Francis Scott Key Bridge (I-695) complete collapse after large ship hits it

[roadman65]

I see the Hale Boggs Bridge in Louisiana is another unprotected bridge. It's piers are in open water and are subject for the same type of strike the Francis Scott Key suffered.

[Sonic99]

Like I mentioned a few pages back, I think there's absolutely zero chance they rebuild it using the current approaches or honestly much of any of the existing facility. (The fact that people like Elon Musk are genuinely suggesting pulling the pieces of the old bridge out of the water and reusing them is terrifying to anyone with brain cells). Especially if the Feds front the entire bill, it would be stupid to not take the opportunity to build something as a "new icon" of Baltimore. Not that I'm saying to overbuild purely to spend more $$, but this bridge is truly the "entrance to the harbor". They're gonna go larger and "iconic" in design, I almost guarantee. Minimum 6 lanes capacity to accommodate any future expansion of 695 on either side (3 each direction), perhaps some type of bike/pedestrian access, and likely a cable stay or suspension design. Maybe something like the new East span of the San Francisco Bay Bridge.

[Rothman]

I see the Hale Boggs Bridge in Louisiana is another unprotected bridge. It's piers are in open water and are subject for the same type of strike the Francis Scott Key suffered.

We must panic.

[roadman65]

I see the Hale Boggs Bridge in Louisiana is another unprotected bridge. It's piers are in open water and are subject for the same type of strike the Francis Scott Key suffered.

We must panic.

Panic isn't the word. We must take proactive measures to update our bridges to conform to safety.

However, every time a barge hits a bridge like on US 59 in Oklahoma it will be front page news.

[jeffandnicole]

I see the Hale Boggs Bridge in Louisiana is another unprotected bridge. It's piers are in open water and are subject for the same type of strike the Francis Scott Key suffered.

We must panic.

Panic isn't the word. We must take proactive measures to update our bridges to conform to safety.

However, every time a barge hits a bridge like on US 59 in Oklahoma it will be front page news.

How much does everyone want their taxes raised? Or what other maintenance should be deferred?

Unfortunately, the number of bridges that have little or no protection is probably incredibly overwhelming. And these projects to protect the main supports, when they do occur, are years in the making.

Whenever a major incident occurs, it because the newsworthy thing to solve. Until the next newsworthy event occurs. Look at the world around us, and try to think of the next looming disaster. That's truly being proactive.  But people won't be concerned about such an issue thinking it won't happen...until it does.

[Rothman]

I see the Hale Boggs Bridge in Louisiana is another unprotected bridge. It's piers are in open water and are subject for the same type of strike the Francis Scott Key suffered.

We must panic.

Panic isn't the word. We must take proactive measures to update our bridges to conform to safety.

However, every time a barge hits a bridge like on US 59 in Oklahoma it will be front page news.

No, it won't.  Give it six months or so and barge hits, which are quite common nationwide, will drift back to regional news reporting where it has been for years.

The public's attention span is notoriously short.

[Alex]

Heading south on I-95 right now, crossing I-695.  Very strange knowing we're so close to the site of  international news story...  The VMS messages are all clear about the closure but the regular signage hasn't been patched or anything yet.  We're late enough today that it looks like both tunnels are free and clear.

Don't think they would have been able to fab patches this fast to be honest.  Probably by the weekend more 'permanent' signage fixes might be ready, if not sometime next week.

Another way would be to simply cover up the signs with a black tarp, which can be removed once the replacement bridge opens. For now, I-695 will just become another "Highway to Nowhere", as there's no way across the river on it (although the two tunnels are more than capable of taking on the extra traffic).

A possibility I thought that could be implemented, since this likely going to be several years before a replacement bridge is completed, is to temporarily renumber the Baltimore Beltway south of I-95. This would be similar to what Delaware did with I-95/495 during the Wilmington Viaduct reconstruction from 1979 to 1982, when Interstate 895 was temporarily designated.

Since the beltway is actually MD 695 east of I-97 to Hawkins Point and south of the eastern junction with I-95 to Sparrows Point, those remaining segments could be renumbered as state route spurs. Then to provide continuity to I-97 without having to place orange signs along the portion of I-695 to the southwest, just extend I-97 to I-95 at the west junction with I-695 near Halethorpe.

Since I've been taking GIS classes, I thought for added practice to create a map showing what I imagined could work:



MD 995 for the western spur, as the existing MD 995 is not marked, and that could just be reassigned as MD-995A. MD 595 for the eastern section, as MD 595 is not assigned and there would be no conflict with I-595, since it is not signed.

MD 995 could also just as well be MD 397, as that number is also unused.

[WillWeaverRVA]

Heading south on I-95 right now, crossing I-695.  Very strange knowing we're so close to the site of  international news story...  The VMS messages are all clear about the closure but the regular signage hasn't been patched or anything yet.  We're late enough today that it looks like both tunnels are free and clear.

Don't think they would have been able to fab patches this fast to be honest.  Probably by the weekend more 'permanent' signage fixes might be ready, if not sometime next week.

