MennoNet.com

Martin wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2024 9:42 am I reflected on how Ukraine deals with catastrophic damage of this nature on a weekly basis.

RZehr wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2024 1:18 pm I’ll guess that they throw up a temporary bridge within 8 months. And then a new permanent one will take longer than…I’ll guess 4 years.

ken_sylvania wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2024 1:24 pm

RZehr wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2024 1:18 pm I’ll guess that they throw up a temporary bridge within 8 months. And then a new permanent one will take longer than…I’ll guess 4 years.

I think they have a temp bridge up within a year and maybe, maybe... a new one up sometime within 30 years.

RZehr wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2024 1:18 pm I’ll guess that they throw up a temporary bridge within 8 months. And then a new permanent one will take longer than…I’ll guess 4 years.

Judas Maccabeus wrote: ↑Tue Mar 26, 2024 9:28 am

Soloist wrote: ↑Tue Mar 26, 2024 9:15 am I don’t really care enough to go looking into each one of these to see if it was a foreigner or an American operating the ship. That doesn’t really matter. Accidents happen, and this one may end up not being the pilots fault after investigation.

The trip out of Baltimore is a pilotage area. A bay pilot was on board and directing the ship. This is required for all vessels over a certain weight. The ship's master or some other qualified officer would be on the bridge as well. He would on necessity be an American, and a very highly paid one at that. Vessel was nearly new. This was not a rust bucket, as the "El Faro" that was tied up here for awhile.

Lights of ship were going on and off prior to accident, suspicion is pointing to mechanical failure. Interestingly enough, that crossing was originally proposed and. bid out as a tunnel. Costs ran to high so they switched it for a bridge.

The 985-foot container ship, known as the Dali, left Baltimore about 12:30 a.m. Tuesday, bound for Sri Lanka. Clay Diamond, the executive director of the American Pilots’ Association, said the ship experienced a “full blackout” around 1:20 a.m., meaning it lost both engine power and electrical power to the ship’s control and communications systems.

The ship was traveling at 8 knots, a normal speed for the area that Diamond described as “ahead slow.” The ship never regained engine power, but Diamond said a diesel backup generator did kick in, restoring the electrical systems — the possible source of a puff of black smoke visible in video of the collision circulating on social media.

Unable to slow the ship, Diamond said the pilot, who had more than a decade of experience, radioed an emergency message to have the Francis Scott Key Bridge closed. That mayday call has been credited with saving lives.

Foreign-flagged ships are required to have pilots aboard to guide them in and out of U.S. ports. Pilots have detailed knowledge of local shipping channels and complete an apprenticeship before becoming fully qualified. Diamond said they don’t take direct command of the vessel, but work with its crew to get it safely out to sea.

Ken wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2024 2:50 pm

RZehr wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2024 1:18 pm I’ll guess that they throw up a temporary bridge within 8 months. And then a new permanent one will take longer than…I’ll guess 4 years.

I'm not an engineer and therefore not an expert on any of this. But I'm not imagining how they could put up a temporary bridge for a span this wide.

Temporary bridges would make sense for a small river or something where you can just drop a truss in place until you get a better bridge made. But this is a 1.5 mile span. Seems like it would be just as much work to build a temporary bridge as a permanent one.

The question in my mind is whether they re-use the existing support pylons for the old bridge, or build new ones and move the new bridge to a different spot along side the old one. I would expect that they will probably have to build all new pylons because the one that was hit by the ship will obviously be damaged. And the others are all 50 years old and concrete has a finite life span in salt water. So if you are going to spend billions putting in new bridge decks and trusses, you are going to want it to be sitting on support structures that will have the same life span as the rest of the bridge.

If they are going to move the new bridge then there is no reason why they can't start with the construction on the new one immediately, even before the old one gets cleared away.