MV Dali & Baltimore Bridge April 1, 2024 Update | New Channel, Who is in Charge & End of NTSB News
Вставка
- Опубліковано 10 чер 2024
- A New Channel for Baltimore
What's Going on With Shipping?
April 1, 2024
In this episode - maritime historian at Campbell University (@campbelledu) and former merchant mariner - provides an update on MV Dali and discusses the new channel being opened by the Coast Guard, the Unified Command structure, and the NTSB ending press conferences.
#dali #baltimorebridge #baltimore #shipping #brdigecollapse #supplychain #containerships #containerships
Support What's Going on With Shipping via:
Patreon: www.patreon.com/wgowshipping
Twitter: @mercoglianos
Facebook: @wgowshipping
Email: mercoglianosal@gmail.com
Key Bridge Response 2024
www.keybridgeresponse2024.com/
![ПОЛНАЯ ИСТОРИЯ ЭКЗОРЦИЗМА [Топ Сикрет]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/qBySr6Bt0B8/mqdefault.jpg)
When everyone is in charge, no one is in charge!
Yes. When everybody is in charge they can all say “it’s the other guys fault”. There needs to be an “MMFIC”.
Why the hard turn to Starboard? All wind and current issues were coming from the Port side, and the Autopilot or Harbour Pilot were adjusting for the wind and current variations that affected the ship's course. the mayday call had been sent and still, the ship continued on the course because the rudder was still working, they had dropped the Port anchor but didn't let out enough chain as shown after the crash the chain is hanging down meaning that it had not been dragging on the bottom. so the Anchor would not interfere with the course change into the Bridge Pier. My understanding of modern-day ships, a ship loses power to the propeller, the ship will continue on the course it was on before the loss of engine power, and the weight and momentum of such a heavy ship will never accidentally turn like the video shows. Remember the ship's electrical supply is from one of several Diesel Generators that the ship's electronic Autopilot controls to the Diesel motors controlling the Hydraulic rams to the Rudder and will keep working keeping the ship on the course set by the Harbour Pilot, remember that the ship was on course to pass under the bridge when the lights were turned off, without electric power to the Autopilot the rudder will remain on the set course while it was adjusting course for any wind or current variations, then when the lights (electric power) came on again the ship auto-pilot would automatically resume the original course settings before the power loss, But! The video showing the sharp turn onto the target had nothing to do with the lights, or Autopilot or wind or currants proving that The HUMAN FINGERPRINT is all over this deliberate turn into the Bridge. Heavy smoke from the engine funnel is caused by a sudden increase in fuel to the engine, providing strong water pushed onto the now hard-turned-to Starboard rudder, then again the ship rudder was adjusted to Port to stop the turn because the ship needed to make a direct hit not a glancing blow against the target. This was intentional closure of Americas 5th biggest port! No question about that! But was it the US Government extremists or their FBI, or CIA! Did Terrorists sneak on board and overpower the crew? Was it blackmail of the Harbour Pilots and captains and engineers, no matter why? It is “who are they” that must be discovered because 6 people are dead because of this deliberate act by some of the People on this ship!!!!!!!
Not how unified command works. He’s wrong.
@@geoffreytoomey682 Essentially nothing you’ve said here is correct. From your comment, it is abundantly clear you have no experience whatsoever with a vessel of any size or complexity. Absolutely none. Yet here you are speaking with great authority where no knowledge exists. Sad.
Avoid all responsibility and accountability at all costs the way of the politicians!
Sal, I don't know who's not "liking the info you're putting out" ... (Really don't care, free country) But I think you're doing a great service to those who are interested. Many thanks. 👍👍
This channel is sooooooo much more informative about this incident than any news station!
Of course, this channel was made exclusively for that. News station just drop general news once a week.
News stations don't give you news. They sell pieces of news to you, for the price of "watch a few ads". It's all cherry-picked garbage to make the people the most susceptible to the advertising that wraps around the "reporting".
My dad used to say: 'You can only have one captain on a ship'. He was a second officer on a coastguard ship in Rotterdam harbor for most of his life.
I appreciate this channel deals in knowlege, not wild conspiracies, or speculation based on no knowlege of shipping.
Same. Refreshing to scroll through the comments and gain further insight.
Agreed !
It's exhausting how quickly people with absolutely no clue about how the world works who immediately scream some sort of politically driven conspiracy for every single disaster. The tower collapse in Florida, Suez, this. It's always such stupid stuff.
Accidents have always happened, we shouldn't be surprised if they continue to happen.
I have nothing against people who are suspicious, but they have to look for the facts first.
@@joejoejoejoejoejoe4391 those facts do look quite suspicious, as do some of the reactions from institutions. to ignore the timing and circumstances would be a huge oversight. but i guess there are people working on that without tweeting about it all day. and thats good.
i also think that stupid theories muddy the waters additionally to the possible "conspiracy" itself. but you never should go overboard on either side i guess. remember, people, theres a lot of hybrid war going on for years now. NSII opened the floodgates for this kind of thing. the gloves seem to come off now. just saying.
Thank you for your wonderful channel. I stopped sailing in 1979 (2nd Mate) and left the industry. I always feel the call to go back to sea, but, never answered the bells of St. Mary's calling again. Yes, 1973, marine transportation. In all the searching the internet, you and your associates seem to have the BEST channels. Again, thank you from a 71 year old former merchant marine officer.
wow
As a Retired US Army Colonel and commander throughout my military career (*and current USCG Captain/Master 50 ton/offshore), I believe you are Absolutely spot on with your analysis hand opinions about incident command and public disclosure of findings. “Someones” are very eager to keep the public ignorant and that is not good.
Why the hard turn to Starboard? All wind and current issues were coming from the Port side, and the Autopilot or Harbour Pilot were adjusting for the wind and current variations that affected the ship's course. the mayday call had been sent and still, the ship continued on the course because the rudder was still working, they had dropped the Port anchor but didn't let out enough chain as shown after the crash the chain is hanging down meaning that it had not been dragging on the bottom. so the Anchor would not interfere with the course change into the Bridge Pier. My understanding of modern-day ships, a ship loses power to the propeller, the ship will continue on the course it was on before the loss of engine power, and the weight and momentum of such a heavy ship will never accidentally turn like the video shows. Remember the ship's electrical supply is from one of several Diesel Generators that the ship's electronic Autopilot controls to the Diesel motors controlling the Hydraulic rams to the Rudder and will keep working keeping the ship on the course set by the Harbour Pilot, remember that the ship was on course to pass under the bridge when the lights were turned off, without electric power to the Autopilot the rudder will remain on the set course while it was adjusting course for any wind or current variations, then when the lights (electric power) came on again the ship auto-pilot would automatically resume the original course settings before the power loss, But! The video showing the sharp turn onto the target had nothing to do with the lights, or Autopilot or wind or currants proving that The HUMAN FINGERPRINT is all over this deliberate turn into the Bridge. Heavy smoke from the engine funnel is caused by a sudden increase in fuel to the engine, providing strong water pushed onto the now hard-turned-to Starboard rudder, then again the ship rudder was adjusted to Port to stop the turn because the ship needed to make a direct hit not a glancing blow against the target. This was intentional closure of Americas 5th biggest port! No question about that! But was it the US Government extremists or their FBI, or CIA! Did Terrorists sneak on board and overpower the crew? Was it blackmail of the Harbour Pilots and captains and engineers, no matter why? It is “who are they” that must be discovered because 6 people are dead because of this deliberate act by some of the People on this ship!!!!!!!
