Baltimore bridge collapse: Two possible causes for catastrophe

Published

2 years ago

March 26, 2024

admin

In an instant, a large section of the Francis Scott Key Bridge was gone – as dozens of its steel beams collapsed into the water after being hit by a cargo ship.

But how could such a catastrophe have happened?

Baltimore bridge latest:
Follow live updates
What do we know about bridge and the ship that hit it?

Emergency services are still at the scene and details about casualties are still emerging.

Sky News has spoken to a number of maritime and engineering experts to try and understand what might have happened – and what issues may have been at play.

Was human error to blame?

Professor Helen Sampson, an expert at the Seafarers International Research Centre at Cardiff University, says the crash may have been caused by someone’s mistake.

She told Sky News: “Was there some sort of miscommunication or misunderstanding between the pilot and the crew? Or was there a pilot error?”

The time of day when the disaster occurred – around 1.30am local time – gives rise to concerns about tiredness, she added.

“The time makes me also wonder whether there was an element of fatigue at play…

“It’s almost always the case that we focus on human error at the individual level, it’s almost always the case that there’s a broader context which has resulted in that human error, like fatigue and the demands made on pilots or on crews.”

What about a mechanical problem?

However, another maritime safety expert says the “most likely” cause of the crash was a failure in the ship’s machinery.

David McFarlane, director of Maritime Risk and Safety Consultants Ltd, told Sky News: “The first thing that springs to my mind is: was there a sudden fault with the ship’s engines or the steering gear?”

Mr McFarlane said a human error was less likely because of the number of people who would have been on duty.

“There should be no room for one-person errors because one of the other people should jump in and say ‘hang on’,” he said.

“The most likely cause of this is a failure in machinery or steering gear, but we just won’t know until the authorities have been on board. And even then, they’re unlikely to say what’s been going on for some considerable time.”

Prof Sampson said a mechanical failure with the steering gear or something similar would be the “most dramatic” explanation for what happened.

Officials have confirmed the ship that crashed into the bridge had issued a mayday call and had lost power.

Was there a design flaw in the bridge?

Opened in 1977, the Francis Scott Key Bridge is named after the poet who wrote the words to the Star Spangled Banner, the American national anthem.

Constructed from steel, it was 1.6 miles long and not dissimilar to some bridges in the UK, one expert told Sky News.

Julian Carter, a structural and civil engineering expert, said these structures are simple in concept – but “very weak” at certain points.

“It’s what we call a continuous structure every little piece is connected to another – and unfortunately it’s a catastrophic collapse.”

Professor Barbara Rossi, an expert in engineering science at the University of Oxford, said the impacting force of the cargo ship must have been “immense” to lead to the collapse of the concrete structures underpinning the bridge.

“We should not speculate around if such huge impact forces should have been taken into account at the design stage,” she added.

There has also been discussion about whether “dolphins” (steel structures embedded in the seabed to stop or divert a ship) or artificial islands may have been inadequate.

Bridge designer Robert Benaim said: “I do not know what the arrangements were for this bridge but major bridges over shipping lanes must have substantial protection for piers or columns.”

He added: “If piers are not protected adequately then they are vulnerable to ship collision. Clearly the protection of the piers in this instance was inadequate. A pier or column of a bridge could never resist the impact of a large ship. They must be protected from collision.”

US

Marjorie Taylor Greene: Former Trump ally turned critic announces sudden resignation

Published

18 hours ago

November 22, 2025

admin

Marjorie Taylor Greene: Former Trump ally turned critic announces sudden resignation

Marjorie Taylor Greene – a one-time MAGA ally who has turned into a fierce critic of Donald Trump – has unexpectedly announced she is resigning from Congress.

Her relationship with the president has deteriorated in recent months, and she had vocally campaigned for the justice department to release all of its files concerning the convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.

Mr Trump has been fiercely critical about Ms Greene on Truth Social – describing her as a “lunatic”.

In a statement posted on X, she wrote: “Standing up for American women who were raped at 14, trafficked and used by rich powerful men, should not result in me being called a traitor and threatened by the President of the United States, whom I fought for.”

Ms Greene went on to confirm her last day in office will be on January 5.

The hard-right Republican was one of the most aggressive spokespeople for the Make America Great Again movement – and had become infamous for her combative encounters with journalists, including Sky’s Martha Kelner.

She was known for her susceptibility to conspiracy theories, and was widely denounced for comparing COVID-19 masks and vaccinations to the persecution of Jews during the Holocaust.

On social media, she had made posts advocating violence against Democrat opponents – and casting doubt on the 9/11 terror attacks and the school mass shootings at Parkland and Sandy Hook.

The bond between Ms Greene and Mr Trump started to break down after she lambasted his foreign policy – describing it as “America Last”.

Last week, the president had announced that he was withdrawing his support and endorsement for the 51-year-old, who had been expected to run for re-election in Georgia’s 14th congressional district next November.

Her statement added: “I have too much self-respect and dignity, love my family way too much, and do not want my sweet district to have to endure a hurtful and hateful primary against me by the president we all fought for, only to fight and win my election while Republicans will likely lose the midterms.”

A few days ago, Ms Greene had warned the breakdown in relations with the White House had led to her construction company receiving a pipe bomb threat.

She had written on X: “President Trump’s unwarranted and vicious attacks against me were a dog whistle to dangerous radicals that could lead to serious attacks on me and my family.”

Ms Greene went on to warn his inflammatory rhetoric “puts blood in the water and creates a feeding frenzy that could ultimately lead to a harmful or even deadly outcome”.

