305 Comments

By definition it's a conspiracy theory. For your theory of what caused the destruction of this bridge there would had to have been more than one person involved. The Marxists have made the term dirty when in fact it's perfectly legitimate to use. Don't run away from it. That's what they want you to do.

Expand full comment

This has absolutely nothing to do with "Marxists," whomever you think those are these days. "Conspiracy Theory" was first used to shut down serious discussion of the JFK assassination. Considering the Spook Agency/Deep State actors involved in that murder and cover-up, how you imagine this has anything to do with Marxists is beyond me.

Expand full comment

Because JFK's murder is no longer the only thing that is deemed a taboo conspiracy when a centralized yet clandestine threat to personal unalienable rights has spread to loss of job and life, by policy "suggestions" in the name of "pro-science, anti-racism, stop asian hate, anti-antisemitism, anti-homophobia, masking/distancing/injecting to protect all." Endless sloganeering + constant surveillance/censorship with more immediate consequence of revoking professional licenses on wrong speech are typical in countries shaped by Marxism.

Expand full comment

Constant surveillance/censorship is also rather typical in countries like the US of A. Remember the Palmer Raids? The Red Scare? What do you think J. Edgar Hoover was doing all those decades? What we're seeing now is different in form, not in essence, and, as always, serves to cement the hold of the ruling class over society. That ruling class is NOT Marxist. Just to take one of your examples, the "pro-science", "masking/distancing/injecting to protect all" censorship served to enrich the most assuredly NOT Marxist Big Pharma conglomerates, like Pfizer.

Of course the JFK murder is no longer the only thing that is deemed a taboo conspiracy. I simply pointed out that the term "conspiracy theory" was first rolled out to suppress serious examination of the role of State agencies in seriously nefarious deeds. It worked so well, it's been used over and over again. We plebes are supposed to believe in innumerable coincidence theories rather than peek behind the curtain.

Odds are we agree on much, especially related to civil liberties and personal rights. It irks me when people mistake the suppressive actions of the capitalist State for "Marxism." This is like 1950's "Reds Under the Bed" hysteria all over again, distracting us from the wealthy elite that really in control.

Expand full comment

It is not "capitalist" either. It is much closer to facist. All the power comes from government. However there is an undeniable "globalist slant to the Statism we see today. The merger of global corporations with globalist tyranny is simply best called statism. All the proposals for solutions, centralize government power.

Expand full comment

I think Jim and Jaq ARE talking about the same people. Since we dont know who they are, we often dont know what to call them! I think Globalist or Fascist are closer to the truth!

Expand full comment

EXACTLY!

Expand full comment

First Jim, may I call you Jim? It's interesting you latched onto the phrase "conspiracy theory" and it's origin Rather than who's wielding it. I didn't mention when the term was first used did I? No I didn't. I don't actually think it's relevant when it came into fashion. Who really knows when a group of criminals first used a phrase to paint someone as a full of shit nut bag in order to deflect attention from themselves? I'm pretty sure if we looked we'd find myriad examples throughout history of similar tactics being used by criminals to avoid the stock or the rope, or quartering.

But I digress.

What I did say is "Marxists have dirtied the term" and I stand by what I said. If you don't think that marxist ideology is at the core of these word game tactics then thats a different conversation that I'm happy to have. During Mao's cultural revolution language was turned on it's head and used as weapon much as it is being used today, to assault common sense reality. Lines between the sexes were obliterated by forcing women to dress as men. Today the term "transgender" implies males and females are interchangable. Men can get pregnant. "Justice Jackson, a women, can't define what a women is but the man who nominated her did so on the strict basis that he nominate a black women. Everything we see today mirrors Mao's tactics for control and they were based on Marx's theories. Following Marx there have been several iterations of his philosophy. But all share a common thread back to Marx.

Expand full comment

So it’s either incompetence or deliberate. Either way, a true tragedy. People died. Was the ship insured?

Expand full comment

Probably so however Biden said the government will pay the costs. Now THAT’S weird. Surely an insurance company would require an investigation. We’d all like to see that report.

Expand full comment

Government will pay the cost. Oh thanks for dipping into our wallets again.

Expand full comment
founding

Biden will use funds to funnel to democrat campaigns without a trace. The ship is insured. Rather odd Biden cut that off at the pass…

Expand full comment

I think every tax paying citizen is going to want to see that report!

Expand full comment

Follow the money.

Expand full comment

I disagree. It is not money Imho. Imho WEF wants the breakdown of supply chains. The bridge allegedly had to be hit between 2 points, which it was, to bring down the whole bridge.

I know nothing other than what I read.

Expand full comment
Mar 31·edited Mar 31

Corruption is never written about in the news in advance of it happening. So it’s important to understand the dynamics of corruption…how it’s been done in the past. Destroying the bridge is a creative cover for it. It will never be investigated as a crime scene. It will be a windfall for the DelMarVa area companies “chosen” to respond to the damage. Blowing up Nordstream was a boon to US energy suppliers. For every loser there’s a winner somewhere. Take a close look at who wins from this.

Expand full comment
Mar 30·edited Apr 2

Don't doubt the U.N. Govt. now in power in the Eastern Corridor; the Communitarians masking Imperialism/Feudalism/Communism/Socialism/Fascism/Nazism COMBINED

perpetrated this False Flag Tragedy.

