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

Suez Canal says traffic in channel resumes after stranded ship refloated

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

521–530 of 593 posts

Re: Suez Canal says traffic in channel resumes after stranded ship refloated

#521

Post by saalweachter »

arethuza wrote: post #259
leoh wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There appears to be little "high-end engineering." Just a high tide and a bunch of tug boats.

Pretty sure I've seen a definition of engineering that was "Solve the problem by doing as little new as possible".

Or "by doing as little as possible".

It's easy for me to throw together a small house, shed or bridge, but chances are whatever I build -- if it doesn't immediately collapse -- is horribly overbuilt for its purpose, because I don't know how to calculate and analyze the various stresses and material capacities well enough to size everything to a proper margin. So when I build a bridge I use lumber that is bigger than I think I need and use more of it than I think I need until it feels quite solid, but if I were a proper engineer I could figure out the exact right amount to use.

Re: Suez Canal says traffic in channel resumes after stranded ship refloated

#522

Post by ErikVandeWater »

throwawayfire wrote: post #355
chipsambos wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree it's incalculable, I don't mean that in the "it's too big of a number" sort of way but in the "we can't possibly know" kind of way: 1) The scale and depth of the disruption makes it impractical to figure in any kind of accurate way and 2) The disruption will have introduced hypotheticals that nay spiral out themselves (butterfly effect style) e.g. some retailer may have lost a customer who went elsewhere, some…

> The disruption will have introduced hypotheticals In general, temporary disruption has some long-term positive economic effects (which is directly why 'disruption' is valued in Silicon Valley). For example, during London Tube Strikes, commuters find different and more efficient routes and 5% ended up permanently changing their route on public transport: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/tube-strike..…

That article doesn't link to the study and leaves out major questions about the methodology:

1. How did they decide that the benefits would continue over the course of 4 years?

2. How did they determine what "time lost" was? I imagine it's greater than just extra time waiting at the station. People probably also got lost trying to find a new way around, and were late to things important to them. Unexpectedly being late to a job interview is a very different kind of time lost than saving 3 minutes on your regular daily commute.

Re: Suez Canal says traffic in channel resumes after stranded ship refloated

#524

Post by EricE »

ce4 wrote: post #415
EricE wrote: post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without the high tides the amount of material needed to be removed would have been dramatically higher. That’s the point and the absolute bit of luck. Without the high tides they likely wouldn’t have been able to get it unstuck as quickly. Search for slope/fill volume calculation charts - the amount of fill required to be removed as you go deeper is logarithmic, NOT linear. It was VERY lucky they had the highest tide…

Did the ship crash during high tide or low tide? The tide 6 days ago when it got stuck compared to today is more important.

What? Tide mattered more now because it had a significant impact on getting it out quickly.

Luckily it wasn’t nearly as high when it beached itself - but if it had beached itself on the downslope of the peak tide instead of the upslope it very likely would still be stuck!

Tide when it crashed was not nearly as significant as when it got free.

Re: Suez Canal says traffic in channel resumes after stranded ship refloated

#525

Post by airstrike »

lukifer wrote: post #367
airstrike wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my bedroom as a young teenager I used to think a worldwide event which affected every person equally, like finding life in another planet, would surely usher in a new era of common interest and a shared view that we're all but the same thing: human. I've since turned more cynical and believe that greed is as essential to humanness as empathy, if not more, and without a strong moral code (and fear of being ostraciz…

I had high hopes for a pro-social silver lining around the pandemic as well, but it's simply too distant and indirect (especially given that the outcomes ranged so widely to those infected: from death, to the worst flu ever, to no symptoms at all). What gives me hope is the fact that our species has altruism at all, even if it isn't as widespread as we would like; it's evidence that cooperation is at least sometimes…

Thanks for commenting. That's a helpful and insightful perspective.

Re: Suez Canal says traffic in channel resumes after stranded ship refloated

#526

Post by perl4ever »

notyourday wrote: post #490
fiedzia wrote: post #438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its large, but its size is limited by sues canal. Ships could be much larger if they were designed for a different route.

Only Qmax and Chinamax are higher.

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

This has a rather odd diagram, and I'm not sure if it supports your comment or not.

It shows Suezmax as having "unlimited length", while Chinamax is given as 360 meters, which I think is smaller than Ever Given.

Obviously unlimited length can't be literal, if the Suez isn't perfectly straight, right?

On the other hand the Chinamax diagram says "unlimited air draft" which again, can't be literal since at some point it would be impossible to keep upright?

The Chinamax designation seems to imply a greater draft, which does make sense, but it's only 20% greater than the greatest stated for Suezmax.

Re: Suez Canal says traffic in channel resumes after stranded ship refloated

#527

Post by thaumasiotes »

mgfist wrote: post #486
Raineer wrote: post #416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just adore that us little humans got our big boat stuck in the sand and uncle moon had to reach down and fix it for us.

Auntie Luna

The moon is masculine in Germanic mythology: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%A1ni

Re: Suez Canal says traffic in channel resumes after stranded ship refloated

#528

Post by perl4ever »

OscarCunningham wrote: post #398
Taek wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not necessarily. I pay only $1 a day for water, but if you stop giving me water for 7 days the damages are going to be a lot more than $7. That doesn't mean it's reasonable to charge me more than $1 per day for water. Obviously an extreme example, but the situation with this ship is likely similar. The damages probably far exceed the $15m/day in revenue (though I suspect they are far lower than $7b per day).

The reason water is cheap is because it's plentiful; there's a lot of competition to supply it. But there's only one Suez canal and sailing around Africa is much worse. So you would expect Egypt to be extracting a significant portion of the value the Suez canal adds.

Yes, but you said it yourself, the value the Suez canal adds, compared to going the long way. It's much smaller than the value of being able to ship from A to B at all.

Re: Suez Canal says traffic in channel resumes after stranded ship refloated

#529

Post by Teever »

perl4ever wrote: post #526
notyourday wrote: post #490

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only Qmax and Chinamax are higher.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinamax This has a rather odd diagram, and I'm not sure if it supports your comment or not. It shows Suezmax as having "unlimited length", while Chinamax is given as 360 meters, which I think is smaller than Ever Given. Obviously unlimited length can't be literal, if the Suez isn't perfectly straight, right? On the other hand the Chinamax diagram says "unlimited air draft" which again,…

I am not an expert but what I think they mean by 'unlimited' in this context is 'limited by engineering, not limited by 'geology of man made structure.'

Re: Suez Canal says traffic in channel resumes after stranded ship refloated

#530

Post by Spooky23 »

iso1210 wrote: post #301
lisper wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can get a rough idea by thinking of this as if it were a natural disaster, and from that perspective I think the toll is probably not too bad. No casualties, very little property damage, and a week is not really all that long. However... that is no excuse to shrug this off. We were very, very lucky that it was only a week. The ship could easily have broken in two, which would have been a catastrophe of the first…

The canal revenues were down about $15m/day. If it really cost $7b a day, then Egypt is massively undercharging.

I doubt it. It’s a significant source of revenue for a country with limited revenue sources.

End of the day, the big shippers can price in the two week delay to round Africa, and higher tolls could make a competing railway feasible. As it is China will probably have built a rail corridor in a few decades.

Post reply on HN