I tried numerous ways and numerous times to find the old (and interesting) thread on the catastrophic collision between the boxboat Dali and the Francis Scott Key bridge in Baltimore. Couldn't track it down.
The final report on what happened aboard the ship is still pending (such investigations can take 2+ years), but the NTSB HAS identified some very real concerns about the bridge itself - and others. None of this is any surprise to me, but it's still worth considering.
You can read more about this here. But the key takeaway is this:
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) revealed today that the Francis Scott Key Bridge, which collapsed following a vessel strike last year, had a risk level nearly 30 times above the acceptable threshold for critical bridges.
In a significant development, the agency has identified 68 bridges across 19 states that require immediate vulnerability assessments, including the Golden Gate Bridge, Chesapeake Bay Bridge, Verrazano Narrows Bridge, and Greater New Orleans Bridge, among others. The NTSB said these bridges, all designed before current safety guidelines were established, lack current vulnerability assessments for vessel collision risks.
From a local perspective, the bridges listed as lacking these assessments include the Tobin Bridge in Boston - massively important - and the two bridges that connect Cape Cod to the mainland. A full list of the bridges NTSB is concerned about is found in an appendix in the report (second link, above).
Edited by - eagleisland on 03/21/2025 06:16:01
The word on the street is that in addition to downsizing, the NTSB is also going to have its name changed to the National Cisportation Safety Board.
quote:
Originally posted by RB3The word on the street is that in addition to downsizing, the NTSB is also going to have its name changed to the National Cisportation Safety Board.
Snort.
Skip, thanks for the information.
I wish prior funding for "roads and bridges" would have actually fixed and rebuild so many "shovel-ready" type projects. Or those funds spent more efficiently and effectively.
Those old long bridges give me the "willies". Luckily, I do not have to travel on them frequently. Brad
Edited by - rinemb on 03/21/2025 07:31:09
eagleisland
Might the thread you're looking for be this one? banjohangout.org/archive/396498/3
quote:
Originally posted by Texasbanjoeagleisland
Might the thread you're looking for be this one? banjohangout.org/archive/396498/3
Yep, that's the thread. For some reason, now that it's archived, the various search parameters I used were ineffective. Given that it IS archived, no reason not to let this thread stand in its stead.
Good followup Skip..
Thanks..
When they were talking about putting a new bridge up, with the ramp going through my house, the DOT mentioned that the bridge that they built in the 80s, only had a 50 lifespan. Color me not impressed with modern design specs. The same DOT just rebuilt a bridge and causeway which frequently flooded, and after 4 years of work, it is only a couple of feet higher.
Thank you kindly.
I took a bit of time after lunch to revisit the original thread. Other than stuff I corrected at the time, I still stand by it (looking at you, @mad hornet ).
What I do find most interesting (though as noted, not surprised) about the latest news is just how many major bridges in the US may be similarly vulnerable - or, more specifically, how many bridges haven't been properly assessed for their own vulnerability. I'm not too worried about the aforementioned Cape Cod bridges - the Canal doesn't get really large ships going through and besides, the supports are all on solid ground (and the depth near the Canal's edge would likely impede any out-of-control vessel before it came close.
Most of the commercial traffic through the Canal consists of fishing vessels, occasional (not gigantic) cruise ships and ATBs - articulated tug/barge assemblies transporting petroleum products. I've seen a few car carriers going through, but I've never seen a boxboat - and even if there area a few, the Canal and its approaches couldn't handle one the size of Dali.
OTOH, those bridges opened in 1937 and are woefully underdesigned for today's standards. They're scheduled to be replaced, starting with the Sagamore, but I doubt I'll ever drive across the the replacement for the bridge I usually use. Actuarial tables tell me so. And without those bridges, Cape Cod is functionally an island.
But back to Baltimore. One of the more vocal participants was wondering about the legal ramifications. It seems clear now that this event will be tied up in court for many, many years. Yes, there is almost certainly liability on the part of the vessel's owners - but maritime law will likely cap their exposure at far less than the costs this incident produced.
But as we see with the NTSB findings, other entities bearing some responsibility almost certainly include the Port of Baltimore, the State of Maryland, the Army Corps of Engineers and other aspects of local, state and federal governments. The Key Bridge has been vulnerable to something like this happening for a long time, and nobody did anything about it.
Who pays, and how juries (and there will be many) will slice up the pie will be a mess.
Corwyn, you mentione being unimpressed with modern design standards. As may be. I'm particularly unimpressed with the pace of construction. The original Cape Cod bridges were built in under two years. God only knows how long the new ones will take...
Edited by - eagleisland on 03/21/2025 13:07:24
quote:
Originally posted by eagleislandquote:
Originally posted by Texasbanjoeagleisland
Might the thread you're looking for be this one? banjohangout.org/archive/396498/3Yep, that's the thread. For some reason, now that it's archived, the various search parameters I used were ineffective. Given that it IS archived, no reason not to let this thread stand in its stead.
As I understand it, all archived threads are locked and you have to start a new one if you need to add more information.
quote:
Originally posted by Texasbanjoquote:
Originally posted by eagleislandquote:
Originally posted by Texasbanjoeagleisland
Might the thread you're looking for be this one? banjohangout.org/archive/396498/3Yep, that's the thread. For some reason, now that it's archived, the various search parameters I used were ineffective. Given that it IS archived, no reason not to let this thread stand in its stead.
As I understand it, all archived threads are locked and you have to start a new one if you need to add more information.
I get that part. The headscratcher is that the archived thread didn't show up, despite many different keyword attempts. C'est la guerre. We're off and running regardless. And thanks, as always!
Just saw a news piece on the new look at our bridges.
I remember (vaguely) of the original 30s roads and bridges fund (50m ?) never going where it was intended.
I wonder if that's still a problem.Maybe they never increased the amount.