THEY SIMPLY MUST CONTINUE PRIMING THE U.S. POPULATION WITH SOFT ATTACK TO DESTROY MENTAL CAPACITY AND ABILITY TO THINK AMONG THE PEOPLE TO GIVE THEMSELVES THE ADVANTAGE.

THEY ARE BENT UPON FORCING their 'One/New World Police State' of all Police States onto the U.S. to bring down the rest of the world hypothesized to crumble with North America. The old Venetian Black Nobility's Central Bankers out of The City of London and Crown Corporation with their PUPPET CONSPIRATORS hiding behind the U.N. are orgasmic to finally attain 'RULE OF THE WORLD; EVERYBODY IS REPORTED TO WANT.'

Expand full comment

I agree, yet they are an assorted group with ever increasing in fighting as to whom is to really be in charge. They are fracturing even now. Yet they have harmed many, will do far more.

Expand full comment

they are definitely not unified, except with their hatred of the annoying voices of their slaves. We need to think on how to create bigger fights among those powers.

Expand full comment

Like how you think....Won't be necessary to follow the formula of their Hegelian Dialectic B.S...Just turn it around to use it against them.

Expand full comment

You left out capitalism, and fascism and corrupt communism with oligarchs, Imho.

Expand full comment

U.S. is a Capitalist State with some very Important Industries Federally Owned (Socialism); as the Grid and Water Purification/Sewage which requires tremendous updating.

Dictators are invariably Oligarchs and are always of single rule as Totalitarian or Imperialism. The FEW surrounding Oligarchs are those few extraordinarily wealthy which means their Economy is Plutocracy.

Looks as though there is a major bit of confusion here...Was primarily addressing Political Constructs as opposed to Economic; but there is overlap as you're pointing out.

Expand full comment

Chubb is the primary insurer but I read that the re-insurers will be hit the hardest.

Expand full comment

As others have said, until the cause is resolved, the insurance company (which company?, it depends upon what the cause was & therefore who is at fault, but the cleanup & investigation will proceed in parallel & costs will be assessed to the responsible party’s insurance company.

Expand full comment

Biden immediately said, within minutes of bridge collapse, the government (tax payers) will pay the reconstruction cost—this is “obviously” side stepping the insurance companies investigation and the reconstruction cost/expense being funded by the Insured shipping company. Optics are everything, it appear “an independent investigation” is not wanted-this would reveal the Real Cause for bridge destruction!🤨

Expand full comment

Carol-Why isnt the insurance company paying?

Expand full comment

They are not going to pay for something that US pilots made the mistake of! As a matter of fact... the post will end up paying for fixing the Dali eventually!

Expand full comment

Indeed why not? One can only hypothesize. I wonder if it is to shut down an investigation. And why do that? Something to ponder.

Expand full comment

it will shut down any discovery in a lawsuit over responsibility

Expand full comment
deletedMar 30
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

I live on Maui and approve this message. 👍🏼

Expand full comment

Hey do you know the Macadangdang restaurant, his brother is my solar sales guy and friend.

Expand full comment

Incompetence cannot explain observable data.

Expand full comment

Bingo, incompetence is ringing true here and it’s a very good possibility that the insurance money was embezzled.

Expand full comment

One fact really stands out for me. The US government has immediately stepped in and said they’ll pay for the rebuilding. Are the involved parties not privately insured?

If the government pays, THEY get to decide who gets paid for doing what.

This could all be a last giant shakedown before the Biden administration is voted out in November. Sweetheart contracts worth billions and millions quickly awarded to family members, friends and other associates of politicians and donors with little scrutiny and much urgency.

Looks to me like the nearby seaport of Wilmington, Delaware has the most to gain from this. Delaware….hmmm, which US politician has close personal ties to Delaware????

Are US politicians crooked enough to do something like this…destroy billions of $$ of our own critical infrastructure for personal gain??? Their behavior since early 2020 is entirely consistent with the above scenario.

Expand full comment

After Lahaina, my answer is an absolute yes.

Expand full comment

Sorry if you think I'm a conspiracy theorist, but I'll say after 9/.11 yes.

Expand full comment

These days, the term conspiracy theorist has become synonymous with critical thinker.

Expand full comment

Gore speaks for me: I’m not a conspiracy theorist - I’m a conspiracy analyst.

Gore Vidal

Expand full comment

Conspiracy realist. No need to be sorry. Facts just are.

Expand full comment

Some things to add to your 11SEP01 observation: I can think of no faster way to unite the American people behind George W. Bush than a terrorist attack on an American target overseas. And I believe George W. Bush will quickly unite the American people through his foreign policy. Henry A. Kissinger Not overseas, but. The behaviour of President Bush on 11 September certainly gives rise to not unnatural suspicions.

Gore Vidal

Expand full comment
deletedMar 30
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

You're right. Everything is confusing.

Expand full comment

Payback for Nord Stream bombing?

Expand full comment

Because the people in charge of the boat were from our port! Two pilots who worked for the Port of Baltimore were navigating the cargo ship at the time of the collision. Pilots are local specialists who help guide vessels safely in and out of ports. Both pilots are U.S. citizens, Synergy told the Associated Press.

Expand full comment

It’s remarkable how many doctors and scientists acted wrongly under the influence of money since 2020.

