https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/26/us/key-bridge-collapse-baltimore-what-to-know.html
This question will resolve to all the answers that are contributing factors of why the boat hit the bridge. As long as there's a reasonable causal connection, it counts - eg "failure to properly follow up on inspections" would count, so long as the followup could have plausibly averted the collision.
According to the NYTimes, what we know so far:
Why did the ship hit the bridge?
It is not known, and the National Transportation Safety Board said it is investigating. The 985-foot-long cargo vessel, called The Dali, was leaving the Port of Baltimore when it lost power and issued a mayday call just before hitting a critical component of the bridge, known as a pylon or pier. Radio traffic from emergency workers suggested that the crew was struggling to steer the ship, according to audio published by Broadcastify. Most of the lights of the ship went dark abruptly, just over two minutes before the ship hit the bridge. Baltimore harbor pilots were directing the ship at the time of the crash, as is customary when vessels enter ports or canals, according to a joint statement from the ship’s owner and manager. Governor Moore said the bridge was fully up to code, and that the collapse did not appear to be the result of a structural issue.
Feel free to add your own answers. I will moderate and N/A any that are obviously false/true and don't add value.
I'll only bet to set some initial values.
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ64 | |
| 2 | Ṁ49 | |
| 3 | Ṁ43 | |
| 4 | Ṁ39 | |
| 5 | Ṁ38 |
At this point there are a lot of sources that point to negligence from the parent company: https://www.lloydslist.com/LL1151117/Grace-Ocean-and-Synergy-settle-civil-suit-with-US-Justice-Department-for-$102m#:~:text=%E2%80%9COut%20of%20negligence%2C%20mismanagement%2C,reconstruction%2C%20and%20other%20damage%20claims.
EDIT: While the crew's actions at the time of the incident seem praise-worthy, the root cause was in part a mistake in a previous day with the breakers. I'm asking @mods to re-resolve this option as YES.
I missed the report released June 14, but I'm going through and resolving based on it now.
https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Documents/DCA24MM031_PreliminaryReport%203.pdf
@TheAllMemeingEye None of this would have happened if they just built an underwater tunnel like civilized people...
I'm going to resolve a few answers based on what we know for sure right now. Investigations are still ongoing (including the FBI boarding the ship today), and it seems like it could be a while before there is an accepted story for what actually went wrong.
The options I resolve now will be based on this article, and hopefully won't be controversial. There seems to be a consensus that a power outage on the shipped knocked out steering and navigation, at least (but potentially not for sure?) until the emergency generator kicked in, which was either too late or otherwise insufficient to avoid the collision.
If the backup system engaged, but too late, would this resolve Yes? Most backup systems take a bit to kick in
@Marnix If the backup system worked as it should, then it would resolve NO. That being said, if it “failed” because of an upstream reason, that still counts. Kicking in too late doesn’t necessarily mean resolving to YES as long as the delayed start is expected from the system.
@Dan How broad will "failure of ship machinery" be interpreted? Do external factors that caused the machinery to stop working make it resolve to yes? For example if an operator used a hammer to break a part of the machine, is that a machine failure?
@DavidS I'll interpret it fairly broadly, so yes the hammer example would count, but "someone turned it off" wouldn't. Generally something mechanical/electrical on the ship has to have stopped functioning properly somehow, regardless of why.
Some quick details on a couple of the answers. Please ask on others!
Error on the part of local pilots: “local pilots” refers to the specialist crew that brings the ships out of port, not part of the regular crew.
Negligence on the part of Synergy Marine Group: “negligence” here refers to a layperson understanding, not any legal case.