The only thing more shocking than the total collapse of the Key Bridge in Baltimore last week was the number of speculative conjectures stated by elected and appointed officials in the hours after it was struck by a container ship. Federal and state officials almost immediately declared it had not been a terrorist attack. While there has so far been no evidence whatsoever showing the crash was intentional, there had not been adequate time to investigate sufficiently to entirely rule it out at the time they made that declaration. More importantly, the claim was made - and then repeated ad nauseum by the media - that any type of bridge would have completely collapsed in this scenario. An investigative report published by The Washington Post this past Saturday has determined that claim to be false.
A collapse of a similar bridge over Tampa Bay in Florida following a ship collision in 1980 resulted in federal authorities alerting highway agencies to review all bridges, to find out how many might have the same vulnerability, the Post learned. An engineer with the Maryland Department of Transportation confirmed to The Baltimore Sun that year that the Key Bridge was one of the state's bridges that fell into that category. "I'm talking about the main supports, a direct hit - it would knock it down," he told the Sun.
Despite learning this in 1980, state and federal officials took no action to construct barriers or islands around the Key Bridge's support columns. "They had all this time to realize the danger, and it appears to me they did nothing about it," Florida attorney Steve Yerrid told the Post. Yerrid was a lawyer for the pilot of the ship that struck the Sunshine Skyway Bridge in Tampa Bay. "Maryland officials should have moved aggressively to protect their bridges from collisions, despite the costs," the Post cited Yerrid as saying.
National Transportation Safety Board Chair Jennifer Homendy also put to rest the idea that "no bridge could have survived this crash." She said the bridge designs of today have "redundancy" built in, so that the loss of one pier doesn't cause a total collapse. In contrast, Maryland officials knew that the Key Bridge was among the thousands of "fracture critical" bridges in America. "Fracture critical" means that "if one key piece fails, part or all of the bridge would likely collapse," the Post reported.
America's crumbling infrastructure is often in the news, but rarely in state and federal budgets. We know that trillions of dollars that could have been spent on new bridges and highway maintenance, high speed rail, utility networks, healthcare, poverty, housing for the homeless and other essential needs have instead gone to costly wars overseas, as just one example of nonsensical spending priorities.
Senator Chuck Schumer is reportedly having difficulty finding $10 million to correct major infrastructure issues at the National Institute of Standards and Technology campus right here in Gaithersburg, deficiencies that are currently threatening national security and the health of NIST employees. But the U.S. government had no difficulty finding $75 billion for the Ukraine War, at least $3 trillion for the Iraq War, $2.3 trillion for the Afghanistan War, $2.2 billion of weapons for rebels against the government of Syria, $17 billion on a military adventure in the former Yugoslavia, a $100 million drone base in Niger...the list goes on and on, and most of the money goes into the private profit pockets of the military-industrial complex. None of those outlays has resulted in a successful geopolitical victory for the United States.
At the same time, Maryland elected officials have spent big and repeatedly raised taxes since 1980. The completely-preventable collapse of the Key Bridge forces us to now evaluate just which frivolous things - and campaign donors - our representatives have spent all that tax revenue on instead.
In many photo-ops over the last week, our elected officials have striven to give us the impression they are here to save us from an economic catastrophe that also cost at least six human lives. As the Post report proves, they were actually the problem in the first place, having failed to act to modify or replace the Key Bridge for 44 years.
"...declared it had not been a terrorist attack... there had not been adequate time to investigate sufficiently to entirely rule it out at the time they made that declaration"
ReplyDeleteBefore the collision, the ship broadcast a mayday call, which gave officers time to block traffic and potentially saved many lives. Seems safe to say it was not a terrorist attack.
While that seemed to indicate that the crew itself did not have any nefarious intent, none of the officials who made the claim had yet reviewed the black box or onboard systems to rule out an outside actor having hacked the navigation or other onboard systems. That is a real concern that predates the Key Bridge incident, and several vessels have been hacked and taken control of in the past. So it was irresponsible for them to rule out something that hadn't actually been ruled out at that early moment.
DeleteSo irresponsible! Shame on them for calming the public. They should know accidents never happen in conspiracy land. How could anyone pass up such a golden opportunity to foment fear and hate for polical gain.
DeleteWeak argument for a pathetic excuse for the cause. Prove your suspicion regarding past hacking attempts.
Delete2:49: Hacking of ship navigation systems has been a major concern for more than a decade, and has indeed happened already, such as when hackers took control of a German cargo ship in 2017.