Expand full comment

Nicely and quickly said. Our best and brightest and most willing to do anything to keep their power and privilege, including mass murder

Expand full comment

one Pilot was Ukrainian.

Expand full comment

No he wasn't!

VERIFY reader Linda asked our team in an email if the Dali cargo ship captain is from Ukraine.

THE QUESTION

Is the captain of the cargo ship involved in the Baltimore bridge collapse Ukrainian?

THE SOURCES

Synergy Marine Group, a ship management company

BalticShipping.com, maritime jobs database

THE ANSWER

This is false.

No, the captain of the cargo ship involved in the Baltimore bridge collapse is not Ukrainian.

WHAT WE FOUND

The captain of the Dali cargo ship that was involved in Baltimore’s Francis Scott Key Bridge collapse is not Ukrainian. The captain and crew of the cargo ship are Indian, according to Synergy Marine Group, the ship’s management company.

Hours after the bridge collapsed on March 26, Synergy Marine Group said in a press release that all 22 crew members on the ship when the bridge collapsed are Indian.

Two pilots who worked for the Port of Baltimore were navigating the cargo ship at the time of the collision. Pilots are local specialists who help guide vessels safely in and out of ports. Both pilots are U.S. citizens, Synergy told the Associated Press.

The screenshot from the viral social posts appear to show that a 52-year-old Ukrainian man listed on BalticShipping.com’s database worked on the Dali as a master or captain.

We found that the man’s profile has since been removed from the BalticShipping.com database. However, online records acquired by the Associated Press and other media outlets showed the man worked as master on the ship from March 19, 2016, to July 27, 2016.

Expand full comment

You are on the trail, Tom. Thank you.

Expand full comment

Biden stepped right up saying he'd pay for the damages because the last thing the US Govt. wants are insurance investigators crawling all over the place.. thats at least a 100 million dollar repair bill ?What happened to the crew members somehow they can't be found for interviews.? Governments trying to cover up what happened.. Absolutely..

Expand full comment

Assisted assault on the USA, coverup by the bad actors.

Expand full comment

Yes, very odd indeed. There's a video that captures the ship well before hitting the bridge. The video shows the ship distinctly turning right directly towards the bridge pylon while the ship's lights are still on. Then the lights go out for a few seconds and then come back on. The lights are back on for 16 seconds while the ship continues heading straight for the bridge pylon and hits it. Why couldn't it have at least attempted to turn back to the left during those 16 seconds?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPT9gDz8hlg (shown in the first minute or so of this Jimmy Dore video)

Expand full comment

IF there was a major power failure aboard, you can't assume because lights come back on that ALL circuits are reactivated. System failures of this sort aboard a ship like that will restore power, as available, to loads sequentially, to prevent a resurge causing a subsequent loss of power. As I said above, that ship did not make a free turn to starboard by rudder only. The bow went to starboard and the stern yawed out to port. The report of the anchor(s) being dropped for the starboard side of the bow would cause that clockwise rotation to end up headed for the pier. If I were aboard a ship losing propulsion and beginning to rotate, I might consider dropping an anchor to swing the hull to the port so the bulk of it would pass under the span -- but, it isn't clear from the view I've seen of it's travel how far it was from the bridge when it became clear on the bridge that a collision was likely imminent. If so, and you're 'dead in the water' an anchor to starboard from the bow is about the only solution you might have...

Expand full comment

Thx for additional info. All the more reason to have the entire context of this incident thoroughly and independently investigated, which US authorities have a pretty poor track record of in certain high profile cases. Like NIST's completely debunked and erroneous conclusions about how WTC7 came down on 9/11.

Expand full comment

I read somewhere that the pilot dropped the port anchor.

Expand full comment

The report is that the port bow anchor was dropped, I see ZERO evidence that happened.

Expand full comment

There is a picture, taken in daylight, (next morning?) where, assuming we're looking at the Dali, the portside anchor dropped with a little taut stern direction from vertical...

Expand full comment

The vast majority of the turn happened way before the last shift directly into the support tower.

Expand full comment

It was a total of 40 degrees of turn I address that here:

https://nukepro.net/5094/

Baltimore Boat Debacle, Using Angularity Math, to Calculate the Turn Angle of the Boat

Expand full comment

Sharp turn to starboard directly into pylon. Previously skeptical; no more.

Expand full comment

I just keep wondering who shot the video? They sure had a front row seat. Almost like they knew about it in advance.

Expand full comment
Mar 30·edited Mar 30

The video was from a permanently-mounted video camera located on the edge of Ft. Armistead Park just south of the Key bridge on the SW side of the Patapsco River. The camera's "look" angle is NNW. This cam produces a YouTube livestream from which the video clip (no audio) of the crash and collapse was pulled (the one that's been viewed a gazillion times by now). The cam is operated and maintained by StreamTime Live, and is one of at least nine currently broadcasting, with others showing places like New York Harbor, Port Huron in Michigan, and Chicago’s Midway Airport. https://www.baltimoreshipwatchers.com/livestream

Expand full comment

Thank you.

Expand full comment

Wow. At such times the cameras are handy

Expand full comment

Yes. The group that helped get them installed are a bunch of ship enthusiasts. Kind of like train enthusiasts but they follow ships. I’m sure no one was expecting to see such a horrible tragedy right in front of one of the cameras.