Something stinks to high hell sir..I don't like it one bit. We are in ww3 whether anyone likes to admit it. On the brink in the middle East with the red heifer sacrifice and then there is the dubious terror attack in Moscow. A lot of quick denials and projection of guilt taking place. Good to to get right with God and watch your 6 out there as our WIDE-OPEN BORDER and derelict/ treasonr admin is letting in a literal flood of unvetted military ages males from 160 different countries... 30- 40mil so far. WHISKEY TANGO FOXTROT?!?!!
My belief is the want to keep the public ignorant comes from the top. The absence of information will breed questions with unsubstantiated answers. Then the media can call these questions and answers conspiracy theories and ridicule the fact that they exist.
@@geoffreytoomey682current shipboard design allows for power coming from two sources. One from the port side of the ship and the other from the starboard side of the ship. If the steering gear looses power an automatic bus transfer switch automatically transfers power to the alternate source. The alternate source being an emergency generator. It takes anywhere from fifteen to thirty seconds for the emergency generator to start and energize its bus. If the ship made a correction to starboard before loosing power it will maintain that course until power is restored and the bridge helm institutes are new coarse. If a collision was eminent a prudent course of action would be to command a hard to starboard (right) turn and all back (reverse) full speed thus causing the bow to swing to port(left). Just the thoughts of an old retired sailor.
@@geoffreytoomey682great job telling the world you don’t have a clue about ship operations without saying you don’t have a clue about ship operations 🎉
The Unified Command structure is the 'new' thing employed by government and large corporations. With no individual in charge, there is no way to blame any individual or agency when things go wrong, which this structure guarantees will occur.
You are 100% correct about a single person in charge. The current scheme leads to the split brain problem because of competing interests. I’ve seen it plenty of times.
You really want to take a chance that one. Trumplike person in charge. In these situations it is not necessary
It's also about safety. You can have doubts, but think..."oh I'm sure, they've thought of that...." but maybe not checking to be sure that they've thought of it...
Rule by commitee in most cases cannot make a decision quickly and rarely commensurate.
@@rosean374
“Too many Chiefs and not enough Indians.”
Never heard of that old parable?
In four years Trump never bossed
around agencies like current president is doing.
@@rosean374254u
Sal - As a former shipyard worker, firefighter, member of the USCG Auxiliary at Deepwater Horizon , and a current volunteer with the California Governor's Office of Emergency Services, I am quite familiar with the Incident Command System and have taken many ICS courses. You are right on with your comments. I hope they listen.
As a Radio Operator for our local Emergency group, you are correct. We are required to have a lot of ICS courses, and having one person in charge at the top( even with Unified Command) gives cohesiveness and a “buck stops here” endpoint. Maybe no one in Baltimore wants to be that person!
NTSB usually do at most 2-3 daily on-site press briefing even for major air disaster. It depends on the amount of info they are able to share at the time. If they decided to no do more press briefing it's usually because there aren't more to share at the time. The preliminary report will provide most of the early info so wait for that. That should have a summary of the interviews if they are relevant but don't expect any full transcript. They conduct their interviews under the agreement that anything disclosed in those interviews will not be used in court if any lawsuit/criminal charges arise. That is to ensure that witnesses (and their lawyers) would feel free to provide accurate information and not hide anything in fear of getting prosecuted.
I hope they do a public investigatory hearing for this as that would give us more direct testimonies from all relevant parties. You can watch the hearings they held for the East Palestine train derailment to get a sense of how that usually goes.
Always having good information is your trademark. Thank you!
G'day,
And the poor silly under-educated
'MurriKans(!)
STILL cannot spell the
Word.
A "Meter" is an
Instrument featuring a
Dial-faced Display with a fixed
Graduated-Scale and a moving Pointer ; used to show a single measured
Parameter, in realtime.
Eg,
Altitude, Airspeed, Temperature, Fuel remaining, Oil Pressure, etc.
A
"Metre"
Is a Napoleonic-vintage
French word...;
Meaning,
"39.3937 Inches".
And, Yanqui,
If ye Cannae
SPELL it, then ye
Most certainly,
Cannot expect to be
EXPLAINING
It...(!).
Just(ifiably ?) sayin'.
Such is life,
Have a good one....
Stay safe.
;-p
Ciao !
Why the hard turn to Starboard? All wind and current issues were coming from the Port side, and the Autopilot or Harbour Pilot were adjusting for the wind and current variations that affected the ship's course. the mayday call had been sent and still, the ship continued on the course because the rudder was still working, they had dropped the Port anchor but didn't let out enough chain as shown after the crash the chain is hanging down meaning that it had not been dragging on the bottom. so the Anchor would not interfere with the course change into the Bridge Pier. My understanding of modern-day ships, a ship loses power to the propeller, the ship will continue on the course it was on before the loss of engine power, and the weight and momentum of such a heavy ship will never accidentally turn like the video shows. Remember the ship's electrical supply is from one of several Diesel Generators that the ship's electronic Autopilot controls to the Diesel motors controlling the Hydraulic rams to the Rudder and will keep working keeping the ship on the course set by the Harbour Pilot, remember that the ship was on course to pass under the bridge when the lights were turned off, without electric power to the Autopilot the rudder will remain on the set course while it was adjusting course for any wind or current variations, then when the lights (electric power) came on again the ship auto-pilot would automatically resume the original course settings before the power loss, But! The video showing the sharp turn onto the target had nothing to do with the lights, or Autopilot or wind or currants proving that The HUMAN FINGERPRINT is all over this deliberate turn into the Bridge. Heavy smoke from the engine funnel is caused by a sudden increase in fuel to the engine, providing strong water pushed onto the now hard-turned-to Starboard rudder, then again the ship rudder was adjusted to Port to stop the turn because the ship needed to make a direct hit not a glancing blow against the target. This was intentional closure of Americas 5th biggest port! No question about that! But was it the US Government extremists or their FBI, or CIA! Did Terrorists sneak on board and overpower the crew? Was it blackmail of the Harbour Pilots and captains and engineers, no matter why? It is “who are they” that must be discovered because 6 people are dead because of this deliberate act by some of the People on this ship!!!!!!!
