[Ruzinvincible]

This was a huge bridge (the pictures don't make you realize the scale).
Was shocked to hear the news in the early morning hours yesterday
I always used to get nervous when I used to drive over it, the fact the center span was only supported by two piers used to make me nervous. You could view the side of the bridge from the ramp from both directions.

[Thad E Ginathom]

Originally Posted by Turbanator

Per WSJ, there were local harbor pilots in command.

According to my amateur understanding of marine lores and laws, it is the ship's master who is always in command. The role of pilots is advisory.

For interest: The chart is available here: Chart 12281 - online viewer

[Turbanator]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

According to my amateur understanding of marine lores and laws, it is the ship's master who is always in command. The role of pilots is advisory.

Correct, my idea was to point out that these things do add to counterarguments. That's what happened with Evergreen.

“Critically it is important to clarify that whilst the master is ultimately responsible for the vessel, navigation in the canal transit within a convoy is controlled by the Suez Canal pilots and SCA vessel traffic management services,” UK Club said on Thursday

https://english.ahram.org.eg/News/413582.aspx

They negotiated and paid SCA undisclosed amounts later, but much lower than what SCA originally asked.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...nsation-agreed

In this case, we are looking at much higher claims. Will be interesting to see who bears what.

“The claim will likely involve several insurers, reinsurers, subrogation, and legal issues and will serve to add to the increasing challenges in reinsurance availability,” continues the rating agency.

https://www.reinsurancene.ws/reinsur...-says-am-best/

and

https://www.insurancebusinessmag.com...er-482812.aspx

[alphamike_1612]

Originally Posted by Turbanator

Per WSJ, there were local harbor pilots onboard.

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

According to my amateur understanding of marine lores and laws, it is the ship's master who is always in command. The role of pilots is advisory.

Disclaimer - I'm a landlubber and my knowledge of ships is only from YT vlogs, books and movies.

Per my understanding, the pilot is the one who, for lack of a better term, "controls" the ship in designated areas.

Extrapolating this, if I have a friend who knows the local area and is helping me get out of his town, drives my car and causes an accident wouldn't he be responsible?

How would I, the poor owner/actual driver for the rest of the journey be held responsible for something I had no control over?

More so, because once again, per my limited knowledge, Piloting is not free and each ship pays money. In this case, I am expecting a service and any issues that arise as a result of the service should be dealt with by the service provider right? (As long as I have fulfilled all other parts of the agreement, such as keeping my vehicle in perfect working order)

Ofcourse, this entire argument gets junked if the Merchant Navy officers/seamen here confIrm that it is the captain who "controls" the ship and the pilot is nothing but Google Maps directing your navigation.

I've had this doubt ever since MV Ever Given decided to bank herself into the Suez Canal under Pilot command, but I never got a definitive answer for it.

@Thad has quoted the rulebook, but how do captains agree with this rule, incase the situation is as I've explained?

Also, to all the Merchant Mariners out there, Thank you for doing what you do.

[Old_Salt]

Except Panama Canal, where pilots are completely responsible for the safety of navigation, all other navigable waters in the world, Master is always in command and pilots in an advisory role.

There is an exchange of information before the pilotage starts and crucial and critical legs of the passage are discussed.

Although the orders are given by pilots on how what speed and what course to steer, the ultimate responsibility lies with the bridge team to counter check the pilots actions and if required take back the control to ensure safety of the vessel.

In this case, as it was a main engine failure, there is very little the pilot can do. It is the vessels responsibility to provide a tested and working engine to pilot so he can perform his duties. Ofcourse the engines are tested before leaving berth, but then again, it’s a machinery and can malfunction any time. The vessel has failed to provide same.

The accountability lies completely with the vessel.
Pilot will go Scot-free.

[TorquePull]

I wonder who pays for the damaged bridge. Do the ship owner pays or insurer, if any or the authorities using taxpayers money?

And also who compensates the loss of life and property of the road users?

[SnS_12]

Insured losses from bridge collapse could reach $4 billion: Morningstar

Total insured losses could surpass the 2012 Costa Concordia disaster that resulted in a record marine insurance loss of around $1.5 billion, Morningstar said.

Depending on the length of the blockage of the port and the nature of the business interruption coverage it carries, “insured losses could total between $2 (billion) and $4 billion,” the report said.

