No. of Recommendations: 5
Here are some items I've seen from news coverage:
* there were construction crews on the bridge fixing potholes but nothing structural
* the bridge was fully certified and had no issues flagged as a threat to safety
* the crew sent a Mayday to the port authority notifying them of a loss of propulsion problem
* the port authority IMMEDIATELY closed entry to the bridge on both sides within SECONDS, limiting the number on the bridge as much as possible
* local emergency dispatchers immediately notified teams to not enter the bridge where they might not realize the bridge was lost in the dark
So far, from those elements, it looks like the bridge was adequately maintained and that officials have been very efficient and professional in their response.
It isn't clear yet when propulsion power was lost but the ship appeared to lose lights a minute or two before the strike. It regained its lights, then began belching thick black smoke. Sign of an engine failure after trying to switch to reverse or a sign of some other explosion in the power systems of the ship. Not known. The pylons for the bridge had relatively small concrete barriers around the base for protection but NOTHING is going to prevent the momentum of a 100,000 ton ship moving at 6 knots from taking out the pylon. The bridge design did not implement completely standalone spans that could remain in place if an an adjacent span collapse. Taking out one pylon support two spans allowed those spans to fall which pulled on their connected spans pulling more down beyond the initial point of impact. Construction of larger diameter "protection donuts" around each pylon apparently had been discussed years ago but skipped due to extremely high costs.
It is apparently normal for ships using this port to NOT use tugs to guide them through the channel past the bridge. This ship was docked facing northwest, had to sail a counter-clockwise loop to face southest, then head to the designated channel to pass under the bridge into the larger bay. It appeared to do that without incident until it lost power. The video link above theorizes that by attempting to drop anchor on the port (left) side to slow / stop the ship, doing so actually skewed the ship's path further to the right away from the center of the designated channel towards the pylon. Avoidable mistkae? I have no expertise with which to judge.
Replacing this bridge will cost many multiples of $250 million. The ship needs to be certified for seaworthiness then somehow moved back to a dock for unpacking then moved somewhere for repairs or gutting. The shipping channel needs to be cleared immediately of the fallen bridge spans to restore access to ports. Removal of the wreckage will take extra time due to the depth of water and the need to preserve key evidence. There will be hundreds of lawsuits for victims, for other shippers impaired by the blockage of the port, etc. Maersk was the entity chartering this shipment but they were not the owner of the ship. Will a record of maintenance problems regarding propulsion and/or steering show up in an investigation? That could drive billions in liability claims.
WTH