@@geoffreytoomey682Wow that's sincerely funny it's so wacky.
Can I use some of the foil from your hat for a baked potato?
I'm learning a lot from you Sal!
@@matt5721 sure you can Matt, Thanks Glen, no autopilot is ever being used by the harbour pilots in confined waters, and the Captain must not touch the controls without a very good reason, Thanks I've never been on the bridge on a large ship like this one, and I still have a problem trying to explain how the rudder moved to take the ship dramatically off course? and there was not a beginning of a slow turn to the starboard shown in the video when the engine was not pushing the ship? so I'm assuming the rudder was still set on the course to clear the bridge until the engine was given a full throttle ahead signal from the bridge or could it have been in the engineering area? thus the sharp turn to starboard, not a slow dragged turn, slowing the ship in reverse would drag the stern to Starboard and drag the bow too slowly to Port, Glen how's your math? someone good at math could probably work out how far the ship was from its course to clear under the bridge, the video showing the ship approaching and the turn into the Bridge Pier by timing the ship's turn from its original course, knowing the also length of the ship, then the time the ship is heading directly at the pier until the collision, assume a speed of 8 knots? plus add the time during the turn at the correct "math ratio" thingie???) not me, Grade 7 was 3 of my favourite school years :) I believe the 6 Humans that lost their lives during this, whatever it was, their families should get a better explanation than what the MSM and Government experts are telling us all. may they R.I.P.
Firstly, I discovered you on Mr. Carrol’s channel concerning the Red Sea. Thank you for providing such valuable information in terms everyone understands. You don’t hype and remain neutral in your presentation.
I just wanted to throw this out there concerning the unified command structure. I agree with your assessment but honestly given the complexity of the salvage and number of parties involved I can say with confidence the government and local politicians aren’t capable of handing that much power over so fast. Not that any one person is volunteering for the task.
Why the hard turn to Starboard? All wind and current issues were coming from the Port side, and the Autopilot or Harbour Pilot were adjusting for the wind and current variations that affected the ship's course. the mayday call had been sent and still, the ship continued on the course because the rudder was still working, they had dropped the Port anchor but didn't let out enough chain as shown after the crash the chain is hanging down meaning that it had not been dragging on the bottom. so the Anchor would not interfere with the course change into the Bridge Pier. My understanding of modern-day ships, a ship loses power to the propeller, the ship will continue on the course it was on before the loss of engine power, and the weight and momentum of such a heavy ship will never accidentally turn like the video shows. Remember the ship's electrical supply is from one of several Diesel Generators that the ship's electronic Autopilot controls to the Diesel motors controlling the Hydraulic rams to the Rudder and will keep working keeping the ship on the course set by the Harbour Pilot, remember that the ship was on course to pass under the bridge when the lights were turned off, without electric power to the Autopilot the rudder will remain on the set course while it was adjusting course for any wind or current variations, then when the lights (electric power) came on again the ship auto-pilot would automatically resume the original course settings before the power loss, But! The video showing the sharp turn onto the target had nothing to do with the lights, or Autopilot or wind or currants proving that The HUMAN FINGERPRINT is all over this deliberate turn into the Bridge. Heavy smoke from the engine funnel is caused by a sudden increase in fuel to the engine, providing strong water pushed onto the now hard-turned-to Starboard rudder, then again the ship rudder was adjusted to Port to stop the turn because the ship needed to make a direct hit not a glancing blow against the target. This was intentional closure of Americas 5th biggest port! No question about that! But was it the US Government extremists or their FBI, or CIA! Did Terrorists sneak on board and overpower the crew? Was it blackmail of the Harbour Pilots and captains and engineers, no matter why? It is “who are they” that must be discovered because 6 people are dead because of this deliberate act by some of the People on this ship!!!!!!!
Sal, as always, thanks for your presentation of news and information around significant shipping issues - very much appreciated. But . . .I am also grateful for your opinions. You have YEARS of in-depth knowledge and experience from many areas of life and your sound judgement make your thoughts and opinions valuable (to me at least!). Don't mind the nay-sayers, steady as you go, we'll be here!
You are spot on, Sal. I ran IRTs for years. You need to have one person that makes the call across the entire effort. Keep saying it.
I’m a 50 year old carpenter from New England. Your doing a great job! Best on You Tube💯
I agree with you, needs to be one in charge of the effort, even if that command changes during the operation as it progresses.
Put TRUMP in charge 🏳️⚧️😍
Too many egos spoils the broth!
@@ugiswrong Hell no he craps on anything he touches
You need a person that leads something along the lines of:
“Listen up folks! We’ll have a full and frank discussion. We’ll have a democratic vote, and then. . .
I’LL TELL YOU WHAT’S GOING TO HAPPEN!” 👍
Here here!
Sal you are absolutely correct on multiple issues, 1st, yes, there should be a sole leader to orchestrate this operation. 2nd, we should be getting updates daily from NTSB. This isn’t a run aground that caused a traffic jam. This is a vessel accident, involving multiple deaths and billions in damages, that WE ALL will be paying for.
KEEP CALLING THEM OUT SAL. WE HAVE THE SAME QUESTIONS, TOO!
Don't worry about the haters. You are doing the best job on this issue and all other issues you cover
I remember many years ago, like before 9/11, there was a fire inside the freight railroad tunnel in Baltimore - serious disruption to rail traffic. They worked hard and got the place repaired and as it turned out, some of what they learned in this tunnel fire was helpful in getting New York taken care of after 9/11. There is a lot of learning going on here at Baltimore Harbor now too. It may prove useful too, sometime in the future.
More Black Swan Events coming. Bet on it.
In the years leading up to 9/11 they imploded every high rise project in Baltimore - they last was February 2001.
No one mentions Thomas D'Alesandro and "The Exodus" of 1947, but they will use the word "Exodus" when describing how the businesses have left the Inner Harbor.
I lived through the 80s and was there for the ENTIRE "We are the World" programming that happened. I hope people are ready for what is coming since they are too scared to ask questions. They took Baltimore by fire in 1904 and by vessel of the sea in 2024. I wish I could say this was "just an accident" but I have spent my entire life learning the TRUE history of Baltimore & Maryland.
I agree, the best outcome to all of this would be to understand what happened and apply those lessons to future situations. It feels like in recent years however there's been more effort put toward public opinion and damage control than transparency and accountability. And the NTSB's decision to shut down further conferences at this stage feels like just that, I hope I'm wrong.
