Container Ship Hits Baltimore Bridge

Temporary alternate channel:
https://www.marinelog.com/legal/saf...m_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=45182

Some interesting comments on bridge issues.


I fear some is BS but other aspects are fair to good.

Galleries thoughts?

So, some reports were released by the feds this week indicating there were multiple power failures, breaker trips, all leading up to the ship striking the bridge. They lost steering for a several seconds or minutes...but the steering was reported at zero, and systems failed with the power loss that made rudder movement unavailable...ultimately they lost high voltage and propulsion, so when the low voltage was restored they had no propulsion to maintain steerage.

Did the sudden shift to starboard and impact result from the anchor deployment?

Pilot reported that upon boarding he asked for confirmation of vessel condition, and the response was that she was in good order. Something of that sort. NTSB went into detail regarding the failure of the low voltage network breakers (with no loss of power) followed by that being reset and then a loss of high voltage breakers and a loss of propulsion. But if the steering was at zero and they lost steerage....within a few boat lengths that was a pretty rapid turn...just speculating, but they reported that the anchors were deployed. The hand at the bow ran for cover and didn't finish setting the brakes...

Might have gotten one locked down. From what I saw simply said that he didn't get finished locking them both down, saw the impact looming, ran for cover. Said they still had not yet determined how much chain had been let. Not much detail on this yet. But from what I saw in the report, the anchor is about the only thing I could see that would have created a turn like that. Much of the time they were without steering, steering was at zero, and later a turn to port was ordered but rendered ineffective as they had no propulsion at that time. So what else would cause the crazy ivan to starboard?

Please review my post #28.

• She was doing 9 knots, her reported speed at idle
• She lost steerage until the very end and a port turn was ordered
• She lost propulsion back about a ship's length or so from the bridge
• When she lost propulsion the pilot radio'd for help, tugs 3 miles away.
• Pilot radio'd alert to marine traffic and the bridge was notified to stop traffic. They stopped on lane a minute to 90 seconds ahead of impact. Didn't stop the other lane until a bit later, and last car just barely cleared.
• When radio alert went out, pilot ordered the anchors dropped. This would have likely then happened in the final ship's length from impact.
• Crewman reported could not complete the brake set. Saw impact imminent and ran for cover.

I’m no legal expert, but a series of related events could trip the insurance coverage and shift liability upstairs, perhaps even beyond the shell due to deaths.

Takeaway here to all of us is to think about our own liability as we own or operate vessels. Serious responsibility.

That was where my mind went. When you look at the accidents of the largest vessels, they just amplify the underlying risks involved with any vessel.

Real good update here;

Engine pumps were 480v. They dropped off line when the low voltage buss tripped both breakers....transformer?

When the 480v circuits were lost, the pumps stopped, and when the pumps stopped the engine shut down for safety. That was my take away.

I listened to a summary. I didn't read the report. Summary stated both systems were 440. Makes sense they were 440.