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

[PColumbus73]

I wasn't the one who revived this thread with fictional tunnel ideas at 12:39 AM.  The previous reply was on August 3rd.  I'm perfectly content with letting the thread die either naturally or via figurative catastrophic collapse. 

There is nothing "fictional" about building a tunnel here given that it was the original design with this crossing and the land approaches were built and the tunnel was designed and bids were advertised and opened. Plus the fact that this harbor has two other tunnels and it is not without precedent. Plus the fact that nothing new has been built yet.

This ship explosion and fire near the bridge just reinforces the need to consider all forms of risk that are involved.

I've heard of projection -- and at this point I'm seeing you demonstrate it with every one your posts, with your petty need to have the last word until everyone says they agree with you.  You've clearly made your point, umpteen times.  Let it go, willya?

Not until we all join in protest and roll around the banks of the Patapsco River until we look like bog monsters, but not before a pilgrimage to Hampton Roads to marvel at the glory of the tunnels.

[Beltway]

There is nothing "fictional" about building a tunnel here given that it was the original design with this crossing and the land approaches were built and the tunnel was designed and bids were advertised and opened. Plus the fact that this harbor has two other tunnels and it is not without precedent. Plus the fact that nothing new has been built yet.
This ship explosion and fire near the bridge just reinforces the need to consider all forms of risk that are involved.

I've heard of projection -- and at this point I'm seeing you demonstrate it with every one your posts, with your petty need to have the last word until everyone says they agree with you.  You've clearly made your point, umpteen times.  Let it go, willya?

This ship explosion and fire near the bridge site is new news about the project.

Rather than whining and complaining about what I post, how about explaining in detail where my opinions are incorrect?

There are at least 5 posters here who have done nothing but make throwaway comments about my posts.

I usually ignore them but sometimes don't -- I need to be more disciplined because they just clog up the thread with nonsense -- and replying to them just feeds their energy.

[Max Rockatansky]

I'm just amused that you think you're somehow coming from a position of credibility in this thread.

[roadman65]

I think Taps needs to be played here and give this thread a burial.  The bridge collapse is ancient history and the replacement talk can merit its own thread.

[vdeane]

Rather than whining and complaining about what I post, how about explaining in detail where my opinions are incorrect?

We have.  Repeatedly.  We don't feel like doing so again and again and again, and are quite frankly sick and tired of you acting like a broken record.  Give it a rest.  Maryland is continuing to move forward with the replacement bridge, and no amount of posting from you on the internet is going to change that.  At this point, you're shilling for a tunnel so much that I'm convinced you must have some financial stake in the idea.

[Beltway]

Rather than whining and complaining about what I post, how about explaining in detail where my opinions are incorrect?

We have.  Repeatedly.

Where are they?

I put up a simple update post about the ship explosion and conflagration near the bridge. That is relevant to what will be built there.

We don't feel like doing so again and again and again, and are quite frankly sick and tired of you acting like a broken record.  Give it a rest.  Maryland is continuing to move forward with the replacement bridge, and no amount of posting from you on the internet is going to change that.  At this point, you're shilling for a tunnel so much that I'm convinced you must have some financial stake in the idea.

That response is emotionally charged, but it's also a classic example of deflection and projection -- especially if my advocacy for a tunnel or longer bridge main span is grounded in engineering, safety, economic, environmental and long-term planning concerns.

What's actually being said
+ "Broken record":  This implies repetition, but repetition is often necessary when institutional decisions lack transparency or public engagement.
+ "Give it a rest":  A rhetorical shutdown, not a substantive rebuttal.
+ "Maryland is moving forward":  True, but that doesn't invalidate public discourse. The Key Bridge rebuild is still in pre-construction phases, and design decisions are being shaped now.
+ "You must have a financial stake":  That's an ad hominem attacking motive instead of engaging the argument.