This is an inside job
🤣🤣🤣🤣@@Skidderoperator
Yeh Hi Sal, listened with great interest to your interview on Ward's channel and quickly understood why he invited you along.
I don't know much about ships but a fair amount about bridges and general construction - retired site boss here in the U.K. but for my two cents ( we'd say twopen'arth over here) - I'm 100% with you on the BOSS business!
The collapse is in a different class to projects I've been involved with but the first thing I've always asked at the outset - IS THIS MYJOB? I don't mind sticking my neck out but I need to know it's not under a guillotine controlled by someone else! I'm fully aware that phones have probably been ringing around the country before my screen lit up - wisdom, or what passes for it, comes with experience - and in more than a few schemes I said yes to - I was put there to fail or the possibilities of cock up were high enough for other qualified guys to cried off.
From the few thousand miles away - the Key Bridge has all the makings of a complete dog's breakfast! The obvious loss of the bridge, practicalities of clearing the wreckage, making safe and moving the ship, contending with The City, the Port, the money people and even The President - all in an election year - and that's before thinking of a new crossing and who pays for the disruption. Wishing all involved - the Best of British - you're going to need it.
I think a cool video idea for you would be to have Blancolirio on the channel. Juan Brown could give some great guidance on the differences in NTSB for aircraft accidents and why they should be following a similar model given the significance of this tragedy. Keep up the great work!
thanks again. I worked in California for year and the one flaw we found in the one person in charge system was that several times at day three they collapsed or had a heart attack. This was forty years ago so I hope that things have improved. It is a lot of questions and a lot of stress for some one.
When we implement within our company we have an IC and deputies to cover evening, night and weekend hours to provide 7x24 coverage. IC has “night orders” on limits of what deputies can or cannot do plus reasons to call IC. Not pure ICS but works for a Fortune 500 company.
Henry Arnold, the One Guy in Charge (commanding general) of the US Army Air Forces during World War II, had _four_ heart attacks between 1943 and 1945. Appropriately enough, one of the reasons for same was that he had to deal with Admiral Ernest King of the Navy on a fairly regular basis. :)
Thanks!
That's awesome!!
Wow...thank you so much!
I always appreciate the way you present your videos, and obviously you can speak from having been in the maritime industry and your service as a volunteer fireman. You are aware of things that most of us are not.
By "New Channel", I thought you were starting a second UA-cam channel.
Thanks for keeping us up to date on shipping news.
Me Too.
I love the way you talk in layman's language. I've been watching you for some time now, and the learning and understanding is great. Thank you for this. A New Zealander
Hi Sal, couple thoughts coming from the Aviation & Volunteer SAR world.
1) NTSB absolutely stops making daily briefings on air crashes. In our world, we're usually lucky to get 1, may be 2 live press briefings after a major accident from the NTSB before they just start issuing press releases. Knowing who always does the press briefings, be thankful. It's always the board members, and they're *never* actually knowledgeable about what they're speaking on.
2) Unified Command is exactly what ICS requires in this situation. Having participated in several Hurricane responses with Civil Air Patrol, we've seen how UC, AC, and IC works and every time, when you're dealing with as many agencies and moving parts that have different start and end times, UC often becomes much easier for all involved and actually reduces the amount of duplication of work and required coordination between groups. Each part of the unified command has a well defined functional and geographical boundary and each has their own Incident Commander for their portion. An additional level to designate a single IC over the other ICs simply doesn't make sense. Yes, you have multiple salvage entities involved, but each works for a specific group and is working on a specific part of the incident. Wherever there is overlap, then the respective members of the UC team will coordinate between themselves and not need to involve the other members who aren't involved. It's all part of span of control and that's what the UC is designed to allow for. If this was just an accident like Exxon Valdez or Deepwater Horizon where there weren't additional geographical considerations (i.e. the Bridge), I'd agree on IC being the right way. The other thing that UC does is allow for much quicker demobilization or separation since some parts of this incident will be ongoing for months while others (like the ship salvage) will be done in probably a couple weeks. Under single IC, you're creating a lot of unnecessary overlap of people because they're now responsible for the *whole* incident instead of just their one part. This will become a single IC event soon enough, but for the initial response, UC is the way to go.
I appreciate the info. Thanks!
My only caveat is that in the largest maritime incident before this, Deepwater Horizon, we appointed former USCG Commandant Thad Allen for command.
This is not a hurricane, over a broad area but a complex incident over a very specific areas in a maritime environment with overlapping jurisdiction, including a ship of foreign sovereign territory.
Spot on.
It sounds like your experience dealing with government agencies and contractors has given you some insight into how things get done (or not done). Your approach makes sense for such a large undertaking. I do agree with Sal that an Incident Commander can be the "czar" who gets things done, however I think it can grow into more than a one person job quickly. Still, I wonder where the buck stops. At some point someone has to be able to say yes or no and be accountable.
Would congressional legislation be needed for this? Or could the President make a unilateral decision to name a unified commander for the duration of the disaster?
@@wgowshipping are u sure the new channel isnt a april fools joke?, buildign a new channel while conducting a salvage op in region seems to be more work than just clearing the existing channel?
I've been an ICS instructor for eight years. I was also working the night the bridge was struck. If you do not have a unified command, you have a king with seven liaison officers.
Unified command works. If two entities disagree, they need to work it out. I've never been a part of a campaign that had two parties did their heels in.
Agreed and although as a firefighter of many years and also someone that works at FSK currently I’m going to contact him so hopefully he can get more info from our communications dept.
I also don’t understand the “King” push. This isn’t an active fire ground with the Chief having the last say so.
This is a methodical process that needs all stakeholders involved with no decisions rushed. There will be no “stale mate” when getting these things done.
I would think it requires a lot more communication and maturity. It can work, but just logically it's got more failure points.
Also an ICS 300/400 instructor. I think he misses the point of the unified command structure in a static event. The structure is to set strategy and objectives and create the leaders intent. Control from that point should be decentralized so that the Ops Chief and other staff positions can react to immediate changes in the event within the leaders intent. This needs to be true down through branch, division, group and single resource levels. If the only person who can make decisions is the single incident commander the entire incident gets bogged down waiting for decisions. I have seen this play out on large dynamic incidents here in California. Hopefully he sees this comment, it's a worthy topic for debate.
Um? Since when has Decision-by-Committee been the best option? This is news to me. I've seen far too many committee failures where everyone is glad to pass the buck or ready to blame someone else for poor decisions. So, respectfully, to say that Incident Committee works where no one is in true command might call for a little more explanation.
@@x--. There is no such thing as a committee in ICS. Educate yourself.
You keep up the work you are doing. People want drama not facts. I find your videos based on current fact not speculation. That is so refreshing. To many nut jobs trying to make controversy when it is not helping anyone. Thanks for your good work!