Expand full comment

Port Authorities have camera systems installed for all large inland waterways in the US by law or Coast Guard regulations, if I recall correctly.

Expand full comment

I had the same thoughts.

Expand full comment

Well our entire world is under camera tracking surveillance.

Expand full comment

THE LIVE STREAM FROM THE BALTIMORE PORT AUTHORITY!!!!!

Expand full comment

There are harbor cams installed everywhere in a busy waterway like that...

Expand full comment
Mar 30·edited Mar 30

I saw the following in another article. A senior engineer reported his opinion of what transpired on the Dali based on what he observed and what he knows of normal practice .

Michael Buckley III 24m

As a Chief Engineer for 20 years with Maersk Lines, onboard a container ship and watching the video I believe only certain events could have taken place.

X

A ship that size has 4 generators, 3 of them should be running & online to support all the engine room machinery, deck machinery, house load, including both a very large (KW), bow thruster, and stern thruster motor, used during maneuvering in & out of port.

In order to lose all three generators, and ships power, would be caused by 2 things only: Drop of fuel pressure, or the machinery electrical computer system failed, both causing the generator main power breakers to open, loosing all power, as seen on the video. Once a ships power is lost (lights going out the first time), the ship's Emergency Generator comes on & is designed to restart a generator engine & re-supply power to the entire ship (lights coming back on). Shortly after the lights come on the Captain realized he was on a collision course for the bridge, he put the ship in Full Astern, causing full fuel pressure to the Main Engine, (black smoke from the stack). The loss of power the second time (lights went out again), was caused by a power surge to the one generator that was supplying all machinery systems, including the Bow Thruster, which the Captain at a last attempt, requested max power to the Bow Thruster, tripping the power back off. When a ship loses power, it loses all steering until the Emergency Generator starts & supplies power to the Steering Hydraulic pumps. Once the power was lost the second time, the vessel course could not be changed, travelling at 9 knots, and collided with the bridge. Michae E. Buckley III.

Chief Engineer

Maersk Line Ltd

That is his view, my take on the combination of engines astern combined with full port rudder is the stern would swing to the port side due to starboard side astern thrust action causing ship to rotate its heading to starboard and port side suction drawing in water from port side of rudder and helping to swing to starboard.

Expand full comment

Thank You Michael, I concur with your information. And Fred, you are correct in your observation that port rudder would swing the stern portside... which looks exactly like what happened, it's rotation was not centered amidships, but rather pulled port from the stern while still moving forward- thus pointing the center of mass further to starboard - whereupon the second power failure would secure that heading and no longer reduce the weigh forward....

Expand full comment

Thanks, and please can you explain to a simple landlubber why "port rudder would swing the stern portside" as I have obviously got something wrong. I will be very happy if you or someone could correct this verbal visualisation:

The rudder is at the back of the boat and can swivel left or right, looking at the boat from behind it.

When the steering person turns the wheel anticlockwise (looking forwards in the direction the boat's moving) this is intended to make the boat proceed leftwards, or anticlockwise, respecting its current forward movement. And of course vice versa.

So when the chap steering turns the wheel anticlockwise the rudder will pivot clockwise (seen from above) making the water hitting the rudder push the boat in an anticlockwise direction,

thus pushing the stern to the right (which I think is starboard).

For some reason I can't match what you say in the patch I copied and quoted above.

I cannot figure how trying to turn left will push the back of the boat leftwards .... please help me out!

Expand full comment
Mar 30·edited Mar 30

DD, Let me see if I can help you sort out the directions, props and rudder question. In your car, when you turn the steering wheel to the right, the front of the car goes to the right -- the direction of the car rotates clockwise WHEN YOU ARE GOING FORWARD! But... when you're in reverse and backing up -- the front of the car goes to the left and the back of the car goes to the right.

In my example from the comment preceeding in reply to Fred J., I misstated the direction of the stern movement, It should have been to starboard. Sorry for the confusion. :)

In nautical terms, left is to port, right is to starboard and the boat works just like your car. Turn the helm (ships steering wheel) to the right, the front (bow) will go to the right (starboard) as the rudder moves the back (stern) of the boat to the left (port) and out from directly behind the bow (with respect to the direction the whole boat is moving.) When in reverse, just like your car, the rotation of the whole boat is reversed. In reverse, now when you turn the helm to the right (clockwise) the stern pulls to starboard and now the bow points toward the left of where it was pointed.

From what I can see, prior to the impact with the bridge, the ship never went in reverse. So, at all times, the rudder was working in the forward direction.

Again, Pilots are extreme professionals, sometimes more so that the Captains and crew of ships they direct - a reason why they are required. To handle a point made above, that Pilot for sure boarded that ship before it ever left the docks at the point of departure and would have been with it full time until it reached the end of the controlled waterway...

To have had this be an intentional accident would have only required the cooperation of the Pilot, the Captain, and the Chief Engineer and maybe an engineer's mate. Misdirecting a ship under those conditions would be easy from that point of view. From what I saw from the front-on view, I found myself asking why the ship wasn't further to the East and more in the center of the waterway to have crossed under the bridge more mid-span. When we first see the ship on the videos I've seen, it seems way too far to the west side of the channel, bringing it close to the west pier of the bridge. Again, I don't know the waters, nor have I looked at a coast guard navigation chart to know the lay of that channel... but I was surprised to see it where it was when the video first started... I would say that, at that point, it was at risk of hitting the pier even if there had been no issues with the operation of the ship systems... If it was an intentional collision, it's execution was already sealed when the video we see begins.

