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

561–570 of 593 posts

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

#561

Post by lolc »

prebrov wrote: post #552
lolc wrote: post #432

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As is standard for canal transit, the Evergiven was piloted by a Suez pilot at the time of the accident. Because this ship's main steering force comes from the rudder, it has more force when it goes faster. Maybe they even accelerated to counter the strong winds.

Navigating canals and major harbours requires a pilot. Pilot was on board, but there seems to have been some kind of conflict between Master and Pilot that resulted in high tension environment on the bridge. Ever Given Master’s statement is published here, and has been circulating among the crews for a few days: http://www.maritimebulletin.net/2021/03/28/ever-given-latest... So, some weird drama. If this is true, how…

I don't see how the report in the linked article is related to Ever Given. It certainly isn't of the fateful trip because it's about a southbound journey.

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

#562

Post by kenneth »

goatinaboat wrote: post #554
mywittyname wrote: post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're forgetting about the stick, namely, the literally armies backing these massive shipping companies. If you're going to run an extortion racket, you need the power to secure yourself against the inevitable challenges to your station. Egypt is in no position to handle and armed threat from the US, China, or even most European nations. Their government would be toppled and a sympathetic one would be installed who…

Egypt is in no position to handle and armed threat from the US, China, or even most European nations A little history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suez_Crisis

The Suez Crisis's failure by the British and French had nothing to do with Egypt beating them militarily, and had everything to do with American pressure. One of the West's biggest strategic failures.

The Israel, British, and French insurrection completely dominated the Egyptians. The US wanted to carry favors with Egypt to prevent them to falling into the communist sphere, so it applied a pressure campaign against the British and French that completely wrecked the European economies (and from which they never really recovered). It didn't work, Egypt did not become an American ally in any meaningful way, and instead the West lost control over one of the most important shipping lanes in the world, turning it into a corrupt mess where you have to pay for passage in cigarette boxes and bribes.

It was one of the biggest foreign policy fuck-ups of the USA, in my opinion.

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

#563

Post by kalium-xyz »

HeyLaughingBoy wrote: post #285
pradn wrote: post #207

A great Twitter thread with many articles/resources if you want a critical lens at the global logistics supply chain. https://twitter.com/CharmaineSChua/status/137586855212986368... I found this article on the impact on super-sized ships on logistical infrastructure useful and fascinating. It describes how the creation of ships too big to fit in the Panama canal (post-PANAMAX ships) was received by 1) Panamanians 2)…

>the hydrodynamic effects of these large ships in relatively shallow and narrow canals is underappreciated I'm really surprised I haven't seen this mentioned. A long time ago, I was trained as a merchant ship's navigation officer. One of the things we were taught (but unfortunately had few opportunities to practice), was using "bank cushion" or "bank suction" to use the hydraulic interaction between the hull and a na…

There is one thing I cannot find an answer for: Why did it draw a penis?

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

#564

Post by itismetheidiot »

Some feedback that will help better understanding of costs.

1. A medium size container vessel (10k TEUS) with abt 15kts speeds will cost the same as the canal transit cost now that the fuel is relatively cheap, compared to the Africa voyage. But you save time.

2. Major liners (APM, MSC, etc), enjoy significant discounts over face value for the canal transits as they commit volumes. The discounts could be north of 30%+, but not publicly available. WILHELMSEN has a nice calculator

3. There is no scenario that something cannot be monetized, either it will be fuel or time or both. As such any financial loss due to the canal clocking can be calculated. The vessel’s P&I will be very busy.

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

#565

Post by throwawayfire »

andechs wrote: post #512
gt565k wrote: post #474

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This happened with the bridge collapse on I-85 in Atlanta [1] I used to take the access road parallel to the bridge and avoid a lot of traffic that was south bound. When the bridge collapsed and I-85 was blocked off, everyone learned about the parallel access road, and it now became a cluster of a traffic hot zone too. Prior to that, a lot of people were not aware of the alternate route. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/…

The discovery of the alternate route by "everyone else" means that the roads are now in more usage. Unless the bridge collapse resulted in increased traffic levels afterwards, the same traffic that used to go over I85 is now distributed over 2 routes. While there's a net negative to you, it's likely that a lot of people ended up saving time on their routes.