Management by committee usually results in big problems. Since nobody is taking responsibility, unusual risks might be taken. You're right, Sal. This is a situation that requires one person with ultimate responsibility. God, I pray this operation goes without too many hitches.
NTSB typically has press conferences when they are on-site, then they go radio silent until they provide a preliminary report in a few weeks and then nothing for a year or two. And they get very upset if one of the parties talks to the media. Not saying this is right or wrong, but they are doing what they always do.
This is the 2nd or 3rd busiest port
in the nation, it’s not just about one
bridge or one ship, it’s the shipping port,
it’s Baltimore, it’s the East Coast.
Pray for America.
You are right. Unified Command will probably do press briefs for the response and salvage
The NTSB is not doing anything differently from what they’ve done for decades. Thanks to a whistleblower on Reddit, the Seattle Times, and some youtube channels we know exactly what happened with the Alaska Airlines MAX9 that lost the plug door. But the NTSB is still treating it as a big mystery which they will THOROUGHLY investigate before rendering judgement. Yes, their approach is anachronistic in today’s world but don’t count on them changing.
@@robertbutsch1802 It's not anachronistic. I understand that people want instant results, but if those preliminary results end up not being true, it could lead to bad outcomes.
It's better for everyone if the full results come out and not only are the correct causes identified, but incorrect causes rolled out can proper corrective actions be taken.
Number one for autos on the east coast. Ninth overall. The fact that $80billion worth of goods came through the Port of Baltimore is quite telling. @@saywhat8966 But I fully agree with you
You're doing a great job Sal
Most people don't enjoy when someone speaks facts. Please keep going despite the few people who "aren't happy" lots of us are happy
Thank you for keeping us informed about this terrible tragedy
Hi Sal, Fellow firefighter (retired) here. I here you about an incident commander. But I have to agree with the powers that be. Unified Command is the correct approach to an incident like this.
Please keep up the excellent work you do!
I'm curious, have only been trained on ICS for technical incidents in software. What are the benefits of unified command?
@@elliefitzpatrick1552 Hi ellie. Unified Command joins the leadership and expertise of multiple agencies and disciplines to problem solve. It was developed out of ICS when it was discovered that a single incident commander was inadequate for some larger tasks. This whole disaster is a good example.
Sal, fellow NY Maritime graduate here! (Class of 1971)
The last 20 years of my working life were in the Emergency Preparedness / Planning organization of an electric & gas utility.
I cannot emphasize how much I agree with what you say about the need for one person being in charge!
The ICS (incident command system, for those of you that are not familiar with it) exist for a reason!
I agree. If everyone is in charge, no one is in charge.
Brit here.
You are absolutely right. There needs to be one "the buck stops with me" person in command. If Eisenhower had not been SUPREME allied commander in WW2 we would probably still be fighting to get off the beaches in Normandy!
Very rarely is an accident caused by a single error. A single error is usually inconsequential, but catastrophes happen when you get several errors occurring at the same time (what the airplane industry call an "error chain"). That is what happened at Baltimore.
I am not an engineer but l would posit that one of the errors in the chain was the bridge itself.
It was constructed at a time when most ships were much smaller. Box boats (aka Container ships) were tiny compared to the MV Dali ( not very big as modern box boats go). But as the size of ships has increased significantly, l doubt if much thought was given to bridge protection ( and this applies to most bridges in the US, not just this one). Look at the nearby pylons supporting the power cables crossing the river. They have some protection, bridge pylons - haven't seen any in any of the videos.
It is right that every effort is made to recover the bodies of the poor construction workers and get the channel reopened very quickly ( a new bridge is not as economically important - ferries as a stop gap?).
Your not replacing Interstate 695 with ferries.
Why the hard turn to Starboard? All wind and current issues were coming from the Port side, and the Autopilot or Harbour Pilot were adjusting for the wind and current variations that affected the ship's course. the mayday call had been sent and still, the ship continued on the course because the rudder was still working, they had dropped the Port anchor but didn't let out enough chain as shown after the crash the chain is hanging down meaning that it had not been dragging on the bottom. so the Anchor would not interfere with the course change into the Bridge Pier. My understanding of modern-day ships, a ship loses power to the propeller, the ship will continue on the course it was on before the loss of engine power, and the weight and momentum of such a heavy ship will never accidentally turn like the video shows. Remember the ship's electrical supply is from one of several Diesel Generators that the ship's electronic Autopilot controls to the Diesel motors controlling the Hydraulic rams to the Rudder and will keep working keeping the ship on the course set by the Harbour Pilot, remember that the ship was on course to pass under the bridge when the lights were turned off, without electric power to the Autopilot the rudder will remain on the set course while it was adjusting course for any wind or current variations, then when the lights (electric power) came on again the ship auto-pilot would automatically resume the original course settings before the power loss, But! The video showing the sharp turn onto the target had nothing to do with the lights, or Autopilot or wind or currants proving that The HUMAN FINGERPRINT is all over this deliberate turn into the Bridge. Heavy smoke from the engine funnel is caused by a sudden increase in fuel to the engine, providing strong water pushed onto the now hard-turned-to Starboard rudder, then again the ship rudder was adjusted to Port to stop the turn because the ship needed to make a direct hit not a glancing blow against the target. This was intentional closure of Americas 5th biggest port! No question about that! But was it the US Government extremists or their FBI, or CIA! Did Terrorists sneak on board and overpower the crew? Was it blackmail of the Harbour Pilots and captains and engineers, no matter why? It is “who are they” that must be discovered because 6 people are dead because of this deliberate act by some of the People on this ship!!!!!!!
You have a 116,000 ton ship here. =That bridge is toast unless a considerable concrete with reinforced steel base is used. -and even then the whole thing might move.
These East Coast ports have tides that bring in silt all the time = you need to push steel supports 100-200ft down below all the mud to get to bedrock (if there is any)
= Big costs.
@@geoffreytoomey682More than one race car driver died doing just that at Indy Speedway!!! You've been warned!!!😮😮😮
@@geoffreytoomey682you are wrong, ships like this never sails on Autopilot when they have pilots on board, there is a man at the helm following the course instructions from the pilot.
When a ship engine stops the propeller will still turn and you will have the “prop walk” effect, dragging the stern port or starboard depending on which why the propeller is rotating
Thank you very much for the Update! Only as addition: In Aviation Accidents a Preliminary Report is requested by ICAO 30 Days after the Event happened - but many Accident Investigation Authorities don´t care about this request and you can wait years and years to read anything about the reasons of an Accident. The NTSB is one of the best, if not the best worldwide next to the French BEA in the Aviation Business - you always can expect the Preliminary Report within the 30 Days and usually the Final Report within two years. There´re Investigation Authorities out which need ten or more years to bring a Final Report out.