US

Pras Michel: Fugees rapper ‘who betrayed US for money’ is jailed for 14 years

Published

19 hours ago

November 22, 2025

admin

Pras Michel: Fugees rapper 'who betrayed US for money' is jailed for 14 years

A Grammy-winning rapper who “betrayed his country for money” has been sentenced to 14 years in prison.

Prakazrel “Pras” Michel, who was part of 1990s hip-hop group The Fugees, was convicted of illegally funnelling millions of dollars in foreign contributions to Barack Obama’s re-election campaign in 2012.

The Justice Department had accused the 53-year-old of accepting $120m (£92m) from Malaysian financier Low Taek Jho, who wanted to gain political influence in the US.

Prosecutors said Michel “lied unapologetically and unrelentingly to carry out his actions” – and sought to deceive the White House, senior politicians and the FBI for almost a decade.

In 2018, it is claimed he urged the Trump administration and the justice department to drop embezzlement investigations against Low.

Michel was convicted of 10 counts by a federal jury in 2023 – and last month, he was ordered to forfeit about $65m (£50m) for his role in the scheme.

Hollywood star Leonardo DiCaprio testified at the trial, and Low was a primary financier in his 2013 film The Wolf Of Wall Street.

The Oscar-winning actor said the businessman’s funding and legitimacy had been carefully vetted before they entered a partnership.

Prosecutors had been seeking a life sentence to “reflect the breadth and depth of Michel’s crimes, his indifference to the risks to his country, and the magnitude of his greed”.

However, the rapper’s lawyer Peter Zeidenberg has argued that the 14-year term is “completely disproportionate to the offence” – and is vowing to appeal.

Last year, a judge rejected Michel’s request for a new trial after claiming that one of his lawyers had used AI during closing arguments.

Low Taek Jho has been accused of having a central role in the 1MDB scandal, amid claims billions of dollars were stolen from a Malaysian state fund.

The 44-year-old is a fugitive but has maintained his innocence, with his lawyers writing: “Low’s motivation for giving Michel money to donate was not so that he could achieve some policy objective.

“Instead, Low simply wanted to obtain a photograph with himself and then President Obama.”

Michel, who was born in Brooklyn, was a founding member of The Fugees with childhood friends Lauryn Hill and Wyclef Jean – selling tens of millions of records.

US

Trump peace plan: We could all pay if Europe doesn’t step up and guarantee Ukraine’s security

Published

20 hours ago

November 21, 2025

admin

Trump peace plan: We could all pay if Europe doesn't step up and guarantee Ukraine's security

The Donald Trump peace plan is nothing of the sort. It takes Russian demands and presents them as peace proposals, in what is effectively for Ukraine a surrender ultimatum.

If accepted, it would reward armed aggression. The principle, sacrosanct since the Second World War, for obvious and very good reasons, that even de facto borders cannot be changed by force, will have been trampled on at the behest of the leader of the free world.

The Kremlin will have imposed terms via negotiators on a country it has violated, and whose people its troops have butchered, massacred and raped. It is without doubt the biggest crisis in Trans-Atlantic relations since the war began, if not since the inception of NATO.

The question now is: are Europe’s leaders up to meeting the daunting challenges that will follow. On past form, we cannot be sure.

The plan proposes the following:

• Land seized by Vladimir Putin’s unwarranted and unprovoked invasion would be ceded by Kyiv.

• Territory his forces have fought but failed to take with colossal loss of life will be thrown into the bargain for good measure.

• Ukraine will be barred from NATO, from having long-range weapons, from hosting foreign troops, from allowing foreign diplomatic planes to land, and its military neutered, reduced in size by more than half.

And most worryingly for Western leaders, the plan proposes NATO and Russia negotiate with America acting as mediator.

Lest we forget, America is meant to be the strongest partner in NATO, not an outside arbitrator. In one clause, Mr Trump’s lack of commitment to the Western alliance is laid bare in chilling clarity.

And even for all that, the plan will not bring peace. Mr Putin has made it abundantly clear he wants all of Ukraine.

He has a proven track record of retiring, rallying his forces, then returning for more. Reward a bully as they say, and he will only come back for more. Why wouldn’t he, if he is handed the fortress cities of Donetsk and a clear run over open tank country to Kyiv in a few years?

Since the beginning of Trump’s presidency, Europe has tried to keep the maverick president onside when his true sympathies have repeatedly reverted to Moscow.

It has been a demeaning and sycophantic spectacle, NATO’s secretary general stooping even to calling the US president ‘Daddy’. And it hasn’t worked. It may have made matters worse.

The parade of world leaders trooping through Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, lavishing praise on his Gaza ceasefire plan, only encouraged him to believe he is capable of solving the world’s most complex conflicts with the minimum of effort.

The Gaza plan is mired in deepening difficulty, and it never came near addressing the underlying causes of the war.

Most importantly, principles the West has held inviolable for eight decades cannot be torn up for the sake of a quick and uncertain peace.

With a partner as unreliable, the challenge to Europe cannot be clearer.

In the words of one former Baltic foreign minister: “There is a glaringly obvious message for Europe in the 28-point plan: This is the end of the end.

“We have been told repeatedly and unambiguously that Ukraine’s security, and therefore Europe’s security, will be Europe’s responsibility. And now it is. Entirely.”

If Europe does not step up to the plate and guarantee Ukraine’s security in the face of this American betrayal, we could all pay the consequences.