Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: "Carlos E.R." Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design Subject: Re: Full video of ship hitting and destroying the Francis Scott Key bridge in Baltimore Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2024 23:19:04 +0200 Lines: 74 Message-ID: <8j0pdkxt1o.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> References: <2iv80jd4bmm08fr24nmum9k8vikiumhe0d@4ax.com> <6604f7e3$0$897428$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: individual.net hP7oX5R7/z4F1A6K1lSIaQdXGuETMa0xdd/+GR4/Ot08pY6/ry X-Orig-Path: Telcontar.valinor!not-for-mail Cancel-Lock: sha1:eUew7ghi+/WN33JUqnbYEeKlVQY= sha256:WuOT1IWKR8rZ65TcoSMMjCaY3z791pl/2b/pMDKXnQk= User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Content-Language: es-ES, en-CA In-Reply-To: Bytes: 4009 On 2024-03-31 01:47, bud-- wrote: > On 3/30/2024 12:05 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote: >> On 2024-03-29 16:21, bud-- wrote: >>> On 3/29/2024 5:18 AM, Martin Brown wrote: >>>> On 29/03/2024 06:06, UFO wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Out of all the hours it sailed in operation, maintenance checks >>>>> were all fine >>>>> then out of the blue not 1 but 3 power failures, and not out in the >>>>> middle of the ocean >>>>> from harms way...just close enough to a bridge and hit the weakest >>>>> spot. What a >>>>> "fluke" >>>> >>>> Hardly. Murphy's law can apply IRL. Dirty fuel seems quite plausible. >>>> >>>> The bridge was *designed* to fail catastrophically if anything hit >>>> one of its main supports which is unforgivable on a bridge that is >>>> over a waterway leading to one of the busiest Atlantic ports in >>>> America. >>> >>> Bridges would not similarly fail when you take out a pier for a major >>> span? >> >> On some bridges, only the spans directly supported by that pier fall, >> not all. >> > > So main span falls and on the other side of the pier that did not fail > the approach stays intact? Falling main span does not affect pier? Depends on the design. I can not tell you what they do, only that I read or heard comments from "experts" saying so. > >>> >>>> >>>> Most big bridges in first world countries have buffer islands and >>>> underwater structures to deflect and/or slow a large vessel to >>>> prevent them from impacting any of the key support structures near a >>>> live shipping channel. The ship may ground and be damaged and the >>>> bridge shaken by that impact but that should be about the limit of >>>> what can happen to a properly designed bridge in these circumstances. >>> >>> The United States Secretary of Transportation (Buttigieg) has said he >>> doesn't know of any bridge that could withstand a similar hit. Hard >>> to imagine how you could protect from the energy in such a massive ship. >> >> With a massive island, but that reduces the passage for ships, which >> then have more chances to crashing into it, and impairs traffic. >> > > So island is anchored and constructed so a hit from a massive container > ship won't destroy it or tip it (how far down does it go)?. And has to > be bigger than how far into the island the ship penetrates plus how far > the bow sticks out plus how far the bow dents in? Plus the pier can > survive the shock (like earthquake proof)? Where does the energy go? Heat, and metal crushing :-) Yeah, the island has to be massive, which is a problem for traffic. > > Requiring tugs to accompany large ships may be more practical. One may > assume that wasn't required here. Bow thrusters probably make > maneuvering ships in a harbor without a tug practical. Yep. -- Cheers, Carlos.