Expand full comment

Yup thanks for that, it was the "port" mistake that had me spinning.

I did have the context correct in my head.

Thing is, if the boat's going forwards and you put on left rudder, it will swing left (to anticlockwise). Vice versa, going backwards and put on left rudder, it will swing right (to anticlockwise).

Now what confuses me is, the boat is still under forwards momentum, and you power up reverse, and put on left rudder, what happens?

I guess the answer on that could be anywhere between swing left and swing right depending on its forward speed, the prop speed, and the degree of rudder off centre: and, of course, the current.

Even so, it is only going to head to the bank (clockwise) if it's still powering forwards <RELATIVE TO THE CURRENT> ... basically, drifting, in which case the rudder imho has nothing much to say-¿¿??.

This thread reminds me of the China Eastern Airlines crash which turned out to be a clear (and tragic) case of pilot suicide, which tbh was probably the intuitive answer, notwithstanding lots of contributions from the knowledgeable, in various (as it turned out) useless directions.

I am not holding my breath.

Thanks very much for your response!

Expand full comment

"Shortly after the lights come on the Captain realized he was on a collision course for the bridge, he put the ship in Full Astern"

Not what I saw. The ship appeared to have moved past the bridge and made a continues long starboard turn not appearing to slow in any real way. Dropping only the starboard anchors makes no sense and is not explained.

Expand full comment

As noted by others and seen in photos taken after the incident the port anchor was dropped.

the theory is that the drag will pull the ships direction to port if the anchor bites into the bottom. I have done that on a small sailboat and it works. Unfortunately in a ship that large the anchor is not going to stop the ship and if the seabed was what I expect it will be sandy or silty so nothing for the anchor to bite into and even it it did it is likely the chain would break or the chain would rip a hole in the side of the ship due to the momentum of the ship and the size of the chain.

Expand full comment

I would not expect the chain to break under any conditions, even if it grabbed a 50 ton boulder under water.

Expand full comment

The Dali Nailed a concrete dock a few years back really hard amidships grinding all the paint off of her at below deck rail elevation. No thrusters helping out on that approach.

Expand full comment

They were leaving, the dock was heaviliy damaged enough to be shut down, Dali took good size damage to with holes in the hull, but above water line. The Dali was impounded after that Debacle.

Expand full comment

Was the DALI even equipped with modern Bow Thrusters Port and Starboard?

She Required 2 tugs to pull off docking and made a perfect u turn with assisting tugs in center of channel.

Only after the DALI was under 1/4 power and heading arrow straight for under the center of bridge did the tugs let her loose and turn back into the docks of the bays.

Expand full comment
Mar 30·edited Mar 30

Yes, the Dali had a single bow thruster of 4000 hp. Definitely a big block load to drop on its

set of 4 generators totalling about 18 megawatts assuming they are paralleled worse if not all generators running or other significant loads were running. see Wikipedia entry below.

Note that bow and stern thrusters are used for manoeuvring close to dock at minimal speed and not intended for use while underway. They are weak.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MV_Dali

Expand full comment

I do realize there is no real direct iron shaft like an outboard or a stern drive vessel.

More like a locomotive as diesel powers generators that power traction motors that are more like giant drill motor at each iron wheel. The DALI has similar drive systems to drive the shaft outbound of the giant screw(Propellers weight a ton) There are no brakes on ships.

Expand full comment

Great diagnostics Fred.

I think the crew and Capt. were very tired and even more so unprepared to maneuver DALI.

Expand full comment

I am open to either accident and intentional act. It has been reported that 1 minute of the black box data recordings were missing when the power went out. I assume that the black box should have battery backup. According to current information the rudder requires power from the generators to operate so no power, no main or back up rudder control. It also seems that no power means no transmission of systems data to the black box. If a fuel contamination problem occurred then that might explain the loss of power however my understanding is the main diesel and the 4 generators may have used different fuels.

Expand full comment

Got it. But like all things computer, the dang thing often must reboot the entire system back to start up . Takes time if this is the case. It double checks prior to allow a reboot. ??

Expand full comment

If someone wanted to plan an attack on a bridge, 3 or 4 people could conspire to be on a ship together that would transit the target area at some scheduled time. But that's a function of shipping schedules and other logistics of complex interface... At this point, I can accept the ship's power failed and the boat ended up in the bridge piers... the only conspiracy/deliberate evidence I am comfortable with comes from the government and official responses... secrets, obfuscations and the usual appearance of incompetence that tends to point us toward a deliberate act... Turns out the ship had TWO Pilots aboard, a Senior and a Junior pilot. Seems unlikely that this could have been a deliberate act... sure, Pilots could be bought, but this particular ship on this particular night was probably not scheduled too far in advance -- shipping demands are what determines schedules... even as 3 or 4 people COULD agree to drive any big ship into a bridge if there was the intention... like the first officer might have turned off oxygen aboard MH-370 killing everyone aboard except himself and then flying it due south and crashing in the ocean once it ran out of fuel... single people in control of such ships/planes and so on have a LOT of autonomy for sure.