Another way would be to simply cover up the signs with a black tarp, which can be removed once the replacement bridge opens. For now, I-695 will just become another "Highway to Nowhere", as there's no way across the river on it (although the two tunnels are more than capable of taking on the extra traffic).

A possibility I thought that could be implemented, since this likely going to be several years before a replacement bridge is completed, is to temporarily renumber the Baltimore Beltway south of I-95. This would be similar to what Delaware did with I-95/495 during the Wilmington Viaduct reconstruction from 1979 to 1982, when Interstate 895 was temporarily designated.

Since the beltway is actually MD 695 east of I-97 to Hawkins Point and south of the eastern junction with I-95 to Sparrows Point, those remaining segments could be renumbered as state route spurs. Then to provide continuity to I-97 without having to place orange signs along the portion of I-695 to the southwest, just extend I-97 to I-95 at the west junction with I-695 near Halethorpe.

Since I've been taking GIS classes, I thought for added practice to create a map showing what I imagined could work:



MD 995 for the western spur, as the existing MD 995 is not marked, and that could just be reassigned as MD-995A. MD 595 for the eastern section, as MD 595 is not assigned and there would be no conflict with I-595, since it is not signed.

MD 995 could also just as well be MD 397, as that number is also unused.

Would it be possible to just change the segment east/north of the bridge back to MD 695 since that's its official designation?

I also like the idea of giving the segment west/south of the bridge an MD x97 designation.

[The Ghostbuster]

I think a temporary renumbering of the Interstate 695 beltway is completely unnecessary. Maybe erecting "Temporary" or "To" Interstate 695 signs along the Interstate 895 spurs, Interstate 895 itself, and Interstate 95 (or some other routes) would suffice.

[WillWeaverRVA]

I think a temporary renumbering of the Interstate 695 beltway is completely unnecessary. Maybe erecting "Temporary" or "To" Interstate 695 signs along the Interstate 895 spurs, Interstate 895 itself, and Interstate 95 (or some other routes) would suffice.

The problem is the portion of I-695 that's out of commission primarily saw thru truck or shipping traffic that can't use the I-95 or I-895 tunnels - in fact, these routes sign the Key Bridge segment of I-695 as truck routes. Considering their only detour is to take the long way around Baltimore, signing I-95 and I-895 as "to" or "temporary" I-695 won't work.

[SectorZ]

https://apnews.com/article/baltimore-bridge-collapse-liability-litigation-16de885948e769566e7181ffa35b1753

Filed on April Fool's Day and too bad it isn't one. The company whose boat knocked the bridge down wants to limit their liability to less than $100M.

[roadwaywiz95]

Please join me for a special edition Webinar presentation on Friday 4/5 at 6 PM ET. It will feature a comprehensive examination of the Francis Scott Key Bridge disaster of March 26, 2024. Included will be a discussion of the history of the bridge, the circumstances surrounding its collapse, and the immediate recovery and salvage efforts already underway. We'll also be looking ahead at what to expect from a potential future replacement crossing over the next few years.

Link to Key Bridge Webinar:

[Henry]

Heading south on I-95 right now, crossing I-695.  Very strange knowing we're so close to the site of  international news story...  The VMS messages are all clear about the closure but the regular signage hasn't been patched or anything yet.  We're late enough today that it looks like both tunnels are free and clear.

Don't think they would have been able to fab patches this fast to be honest.  Probably by the weekend more 'permanent' signage fixes might be ready, if not sometime next week.

Another way would be to simply cover up the signs with a black tarp, which can be removed once the replacement bridge opens. For now, I-695 will just become another "Highway to Nowhere", as there's no way across the river on it (although the two tunnels are more than capable of taking on the extra traffic).

A possibility I thought that could be implemented, since this likely going to be several years before a replacement bridge is completed, is to temporarily renumber the Baltimore Beltway south of I-95. This would be similar to what Delaware did with I-95/495 during the Wilmington Viaduct reconstruction from 1979 to 1982, when Interstate 895 was temporarily designated.

Since the beltway is actually MD 695 east of I-97 to Hawkins Point and south of the eastern junction with I-95 to Sparrows Point, those remaining segments could be renumbered as state route spurs. Then to provide continuity to I-97 without having to place orange signs along the portion of I-695 to the southwest, just extend I-97 to I-95 at the west junction with I-695 near Halethorpe.

Since I've been taking GIS classes, I thought for added practice to create a map showing what I imagined could work:



MD 995 for the western spur, as the existing MD 995 is not marked, and that could just be reassigned as MD-995A. MD 595 for the eastern section, as MD 595 is not assigned and there would be no conflict with I-595, since it is not signed.

MD 995 could also just as well be MD 397, as that number is also unused.

Would it be possible to just change the segment east/north of the bridge back to MD 695 since that's its official designation?

I also like the idea of giving the segment west/south of the bridge an MD x97 designation.

Hey, extending I-97 to meet I-95 is not a bad idea at all, and it would have a proper terminus as opposed to being a spur off I-895 (why didn't they extend it onto the Thruway when they had the chance?). However, I'm still partial to signing the broken parts of the beltway as MD 695, and I have no problem with it being discontiguous. And MD does not like to sign "Temporary" routes, so making either tunnel route a temporary I-695 is a nonstarter, plus hazmats and other tunnel no-no's now go the other way around on the loop anyway.