But doing Press Conferences is uncommon amongst these Investigation Authorities. They usually put the written report onto their website and that´s it. That the NTSB is doing Press Conferences at all and give therefore the Possibility to question them is uncommon. So the transparency of the NTSB is the best you can get in this branch - worldwide.
Why the hard turn to Starboard? All wind and current issues were coming from the Port side, and the Autopilot or Harbour Pilot were adjusting for the wind and current variations that affected the ship's course. the mayday call had been sent and still, the ship continued on the course because the rudder was still working, they had dropped the Port anchor but didn't let out enough chain as shown after the crash the chain is hanging down meaning that it had not been dragging on the bottom. so the Anchor would not interfere with the course change into the Bridge Pier. My understanding of modern-day ships, a ship loses power to the propeller, the ship will continue on the course it was on before the loss of engine power, and the weight and momentum of such a heavy ship will never accidentally turn like the video shows. Remember the ship's electrical supply is from one of several Diesel Generators that the ship's electronic Autopilot controls to the Diesel motors controlling the Hydraulic rams to the Rudder and will keep working keeping the ship on the course set by the Harbour Pilot, remember that the ship was on course to pass under the bridge when the lights were turned off, without electric power to the Autopilot the rudder will remain on the set course while it was adjusting course for any wind or current variations, then when the lights (electric power) came on again the ship auto-pilot would automatically resume the original course settings before the power loss, But! The video showing the sharp turn onto the target had nothing to do with the lights, or Autopilot or wind or currants proving that The HUMAN FINGERPRINT is all over this deliberate turn into the Bridge. Heavy smoke from the engine funnel is caused by a sudden increase in fuel to the engine, providing strong water pushed onto the now hard-turned-to Starboard rudder, then again the ship rudder was adjusted to Port to stop the turn because the ship needed to make a direct hit not a glancing blow against the target. This was intentional closure of Americas 5th biggest port! No question about that! But was it the US Government extremists or their FBI, or CIA! Did Terrorists sneak on board and overpower the crew? Was it blackmail of the Harbour Pilots and captains and engineers, no matter why? It is “who are they” that must be discovered because 6 people are dead because of this deliberate act by some of the People on this ship!!!!!!!
@@geoffreytoomey682 BS.
@@NicolaW72 This deliberate act is to close the Port for the rest of 2024, a big year for distractions in the US apparently, we will see, the Black Box will show the engine was never stopped by the electricity issues, you need electricity to turn the engine off, without electricity to the fuel supply solenoid that stops the engine there is a manual shut off valve, the engine was given full power for their turn onto their target, turning the lights of and on was an excellent distraction for people like yourself, now wanting the murder of 6 people to have been deliberate. I'm with you on that.
Once again Sal makes the difficult simple, he is correct, an independent third party needs to oversee this massive project.
"Speaking truth to power" Well done Sal. More evidence of your value is demonstrated by the company you attract. As in the comment by CAPFlyer. I too have completed ICS 300/700 and more, and it is interesting and informative to gain a different and evidently valid, experience as related by CAPFlyer.
Glad you can call things and organizations out if you have a defendable position! We learn from hearing the challenging questions and opinion. Thank you.
I saw success with unified commands in wildland firefighting. Specifically, the 1988 wildfires in Yellowstone NP. The Great Yellowstone Area Command. I was assigned to that command, it worked among the land agencies involved. The military also became involved. If these folks can set aside their organizational egos, it will work fine.
Different interests but all have the same basic goals. I think everyone involved knows that the operation has to unfold in phases and that will dictate the priorities to a large degree. For example, It’s premature to start rebuilding the bridge. Even if it was given top priority, the channel must be cleared first anyway. The debris spans must be removed.
The other thing that occurs to me is that it’s quite possible that these agencies have trained for multiagency cooperation under a variety of scenarios. If this is the case they already have established lines of communication as well as areas of responsibility.
To change a structure already set up and operating merely because a single commander seems more efficient might actually be counterproductive.
If there are infighting problems, then we can talk about appointing an overall commander rather than having an overall coordinator.
I rather suspect that many people are just hung up on the word “commander”. They want one person with the power to push things through. But there is no evidence yet that anything needs to be pushed through.
Forest and range fire managent have a LOT of experience with the incident command setup. Going thru all the FEMA training it appeared to me the fire fighting orgs out West pretty much wrote the book. Maybe that's not totally accurate but it sure looked like it to me.
Thank you so much for covering this incident. I must say, for as informative your videos are, the real entertainment is reading comments from the countless Armchair Admirals and conspiracy nut jobs. The truth is this was a disaster waiting to happen. The size of container ships, since the construction of the key bridge, have increased, while precautions that needed to be put in place to prevent this sort of incident have been ignored primarily because of cost. Because of this, several workers died. The ports are losing lots of money daily, and politicians are trying to figure out who to point the blame at.
Keep up the good work with your coverage.
Your criticism of the Unified Command approach is valid. That was the same approach deployed in a toxic train derailment I worked on in Paulsboro NJ (EPA was involved as well). It is the structure established under feral law. The NTSB Final Report was scathingly critical. In that case, there were similar political, bureaucratic, and economic interests at play behind the scenes, and NTSB went into black hole mode. They even allowed the freight trains to run before the defective bridge was repaired! The remedy to this could be an Executive Order by Biden, but even that may have legal limitations.
Thanks Sal
I live in Baltimore and I LOVE when people speak their truth!!!!
LOVE your updates!!!!! Thank you so much
When the "authorities" stop talking THAT alone speaks volumes above the sound of their voice.
They stop talking because the NTSB are investigating their own crime. Heads must roll at the NTSB because they did not ensure the bridge was safe, The NTSB is 100% guilty of not preventing this disaster and now they are tasked with investigating it! That is absurd. The fact that the bridge collapsed is proof that it was unsafe, and no more investigation is needed to prove that. The bridge could not withstand the impact of a ship suffering a simple malfunction. It is wrong to claim that the bridge was built when all ships were smaller. If the bridge was only safe for ships below a certain size to pass below it, then ships larger than the maximum safe size should have been prevented from getting near the bridge until it was suitably protected from possible impact from the newer larger ships. The NTSB failed to ensure that threateningly large ships were kept away from this vulnerable bridge, so NTSB officials must be harshly punished. And yes, the ships operators are responsible for all the damage, but the NTSB is guilty of failing to perform their primary duty: to keep transportation safe.
@@saeed-sc6ss Ok expert. Now go back on the couch to your Doritos.
There is no such thing as "their truth" wtf is that besides a delusion... There is only the TRUTH supported by hard facts and evidence... Just like 2 genders simple as that
@@saeed-sc6ss do you actually understand the NTSB's job?