DeleteHere are articles from several reputable news outlets regarding the danger of ships being hacked and remotely controlled - something that could not possibly have been ruled out at the time federal and state officials falsely-declared that they knew the Key Bridge incident was not an attack:
BBC:
"'We know a cargo container, for example, where the switchboard shut down after ransomware found its way on the vessel,' says Patrick Rossi who works within the ethical hacking group at independent advisory organisation DNV GL.
"He explains that the switchboard manages power supply to the propeller and other machinery on board. The ship in question, moored at a port in Asia, was rendered inoperable for some time, adds Mr Rossi."
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-40685821
Scientific American:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/gps-is-easy-to-hack-and-the-u-s-has-no-backup/
CNBC:
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/06/27/hackers-can-now-bring-cargo-ships-and-planes-to-a-grinding-halt.html
Reuters:
https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSBREA3M208/
Given the wealth and depth of reporting on ship hacking, it is shocking that the press didn't push back on the premature claims of "no terrorism."
I agree, there definitely should have been protective barriers or islands around the support columns of the bridge to help prevent a collapse. I agree also that we spend far too much on foreign wars, spending on Ukraine is too much.Europe should be supplying the majority of the money for Ukraine,we need to spend that money here.
ReplyDeleteOf coure Europe is supplying the majority of the money for Ukraine:
Deletehttps://www.statista.com/chart/28489/ukrainian-military-humanitarian-and-financial-aid-donors/
You know nothing about federal budgets and spending as displayed by mixing apples and oranges in this reply. Defense budgets and domestic issues are separate items in a budget and never comingled. This is the same as in local government budgets as well. You don't take from Peter to pay Paul. You and Robert are ignorant of the budgeting process.
DeleteYour are sadly mistaken,the United States has supplied the majority of money to the Ukraine war effort,at approximately 75 billion. The European union as a whole has supplied slightly more than 75 billion, that means all European countries in the European Union have given just slightly more than the United States,which again just shows that America is being used by Europe.
Deletehttps://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/these-countries-have-committed-the-most-aid-to-ukraine
Yes. Google-earth the new Sunshine Skyway Bridge in Tampa Bay. There are 36 large concrete dolphins protecting her support columns from a ship-strike. Key Bridge had four all of which MS Dali conveniently avoided.
ReplyDeleteWhat a poor, disturbing attempt at politicizing this issue.
ReplyDeleteYes, the Iraq War was a waste of trillions of dollars. No, that doesn't mean billions should have been spent on an unnecessary new bridge just because the old one couldn't withstand 100,000 tons of force smashing into it.
2:54: I'm not sure I understand your argument. You're saying that protecting or replacing a bridge our elected officials knew would completely collapse if bumped by a ship, that stood over a channel heavily traveled around the clock by large cargo ships, was "unnecessary?" In reality, it would have been money wisely and well-spent, and literally a life-saving expenditure.
DeleteMore right wing conservative, crap of ifs and buts. The bridge, any bridge would not survive a hit of a ship of this size, and you know it. All of the experts agree on this. As for the protective dolphins, this and most other bridges don't have these devices due to the cost, even in light of the Tampa incident. Other needs superseded this improvement. Your politicizing it is shall and shameful, then again its just a blogger. Let's see you submit your op ed to a major newspaper like WaPo, Baltimore Sun, or even the Annapolis Capital. Dare!
DeleteWhat's "right wing" about wanting to spend money on infrastructure? The GOP is hardly known for that.
Delete"All of the experts" do not agree that no bridge could survive a hit from a ship of that size. As I noted in the article, the head of the NTSB herself said that bridges are now designed to have redundant structural features, so that ramming one support doesn't collapse the whole bridge.
Which "other needs superceded" the need to protect or replace a heavily-traveled bridge that we knew could collapse with if struck by any of the thousands of cargo ships passing below it around the clock?
The bridge collapse was politicized from the moment it happened. Elected officials at all levels have tried to spin the disaster toward their reactionary response now, as opposed to examining their lack of proactive actions over the last 44 years. At least one goofy news outlet has even tried to pin the blame on Larry Hogan in a desperate attempt to weaken his campaign for U.S. Senate. The argument? Hogan brought too much shipping traffic to the Port of Baltimore. Given all of that politicizing by officials and the media, and the lack of critical analysis of the state's failure to act since 1980, I am one of the few journalists to actually draw attention to the issue.