I understand the feedback, but repeating concerns isn't obstruction — it's accountability. Maryland's rebuild is still in motion, and tunnel alternatives and long main span alternatives deserve serious consideration, especially given long-term resilience and cost. I have no financial stake -- just a civic one. If the current bridge scheme is truly the best option, it should withstand scrutiny. If not, we owe it to future generations to ask hard questions now.

[Max Rockatansky]

What's the angle with trying psychoanalyze the other users using AI script? 

Let's turn this around towards you.  Why are you up in the middle of the night reviving dead threads?  Are you feeling a lack of validation that is causing insomnia?  Perhaps some healthy social interaction with friends and loved ones outside the road hobby is in order?

[Scott5114]

Going forward, posts in this thread need to be about what is actually being considered by the state of Maryland for building the replacement bridge. Couldas, wouldas, and shouldas (i.e. "advocating") will be removed, either to the Fictional Highways forum, or the circular file. (There is no point in "advocating" here—nobody from MDTA is on the forum.)

Posts that appear to be a copy-paste of AI/LLM output will be removed—if forum members need or want that, they can ask the robot for an incorrect answer themselves.

[Rothman]

I wasn't the one who revived this thread with fictional tunnel ideas at 12:39 AM.  The previous reply was on August 3rd.  I'm perfectly content with letting the thread die either naturally or via figurative catastrophic collapse. 

There is nothing "fictional" about building a tunnel here given that it was the original design with this crossing and the land approaches were built and the tunnel was designed and bids were advertised and opened. Plus the fact that this harbor has two other tunnels and it is not without precedent. Plus the fact that nothing new has been built yet.

This ship explosion and fire near the bridge just reinforces the need to consider all forms of risk that are involved.

It is fictional, since the project is progressive design-build (i.e., one contractor from preliminary design through construction, as opposed to just design-build) and pre-construction has already started.  The bridge alternative doesn't appear to be open for further discussion.  Permit applications have been submitted based upon the intended alternative.

https://www.keybridgerebuild.com/

[Beltway]

This ship explosion and fire near the bridge just reinforces the need to consider all forms of risk that are involved.

It is fictional, since the project is progressive design-build (i.e., one contractor from preliminary design through construction, as opposed to just design-build) and pre-construction has already started.  The bridge alternative doesn't appear to be open for further discussion.  Permit applications have been submitted based upon the intended alternative.

Do you know the history of the I-266 Three Sisters Bridge?

[LilianaUwU]

I'll make it clear, you can write this down, I want to fuck a woman as a horse. None of this is a secret, I just, to be clear, many jokes have been made about this but I stand by it. My moral principles are ROCK SOLID. I'm... my feet are firmly planted in the ground. I've got my boots up, they're planted firmly, you cannot move me from my position. This isn't a secret. Talk to a therapist? Why do you want to be the horse Vaush? Because then I'd have a giant dick. Okay? Couldn't you have an uh, a big dick the other way? Well yeah, I mean yeah um, I could have a big dick hypothetically in any variety of scenarios but then it wouldn't really be a horse dick. "Well you could be a human with a horse dick", yes but then I wouldn't have that powerful stallion energy using it. There you go, that's it, that's the whole thing.

is this Umamusume

[freebrickproductions]

At this point, the Francis Scott Key Bridge is a fictional bridge in Alanland that was brought down when the goat captain of the Salvador Dali tried to Tokyo drift the ship into Baltimore Harbor, but crashed because they didn't understand Japanese.

This is what the captain had to say when the media approached them after the incident:

[hotdogPi]

Hot take: The Key Bridge should use permanent Daylight Savings Time.

[Beltway]

Going forward, posts in this thread need to be about what is actually being considered by the state of Maryland for building the replacement bridge. Couldas, wouldas, and shouldas (i.e. "advocating") will be removed, either to the Fictional Highways forum, or the circular file. (There is no point in "advocating" here—nobody from MDTA is on the forum.)

OK then, if crossing alternatives can't be discussed, then what about the matter of whether anything should be built at all -- under the current scheme that the entire country provides 100% federal funding outside of normal federal-aid highway allocations, and with tolling being allowed on a new bridge?

