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

Dali owner file petition to cap liability in Baltimore bridge collapse at $43.7M

mdd.uscourts.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 202 posts

Re: Dali owner file petition to cap liability in Baltimore bridge collapse at $43.7M

#191

Post by shiroiushi »

rich_sasha wrote: post #55
shiroiushi wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here in Tokyo, there's a relatively new bridge that's almost exactly the same length as the Key bridge in Baltimore, and was expressly designed to allow large ships to pass underneath: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokyo_Gate_Bridge By my calculations (using the yen cost in the wikipedia article and the JPY/USD conversion at the time), it cost about USD $1.1B, so a bit less than double this estimate. However, with th…

It probably needs to be earthquake-proof too, which maybe it doesn't in Baltimore.

It definitely needs to be earthquake-resistant; we get earthquakes here constantly.

Another interesting fact about the Tokyo Gate Bridge (from the Wikipedia article): it's basically made of 3 sections, the two sides and one smaller piece in the middle to connect them. The two side pieces are cantilevers, so they're self-supporting. So if a big container ship managed to strike one side and knock it down, theoretically the other side would remain standing, rather than the whole thing collapsing like the Baltimore bridge.

Re: Dali owner file petition to cap liability in Baltimore bridge collapse at $43.7M

#192

Post by nradov »

rightbyte wrote: post #186
nradov wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Legally speaking, the pilot is only present in an advisory capacity. The master is ultimately responsible for safe navigation. As for the anchor, you seem to misunderstand the basics of ship handling. https://youtu.be/qZbUXewlQDk?si=GBPMFyHPZGAF1v5z

Dropping anchor could very well be a thing you do. To me it seems like the boat steers of course after regaining power. Am I imagining things? I guess it could happen by chance too, as drift takes on?

You're imagining things. Did you watch the video?

Re: Dali owner file petition to cap liability in Baltimore bridge collapse at $43.7M

#193

Post by sverhagen »

dagw wrote: post #49
sverhagen wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What helps push down prices of bridges, is to not build them in US. Or at least, it always strikes me how outlandishly expensive infrastructure projects are in the US (for me coming from Europe, originally).

outlandishly expensive infrastructure projects are in the US As someone in Europe I wonder where this notion comes from. Just about every major (and several minor) infrastructure project I can remember in my lifetime, in any of the European cities I've live in, has been both late and wildly over budget

Maybe I shouldn't paint all of Europe with the same brush. Although other comments are agreeing with my observation. And I agree that there's plenty to complain about in Europe too, but then still the total costs are often factors lower than in the US. It being outside of my professional field, I've found it quite hard to search the Internet for easily comparable numbers, but what I've been able to find over the years on cost per mile of road, or cost per meter of bridge, I've found sometimes a 10× difference between the US and the Netherlands (where I'm originally from). Maybe I'm confirming my biases, but I just don't think so.

Re: Dali owner file petition to cap liability in Baltimore bridge collapse at $43.7M

#194

Post by [deleted] »

sverhagen wrote: post #193
dagw wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

outlandishly expensive infrastructure projects are in the US As someone in Europe I wonder where this notion comes from. Just about every major (and several minor) infrastructure project I can remember in my lifetime, in any of the European cities I've live in, has been both late and wildly over budget

Maybe I shouldn't paint all of Europe with the same brush. Although other comments are agreeing with my observation. And I agree that there's plenty to complain about in Europe too, but then still the total costs are often factors lower than in the US. It being outside of my professional field, I've found it quite hard to search the Internet for easily comparable numbers, but what I've been able to find over the year…

[deleted]

Re: Dali owner file petition to cap liability in Baltimore bridge collapse at $43.7M

#195

Post by nashashmi »

lesuorac wrote: post #190
nashashmi wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the engine on airplane fails, it fails immediately before taking off. Destruction is kept to a minimum. Likely no one dies.

Engines can fail after take off i.e. [1]. That said, I don't think it's immediately considered negligence when an airlines engine fails. Its premature to call Dali negligence as well; it may very well be but the investigation needs to complete. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Airways_Flight_1549

Ha! But that was a foreign object getting in the engine. And I guess it failed immediately

Re: Dali owner file petition to cap liability in Baltimore bridge collapse at $43.7M

#196

Post by polski-g »

shiroiushi wrote: post #40
rkrzr wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect that the actual cost to rebuild the bridge will be far higher than that. Initial estimates of large public works projects are virtually always too low, and actual costs can easily be 5-10 times higher. There is a great book about this phenomenon (and how to avoid it) by Brent Flyvbjerg called "How Big Things Get Done".

Here in Tokyo, there's a relatively new bridge that's almost exactly the same length as the Key bridge in Baltimore, and was expressly designed to allow large ships to pass underneath: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokyo_Gate_Bridge By my calculations (using the yen cost in the wikipedia article and the JPY/USD conversion at the time), it cost about USD $1.1B, so a bit less than double this estimate. However, with th…

The entire project should be outsourced to a Japanese contractor. We're going to end up with a 10year $14bn bridge to nowhere, much like HSR in California.

