Francis Scott Key Bridge Collapse

[Don C L]

[QUOTE=Montanan;3888574]Video of progress toward removal of shipping containers from the Dali to facilitate removal of the bridge parts that are laying on top of the ship.

Link:


Let's not forget they are looking for who is liable, not just for the damage, but for the lives of the six gentlemen who were killed. I'd hate to see the loss of their lives get downplayed in any of this.

[GordMay]

There are about 50 salvage divers, and 12 cranes on site, to help cut out sections of the bridge, and remove them from the waterway. The work is difficult, and ever-changing. One shift of debris may cause other pieces to move, forcing crews to reassess the next move.

Divers must go down, into the water, to assess what might happen, if they cut [or lif] different pieces of wreckage.
At best, their visibility is less than one metre, because the water is so murky.

And then there's the potential/stored [both gravitational/positional & elastic] energy.
If you're holding a spring in tension, from both sides, and then you cut it, parts of the spring are going to snap back [converts to kinetic energy]. And, that's what you have in portions of the wreckage.

Along with removing the debris, the team is trying to recover the bodies of the dead workers. So far, three bodies have been recovered. Eight people were working on the bridge, at the time of the collapse. Two were immediately rescued, and survived. Three more are still missing.

They hope to have a limited access channel, that will be 11.5 metres deep and 85 metres wide, open by the end of April. Then, the goal is to restore normal capacity to Baltimore's port, by May 31.

[JPA Cate]

It must seem like for [bloody] ever to the folks in Baltimore, but I think it is being laudably fast. It is dangerous, tricky work, and good on all of 'em who are helping!

Ann

[GordMay]

New USN sonar images captured the deepest remains of the bridge, from 50 feet below the water's surface, below the mudline, which officials said* would be more difficult to salvage.
The sonar dives, which use the 3D underwater sonar imaging tool, named ‘CODA Octopus’, are key to the essential, but painstaking phase, of identifying and locating all of the bulk debris, that was once the Francis Scott Key.

The dive teams are NOT recording underwater river footage, themselves, because, as one Navy-led diver put it: “There's no need take video of something you can't even see.”

Laser-based 'Light Detection and Ranging' [LiDAR] is also in use, by supervisors on land, to better provide the divers in the water with situational awareness of the tangled, and clouded wreckage.

* Army Corps of Engineers Col. Estee Pinchasin said: “It’s not just sitting on the seabed, it’s actually below the mud line. That makes it very difficult to know where to cut and how to cut, and how to rig and lift.”

More ➥ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart...ail-180984090/

US Navy divers, swimming in 'virtual darkness', through murky plumes of displaced river mud, have secured new sonar images, of the wrecked Francis Scott Key Bridge. The bridge's submerged metal frame extends above the waterline, visible as a blue line, in the sonar images. ➘

[hpeer]

Thanks Gord

[Montanan]

Video showing the progress and the planned channel clearance.

Massive undertaking.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldiIWqqxZBU

[Montanan]

Shippers in Baltimore Disaster Face ‘General Average,’

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/comp...17f7ad84&ei=66


"The owner of the ship that destroyed Baltimore’s Francis Scott Key Bridge has started a formal process in which companies that own goods on the stricken Dali will have to share some of the financial losses, according to the world’s leading container carrier.

A.P. Moller-Maersk A/S has indicated that the process, known as “general average,” was declared by Singapore-based Grace Ocean, "


. . .

“They notified us of their intention to keep all containers, including MSC’s containers, under their control until security arrangements have been made with the average adjusters, both for general average and salvage,”

[TeddyDiver]

Originally Posted by Montanan

Shippers in Baltimore Disaster Face ‘General Average,’

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/comp...17f7ad84&ei=66


"The owner of the ship that destroyed Baltimore’s Francis Scott Key Bridge has started a formal process in which companies that own goods on the stricken Dali will have to share some of the financial losses, according to the world’s leading container carrier.

A.P. Moller-Maersk A/S has indicated that the process, known as “general average,” was declared by Singapore-based Grace Ocean, "


. . .

“They notified us of their intention to keep all containers, including MSC’s containers, under their control until security arrangements have been made with the average adjusters, both for general average and salvage,”

hmm... that sounds like saying "my bad"

[Montanan]

Everything one does NOT want to know about General Average losses:




https://boltonco.com/2021/05/07/everything-you-need-to-know-about-general-average-losses/

[TeddyDiver]

Except the losses in this case include a bridge.

[GordMay]

The origins of ‘General Average’ date back to the York-Antwerp Rules* of 1890, but have obviously been modified, numerous times since, to adapt to modern supply chain conditions, most recently in 2004.
Generally speaking, ‘General Average’ is an ocean marine loss, that occurs through a voluntary sacrifice of part of a vessel or cargo, to safeguard the vessel or cargo from a common peril. If the sacrifice is successful, all parties contribute to the loss, based on their cargo's value.

Two events, in recent years, underscore the enormous importance of General Average:
- The “Ever Given” ship, that blocked the Suez Canal. for six days in 2021. and
- The “Ever Forward” ship, that ran aground in Cheasapeake Bay, in March of 2022.
In each of the events, the ship owners declared a General Average, which required the ocean shippers [or their Insurers*] to contribute, to cover the costs of freeing the vessels plus damages.
With a marine insurance policy*, shippers can completely eliminate their General Average liability, while at the same time insuring their cargo, against other forms of loss, or damage.
* Only some cargo insurance policies include coverage, for General Average.

* THE YORK-ANTWERP RULES 2004 [Rule ’A’] states:
➥ https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&sourc...WO9Q7ZCJO-i9rm

“... There is a general average act when, and only when, any extraordinary sacrifice or expenditure is intentionally and reasonably made or incurred for the common safety for the purpose of preserving from peril the property involved in a common maritime adventure.” (York-Antwerp Rules, 2016 update) From this, General Average is calculated, and each party who suffered a loss will be credited for the value of said loss, and will be charged a percentage of their own interests’ value to pay for shared costs and others’ loss of interests ..."

[requiem]

Originally Posted by GordMay

The origins of ‘General Average’ date back to the York-Antwerp Rules* of 1890, but have obviously been modified, numerous times since, to adapt to modern supply chain conditions, most recently in 2004.

The general concept is far older than that, traceable back to ancient Rhodian law, as the Digest of Justinian mentions: Lege Rodia cavetur, ut, si levandae navis gratia iactus mercium factus est, omnium contributione sarciatur quod pro omnibus datum est.

[JPA Cate]

Please, requiem, could you translate that for us illiterates? TYVM.

Ann

[Wotname]

By the law of Rhodes, it is provided that, if the cargo has been thrown away thanks to the lifting of the ship, that which has been given for all should be compensated by the contribution of all.

[CaptTom]

And I thought I was only learning about obscure maritime law. Now I'm learning ancient Greek!

Anyway, back to the current (1890) law, I'm a bit confused about how this applies to an accident like this. It seems to put a lot of emphasis on "intentional" acts, like tossing over cargo to maintain stability. I assume there's a small clause somewhere I missed, since it's been applied in similar situations before.