Ops-Normal.org

Would the harbor pilots have necessarily been made aware of the electrical issues with the ship?
It would seem it would all be on the ship's captain/master and/or the chief engineer.
I'm sure that the NTSB and Coast Guard investigations will get to the bottom of it.
One of them will get thrown under the bus ship.

PP

There may be a number of reasons why it was not on the ship's officers.

We do not know who certified the in-port electrical problems were fixed. This may have been a repair company.
This may be a situation where the d@mn thing just broke (again), despite the repairs being correctly done.
It may be a new problem that has just been discovered that the repair procedure did not cover.
It may be a non-electrical problem , such as dodgy fuel as some have suggested.
It may be an electrical component that failed, but not the one receiving the attention in port.

We do have to await the investigation on this one.

I recall one aircraft loss that literally happened in front of me in advanced flying training, that the cause turned out to be the design of the standard aircrew boot, although it looked initially for all the world that the pilot had landed with one brake on. And indeed he had, but it wasn't his fault (student on second solo in a Hawk). Pilot was fine, BTW, didn't even get back-coursed.

the boot???

Fox3 wrote:I recall one aircraft loss

By PM please (so we don't contaminate this thread) - I'd be interested to know how that happened and I'll tell you a story about my Cranwell stude (future Air Marshal,of course) who landed with the brakes fully on the sortie on which I was checking him for first solo - I sent him off solo............

Copies to me, too, then, pliiiiz!

Well, thata piques interest, put it in a seperate thread!!! ")

See Boots and Brakes thread.

Fox3WheresMyBanana wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 28, 2024 12:10 am

The remaining question, given the recent information about the ship having serious electrical problems in port, is do the crew get several thousand Brownie Points for doing everything possible when the crisis happened, but lose several million BPs for setting sail with an unsafe ship in the first place.

That might be a bit unfair. If you've got an aircraft back in service after maintenance to fix a problem and you're handed paperwork that shows it's all been done and signed off, at some level you have to trust that the job has been done to an adequate standard. Of course, we don't know the paper trail prior to ship departure yet. Also, it's clear that while there might have been trust in the past, recent history shows that maintenance standards have slipped.

As I say, it's a question, not an accusation.
Post #42 would be just some of the reasons it isn't the crew's fault.

Saw a close up picture of the starboard bow, which unfortunately I can't re produce here, and it is the starboard bow that hit the bridge structure and it is in a mess. The starboard anchor looks to be still in the hawse pipe.

1DC wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 28, 2024 5:44 pm

Saw a close up picture of the starboard bow, which unfortunately I can't re produce here, and it is the starboard bow that hit the bridge structure and it is in a mess. The starboard anchor looks to be still in the hawse pipe.

Source?

PP

It would apear the port side anchor was deployed not starboard:

.

g man my picture was the daily telegraph

NTSB B-Roll Videos:

NTSB B-Roll - Aerial Imagery of Francis Scott Key Bridge and Cargo Ship Dali




NTSB B-Roll - Hazardous Material Investigators and Engineers Aboard the Cargo Ship Dali



NTSB B-Roll - Investigators Aboard the Cargo Ship Dali



PP

Baltimore bridge: Massive US crane to haul wreckage after deadly collapse

"We're talking 3,000 to 4,000 tons of steel that's sitting on that ship," Mr Moore told reporters on Thursday.
The Dali container vessel - which is nearly as long as the Eiffel tower - remains on the water. Its 22-person crew, all Indian nationals, are reportedly still aboard.
The recovery has been further complicated by the amount of debris in the dark waters of the Patapsco River. Divers have been unable to see more than a foot or two in front of them.
The effort will be paid for by the US Army Corps of Engineers, which is sending several officials to oversee the efforts. US Navy contractors will also join the efforts, and they will be joined by more than 1,100 engineering specialists.

The largest crane on the eastern US seaboard, which can lift 1,000 tons, is being erected at the site on Friday. The crane, called the Chesapeake 1000, was built in 1972 and is 191 feet (58 metres) long. It will be followed by a smaller crane on Saturday.
Those involved in the operation must figure out how to cut debris from the bridge into pieces so they can be lifted by the crane, officials said.
It must be done carefully to ensure none of the hazardous material held in shipping containers atop the Dali spills into the river.
Some of those containers stored sheen, which is used in paint. A few have already broken open, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has said.

The Chesapeake 1000 is a pretty old, and quite small by modern standards, derrick barge.i.e. a lifting device fixed to the barge and is non-rotatable. A crane is rotatable, a derrick or sheerleg is not. Modern crane vessels are VERY much larger, the largest currently being the Sleipnir with two 10,000 ton cranes.
The last major offshore project I worked on utilised the Seaway Yudin with a modest 2,500 tonne crane fitted which was used to install the foundation monopiles of an offshore windfarm each weighing some 700 tonnes.

How big a diameter cable do you need for a 1000ton lift? I could probably dust off my school physics and look up tensile strength of steel, but I figure it's easier to ask here first.

I guess that the lift cable will be multi-stranded and multi-stringed.

AS G-CPTN correctly stated, the lifting cable would be multi stranded and the load would be suspended from a multi sheaved block by multiple slings, but as an example, a wire rope weight guide from Mr Google shows that a 2" (52mm) rope has a safe working load of 64,000 lbs.
The picture below shows the working deck of the Yudin with the main crane in the background and main block visible hanging from the boom. The crane in the foreground is the 100 tonne deck crane used for moving items and equipment around and gives an idea of scale. The main crane is BIG!
There are two lifting slings from the main block to a lifting beam on the deck. They are clearly of much larger diameter than the crane lifting cable as they will have to take a much larger proportion of the load. I'll see if I have some close-ups of the load and slings.

Meaning, the 'bits' the bridge remnants are to be cut into, shall have to be quite "small"?