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

[Rothman]

If they had no authority, then how were they responsible?

They should have had the authority to seek authority and therefore are by proxy are responsible.  I think that is what Beltway is trying to say at least?   

Given how Beltway is responding, do not assume consistency.

[Beltway]

If they had no authority, then how were they responsible?

Because the state government and the general assembly didn't grant them sufficient authority.

I said "the Maryland state government holds part of the blame." Which means what it says -- between the legislature and the executive branch agencies they failed to have proper systems in place, to protect both the vessel and whatever it might run into.

It is like if the USAF accidentally dropped an atom bomb on a populated area in the U.S. and it blew up. Some things are so critical that you -cannot- make a mistake.

On average, the Port of Baltimore sees about 2 to 4 gasoline tanker ship arrivals per day, and they carry between 20,000 and 60,000 tons of gasoline depending on the load, and all their docks are upstream of the Key Bridge. If one crashed into the bridge and/or dolphins and the hull tore open and the cargo caught fire it would be a very bad day.

Secondary consequences of a major strike
+ Hazardous material spill: A ruptured tanker or container ship could release flammable, toxic, or reactive cargo directly into the channel, creating both environmental disaster and navigational closure.
+ Fire and thermal load: A prolonged blaze aboard ship or ignited cargo — especially under a cable-stayed span with polymer sheathings and tensioned steel — could compromise structural integrity through heat-induced deformation or cable creep. This could cause the suspended spans to collapse even though not impact damaged.
+ Bridge closure: Even non-collapse damage could mean months of forensic inspection, partial reconstruction at hundreds of millions of dollars, and economic disruption, not to mention rerouting 32,000 vehicles daily.

Limitations of pier protection
+ Deceleration assumption: The idea that a vessel at 10 knots and ~200,000 tons can be safely "caught" by sacrificial concrete or steel dolphins is a fiction born of modeling — not real-world validation.
+ Shock transfer: Impact forces don't just stop at the barrier — they travel into the foundations, into the superstructure, and sometimes into the vessel itself, creating debris fields and multi-system failures.
+ No fire suppression integration: Unlike tunnels, these systems typically have no integrated fire containment, leaving responders to deal with open, unshielded conflagration next to steel infrastructure.

The false promise of "deflection" -- What's being sold as protection is, in reality, impact redirection with untested collateral. It's akin to installing crash barriers on a runway and assuming that'll prevent an aircraft from causing damage during a failed takeoff — without factoring in fuel, fire, or kinetic fallout.

The idea that only Dali-scale ships pose a threat is a convenient fiction. A 50,000-ton vessel moving at 15 knots — even if drawing just 25 feet — still carries enough kinetic energy to inflict catastrophic damage on a bridge pier not designed for modern impact loads.

The physics of a "non-Dali" Strike
+ Kinetic Energy (KE) scales with mass × velocity², meaning velocity is the real multiplier. A ship going nearly twice as fast as the Dali has roughly 4× the impact energy, even if it's half the mass.
+ A Panamax bulk carrier, at 50,000–60,000 DWT and 25-foot draft, is common in U.S. ports and perfectly capable of traveling at or above 14–15 knots in fairway conditions.
+ Unlike container ships with elevated bridge visibility, many bulkers have more challenging sightlines and slower rudder response — amplifying collision risk during navigational error or control loss.

Designing protection systems around "worst-case" Dali-scale impacts ignores the reality of higher-speed, medium-mass vessels, which can deliver destructive force with greater probability.

[Max Rockatansky]

If they had no authority, then how were they responsible?

They should have had the authority to seek authority and therefore are by proxy are responsible.  I think that is what Beltway is trying to say at least?   

Given how Beltway is responding, do not assume consistency.

Oh no, he's been consistently been posted weird nonsense.  I just can't make sense of it and I don't seem to be alone on that. 

[PColumbus73]

If they had no authority, then how were they responsible?

They should have had the authority to seek authority and therefore are by proxy are responsible.  I think that is what Beltway is trying to say at least?   

Given how Beltway is responding, do not assume consistency.

Oh no, he's been consistently been posted weird nonsense.  I just can't make sense of it and I don't seem to be alone on that. 

We're gonna need more pool noodles...

[Max Rockatansky]

If they had no authority, then how were they responsible?

They should have had the authority to seek authority and therefore are by proxy are responsible.  I think that is what Beltway is trying to say at least?   

Given how Beltway is responding, do not assume consistency.

Oh no, he's been consistently been posted weird nonsense.  I just can't make sense of it and I don't seem to be alone on that. 

We're gonna need more pool noodles...

I mean hey, pool noodles are miniature tunnels if you really think about it.

[Rothman]

If they had no authority, then how were they responsible?

They should have had the authority to seek authority and therefore are by proxy are responsible.  I think that is what Beltway is trying to say at least?   

Given how Beltway is responding, do not assume consistency.

Oh no, he's been consistently been posted weird nonsense.  I just can't make sense of it and I don't seem to be alone on that. 

We're gonna need more pool noodles...

I mean hey, pool noodles are miniature tunnels if you really think about it.

*mind blown*

[kphoger]

Maryland was responsible for having inspections for seaworthiness

Maryland had no authority to inspect the vessel's seaworthiness

It is like if the USAF accidentally dropped an atom bomb on a populated area in the U.S. and it blew up.

No, it isn't like that.  By your analogy, the USAF doesn't have the authority to inspect their own airplanes.

[Beltway]

Maryland was responsible for having inspections for seaworthiness
Maryland had no authority to inspect the vessel's seaworthiness

It is like if the USAF accidentally dropped an atom bomb on a populated area in the U.S. and it blew up.

No, it isn't like that.  By your analogy, the USAF doesn't have the authority to inspect their own airplanes.

You can be logically and sociologically and morally responsible for something yet not be given sufficient legal authority to manage it properly; neither any controls in place to make sure you are managing it properly.

Highway construction inspector joke (from my time thereof):

Question: How do you know when the nuclear density gauge is malfunctioning?
Answer: When you see a blinding flash of light and then a mushroom cloud.

. . . . . . . . . .

The device being referred to:

Troxler Model 3440 Nuclear Moisture/Density Gauge

This instrument uses a Cesium-137 source to measure soil and asphalt density, and an Americium-241/Beryllium source to assess moisture content. It operates in either direct transmission or backscatter mode, depending on the depth and material being tested.

[kphoger]

logically and sociologically and morally

Ah, so now we've gotten to the truth of the matter, which is that the statements below are just, like, your opinion, man.

the Maryland state government holds part of the blame

Maryland was responsible for having inspections for seaworthiness

That is to say, legally, the Maryland state government neither holds part of the blame nor was responsible for having inspections for seaworthiness.

[Max Rockatansky]

Since we are talking about nukes, can we just nuke this thread from orbit?  I feel it is the only way to be sure.

[PColumbus73]

Since we are talking about nukes, can we just nuke this thread from orbit?  I feel it is the only way to be sure.

The Mods don't have the authority to nuke this thread, but they are responsible for not nuking the thread.

[Max Rockatansky]

Since we are talking about nukes, can we just nuke this thread from orbit?  I feel it is the only way to be sure.

The Mods don't have the authority to nuke this thread, but they are responsible for not nuking the thread.

This operation is under commenter jurisdiction, and kphoger is next in chain of command. 

[kphoger]

The Mods don't have the authority to nuke this thread, but they are responsible for not nuking the thread.

It is like if Scott Nazelrod accidentally dropped an F bomb in a populated Wal-Mart parking lot in the U.S. and a little old nun blew up at him for it.