Expand full comment

Two pilots who worked for the Port of Baltimore were navigating the cargo ship at the time of the collision. Pilots are local specialists who help guide vessels safely in and out of ports. Both pilots are U.S. citizens, Synergy told the Associated Press.

Expand full comment

That's really very interesting. My first thought to that is how do they get off the ship once it has gone beyond this safety zone? The tugs had let the DALI loose and on her own at least half mile from the crown of the bridge over head lanes. Is there a boat waiting outside that perimeter that fetches the two Port specialists and return them to some HQ or even another waiting vessel ready to Journey out to sea? Why wouldn't the tugs just guide it into the narrows and release the DALI when no collision with other ships or the supports in the water? Thanks for the feedback. I'm a real curious about this as these ships are monsters

The port was never designed to really handle the size they have become. But they do well.

Expand full comment

Pilots are embarked and disembarked from their ship assignments via smaller vessels that provide their transportation to and from their assigned ship. They often use rope ladders to get from the deck to the pilot vessel... in rough weather, I've heard helicopters are also an option.

Expand full comment

Indeed, Thrusters are not considered navigational propulsion.

Expand full comment

Thanks for the data input.

1) There will be no course alteration of a "drifting" vessel.

2) The copious fuel smoke emitted from the ship strongly suggests applied power.

3) Only powered hard starboard rudder explains the turn.

4) The "turn" ended when the ship achieved a straight line course intersecting the pylon.

5) Turn termination indicates a second powered rudder adjustment.

Conclision: Either that ship was deliberately driven into that pylon or,

"normal office fires" brought down the Francis Scott Key Bridge, just like Bldg 7.

Expand full comment

Yep, they made a 100,000 ton ship turn 40 degree in minutes. Part of it was the full reverse, which in a right pitched propeller drives the front to the right, boat physics here

https://nukepro.net/5090/

Expand full comment

Stock, the only issue I have with this explanation is the boat had 8 knots of weigh -- rudder or not, prop walk is inconsequential at those speeds. It's interesting from the video to see the ship appear to actually point the bow at the piers and piroutte the stern around to port, rotating the ship clockwise as seen from the top... didn't seem like a current and wind were strong enough to do that... ???

Expand full comment

As am MSME and salty kind of guy, my gut feeling is that full starboard rudder and 100% throttle reverse in a right handed propeller would make the turn much quicker, and this AI interpretation, aligns with my Gut.

You are correct in your assessment. When a vessel is moving forward at a decent speed and the engine is suddenly put into full throttle reverse while simultaneously applying a full starboard (right) rudder, and assuming a right-handed propeller (which would produce prop walk to starboard in reverse), it can indeed create a significant turning effect that might exceed the sum of its parts.

This maneuver combines several factors to enhance the turning effect:

Prop Walk: The right-handed propeller, when suddenly put into reverse, would produce prop walk to starboard, causing the stern to swing to port (left). This contributes to the turning effect.

Rudder: The full starboard (right) rudder would also push the stern to port (left), further enhancing the turning effect.

Hydrodynamic Forces: At higher speeds, the hydrodynamic forces acting on the hull and rudder are stronger, which can amplify the effectiveness of both the prop walk and the rudder in turning the vessel.

By combining these factors effectively, the turning effect can indeed be more significant than if each factor were acting independently. This maneuver can be used in certain situations for quick and decisive maneuvers, such as in emergency situations or when making tight turns in confined spaces. However, it's crucial for ship operators to understand the limitations and risks associated with such maneuvers, as they can put additional stress on the vessel's propulsion system and hull structure.

Expand full comment

Is that a single propeller ship? If so, yes it would walk against the rotation of the bottom of the prop against the water...

Expand full comment

single propeller, right handed. The handedness determines whether the stern walks to the right or left, this made the stern walk left pushing bow to right.

Expand full comment

Dennis, on your item 3 above, if engines are hard reverse, and the rudders are hard to port the stern will 'walk' to port, independent of the vessel's forward momentum. I'm not sure that hard to port would have been the right call there unless the plan was to rotate the ship around it's bow to pass under the bridge to the port of the piers... yet, if you have that power going forward, you could steer to port and move away from the pier... the key is, in what order were what inputs made for course correction?

Expand full comment

They could have easily coasted through the bridge opening and then dealt with things. they did not, for a reason.

Expand full comment

You make my point well. That ship was driven into the bridge. However they did it, it was intentional.

Expand full comment

Could depend on currents... if you've lost all power and maneuver and the ship is just adrift, it will tend to rotate to be perpendicular to the direction of the current, assuming the wind doesn't override this. We're moving with the current and (relatively) before the wind. But I think, evidenced by the black smoke there was an effort to restart the diesel engines in that process. A turn to port under rudder and full power to start the rotation would cause the stern to yaw to the right... perhaps a concern that the stern would then hit the bridge. Interesting that when you look at the nav charts, that channel appears to run right up to the west and right next to that west bridge pier. If you're stern yawed to the right with the bow pointed at the bridge pier, you're gonna hit it if there isn't room to allow the stern to be collected to follow BEHIND the bow, not alongside of it. :)

Expand full comment

Jeff Childers covered this in his Coffee and Covid Substack today with a statement by a Maersk chief engineer. Check it out John, if you've not seen it already b/c he also has a NTSB statement.

