4 ms·

Modern bridges are required to endure a collision. This bridge might be very old and not sufficiently maintained against current requirements.

by makach 3y ago

Reason077 3y ago
It opened in 1977. So, oldish, but not that old. Plenty of far older bridges around than that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Scott_Key_Bridge_(Baltimore) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Scott_Key_Bridge_(Balt...
- loeg 3y ago
  Notably predating the 1980 collapse of the Sunshine Skyway after a ship hit.
  - Reason077 3y ago
    Neat how they made what was left of the old bridge into a giant fishing pier!
hgomersall 3y ago
I'm not sure how many brand new bridges would stay up after having one of the piers on the main span removed.
- rob74 3y ago
  The trick is to make sure the piers are not removed. For example, the new Tampa Bay Sunshine Skyway Bridge (rebuilt after a similar disaster): > In addition to a wider shipping lane, the channel would be marked by a 1⁄4 mi (400 m)-long series of large concrete barriers, and the support piers would be protected by massive concrete "dolphins". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunshine_Skyway_Bridge#/media/File:Skyway_Bridge_old_and_new.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunshine_Skyway_Bridge#/media/...
  - gregors 3y ago
    Good view of them on Google maps https://www.google.com/maps/place/Sunshine+Skyway+Bridge/@27.6223368,-82.6586101,954m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m6!3m5!1s0x88c31db3105de9a5:0x53e7724a2432b4a6!8m2!3d27.6207079!4d-82.6558418!16zL20vMDJ3dzdo https://www.google.com/maps/place/Sunshine+Skyway+Bridge/@27...
guenthert 3y ago
Collision with what? I'm pretty sure that with a sufficiently massive ship sailing fast enough, one could take down any bridge. Hence I'd think there are limits which ship may approach at a given speed. Was one of those limits perhaps exceeded?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
boringg 3y ago
Collision means nothing without magnitude of force. A glancing blow is completely different from a direct hit. And the amount of Newtons behind the blow completely changes the outcomes. A small ship versus a loaded container ship is a completely different force. I doubt many bridges would take a full speed, fully loaded container ship directly to one of their supports and survive it. Certainly the most celebrated bridges have a better chance of surviving but I doubt any second tier, lower traveled routes would.
- bmitc 3y ago
  Apparently this container ship was only half loaded to capacity. And it seems likely that a container ship would hit it given the vicinity of such container ships. I'm generally confused on this matter.
  - boringg 3y ago
    It hit the support completely dead on and stopped. All of that momentum and force went directly into the bridge. The pulse from that impact would have been enormous. Why would you anticipate that a container ship would have to hit the bridge? What about the flip side to that... How many bridges have never been hit by a container ship or alternatively how many times have an almost fully loaded container ship come to a dead stop after hitting a bridge?
    - bmitc 3y ago
      According to a quick search and reporting due to this event, apparently a quick number is a few dozen full collapses in the past 55 years, which doesn't seem to account for impacts and collisions that didn't result in full collapses. So that seems like a lot of bridges indeed, along with a lot of deaths and economic impact. The reason why I would anticipate a container ship hitting that bridge is because of the video we've all seen. It's a huge ship that is going the slowest it can while still retaining control over the vehicle, unattended, through a tight spot, close to a bridge with zero protection from ship collisions, and all with a ship design that is apparently (according to other comments) effectively impossible to correctly maintain and keep running at all times. So I think the better question is, why wouldn't you anticipate a collision?

Modern bridges are required to endure a collision. This bridge might be very old and not sufficiently maintained against current requirements.

by makach 3y ago

Modern bridges are required to endure a collision. This bridge might be very old and not sufficiently maintained against current requirements.

Reason077 3y ago

It opened in 1977. So, oldish, but not that old. Plenty of far older bridges around than that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Scott_Key_Bridge_(Baltimore) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Scott_Key_Bridge_(Balt...

loeg 3y ago
Notably predating the 1980 collapse of the Sunshine Skyway after a ship hit.
- Reason077 3y ago
  Neat how they made what was left of the old bridge into a giant fishing pier!

hgomersall 3y ago

I'm not sure how many brand new bridges would stay up after having one of the piers on the main span removed.

rob74 3y ago
The trick is to make sure the piers are not removed. For example, the new Tampa Bay Sunshine Skyway Bridge (rebuilt after a similar disaster): > In addition to a wider shipping lane, the channel would be marked by a 1⁄4 mi (400 m)-long series of large concrete barriers, and the support piers would be protected by massive concrete "dolphins". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunshine_Skyway_Bridge#/media/File:Skyway_Bridge_old_and_new.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunshine_Skyway_Bridge#/media/...
- gregors 3y ago
  Good view of them on Google maps https://www.google.com/maps/place/Sunshine+Skyway+Bridge/@27.6223368,-82.6586101,954m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m6!3m5!1s0x88c31db3105de9a5:0x53e7724a2432b4a6!8m2!3d27.6207079!4d-82.6558418!16zL20vMDJ3dzdo https://www.google.com/maps/place/Sunshine+Skyway+Bridge/@27...

guenthert 3y ago

Collision with what? I'm pretty sure that with a sufficiently massive ship sailing fast enough, one could take down any bridge. Hence I'd think there are limits which ship may approach at a given speed. Was one of those limits perhaps exceeded?

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

boringg 3y ago

Collision means nothing without magnitude of force. A glancing blow is completely different from a direct hit. And the amount of Newtons behind the blow completely changes the outcomes. A small ship versus a loaded container ship is a completely different force. I doubt many bridges would take a full speed, fully loaded container ship directly to one of their supports and survive it. Certainly the most celebrated bridges have a better chance of surviving but I doubt any second tier, lower traveled routes would.

bmitc 3y ago
Apparently this container ship was only half loaded to capacity. And it seems likely that a container ship would hit it given the vicinity of such container ships. I'm generally confused on this matter.
- boringg 3y ago
  It hit the support completely dead on and stopped. All of that momentum and force went directly into the bridge. The pulse from that impact would have been enormous. Why would you anticipate that a container ship would have to hit the bridge? What about the flip side to that... How many bridges have never been hit by a container ship or alternatively how many times have an almost fully loaded container ship come to a dead stop after hitting a bridge?
  - bmitc 3y ago
    According to a quick search and reporting due to this event, apparently a quick number is a few dozen full collapses in the past 55 years, which doesn't seem to account for impacts and collisions that didn't result in full collapses. So that seems like a lot of bridges indeed, along with a lot of deaths and economic impact. The reason why I would anticipate a container ship hitting that bridge is because of the video we've all seen. It's a huge ship that is going the slowest it can while still retaining control over the vehicle, unattended, through a tight spot, close to a bridge with zero protection from ship collisions, and all with a ship design that is apparently (according to other comments) effectively impossible to correctly maintain and keep running at all times. So I think the better question is, why wouldn't you anticipate a collision?