Let's take aviation. They investigate incidents and make recommendations. But they have NO enforcement powers. That is up to the FAA, and several times the FAA have let them down.
Are you absolutely sure the NTSB had a pre-emptive role to protect this bridge?
You are too quick to use phrases like 'is 100% guilty'.
@saeed
So every time there is an accident that involves transportation the NTSB is responsible and then immediately starts covering it up? That’s a lot of covering….
I've learned so much from this channel! Thank you.
As a nobody that knows nothing about shipping i love your show and love hearing an informed opinion. Keep up the good work!!!!
You know what they say about opinions? They’re like…. I appreciate your analysis. You have been my main source for information. I feel like you know your way around the ship. You know your way this whole industry. Got a great job.
The point you made about a single individual officer in charge is vital and you are correct. Leading by panel means when incompetence is practiced fault is hidden
It worked out great for the FIU bridge install.
The committee can choose one person to be day-to-day command.
Like the Sergeant Major shouted out, when he'd arrive at the site, when I was in the Army; "Who's in charge of this clusterf*ck?"!
@@robertewalt7789 Will they because you said so?????
Sorry to disagree, but UC is not "lead by panel". Unified Command is that you have multiple ICs, but each is in charge of a specific part of the incident (whether geographic, functional, or both) and they are the *sole* person in charge of that part. The only time that there is a "panel" discussion is when there's something that involves more than one part of the overall incident and then only the ICs who are involved in the overlap will talk to each other and come up with a decision/plan to move forward.
The idea is to break down the large incident into more manageable parts along clearly defined lines. In this case, it'll be basically the Bridge, the Ship, and the Port/Channel. It just means that instead of 1 person being dragged in 3 directions at once, there's 1 person pulled in one direction all the time and they can get help from the others when needed.
I don’t know why people aren’t happy with what you’re saying on here. It sounds like facts combined with good questions. Great job, as always!
Sal, your not getting everything wrong,your getting everything Right.They should ask you to take control of this mess,who else has the insight and knowlage to just get the job done ?
Complete and timely as always sir.
Having spent most of my career in positions on industrial plants that were responsible for response to electrical incidents. I completely agree with your position that there should be an incident comander
Sal, thank-you for your high standard of ethics. It is important that the issues you raise are addressed.
Your viewers are So Fortunate!
Your experience and time is fascinating ! ❤😂🎉
Thank you, Sal.
Why did it lose control. That is the question. There could be many answers. But the regaining of power without control is the bigger one. Good work Sal.
We won't know until NTSB has issued a final report. Sometimes they make recommendations before the final report, if there is an urgent safety issue.
*Born and raised here and Baltimore.... From what I am hearing from people on the docks. The Dali lost power 2 SEPARATE TIMES, BEFORE exiting the docks. They said it was due to Shipping Containers with Refrigeration Units causing a breaker to trip.*
You are absolutely right about NTSB.
it will proceed slowly. Thank you Sal.
according to The American Society of Civil Engineers 46.000 bridges in the US (about 7,5%) are in poor condition while about 17.000 bridges are fracture critical (at risk of collapse upon impact).
the second group can be part of the first, but can also be in good condition and still fracture critical.
Thank you for being on top of this 🎉🎉🎉
I don't know who isn't enjoying what you are saying but it makes perfect sense. One person needs to be in charge and make final yes or no decisions. So that things get resolved as quickly as possible.
Sal, Be careful you don’t want to become the “Alexander Meigs Haig Jr.”, Al Haig - I’m in charge guy. I agree with your assertions regarding NTSB, they could throw a bone every day or two. I’m glad we are seeing good videos of comparable propulsion plants and steering systems which help the public understand both the complexity of the ship systems, and the redundancy. I continue to be amazing at how the press is allowing the politicians to dodge the questions about the safety of other bridges particularly the Chesapeake Bay Bridge 15 miles away….
Hello Sal, one of your new subs here, from Michigan, appreciate your updates VERY much, you are so professional!😊😊😊
Everybody is preparing to give the faults to others.
I love this approach bringing a nation to the next level!
Following you since the Evergreen incident, this is the best place to get the maritime news. Now a retired carpenter in the south of France, your channel is still my first choice to get the real story. Thanks.
Right there with you, Sal! Design by committee NEVER turns out well. Nobody can make a decision so EVERYBODY makes decisions and there's conflict after conflict as a result.
I actually agree with you. The ICS structure is intended through combined work groups to provide the necessary data, information, and recommendation to the Incident Commander. If no one is in charge then you makes what decisions. Smaller groups reporting up to a top group doesn't work. I have ICS organizations in the Coast Guard and public health and never had a group making decisions. This smells and looks like a political solution. Same with NTSB going silent.
I think you're missing how Unified Command works though. Unified Command is that you have multiple ICs responsible for clearly defined areas (geographic, functional, or both). So in essence you have 3 parallel incidents and commands running under 1 overall incident.
No not missing. Just a different perspective.and experience. I worked a staff position under a sub-IC during the H1N1. Originally OR Public Health was the IC. As the situation worsened the State Police IC and state IC center took over. We had 30 County ICs proving information to us which then analyzed by PH and transmitted to the IC in Salem. I was the subject matter expert for the Drinking Water Program during the Fukushima nuclear accident accident when radio active particles hit Oregon. PH IC ctr was stood up for a couple of weeks.
I watched the unified command during the MV Carissa fall apart as there wasn't a leader in charge. The incident went so far south the USCG MSO Portland found out a Navy sub was involved when they received a bill for Mk 48 torpedo at 1 million dollars. It took 9 years for ship salvage to be completed. The State of Oregon removed the stern via a contractor.
@joecarlson6428 I would contend that UC failed because the UC didn't start off correctly and set the boundaries as required. All UC has different from single IC is that top box. Everything else is the same. What you described was Area Command being labeled as Unified Command and not being done well. There is a difference. Unified Command isn't well understood under the Federal Level because it's not well taught and rarely actually implemented below Federal.
What caused the Unified Command to fail is a question I do not have an answer for in any specific sense. From a report by M. J. HALL
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard Federal On Scene Coordinator, called crisis on the coast " The Incident Command System (ICS) and the Unified Command (UC) deployed during this crisis was a human, complex adaptive system brought together to effectively deal
with a very dynamic and complex casualty. Together the UC rapidly called upon a
number of federal, state and local agencies and other stakeholders and contractors to
assist with the response. Before the incident ended, 58 different agencies and groups, and about 700 people, would lend their expertise and resources to the response and prove the value of a unified operation...A critical aspect of leadership is understanding that people are different from one another and knowing how these differences affect communications, learning and decision-making. It is essential that the FOSC optimize the abilities and inclinations of diverse individuals within the response organization in order to accomplish the mission.