> it's likely that a lot of people ended up saving time on their routes.

It's theoretically possible this describes a Braess paradox, whereby everybody loses: https://image.slideserve.com/280060/braess-s-paradox-l.jpg

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

#566

Post by ArnoVW »

willyt wrote: post #557
rswail wrote: post #544

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ... not compensating for the strong cross winds. Not compensating or not being able to compensate? One implies negligence, the other unavoidable.

> Unavoidable Not really, weather forecasts are readily available and windage calculations are a thing.

I believe the ft article says that they had 30 kts wind, and steered 'into the wind' to compensate. And since they were in a narrow canal, a sudden lull in the wind was enough.

That doesn't contradict the 'going too fast' though. Just like we don't drive 55 mph in a residential neighborhood, thinking 'if a kid runs into the street that is not my fault, it was unforeseeable'.

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

#567

Post by Red_Leaves_Flyy »

ArnoVW wrote: post #566
willyt wrote: post #557

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Unavoidable Not really, weather forecasts are readily available and windage calculations are a thing.

I believe the ft article says that they had 30 kts wind, and steered 'into the wind' to compensate. And since they were in a narrow canal, a sudden lull in the wind was enough. That doesn't contradict the 'going too fast' though. Just like we don't drive 55 mph in a residential neighborhood, thinking 'if a kid runs into the street that is not my fault, it was unforeseeable'.

With a ship of this size couldn't they have the same problem if they go too slow?

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

#568

Post by Jenk »

willyt wrote: post #557
rswail wrote: post #544

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ... not compensating for the strong cross winds. Not compensating or not being able to compensate? One implies negligence, the other unavoidable.

> Unavoidable Not really, weather forecasts are readily available and windage calculations are a thing.

Oh gosh why didn't the expert sailors whom all have many years of experience think about this trivial matter?

Or could it be that navigating a 400mx60m, 220,000 tonne, 60m tall ship through a canal that is barely double the width with only 4m clearance is just a tad more difficult than that?

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

#569

Post by op00to »

Red_Leaves_Flyy wrote: post #567
ArnoVW wrote: post #566

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe the ft article says that they had 30 kts wind, and steered 'into the wind' to compensate. And since they were in a narrow canal, a sudden lull in the wind was enough. That doesn't contradict the 'going too fast' though. Just like we don't drive 55 mph in a residential neighborhood, thinking 'if a kid runs into the street that is not my fault, it was unforeseeable'.

With a ship of this size couldn't they have the same problem if they go too slow?

Yes. The ship needs to have a certain amount of water going over the rudder to effect steering.

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

#570

Post by bkor »

mschuster91 wrote: post #185
ufmace wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably the actual cost will require an army of accountants and lawyers at a dozen major logistics corporations arguing with each other for months to even try to compute. I doubt us regular uninvolved people will ever get a "real" number. How do you even try to calculate and reveal the cost associated with say a manufacturer in the middle of a supply chain deciding to source their parts from a different vendor for t…

Probably the actual "damage" that was caused will be given by the insurance companies as a sum of claims covered, but there will be a lot of companies that simply have to eat the loss incurred by idling factories and the likes because their supply contracts allow for delivery delays or because pursuing coverage isn't worth the effort (e.g. for those who still had sufficient stock to cover a week of delay and no "real…

> but there will be a lot of companies that simply have to eat the loss incurred by idling factories and the likes

Factories will know enough in advance of this problem. They can fly over some supplies to keep the factory running. It's entirely normal to do this. They usually do _not_ idle or shutdown the factory. Who pays is for lawyers and so on.

A shipping company will know about these clients and prioritize that cargo.

Post reply on HN