[epzik8]

I think a temporary renumbering of the Interstate 695 beltway is completely unnecessary. Maybe erecting "Temporary" or "To" Interstate 695 signs along the Interstate 895 spurs, Interstate 895 itself, and Interstate 95 (or some other routes) would suffice.

Everyone knows 695, and it should stay as such. It just won't be a full loop for the time being.

[jeffandnicole]

https://apnews.com/article/baltimore-bridge-collapse-liability-litigation-16de885948e769566e7181ffa35b1753

Filed on April Fool's Day and too bad it isn't one. The company whose boat knocked the bridge down wants to limit their liability to less than $100M.

I mean, that's pretty standard. If anyone caused an accidental loss, they would want to try to find a way out of paying, regardless if it's $10 or $1 billion.

[ixnay]

I think a temporary renumbering of the Interstate 695 beltway is completely unnecessary. Maybe erecting "Temporary" or "To" Interstate 695 signs along the Interstate 895 spurs, Interstate 895 itself, and Interstate 95 (or some other routes) would suffice.

Everyone knows 695, and it should stay as such. It just won't be a full loop for the time being.

Yes, Alex's numbering ideas aren't bad, but I would be happy with the whole thing remaining 695.

Plus, moving 995 to the Hawkins Point stub would leave the road people with the dilemma of what new number to put on the BWI Amtrak station access road, which MD 995 now graces, though not in signing.

[Alex]

I think a temporary renumbering of the Interstate 695 beltway is completely unnecessary. Maybe erecting "Temporary" or "To" Interstate 695 signs along the Interstate 895 spurs, Interstate 895 itself, and Interstate 95 (or some other routes) would suffice.

Everyone knows 695, and it should stay as such. It just won't be a full loop for the time being.

Yes, Alex's numbering ideas aren't bad, but I would be happy with the whole thing remaining 695.

Plus, moving 995 to the Hawkins Point stub would leave the road people with the dilemma of what new number to put on the BWI Amtrak station access road, which MD 995 now graces, though not in signing.

My thoughts on renumbering all of MD 695 south to different numbers was based upon the concept of discouraging through traffic from using it while also conveying that 695 is no longer a complete loop. I-695 or MD 695, I also imagine some motorists cannot discern the difference.

Maryland often assigns multiple branches as unsigned suffixes, which is why I thought MD 995 could be used.

Nonetheless, I can easily redo the map to show the whole southern half as MD 695 or whatever else might work. More than likely we'll see orange guide signs, tarped signs, and VMS alerts for the foreseeable future for I-695 south of I-95.

[MASTERNC]

Traffic was a mess on all the alternative routes yesterday with the rain.  Saw the VMS signs were quoting 30 minutes to go 7 miles on both 95 and 895.  Traffic on 95 was backed up past the Beltway.  An accident north of town on the 695 ramp to 95 North also backed things up.

Hoping there can be some long-term fixes to traffic patterns to help things out.

[SteveG1988]

Question that hasn't really been answered. Why was it kept as MD695 despite I695 being up to the standards except for drawbridges by 1999?

[WillWeaverRVA]

Question that hasn't really been answered. Why was it kept as MD695 despite I695 being up to the standards except for drawbridges by 1999?

I'm pretty sure it's because some of those segments were still substandard (the Key Bridge was also substandard), plus it wasn't built on the original approved alignment for I-695 due to freeway cancellations.

[epzik8]

I think a temporary renumbering of the Interstate 695 beltway is completely unnecessary. Maybe erecting "Temporary" or "To" Interstate 695 signs along the Interstate 895 spurs, Interstate 895 itself, and Interstate 95 (or some other routes) would suffice.

Everyone knows 695, and it should stay as such. It just won't be a full loop for the time being.

Yes, Alex's numbering ideas aren't bad, but I would be happy with the whole thing remaining 695.

Plus, moving 995 to the Hawkins Point stub would leave the road people with the dilemma of what new number to put on the BWI Amtrak station access road, which MD 995 now graces, though not in signing.

My thoughts on renumbering all of MD 695 south to different numbers was based upon the concept of discouraging through traffic from using it while also conveying that 695 is no longer a complete loop. I-695 or MD 695, I also imagine some motorists cannot discern the difference.

Maryland often assigns multiple branches as unsigned suffixes, which is why I thought MD 995 could be used.

Nometheless, I can easily redo the map to show the whole southern half as MD 695 or whatever else might work. More than likely we'll see orange guide signs, tarped signs, and VMS alerts for the foreseeable future for I-695 south of I-95.

Let it be known that I am not at all bashing your map, and just wanted to get my two cents in on the situation.

[1995hoo]

Google Maps no longer shows the bridge.

[SteveG1988]

Random Q, i was looking at old aerials, there used to be a bridge from near the toll plaza, across an arm of the bay, did that bridge have a name?

[epzik8]

Google Maps no longer shows the bridge.

Hope the Street View doesn't go with it.

[SteveG1988]

Google Maps no longer shows the bridge.

Hope the Street View doesn't go with it.

It shouldn't