Industrial Jenga: the battle to reopen Baltimore port
The port of Baltimore could be up and running at full capacity by the end of next month under a tentative timetable released yesterday by the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), a plan which also sees another shipping channel open up later this month.
The port has been largely closed for the last 11 days after the city’s largest bridge was destroyed following a boxship allision, an accident that killed six road maintenance workers.
“These are ambitious timelines that may still be impacted by significant adverse weather conditions or changes in the complexity of the wreckage,” said Lieutenant General Scott Spellmon, USACE commanding general. “We are working quickly and safely to clear the channel and restore full service at this port that is so vital to the nation.”
Salvage teams have managed to open up two shallow shipping channels this week.
“Thanks to the exhaustive work of the Unified Command during the last two weeks, including underwater surveys and detailed structural analysis of the wreckage, we’ve developed a better understanding of the immense and complex work that lies ahead,” Spellmon added.
The delicate operation to remove the bridge, and the badly damaged 9,962 teu Dali containership, was compared by officials to a game of Jenga yesterday.
“With every layer of wreckage that we take out of the water, we have to go back in and survey and assess and determine how the wreckage reacted in order to make sure the next lift will be just as safe,” USACE colonel Estee Pinchasin said.
The Dali blocks only a portion of the main shipping channel on one side. The channel is wide enough for two ships to pass, if debris is removed from the far side, Pinchasin said.
Federal officials are set to release preliminary findings from their accident investigation within days, according to a new report from Bloomberg.
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) recovered a voyager data recorder last week, which showed power failed for just one minute and three seconds as it approached the giant bridge, and that the lead pilot tried to swing the 300 m long vessel clear of a collision by dropping its port anchor to pivot it away.
The disabled ship, managed by Synergy Group and on charter to Maersk, ran into a support pillar and caused much of the bridge to tumble into the Patapsco River at roughly 1:30 am 12 days ago. Just moments before, at 1:26 am, the pilot of the ship called for tugboat assistance, according to the voyage data recorder. At 1:27 am, the pilot made an order to drop the ship anchor.
The head of Lloyd’s of London warned last week that the Dali could prove to be the largest marine pay-out in insurance history.
US president Joe Biden is due to visit the scene today.
Estimates can be difficult, especially when dealing with a situation that is unique. You have ship aground, a bridge fallen down. a part of the bridge astride the ship’s bows, the ship.blocking the deep water channel and finally no contingency plan for a complex problem of this kind. The US will ramp up all available tools and capabilities to resolve the problem but estimating a timeline could turn out to be very wrong. This is a tedious problem, requiring a lot of calculators and a lot of lifting gear.
Boeing is rather relieved at the diversion of attention away from their shenanigans.
Due to the nature of all insurance companies interconnected in this global economy, a car owner in Tanzania will find his vehicle insurance premium rise slightly to pay for claims arising from MV Dali accident. Just a few dollars, not much….
After the Bush-Gore vote count episode, someone opined that no one would have been able to sell that story in a novel before the event. It was just too implausible.
MV Dali is a similar accident.
Two questions remain: (i) why for such size of a vessel for such sensitive channel, pilots did not require tug escort from the dock till drop-off pilot point (or port regulations to mandate it), (ii) why pillars of such an important bridge were not protected by concrete fenders substantial enough to withstand an allision with a vessel even greater than a laden Dali (actually its inertia).
Because the last risk assesment they did was abt 50 years ago and the biggest cont vsl then, was less then 3000 teu but had M/E power almost equal with Dali or the Power to Dsiplacement ratio of other cont. vessels was much bigger then nowadays.
Hence such an event was considered by the Gurus playing with probabilities and guessing VooDOO games as VERY HIGHLY UNLIKELY . But if they have done R.A. recently , then I will be very curious to see it. Reckon ,all insurance gangs would like to see it as well.
Same applies to use of tugs. It has never happened untill it has happened. But it beats me , why nobody has noticed, the ships got bigger, bigger and bigger and with them their kinetic energy : E= M x Vx V/2 and the rule of thumb – less speed =less damage has not changed at all. But I may be wrong of course.
As long there is no large american shipping corporation to extort at Baltimore, escort tugs will not be compulsory for large containerships.
Why did you not mentioned this 5 years ago?
America has a bad habit for doing the absolute minimum duct tape & string quality safety measures and then saying “good job” while patting themselves on the back.
No way should that size of ship not get a mandatory tug escort past the bridge, that is just insane and asking for trouble. Lucky it was not rush hour as that bridge has an average of 1300 cars crossing per day !
Looks like the ship was actually on course until the harbor pilot panicked an dropped the anchor, that looked like it turned the ship into the bridge support.
The port is the one at fault here, neglect of safety protocol and or incompetence. Ships can have machanical an electrical failures at any time in their voyage, not the ships fault if it has all its inspection paperwork in order.
It will take years to sort out the legal mess on this as everybody tries to blame everybody else like little kids fighting. It’s the ships owner, no it’s the shipping contractor that hired the ship, no its the crew hiring company, no it’s the crew…
It’s actually the port authority that is at fault for not following common sense safety procedures or risk assessments as seen in many ports around the world. Not the first time a ship has had an accident, it won’t be the last.
Spot on. The Mayor of Baltimore will get another chance to ask owners for 100 mil usd fund to keem the crabs mating and laying eggs in comfort and keeping the local population employed for for two or more years . Is it not strange, that some major accidents that resulted in huge clean up , demolition and salvage works/jobs has taken place recently in USA??? Strange coincidents .