# Bright Field accident in 1996



## shamrock (May 16, 2009)

I watched the footage of the Bright Field ramming the shopping mall in Mississippi again last night. Haven't seen the film for quite a few months, it still amazes me that a ship that big could go out of control like that.

I assume it was worse since it lost control in a river, but seeing the ship literally 'chasing' people down the quayside was terrifying to watch, I cannot imagine what it must have been like for those actually caught up in it.

Six were killed and around 100 were hurt in the accident...astounding there weren't more casualties really.

http://www.nytimes.com/1996/12/15/us/freighter-hits-riverfront-mall-in-new-orleans.html

http://www.nytimes.com/1996/12/18/us/replayed-warning-opens-hearing-on-ship-s-crash.html

Has this sort of accident happened since or was this (thankfully) a one-off?


----------



## non descript (Nov 18, 2005)

Ummm a classic case of seeing something and reporting erroneous facts….._ “Rescue workers said in the late afternoon that at least six people had been killed in the crash, basing their count on witnesses who reported seeing people disappear under the river or in the debris.” _… that was correct, but what they actually saw was mannequins from the shopping mall floating in the Mississippi River… Yes, the local office workers did see a truly awful sight on first impressions and they all rang round saying how many “bodies” were in the water…(EEK) It is good to see that the NY Times did go a little further and we saw them clarify their inital report with: _“but Coast Guard officials said tonight that they could not confirm even a single death. As of 8:30 P.M., no bodies had been reported found, neither was anyone reported missing from the collision.” _Which was a tad more accurate than the sensational reporting of earlier. – As for the cause, the United States Coast Guard investigated the incident and published its findings on December 8, 1997, citing the cause of the engine failure as a poorly-maintained oil filter. A secondary but contributory cause was determined as a main-engine automation system which produced warnings and alarms that were not consistently relayed to the ship's Master.. It is always good to blame the Master if in doubt(EEK) . The National Transportation Safety Board published its final report on January 13, 1998, which concurred with the Coast Guard's determinations and appear to charge the ship's operating company with the responsibility for the casualty. The ship was sold, but certain parties opted to take her on charter again (basis a discounted rate to reflect the bad ghosts attached to her, and in and in 2000 with the new name of _Bright Star_ she loaded grain for Taiwan.

ps. Without being unduly caustic, the reports of 100 people injured (or 66 if you take other reports) should be read in conjunction with the location of this curious event… (EEK) - it was after all in the United States of America … _aka the land of the free ambulance chasers_. So maybe ‘100 people filed claims for ‘injury sustained on the day’ but not all were found to be wholly believable.’


----------



## Steve Woodward (Sep 4, 2006)

As is usual in the rare event of a bulk carrier 'going shopping' there is a WEBSITE devoted to the subject


----------



## shamrock (May 16, 2009)

The website devoted to her accident is quite eye opening, thanks for that....'going shopping' without getting off the ship first is extreme and thankfully rare. I guess the reporting was a tad overdone due to that rarity in some ways...I can only imagine the editors when reports started coming in...'what do you mean a ship has rammed a mall...don't be silly...they can't do things like that'...and then seeing it on the telly for themselves.

Scary stuff...and as with aircrashes, its always the person in charge who cops the blame initially if not entirely.


----------