My perspective is communication failed within the top end of the UC/IC.
@joecarlson6428 Sorry, was talking more of the H1N1 response than the Carissa. I would argue Carissa would have ended up just as failed event with a single IC as the failure was clearly in the setup of the organization (i.e. people picked) than the type of Command chosen. Even with a single IC, with that many agencies involved, the IC would have been overwhelmed with the amount of interagency coordination needed, and as the situation changed from rescue to recovery to salvage to remediation, there would have been many more ICs involved and changes of "lead" agency and thus IC that would have led to as many or more issues trying to brief the new IC and General Staff as each change in top agency occurs.
In a war or disaster the first thing that dies is transparency and truth
Sal, you speak the language of ‘common sense’. As soon as the situation slips into the ‘quicksand of bureaucracy’, the happier the ‘players’ become because their butts are covered. If there were no Supreme Allied Commander in Europe in WWII, we would still be fighting that war. Wait until the MV Dali is moved off that high pressure gas line & it becomes compromised, then watch the finger pointing! Great job on your YT presentations!!
Too many cooks spoil the broth. It usually results in a Pissing Competition with each big Ego fighting for Dominance. One overall commander, a streamlined hierarchy beneath with all Interested Parties in compliance. Cheers from Michael. Australia.
Hey hey thanks Doc
Great to have a professional like you who knows what he is talking about!
This is a situation where the beloved round table will not work! There will be so many trades involved who can not work uncoordinated without problems. The one person in charge does not have to decide every detail but rather has to keep track on who needs to talk to whom to streamline the operation. You are absolutely right!
Saint Lawrence seaway. Lots of important bridges along there. I remember back in about 2018 a ship lost power. Ran aground right near the Thousand Islands Bridge. If it had hit that bridge it would have been very disruptive! So I agree with you about the NTSB!
I was on the Thousand islands bridge when a medium size ship did hit the stanchon ,but only from the side ,the whole bridge shook & made wierd noises ,but no major damage to the bridge or craft ,....I was actually walking on it & seen it as it was happening, they did a through inspection soon after ,both sides (New York & Canada) had people respond
But the NTSB doing press conferences is not preventing other bridges from get hit. The NTSB sharing preliminary findings with other government entities may save other bridges, depending on what they find. Right now I could imagine that they have talked with the crew, captain and pilots, and don't want to go public with information that could become relevant for legal proceedings.
I agree with you, I've seen management by committee before where priorities and egos clash and you end up with a great big cluster foxtrot.
But the same can happen under a single command. If priorities and egos clash in the hastily cobbled together teams under her or him, the person "in charge" is just an impotent scapegoat who will take the blame and be replaced if things go wrong.
We need more channels like this!!!
blancolirio metioned you in a video so I had to come on by.
The blancolirio channel is a GREAT source of honest reporting as well (covers many different sujects).
Thank you for the honest info!
I am truly enjoying listening to you... thank you
Meters are great. The US went metric in 1975! Nautical knots, that's a different story. .
for some reason I thought that happened when I was a kid and I wasnt born yet in 1975
Yeah, tried and failed. We build jet engines with Imperial measurements.
Knots are convenient for navigation using Degrees Minutes and Seconds coordinates, as a single knot is a single Minute of Latitude. Makes working with DMS maps much easier.
@@UncleKennysPlace Interesting, quaint, but interesting.
@@UncleKennysPlacenasa is metric it caused at least one failure due to mixed measurements
You get em Sal!! I watch multiple channels you are the only genuine one that doesn't have some angle other than what going on! Thank you for braking this down for a old guy in the rockies.
Cheers 🍻
As an ex-commander of a Search and Rescue team here in Nevada, I agree with you. The FEMA Unified Command and Incident Command System, idea is well written, and exercises generally work as everyone involved knows it only an exercise. When there is a life(s) on the line and darkness is closing in, the cohesion between teams, contractors become strained, especially with the horse mounted teams. I don't think that there is a fix as egos and MONEY is/are involved. This mess in Baltimore will be fun to watch. BTW I have completed through FEMA 2000. Once you understand the Federal East Coast college educated - dialect / sentence structure the courses get easier. Love your channel.
Another good program. I also like your sense of humor. The problem with fuel is an old one. Most ships run a test onboard at delivery to see if the fuel is defective.
Thanks for not shying away from telling the truth. We have your back.
Putting a lot of people in charge sounds like a good way to get nothing done.
Humane nature, too many cooks in the kitchen!!!!😮😮😮😮
And allows for a lot of CYA to deflect blame when being held accountable for you actions.
You really want to take a chance that one. Trumplike person in charge. In these situations it is not necessary
It was great to have you on Australian ABC TV the other day. E Sysman also respects your point of view. Bring it on. Thanks 🙏 😊
Thank you! I'm learning so much.
I agree there needs to be a commander with authority to direct all action. There should also be a person on each shift who works directly for the commander to direct priorities . Thank you for keeping up the information flow.
It's a little hard to say a single person or agency should be in charge when you have different priorities going on. You have a salvage operation. You have transportation and navigation Hazard clearing that has to go on. You have a highway bridge building problem. And then you have the Fallout from the loss of all this and the affected businesses and traffic. And last, you still have the active accident investigation.
Barges! I mentioned this a few videos back as a temporary alternative to moving cargo. Glad to see I was not crazy. ❤
Thanks for the update Sal
Greetings from South Africa. Keep at it Sal, you're doing a great job bringing things together.
For a hot second i thought you were starting a new UA-cam channel. Should've figured you meant a navigable channel 🤦🏾♂️
I also appreciate your sentiments regarding NTSB.
It doesn't look good that they aren't planning to publicly explain what exactly happened.
The questions you asked ought to be answered. If this was an accident then we need to know how it happened. If it wasn't we deserve to know that too.
Just wait for the final report to be published, which usually takes 12-24 months
@@lukephillips5618 There will be a preliminary soonish, a few weeks. There should also be a Coast Guard report.
@@lukephillips5618 The 9-11 Commission Report took a while.
And told us nothing.
No, I'm sorry but we need answers a lot sooner than 12-24 months.
The NTSB is basically ran like sh*t under Mayor Buttplug
The other ticklish item is did they lose power due to a technology issue? Is there any pattern to the boat temporarily losing steering on the Danube....or other curious accidents.
I appreciate your understanding and knowledge of the situation. I find it easy to understand!!
The fact that USCG is establishing a bypass channel this quickly is a very positive sign, and helps relieve some of the pressure. I still believe that the north half of the main channel will be open quite quickly. The bigger the crane you have, the bigger the pieces of bridge you can remove, meaning fewer pieces to be moved. A 1000 ton crane is a good start.