Expand full comment

I have reproduced the excerpt from Coffee and Covid above.

Expand full comment

Cargo ships have a redundancy—in the event they lose power and need to steer—it is an “Essential Function!”

Within minutes of bridge collapse, Biden immediately announced tax payers will pay for the reconstruction but Why? Bridge collapse was the ship’s fault & “All shipping companies are heavily

insured.” Insurance companies do a thorough investigation before paying

for any damages incurred by their insured’s (shipping companies, ships etc)

If there would be an “Uncontrolled investigation,” by Insurance company, people would know “what Really Happened,” & would not be a conspiracy theory!”🤨

Expand full comment
Mar 31·edited Mar 31

Biden is senile... who knows what spins through the mouth from the mind of Alzheimer???

Expand full comment

what do you guys think of the "cyber attack" theory?

we know the tech certainly exists... https://eccentrik.substack.com/p/was-the-baltimore-bridge-collapse?r=8ypo0&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&triedRedirect=true

Expand full comment

Cui bono?

Expand full comment
Mar 30·edited Mar 30

I'd say those who wish to destroy American cities through economic collapse and other nefarious plans, specifically against the citizens of the US, are the beneficiaries. They want disruption and chaos.

Baltimore is, and has been for several decades now, a poorly-run democrat stronghold that has been teetering on the edge of societal chaos before this incident. I grew up there, and remember the harbor when it was a very dark, dangerous waterfront, where you expected to see a body or two floating on the oily film near Fells Point. Sadly, this disaster looks like it will only speed up a return to those old days.

I'm glad I got to enjoy the waterfront as a young adult when it was vitalized and made a safe and fun place. Summer weekends in the 70s-80s were filled with various ethnic festivals, concerts, flower shows, Harbor Place. That culture no longer exists.

Expand full comment

It absolutely cannot be dismissed.

Expand full comment

Yes it does and the CCP has that capability. Except not on ships that do not have that technology as in this one... the Dali.

Expand full comment

I saw an interview with a shop captain from Baltimore who said this ship is too old to be hacked. Old technology. But that newer ships absolutely can be hacked.

Expand full comment

depends on updates to a system, unknown.

Expand full comment

Couldn't GPS signals be spoofed, forcing a direct turn to "correct it's course"?

Expand full comment

Yes GPS can be hacked and interfered with, but the ship is under control of a local PILOT who is directing the crew to follow his navigational direction. It was a clear night, and no autopilot is used with a Pilot on the bridge. So, GPS would not have been a primary source of information for the position or velocity of the ship. Again, a Pilot is brought aboard for their LOCAL KNOWLEDGE of the navigational conditions of that river and it's channels, markers and so forth.

Expand full comment

Also it has been said by people that operate ships that this ship was an old beast that does not have sophisticated technology!

Expand full comment

I surely don’t know. This captain believed it to be massive error, plus breakdown of ship maintenance. This same ship crashed a dock in Belgium. In the interview, he discussed the black smoke, and that that was an attempt at correction with the rudder, that was his personal tip off that it was an accident within an attempt to correct. I saw today that the pilot’s attorneys association are circling the wagons, and that tells me that there’s a mistake involved

Expand full comment

Another interesting point that has been brought up is that only one angle/perspective has been released. We’re to believe there are no other cameras w/pictures/videos? Sounds similar to J6 pipe bombs.

Expand full comment

I like this video where there's an electronic navigation and video synchronization.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N39w6aQFKSQ

Expand full comment

There is another from similar perspective but a bit off, and higher quality.

Expand full comment

I have seen a second video from a different angle. I think it was one of the ones on Twitchy.

Expand full comment

The captain is a Ukrainian, maybe he thinks we are the ones keeping the war going on in his country and this indeed is an act of terrorism.

Expand full comment

THE 2 BALTIMORE US PORT AUTHORITY PILOTS WERE IN COMMAND!! GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT BEFORE YOU SPOUT NONSENSE!!!

Expand full comment

Also... the master of the ship was INDIAN NOT UKRANIAN!!!!!

Expand full comment

Okay, the C&C comment I referred to in my first reply was on Wednesday, March 27, by Freedom Fox,a Substack writer, referring to another Substack writer's piece: https://jasonpowers.substack.com/p/francis-scott-key-bridge-collapses. Supposedly, the ship had a highly-paid (>$10,000/month) Ukrainian crew Master. This crew master was subsequently deleted from the DALI's crew listing. Jason Powers provided links, which Freedom Fox included in his comment. Here they are, and if you go to the linked records (archived), you will see this information. Also interesting is the fact that the Ukrainian's record was last updated EARLIER THIS MONTH; the Indian's was updated much longer ago. The Ukrainian's "Last Known Contract" is recorded as "Master;" the Indian's is for "Motorman/oiler." You will see that the archived records differ in that one says, "Two records found" and the other says, "One record found." There are a number of interesting details included.

archive.is/LeT7C --- archive of Ukrainian.

balticshipping.com/vessel/imo/9697428

Ship now shows 1 crew member. Before it was two.

archive.is/KjCNl

Expand full comment

VERIFY reader Linda asked our team in an email if the Dali cargo ship captain is from Ukraine.

