Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Suez canal blocked by a massive ship

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 462 posts

Re: Suez canal blocked by a massive ship

#311

Post by Draken93 »

lovelyviking wrote: post #301
fifilura wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love the position of the Swedish flag in that photo. Given that the accident happened in Germany and the ship is Taiwanese. It is just freaky, I don't know if it is good or bad to be associated with such an incident. In a plane crash they are usually quick to paint over the name of the airline company to not be associated. I don't think this is the same though.

Can't see the flag, because the whole page is blocked by some BS (presumably in german). Blocking own content or creating obstacles to see it ... what can be more ridiculous. I just close such web pages and never come back.

The first notification informes you about the cookies the website is using. You need to agree to the use of the cookies to continue. This is mandatory by european law.

But I agree with you that the placement and the fact that the banner blocks the whole website is unconvenient.

The second notification tells you to turn your ad-blocker of or to watch a video instead.

Re: Suez canal blocked by a massive ship

#312

Post by lb1lf »

HenryKissinger wrote: post #286
cycomanic wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently 30% of all container traffic go through the Suez canal. Around 51 ships per day.

How much longer would it take to go around Africa to Gibraltar?

The increase in distance would be approx. 6,000Nm (assuming they arrived at the entrance to the Red Sea before having to change course).

6000Nm and, say, 25 knots (probably a bit on the high side, but not by much) should add 240 hours of steaming or 10 days to the voyage.

(This will be somewhat offset by the lower speed through the channel, waiting times &c - I've no idea how long a typical Suez transit is.)

Re: Suez canal blocked by a massive ship

#313

Post by sjg007 »

oliv__ wrote: post #101

Tengential but I am always curious what software these huge logistics company use to manage their business. From my outsider's perspective, it seems like a best-in-class-software enabled company would have a massive advantage over the rest. Interested to hear if anyone has insights about this

Well there's Flexport.

Re: Suez canal blocked by a massive ship

#314

Post by larzang »

HenryKissinger wrote: post #286
cycomanic wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently 30% of all container traffic go through the Suez canal. Around 51 ships per day.

How much longer would it take to go around Africa to Gibraltar?

8 days, but the bigger problem is that increases the expected sea states encountered by several levels. Huge container ships don't like that.

Re: Suez canal blocked by a massive ship

#315

Post by Symbiote »

ben_w wrote: post #309
lovelyviking wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't see the flag, because the whole page is blocked by some BS (presumably in german). Blocking own content or creating obstacles to see it ... what can be more ridiculous. I just close such web pages and never come back.

I saw a cookies consent popover followed by a “oh no ad block” popover. I can’t get worked up against them for wanting to get paid, even though I regard adverts as parasites of time, energy, and bandwidth and won’t disable my ad blocker for them — I don’t have solutions, just the aphorism about two wrongs.

It's a GDPR consent banner.

I didn't tolerate it either — I can often figure out which button is "Necessary cookies only", but not in this case.

However, Firefox's reader mode retains the main image: https://www.mopo.de/image/32016852/2x1/940/470/afcc092634a9d...

Re: Suez canal blocked by a massive ship

#316

Post by samizdis »

ggregoire wrote: post #282
danaos wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uhhh it's in Wikipedia's "largest container ships" list! [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_container_ship...

Anyone knows why all those Korean, Swiss and Taiwanese ships are registered in Panama instead of their own country?

It's a system called registering a ship under a "flag of convenience" [1].

Covers lots of questionable business practices, from employment conditions/health and safety, to tax etc.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_convenience

Edited to add this (which I did not know, but think it interesting) from the Wikipedia article:

The modern practice of ships being registered in a foreign country [ie, a flag of convenience] began in the 1920s in the United States when shipowners seeking to serve alcohol to passengers during Prohibition registered their ships in Panama. Owners soon began to perceive advantages in terms of avoiding increased regulations and rising labor costs and continued to register their ships in Panama even after Prohibition ended.

Re: Suez canal blocked by a massive ship

#317

Post by [deleted] »

willyt wrote: post #192
throwaway0a5e wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They'd be crappy terrorists because shipping delays don't cause terror the way real terrorism does.

No they’d be geniuses because they would cause economic losses to powerful people a lot like how the good Friday agreement came about quite quickly after the IRA broke every office window in the finicial district of London with a truckload of fertiliser. No-one was killed and glaziers rates went up 10 times for a few months. It caused a big disruption to the financial district but most ordinary people weren’t that bo…

[deleted]

Re: Suez canal blocked by a massive ship

#318

Post by NorwegianDude »

lmilcin wrote: post #256
speexmex wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't this why new ships are starting to have multiple 360 degree electrical drivers instead of one big propeller? I think they are called iso-pods.

You mean this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azipod I think the biggest issue is complexity and resulting unreliability. On a ship that has to be in constant use for decades you want things that are simple and reliable. "The latest design, the Azipod X, incorporates these improvements, with a view to a service interval of five years, and features bearings that can be taken apart and repaired from inside the pod while…

They usually isn't used as the primary means of propulsion on most bigger ships. It's also not uncommon for them to be retractable. If you need a large ship at a very specific position for a week, then you definetly need it, and that is a common use case as it allows for impressively accurate control. Heck, you could avoid moorings altogether and just keep it in place without it if you wanted to.

Re: Suez canal blocked by a massive ship

#319

Post by airhead969 »

andrewinardeer wrote: post #290
serf wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>and a pleasure craft I see that labeling too, but the Tahia Misr2 is a tug, sister to the Tahia Misr1. I'm not sure why it's displaying as a pleasure craft.

Maybe it is enjoying itself?

I don't want to know, do I?

Edit: The phrase "pleasure craft" is a triple entendre, and possibly a quadruple.

Re: Suez canal blocked by a massive ship

#320

Post by tilolebo »

tilolebo wrote: post #303

https://twitter.com/AgenciesLeth/status/1374674714854105093?... The Twitter account of this transit services agency provides some updates. I already saw multiple French news sites stating that the canal has been unblocked, but apparently that's not true. I wonder where that news came from.

https://twitter.com/AgenciesLeth/status/1374634054096723970?...

2 dredges and a larger tug underway to help unblocking the Ever Given.

Post reply on HN