prior to actually boarding and inspecting it.
I hope this truly is only B roll because I know damn well in 2024 they are not using point and shoot low quality cameras when a Leica BLK 360 or Trimble scanner exists and can create point clouds with higher resolution imagery to also create 3D models from. I’d want my B roll to look like I brought all the tech out to get to the bottom of an investigation. I do have confidence in the team though 🙏
Yeah there's no need to 3D model this. They just want to document what broke on the boat. Probably overkill at this level and a phone camera video would be plenty.
@@blairhoughton7918 I disagree and in the latest NTSB conference they literally stated that they need to capture as much detailed evidence they can because it is “perishable” and as a transportation engineer that actually works at this campus where this occurred and working in GIS I can’t fathom them not wanting to make a digital twin of this incident. I’ve looked at some of their other videos and although very thorough with many SME’s and analysis i just feel like it could be better. Even the drone I saw was the standard DJI Phantom from another vid. Why not give them the latest and greatest to perform the best investigative process that they can
@@NoHarmDunn As someone who's written software for digital twins in another realm, I can't see the value on that expense here. No bridge will ever be built like this again. This one did its job until an event occurred that it was never designed to tolerate. The value will come from building the new bridge with proper fenders for the speed and size -- and shape -- of ships passing under. Nothing to twin here because the fenders didn't even exist. Spend the money where it will do some good.
@@blairhoughton7918 we already use Bentley Systems software for AASHTO requirements and slowly are incorporating not only the AutoDesk suite for this capability but use Revizto by some firms so digital twins will become a part of every project small or large. My reply was strictly for NTSB and their investigation and having them using the latest technology and means and methods of accomplishing their task. Also in the normal design bid build, digitizing asset expenses are already being paid for because our AE firms use it. Lastly we already had dolphins, but as you can see, they were inadequate.
@@blairhoughton7918I wanted to add that if you have the value that you state, are able, and could commute to the area this would be the prime time to help out. Our authority has had vacancies and the AE firms along w/ contractors, MBE firms will have many openings in the coming months ahead. MDOT has a robust program for small and large firms to get involved.
You’ve gotta remember, those containers being that high on any container ship act like sails. It wouldn’t even take a 10Knt breeze to push the ship around.
No matter how many times I see the bridge components, I can’t help but think whoever designed it made it out of ‘Pick-up-Sticks’. For the unaware, that was a popular kids game in the 60’s that had a pile of 1/8”(+-) diameter wooden dowels about straw length sharpened on both ends that us kids would play with for hours on end. That structure to me is way undersized to the point it looks like it was made by toothpicks as well😢
You're deluded by camera perspective. Those girders are feet thick. The bridge was designed with a large safety margin over the rarest of wind and traffic loads. Nobody rational would have designed it to lose a whole pylon and stay up.
This vessel had to have been supported by three or four tugboats until entering the open sea. This is not understandable in a ship 300 meters long, 100,000 gross register tons and transporting 10,000 containers. The presence of the tugboats may not have prevented the collision but it would help a lot to prevent it from happening. This is a very serious failure by the Baltimore Port Authority. I guess they have learned their lesson. In Spain we are much more advanced when it comes to the entry and exit of large ships in ports. ►► You can see in this video from the port of Mugardos (Spain - my country) how 4 tugboats from more than 4 miles in the open sea secure with their ropes a 300 meter long gas carrier loaded with 150,000 tons of gas (in cubic meters) crossing an estuary where at its narrowest part the navigation channel measures the same as the navigable width of the Baltimore Bridge -> ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-p1nlAoFBWWw.html
This is simply not true. It is dangerous for tugboats to be in the channel with a large ship like this. There is a reason there were not any tug boats close to the ship when it happened.
@@user-ul3ws7yc2g What you write cannot be true. There has to be a cost-money reason. I'll tell you why: The passage under that bridge is almost 500 meters wide, and seen in photos, passage with tugboats is perfectly possible. I live in a city in Spain that has a gas port with an entrance into the estuary where its narrowest point is 450 meters wide. During this entire journey, the 300-meter-long gas carriers loaded with more than 150,000 tons of liquefied gas are assisted by 4 tugboats with firm ropes at all times, thus having control of the situation in case the vessel has any failure. And those tugboats wait for that ship in the open sea. /// Here in Baltimore I observe that there is nothing of the sort and with a ship of these same dimensions and the obstacle of a bridge it should have been supported by at least 4 tugboats. There is negligence on the part of the shipowner for not requesting them, and another on the part of the Baltimnore Port Authority for not requiring this security protocol. Here in Spain we know this very well and we apply it. Why don't you do this in the United States? You will know. At the moment, they are already experiencing the cost of not having had this tugboat service beyond the bridge. Look how we do this in Spain -> ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-p1nlAoFBWWw.html
@user-ul3ws7yc2g I agree. The Spaniard's America bashing is forgetting that gas os highly flamable and not hard to ignite. You would need multiple tugs for that alone. And frankly, the very fact that it is narrower is also part of the choice.