Source: https://www.businessinsurance.com/ar...plate=printart

[tushar_j]

Fun fact: This bridge was constructed in the same year when NASA launched the Voyager 1 probe.

[Bibendum90949]

I've just shared this link to a seafarer friend who's the chief engineer onboard a cargo vessel. This is what he replied

A friend of mine is head of Insurance in this company which manages this vessel. It is confirmed that the vessel suffered a blackout twice due to generator failure, thereby losing steering and propulsion.

The ships I sail on are bigger than this one and have been to these ports many times. There is nothing wrong with the vessel's speed or navigation error. Pilots are generally good and experienced.

It is sheer bad luck and fate that vessel suffered a blackout at that critical point. In all probability the vessel's steering got stuck at an angle during the blackout which explains why she veered off course and directly on to the bridge column. Though power was restored, the momentum was too great to take corrective action and avert a collision. Even if the heavens wanted, nothing could have been done. Without steering or propulsion, you lose control of the ship.

Ships are growing bigger and bigger day by day. Unfortunately most ports have not adapted to accommodate these monsters, with no contingency measures or adequate infrastructure in place to deal with such scenarios.This vessel has a capacity of 10000 TEU. Today's new monsters have a capacity of 24500 TEU. Navigating these vessels in an out of confined and narrow ports is a nightmare. There have been numerous articles by many well known persons in the shipping industry mentioning the dangers involved about building such huge vessels without the ports adapting to accommodate them.

Hopefully and surely the industry will wake up and act appropriately.Pray for the poor souls onboard in these tough times. No seafarer deserves to go through such a nightmare.

[Thad E Ginathom]

Originally Posted by TorquePull

I wonder who pays for the damaged bridge.

I would think that all costs fall on the ship.
But I'm assuming. And that's dangerous: the tiny amount of law I studied in college taught me that one either knows the principles that apply or one doesn't. And if not, assumptions and guesses are most likely to be wrong. EG the person who shouts that they know their rights usually doesn't!

If all costs fall on the ship, does that mean the owner or the charterer?

Anyway, my personal interest lies with the sailing/mechanical/seamanship aspects rather than insurance/finance matters. That story might be a long one, and it is no surprise that the US govt says they must get on with rebuilding the bridge urgently regardless.

I wonder how long that will take. Right now they have a ship in the way!

[bblost]

Originally Posted by TorquePull

I wonder who pays for the damaged bridge. Do the ship owner pays or insurer, if any or the authorities using taxpayers money?

And also who compensates the loss of life and property of the road users?

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com...8.cms?from=mdr

Baltimore bridge collapse: 'Federal government will pay for entire cost' of reconstruction, says Biden

I am not a US tax payer and even I am shocked at this use of tax payer money for the full expense.

[devilking]

Why did the ship lose power suddenly after leaving the port. This was no 'electrical systems failure'.

Contaminated fuel is the likely cause, since the ship would have its tank filled to the brim at the port for its 27 day voyage to Sri Lanka.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/news/...idge-collapse/

There were no tugboats accompanying the ship till it was clear of the bridge either. Also the bridge had no barriers or fenders which could have lessened the impact of the crash.

All in all, a failure at many levels.

The more relevant question for those commuting by India's longest sea bridge is if this can happen here, especially considering how close the MTHL is to JNPT. I understand that only smaller vessels are allowed to pass underneath the Atal Setu towards Yogayatan port which hopefully will not cause much damage even if they hit the bridge at full speed. But are there any barriers near the support piers to slow a runaway boat down.

[Thad E Ginathom]

I don't think Biden's statement precludes legal process and recovery. But in the mean time, govt will pay.

I wonder how long it will take?

I assume that no existing part would be reused as it would have been subject to that huge shock strain. Again, a ?

Seafarers: what Marine online publications can you recommend for following this ongoing story?

[BlackBeard]

Originally Posted by Bibendum90949

I've just shared this link to a seafarer friend who's the chief engineer onboard a cargo vessel. This is what he replied

All ships have emergency generators that should automatically start within 45 seconds of a blackout and 1 steering motor is always powered by this emergency generator. So, unless this blackout happened at the very last minute its unlikely that the rudder was locked at a certain angle after the black out. Now if the EMGEN too failed its another story!

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

I would think that all costs fall on the ship.
But I'm assuming. And that's dangerous: the tiny amount of law I studied in college taught me that one either knows the principles that apply or one doesn't. And if not, assumptions and guesses are most likely to be wrong. EG the person who shouts that they know their rights usually doesn't!