THE QUESTION

Is the captain of the cargo ship involved in the Baltimore bridge collapse Ukrainian?

THE SOURCES

Synergy Marine Group, a ship management company

BalticShipping.com, maritime jobs database

THE ANSWER

This is false.

No, the captain of the cargo ship involved in the Baltimore bridge collapse is not Ukrainian.

WHAT WE FOUND

The captain of the Dali cargo ship that was involved in Baltimore’s Francis Scott Key Bridge collapse is not Ukrainian. The captain and crew of the cargo ship are Indian, according to Synergy Marine Group, the ship’s management company.

Hours after the bridge collapsed on March 26, Synergy Marine Group said in a press release that all 22 crew members on the ship when the bridge collapsed are Indian.

Two pilots who worked for the Port of Baltimore were navigating the cargo ship at the time of the collision. Pilots are local specialists who help guide vessels safely in and out of ports. Both pilots are U.S. citizens, Synergy told the Associated Press.

The screenshot from the viral social posts appear to show that a 52-year-old Ukrainian man listed on BalticShipping.com’s database worked on the Dali as a master or captain.

We found that the man’s profile has since been removed from the BalticShipping.com database. However, online records acquired by the Associated Press and other media outlets showed the man worked as master on the ship from March 19, 2016, to July 27, 2016.

Expand full comment

A commenter to the "Coffee & Covid" substack provided links to two records dated very close in time to one another, and the earlier one showed TWO captains/masters/whatever, one of them being Ukrainian and one Indian. The later record had been changed to show just one of the earlier two, and the remaining one shown was the Indian one. I will look for the links.

Expand full comment

VERIFY reader Linda asked our team in an email if the Dali cargo ship captain is from Ukraine.

THE QUESTION

Is the captain of the cargo ship involved in the Baltimore bridge collapse Ukrainian?

THE SOURCES

Synergy Marine Group, a ship management company

BalticShipping.com, maritime jobs database

THE ANSWER

This is false.

No, the captain of the cargo ship involved in the Baltimore bridge collapse is not Ukrainian.

WHAT WE FOUND

The captain of the Dali cargo ship that was involved in Baltimore’s Francis Scott Key Bridge collapse is not Ukrainian. The captain and crew of the cargo ship are Indian, according to Synergy Marine Group, the ship’s management company.

Hours after the bridge collapsed on March 26, Synergy Marine Group said in a press release that all 22 crew members on the ship when the bridge collapsed are Indian.

Two pilots who worked for the Port of Baltimore were navigating the cargo ship at the time of the collision. Pilots are local specialists who help guide vessels safely in and out of ports. Both pilots are U.S. citizens, Synergy told the Associated Press.

The screenshot from the viral social posts appear to show that a 52-year-old Ukrainian man listed on BalticShipping.com’s database worked on the Dali as a master or captain.

We found that the man’s profile has since been removed from the BalticShipping.com database. However, online records acquired by the Associated Press and other media outlets showed the man worked as master on the ship from March 19, 2016, to July 27, 2016.

Expand full comment

As soon as I heard about the bridge and given everything that has happened in the last 4 years, I knew this “accident” was anything but an accident. Not for one second did I think it could have been a “terrorist” of a foreign government or group. No, this was a USA-government terrorist attack on its homeland.

Why in the world would Biden say tax dollars will pay?? When shipping companies have very expensive insurance policies in place for “accidents” such as this??

Last but not least are the CDC containers of hazardous chemicals. Are the containers damaged enough to leak? Are these CDC chemicals leaking into the river? What are we in for now? Is this the start of Disease X?

In these times, anything is possible!

https://open.substack.com/pub/lionessofjudah/p/the-plot-thickens-cdc-hazmat-containers?r=15k78n&utm_medium=ios

Expand full comment

And it sure has diverted attention away from the Oversight Committee's hearings concerning the Biden family's lucrative dealings with China and Ukraine. https://oversight.house.gov/landing/biden-family-investigation/

Expand full comment

I lay out the case here, this was definitely a planned attack....check it out, many references to prior work in which I wasn't sure but was doing calculations and research.

https://nukepro.net/5111/

Expand full comment

I mentioned this in the previous article, but why isn’t the cause of the power loss causing any suspicion? Perhaps the same thing that happened to Lahaina. Anyone thirsty for a Mountain Dew? Maybe heat up a snack in your Microwave? Use a Scaler to clean that fish you caught. Anyone hungry for hints?

Expand full comment

Bingo....he left the helm and the wheelhouse momentarily to grab another Bud light from the fridge.

The Dali did not have a seasoned crew. It no doubt had a "CRACK CREW". Run the Drug tests !!!

No need to eh? This is a maritime incident. Land laws don't apply to foreign ship operations.

Expand full comment

I'm told a Pilot was aboard and in charge of transiting the waterway.

Expand full comment

Well that would be the rule once the DALI was categorized as underway.

Especially given the fact it was in a bay enclosure,

and the narrow under bridge opening was the only way out to open sea.

I bet there are all kinds of written rules about the Helmsman ship for massive cargo rigs.

But was the helm unattended for a crisis even for a minute? I doubt such will be revealed.

How many past Harbor Meetings was the discussion of ships being 5 times the size in the past 10 yrs and the "WHAT IFS" scenarios had been a #1 topic in Baltimore Docks??

Expand full comment