Not true. Commander of the Port of Baltimore Harbor does not require tugs for egress and ingress. The shipping companies contract out for tug assistance. With the advent of bow-stern, and port-starboard thrusters on many ships, tugs just aren’t necessary anymore. Tugs are situational. - A ship of that magnitude, some 110,000 tons moving at 5-8Knts is a big hazard for a tug; Tugs are known to have been capsized and pushed under if they’re in a poor position.
I would tend to think they would check the ship's manifest first to see what HAZMAT was on board before venturing up there. Most likely had a small team wearing PPE check it out first and then sent everybody else forward once they'd determined it was safe.
Must suck to be the captain, chief engineer and chief officer… But but… I also note the difference between professional NTSB using a real camera and amateurs using mobile phones as one. No serious inspector, surveyor or investigator is using a mobile for pictures.
Especially as phones are not designed and certified for hazardous places. On oil tanker, any equipment that is not certified is prohibited to use outside of the superstructure.
They do use "real" cameras too, but phone cameras can collect a large number of different views much more quickly than a big SLR. The same object from multiple angles. Often in an investigation months later, it's "did you get a shot of that bolt? No, it's just out of frame." Quantity of views is important. Also, modern high end cell phone cameras are high quality high resolution.
@@SteamCrane Sorry but you are wrong. A proper authority / investigator do not use phones to take pictures which will be used in a report. A real camera snap raw pictures while a phone camera can be set to take pictures in a certain way which may not represent reality. Also, same picture can be edited within seconds on a phone which is a no no. That is why the NTSB use a real camera while the not so professional USCG use phone. I have personally been assisting Class and insurance representatives when doing engine break down investigations or engine room fire investigations and for the reasons above, then do never use a phone. In my own job, related to engines and engine rooms, we have a company policy not to use phones. You are most certainly not in this branch as you don’t know what you are talking about. Like most commenting here.
Ships have manifests, required paperwork etc of what they carry and where it’s to be unloaded/offloaded. This ship was loading cargo etc at the nearby dock and was close to being fully loaded before it sailed.
Not everyone would be running. I'm pretty sure they put them up in a hotel somewhere (cheaper than a prison and does the job) and asked them to stay for the investigation. I'm also pretty sure they'll have tested all of them for alcohol and drugs immediately after the crash and found them to be sober. If they hadn't been, they'd have been arrested. Looking at the original video of the crash, the crew was doing as good a job as they could, no reason to run, no reason to arrest them. Most civilized countries would act like that.
Funny how we don’t hear ANYTHING about the poor design of this ugly bridge. As if made of matchsticks, it did not even come with a crash barrier around the support columns, something even the cheapest freeway off-ramps have. In a world full of terrorism, you take over a jet and crash it into the world trade center. Or, a cargo ship into an important bridge. WHY AREN’T THEY INVESTIGATING THAT?
It’s not ‘poorly designed’. There’s still thousands of bridges right here in the U.S. that are truss bridges. Seriously ? I mean here’s a 110,000 tons of ship and cargo hitting a pier at 6-8Knts, no bridge without dolphins or pier islands is going to withstand an impact like that. Not even a suspension bridge.
@@65gtotrips - How are no crash barriers protecting the base of any of these support towers be a good design? This sloppiness screams of COST CONSIDERATIONS over SAFETY. NOT anticipating a collision by a massive cargo vessel …either by accident or by intention (terrorism) is what the 3rd World does. The 3rd world also will not bother to tighten the bolts on a passenger jet’s door plug.
Well folks this is a good indication of how well these bridges will hold up in a collision. Not good. My quess is this country's infrastructure is in bad shape. It didnt take much for this freight cargo ship to bing it down at such a low speed or knots.
Infrastructure in the US needs work, but there is no bridge on the planet that would survive a 100k ton vessel hitting at 8knots directly in a core structural component like what happened here.
I think they said one of the propellers hit the main support of the bridge. It was that gigantic propeller. It didn’t stand a chance RIP to all the people that died there though.😢
They also use high end cameras for specific detail shots. Cell cameras to collect thousands of detail images. Modern cell cameras are very good. SLRs are better, but slower to use.
If you know what the hazardous materials are & where they are in the stacks onboard, then why do you need to wear masks when if they are undamaged &/or you're nowhere near them...???
These are accident investigators. There is no such thing as a hazardous materials investigator. The Coast Guard are there because the accident involved a ship. Not all hazmat presents an inhalation hazard. The tank you see with UN1993 placards is a flammable liquid. It could be diesel or it could be just some kind of cleaning solvent.