If all costs fall on the ship, does that mean the owner or the charterer?

Anyway, my personal interest lies with the sailing/mechanical/seamanship aspects rather than insurance/finance matters. That story might be a long one, and it is no surprise that the US govt says they must get on with rebuilding the bridge urgently regardless.

I wonder how long that will take. Right now they have a ship in the way!

When it comes to maritime law, its a very complicated subject...your country is a pioneer in this aspect.
There is something called a P&I (Protection & Indemnity) coverage against 3rd party liabilities apart from the H&M (Hull & Machinery) insurance a ship is covered under. The P&I protects the shipowner from 3rd party claims. The cargo insurer also has liabilities so they will also be involved, wherein things get more complicated.

There is a course in Warsash Maritime College, Southampton UK called a manned model ship handling course, apparently even pilots from different countries attend it along with Master mariners. Scaled down models of powered merchant ships are used to teach the art of ship handling.

Originally Posted by alphamike_1612

Per my understanding, the pilot is the one who, for lack of a better term, "controls" the ship in designated areas.

Extrapolating this, if I have a friend who knows the local area and is helping me get out of his town, drives my car and causes an accident wouldn't he be responsible?

How would I, the poor owner/actual driver for the rest of the journey be held responsible for something I had no control over?

More so, because once again, per my limited knowledge, Piloting is not free and each ship pays money. In this case, I am expecting a service and any issues that arise as a result of the service should be dealt with by the service provider right? (As long as I have fulfilled all other parts of the agreement, such as keeping my vehicle in perfect working order)

I've had this doubt ever since MV Ever Given decided to bank herself into the Suez Canal under Pilot command, but I never got a definitive answer for it.

@Thad has quoted the rulebook, but how do captains agree with this rule, incase the situation is as I've explained?

Its always Masters ORDERS and Pilots ADVICE, having said that if caught with an un-professional pilot it'll be the Masters judgement based on his experience to "take over" from the pilot. Pilots have been found to give un-sound orders and advice & in some countries they have been penalized too.
It is a necessity because in many countries where they do not speak English the pilots presence expedites the whole process safely & smoothly. (communication with VTS, tugs, line handlers, other local traffic...etc)

Regarding the Suez canal incident of 2021, I have attached the official investigation report in that thread, please read it in case you are interested.

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by devilking

Why did the ship lose power suddenly after leaving the port. This was no 'electrical systems failure'.

Contaminated fuel is the likely cause, since the ship would have its tank filled to the brim at the port for its 27 day voyage to Sri Lanka.

[

We will have to see, but I somehow doubt it. Diesel fuel doesn’t get fed into the engines of a ship just like that. The typical arrangement is to have one or more so called day tanks. Fuel is added from the main tanks into a day tank. Along the way the diesel is constantly fed through one or more seperators. Bascically, industrial type of centrifuges that remove, in a contentiousness process anll liquids and solid. Next there will be an elaborate fuel filter and cleansing system. All with multiple back ups.

These days all this sort of equipment comes with a whole host of automatic control system and annunciations. The day tanks themselves are likely to have water detection alarm s as well.

I have been on ships as (chief) engineer where we had total black outs. Never due to fuel problem. Usually electric and or mechanical problems with the synchronisation of multiple generators on the electrical vessel grid.

I have been involved in the salvage of a vessel out on the ocean that suffered a complete black out due to bacteria growth inside the tanks. It can be a real problem and it can happy very fast. All tanks and associated fuel pipes and fuel system got clogged up completely.

These days with better refining techniques and more emphasis on fuel quality this has become more rare.

Also, whenever a ship takes on bunkers (diesel), the bunkercrew will be taking multiple samples during the process. These samples will be sealed. The crew from the vessel is supposed to oversee.

The samples are kept on board. We used to send them in occasionally for random testing.
At least that’s how it was done in my days. Would be interested to hear from our other seafaring members if this is done any differently these days?

So if there is any doubt on the quality of the fuel, it can be easily traced to the respective bunker station. I doubt anybody in the USA would be providing anything but top notch quality bunkers!

Completely traceable. Lawyers love that!

There can be no doubt your honor, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, Company Cheap bunker Inc provided poor quality diesel and thus they are responsible for all the cost associated with this disaster.

Jeroen