Mexican navy tall ship slams into Brooklyn Bridge

[Garbage1]

Multiple people injured after Mexican navy tall ship slams into Brooklyn Bridge in horrifying scene

A massive Mexican navy tall ship making a festive visit to New York slammed into the Brooklyn Bridge late Saturday — toppling its huge masts into the deck in a horrifying scene that left multiple c…

nypost.com

 

[Sym P. le]

There's something very wrong with that scene. The ship was moving backwards and towards the immediate shoreline with the tug in chase. Unfortunately the bridge got in the way. The ship then glanced off the shoreline just after it passed the bridge.

 

[oldrunner]

Did the ship lose power and was caught in the current of the river taking it towards the bridge? If this is true, then the only thing they could do was to drop the anchor. How unfortunate. Love old wood boats.

 

[TugboatEng]

It's a steel ship built in the 1980's

On older vessels, these types of loss of power incidents usually have some absurd cause. My favorite was on the Moku Pahu. A manhole cover had a gasket that someone didn't cut the center out of. The center of the gasket deteriorated and fell into the tank. The gasket ended up in the fuel meter and shut the entire plant down, electrical and propulsion.

However, with modern emissions controlled electronic engines, shutdowns are common and spontaneous. We've been experiencing this in one of our common rail injected engine families.

Redundancy is low in the maritime industry and poorly executed where it exists. I had an engine with primary and secondary ECM's. The secondary ECM failed and as a result misinterpreted the heartbeat from the primary. The secondary took control of the engine without having a personality profile which resulted in the immediate shutdown of the engine with no alarms.

I have a backup power system that can switch to a dead power bank. This and the previous example are from the highest tier OEMs.

Finally, there are no procedures for repair of components. Pneumatic controls on older boats are quite robust but are very sensitive to damage from lubricants. Most don't know to use only non-petroleum greases. Everything will work for 2-3 years but then the problems start if the wrong grease is used.

Finally, that station transfer button is the devil. The Mathers pneumatic system allowed any button to take control. Most of the newer systems transfer control from a station instead of taking control as a station. Very dangerous, these newer systems have caused many accidents. Staten Island ferry experienced a deadly incident some time back.

 

[Garbage1]

It's a steel ship built in the 1980's

On older vessels, these types of loss of power incidents usually have some absurd cause. My favorite was on the Moku Pahu. A manhole cover had a gasket that someone didn't cut the center out of. The center of the gasket deteriorated and fell into the tank. The gasket ended up in the fuel meter and shut the entire plant down, electrical and propulsion.

However, with modern emissions controlled electronic engines, shutdowns are common and spontaneous. We've been experiencing this in one of our common rail injected engine families.

Redundancy is low in the maritime industry and poorly executed where it exists.

It was confirmed in later news feeds, that it was loss of power, and river current that carried sail boat under bridge Another example of why Tugs should be required anytime large ships are operating near bridges that they cannot at clear the superstructure above. Further this could be extended to all bridge crossings based upon container ship into Baltimore Bridge.

 

[TugboatEng]

That ship isn't much larger than the tugs. The tug in the video is around 5-6k horsepower. The ship has 1500 horsepower, when it's engine is operational.

 

[Garbage1]

I should have said large or too tall to clear under bridge. Agree small not large boat.