The existing 12 Interstate lanes across the harbor carry about 225,000 AADT and that is not excessive. As far as HAZMAT, that was only about 400 shipments per day, hardly justification for spending $2 billion, and they can think creatively and say allow escorted HAZMAT shipments between 1 and 5 AM in the Fort McHenry Tunnel outer tubes.

The idea that if Maryland wants this bridge scheme then let them fund it as the original -- with toll revenue bonds and leave the feds out of it.

Would that be acceptable material here?

[roadman65]

 

[Max Rockatansky]

Save the "advocating" for your next letter to DOGE. 

[NE2]

Dumb question. Can't they fly in the backup Key Bridge from the Potomac? Baltimore needs it more than DC.

[1995hoo]

....

The existing 12 Interstate lanes across the harbor carry about 225,000 AADT and that is not excessive. As far as HAZMAT, that was only about 400 shipments per day, hardly justification for spending $2 billion, and they can think creatively and say allow escorted HAZMAT shipments between 1 and 5 AM in the Fort McHenry Tunnel outer tubes.

....

Why would they need to allow hazmats through the tunnel at all? Why can't they just go the long way around the other side of I-695? I recognize it's a much longer drive, of course, but taking longer routes is somewhat inherent in shipping anyway.

[plain]

....

The existing 12 Interstate lanes across the harbor carry about 225,000 AADT and that is not excessive. As far as HAZMAT, that was only about 400 shipments per day, hardly justification for spending $2 billion, and they can think creatively and say allow escorted HAZMAT shipments between 1 and 5 AM in the Fort McHenry Tunnel outer tubes.

....

Why would they need to allow hazmats through the tunnel at all? Why can't they just go the long way around the other side of I-695? I recognize it's a much longer drive, of course, but taking longer routes is somewhat inherent in shipping anyway.

....

The existing 12 Interstate lanes across the harbor carry about 225,000 AADT and that is not excessive. As far as HAZMAT, that was only about 400 shipments per day, hardly justification for spending $2 billion, and they can think creatively and say allow escorted HAZMAT shipments between 1 and 5 AM in the Fort McHenry Tunnel outer tubes.

....

Why would they need to allow hazmats through the tunnel at all? Why can't they just go the long way around the other side of I-695? I recognize it's a much longer drive, of course, but taking longer routes is somewhat inherent in shipping anyway.

Pretty sure that's what they were doing before the bridge was completed in the first place.

[1995hoo]

Pretty sure that's what they were doing before the bridge was completed in the first place.

One significant difference between now and then, of course, is that there was only one tunnel at the time, the Harbor Tunnel, so there were four lanes of cross-harbor Interstate-grade* capacity then versus the 12 lanes operating now. (The Fort McHenry Tunnel opened just before Thanksgiving weekend in 1985.) So I could see an argument that circumstances differ enough to make it the case that allowing hazmats through the new tunnel's outer tubes is less of a risk to the road network as a whole now than it would have been back then. Back then, a fiery crash or similar would have crippled the only direct highway crossing. Nowadays, it wouldn't, and it might not cripple the entire Fort McHenry Tunnel. I have no idea whether that is a good enough reason to allow hazmats through the tunnel at all when the option to go around the other side of I-695 exists (recognizing that the chance of a fiery crash might be worse on I-695 with the aggressive driving that sometimes seems to prevail through there).

*I say "Interstate-grade" solely to be pedantic because the Harbor Tunnel Thruway was not designated as an Interstate back then.

[PColumbus73]

Pretty sure that's what they were doing before the bridge was completed in the first place.