Re: Dali owner file petition to cap liability in Baltimore bridge collapse at $43.7M

#197

Post by eastbound »

buster3000 wrote: post #20
eastbound wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope not. I was irresponsible to let ships pass a dozen times a day through a flimsy contraption that could collapse at the first nudge. This risk was unacceptable. Unacceptable! The people of Baltimore have benefited for years of a port facility literally downtown, which is practically the same thing as building houses in a flood zone. Should have never been permitted! I hope “We The People” accepts the responsibi…

the use of "flimsy contraption" and "first nudge" indicates your level of ignorance of the subject. https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/kinetic-energy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MV_Dali#Description "Description Dali is a Neopanamax container ship[7] with an overall length of 299.92 metres (984 ft), beam of 48.2 metres (158 ft 2 in), moulded depth of 24.8 metres (81 ft 4 in), and summer draft of 15.03 metres (49…

Flimsy:

- You are arguing how big the container ship is,

- It only emphasizes how weak the bridge is compared to the ship and obviously to all ships going through this harbor.

Obviously the bridge is not flimsy compared to mere thousands of cars, but when it’s a bumper on the side of the regular path of herds of 200 elephants of about 1000x the normal size ten times a day, then yes, it’s flimsy.

If you see a sign “Forbidden to elephants” tomorrow on your city’s preferred pedestrian bridge, it’s me. Now I wonder why your politicians didn’t put it for the bridge. It’s simple: The port should pay for dolphins and all security measures, or only sailboats will be allowed.

So yes, you arguing the size of the ship only emphasizes the flimsiness of the contraption.

Re: Dali owner file petition to cap liability in Baltimore bridge collapse at $43.7M

#198

Post by shiroiushi »

polski-g wrote: post #196
shiroiushi wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here in Tokyo, there's a relatively new bridge that's almost exactly the same length as the Key bridge in Baltimore, and was expressly designed to allow large ships to pass underneath: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokyo_Gate_Bridge By my calculations (using the yen cost in the wikipedia article and the JPY/USD conversion at the time), it cost about USD $1.1B, so a bit less than double this estimate. However, with th…

The entire project should be outsourced to a Japanese contractor. We're going to end up with a 10year $14bn bridge to nowhere, much like HSR in California.

>The entire project should be outsourced to a Japanese contractor.

You can't do that; it doesn't work that way unless perhaps you transfer ownership of all that territory to Japan.

This is a location that's on the opposite side of the planet. So you could obviously do the design work in Japan, but the construction has to happen on-site, which means

1) using local workers, and 2) dealing with local laws/regulations.

The labor force alone is hugely different between the two countries, not just the people themselves and their culture and language, but also how they're organized: contractors, subcontractors, unions, etc. A Japanese company with no experience working outside Japan would have no idea how to deal with all that.

Local laws and regulations are also an issue, since again the Japanese company would be unfamiliar with all that. In NYC, for instance, there's some crazy regulations about how many workers have to be present for stuff, which ends up driving costs up a lot. Just having a foreign company manage the project isn't going to change that stuff.

The ridiculous costs of American projects are due to many factors present in America now, and simply hiring a foreign company to manage a project isn't going to change those. America needs to fix its issues. Unlike a car or airplane, a bridge or subway isn't something you can just build offshore and transport to your country.

Re: Dali owner file petition to cap liability in Baltimore bridge collapse at $43.7M

#199

Post by ethagknight »

John23832 wrote: post #135
ethagknight wrote: post #128

Is there not some responsibility on the US govt to reasonably protect its infrastructure in a common maritime path? The harbor long preceded the bridge, and when the bridge was constructed, the harbor had massive container ships moving in and out. No dolphins or starlings around a single point of failure for an entire bridge span? Whole a bridge collapse like this is rare, bridge strikes are not uncommon. It seems li…

Please tell me what you think the "modest" defense is to divert the mass of a fully loaded container ship? Sometimes bad things happen that cannot be "modestly" prepared for. That is why these vessels are required to be insured.

Pile of rocks and concrete. Common stuff. It’s a shallow harbor and an interstate bridge. Just needs to reduce impact speed.

Re: Dali owner file petition to cap liability in Baltimore bridge collapse at $43.7M

#200

Post by ethagknight »

alistairSH wrote: post #147
ethagknight wrote: post #128

Is there not some responsibility on the US govt to reasonably protect its infrastructure in a common maritime path? The harbor long preceded the bridge, and when the bridge was constructed, the harbor had massive container ships moving in and out. No dolphins or starlings around a single point of failure for an entire bridge span? Whole a bridge collapse like this is rare, bridge strikes are not uncommon. It seems li…

The bridge opened in March 1977. A cargo ship at that time would have maxed around 3000 TEU (pre-Panamax). Dali is close to 3x that size at just shy of 10,000 TEU. And Dali basically center-punched that bridge support. And swerved very close to the bridge. A dolphin might have mitigated a glancing blow, but I doubt it would have stopped a direct hit such as this. I'm sure the replacement bridge will have more protect…

But the bridge had _no_ apparent protections even for those 3000 TEU ships. Port of Baltimore spent considerable (federal) funds dredging the harbor to make way for Panamax. A bog standard ring of rocks or concrete or steel piles could have dissipated enough energy to have a very different outcome.

I’m just asking, should not the obligation for reasonable protection of the bridge be on the government or port authority?

Post reply on HN