One significant difference between now and then, of course, is that there was only one tunnel at the time, the Harbor Tunnel, so there were four lanes of cross-harbor Interstate-grade* capacity then versus the 12 lanes operating now. (The Fort McHenry Tunnel opened just before Thanksgiving weekend in 1985.) So I could see an argument that circumstances differ enough to make it the case that allowing hazmats through the new tunnel's outer tubes is less of a risk to the road network as a whole now than it would have been back then. Back then, a fiery crash or similar would have crippled the only direct highway crossing. Nowadays, it wouldn't, and it might not cripple the entire Fort McHenry Tunnel. I have no idea whether that is a good enough reason to allow hazmats through the tunnel at all when the option to go around the other side of I-695 exists (recognizing that the chance of a fiery crash might be worse on I-695 with the aggressive driving that sometimes seems to prevail through there).

*I say "Interstate-grade" solely to be pedantic because the Harbor Tunnel Thruway was not designated as an Interstate back then.

Limiting hazmat to early morning hours through the tunnels sounds less 'creative' and more 'restrictive' when they would have been able to use I-695 at any time.

Secondly, debating about whether the Key Bridge should be rebuilt is just a loophole to continue the same tired argument. If they saw a need to build the original bridge, then there is a case for the need to rebuild it. And as previously discussed, the bridge is planned to be rebuilt anyway, so it's moot.

[1995hoo]

....

Secondly, debating about whether the Key Bridge should be rebuilt is just a loophole to continue the same tired argument. If they saw a need to build the original bridge, then there is a case for the need to rebuild it. And as previously discussed, the bridge is planned to be rebuilt anyway, so it's moot.

I'm just curious about Beltway's reasoning for why hazmats ought to be allowed through the tunnel at all. I have no interest in debating whether the bridge should be rebuilt, whether it should be a tunnel instead, etc.

[kphoger]

You are the one who brought dead things into this thread -- have you heard of the psychological phenomenon called projection?

Projection is a classic psychological defense mechanism where a person unconsciously attributes their own unacceptable thoughts, feelings, or traits to someone else. It's like mentally outsourcing discomfort — rather than acknowledging "I feel angry," the person might insist "You're being hostile," even if the other person isn't.

This is some next-level trolling.

I need to be more disciplined because they just clog up the thread with nonsense -- and replying to them just feeds their energy.

Said the pot to the kettle.

[Rothman]

Going forward, posts in this thread need to be about what is actually being considered by the state of Maryland for building the replacement bridge. Couldas, wouldas, and shouldas (i.e. "advocating") will be removed, either to the Fictional Highways forum, or the circular file. (There is no point in "advocating" here—nobody from MDTA is on the forum.)

OK then, if crossing alternatives can't be discussed, then what about the matter of whether anything should be built at all -- under the current scheme that the entire country provides 100% federal funding outside of normal federal-aid highway allocations, and with tolling being allowed on a new bridge?

The existing 12 Interstate lanes across the harbor carry about 225,000 AADT and that is not excessive. As far as HAZMAT, that was only about 400 shipments per day, hardly justification for spending $2 billion, and they can think creatively and say allow escorted HAZMAT shipments between 1 and 5 AM in the Fort McHenry Tunnel outer tubes.

The idea that if Maryland wants this bridge scheme then let them fund it as the original -- with toll revenue bonds and leave the feds out of it.

Would that be acceptable material here?

No.  The construction of the new bridge is proceeding, so this opinion is moot.

[Beltway]

Secondly, debating about whether the Key Bridge should be rebuilt is just a loophole to continue the same tired argument. If they saw a need to build the original bridge, then there is a case for the need to rebuild it. And as previously discussed, the bridge is planned to be rebuilt anyway, so it's moot.

I am old enough to have driven the original harbor tunnel when there were no other crossings, the completion of I-95 in the city was very much in doubt and far in the future in any case, and the outer harbor crossing was funded with about $60 million of state-issued toll revenue bonds.

Now that there are two cross-harbor freeways totaling 12 lanes, and a $2 billion price tag for building a new outer harbor crossing, then any case to rebuild is dealing with a quite different set of requirements and assumptions.

Would that be acceptable material here?

No.  The construction of the new bridge is proceeding, so this opinion is moot.

I didn't ask for your opinion -- I asked an admin. Let him respond.