Ill bet my car that bridge won't be done before 2040
239
secretlyhumanami21 hr ago
+60
F*** it. I bet my 1999 Daewoo Lanos as well!
60
Kroz25520 hr ago
+10
Damn...I havnt thought about a Daewoo in a minute.
10
originalrocket17 hr ago
+1
I play one every Sunday evening.
1
IWishIWasOdo19 hr ago
+14
You just got killed by a Daewoo Lanos mother f*****! How you like me know?
14
Efficient_Cause_690011 hr ago
+1
Im glad Im not the only one who thought of that scene
1
secretlyhumanami19 hr ago
+1
Pretty sure it would desintegrate if it hit anyone. It's safe for pedestrians.
1
CutbowAndArrow19 hr ago
Thug life
0
BlasterShow12 hr ago
+2
Daewoo , BOUNCE!
2
jimmay66620 hr ago
+1
I had a 99 Daewoo Llanos! Feel free to point and laugh, I’m used to it.
1
secretlyhumanami20 hr ago
+2
I ain't joking. I drive that glorious shitbox.
2
jimmay66619 hr ago
+2
That’s f****** awesome!
2
moneyfink18 hr ago
Can it really grind a rail and drop into a half pipe?
https://youtu.be/pHxLryQP0Hc?si=_pVeZR5KHQjxDx3a
0
kaptain__katnip19 hr ago
+7
I'll raise you my truck it never gets rebuilt. They have been working on the 95 exchange to Bel Air my entire life and still haven't finished. I'm 34.
7
takesthebiscuit19 hr ago
+3
But it will be named Trump and painted gold and cost $1 trillion
3
makualla17 hr ago
+1
The Great bridge race: Baltimore Key vs Brent Spence Companion in Cincinnati
1
cr4vn2k15 hr ago
Not with that attitude!
0
Peaksign944512214 hr ago
!remindme 2040
0
Hydroxychloroquinoa19 hr ago
+137
Expect charges to be dropped after company donates to trump inauguration fund followed closely by announcement of “charges to be filed against joe biden”
137
scrndude14 hr ago
+5
DoJ will settle the case for like a couple family size pizzas
5
RibsNGibs11 hr ago
+3
It's a real sad state of the country that I see an article like this, see that it's the DOJ, and my immediate thought is to wonder if this is retribution against the companies because they did something woke or tariff-related or had a CEO that wrote something unflattering towards trump on twitter 7 years ago or whatever.
I'm sure there are still normal people doing the actual job of the DOJ at the DOJ, but the credibility has been tarnished so quickly that I just assume it's bullshit. Really just kind of amazing the credibility damage that's been done so quickly. I can't just generally trust the DOJ, the CDC, the armed forces... anything anymore. How does a country come back from that?
3
snasna1024 hr ago
+1
Hopefully they don’t come back from it.
1
Vex1om21 hr ago
+64
Complete waste of time. Even if you convict, they don't have $5B to pay, and aren't in the country to imprison. And, of course, nobody is asking the real question - why didn't the bridge have any sort of barrier or safety system to prevent this type of accident?
64
Desblade10120 hr ago
+87
It was grandfathered in because it was too expensive to update.
87
Top-Objective4206920 hr ago
+66
How's that working out for them
66
Smearwashere19 hr ago
+53
Well it’s not a problem anymore
53
NaiveChoiceMaker18 hr ago
+11
It was a problem before, but not anymore.
11
c4ndyman3118 hr ago
+5
Was the estimated cost more or less expensive than the current situation? (I have a guess)
5
JohnHwagi14 hr ago
+10
Likely the cost to update a bridge is much less than to rebuild per bridge, but the cost of updating all similar bridges is much more than the cost to rebuild the portion of non-updated bridges that will be damaged like this before the bridge’s natural end of life.
It is the same logic as why a house built 20 years ago will have at least 2-3 things that are not in compliance were the house built today.
10
tedontwo18 hr ago
+31
The bridge had small "dolphins" that hadn't been updated for the size of modern container ships and the course the ship took was the perfectly worst case for where they were located. They were inadequate, but it's incorrect to say there was no barrier system.
31
Kinggakman19 hr ago
+10
I don’t think you can design a bridge to withstand this level of force without a trillion dollar budget.
10
Senior-Economics323719 hr ago
+10
Plenty of bridges have protection such as artificial islands, dolphins and other things to mitigate ships hitting the bridge itself.
But, like you said the actual bridges aren’t designed to deal with forces like that.
10
takesthebiscuit19 hr ago
+4
\*Click click click\*
What’s that flipper? There’s a bridge ahead
\*\*\*Click click click\*\*\*
Ok I’ll steer 175\^o and reduce to half power, while you call the tug boats
\*Click click\*
4
OptimusSublime20 hr ago
+15
>Why didn't the bridge have any sort of barrier or safety system to prevent this type of accident?
Much like why RBMK reactors used graphite tipped control rods. Because it's cheaper.
15
Ayzmo9 hr ago
Fine. I'll go watch that scene again. If you insist.
0
erkdog20 hr ago
-6
It's the Russian way
-6
Indie8919 hr ago
-1
Not great not terrible
-1
Daren_I21 hr ago
-22
> The National Transportation Safety Board found a single loose wire in the electrical system caused a breaker to unexpectedly open, launching a sequence of events that led to two vessel blackouts and a loss of propulsion and steering.
> The Justice Department said the defendants are accused of relying on a flushing pump to supply fuel to two of the Dali’s four generators but the flushing pump was not designed to automatically restart following a blackout, and the Dali’s generators could not operate without a fuel supply.
Are owners of a ship really responsible for knowing each component and whether a safer component is available? I mean, I can see the ship's engineering staff knowing the difference, but the owners or an off-ship superintendent? It's like buying a car and being legally responsible to know if the manufacturer cut corners on any component and what better options they had available.
-22
Desblade10120 hr ago
+79
The owner of the ship is responsible for what their company does yes.
This isn't like your car, it's like a bus. If you got hit by a bus because the brakes went out on it would you blame the bus driver or would you blame the bus company and by extension also the mechanics responsible for keeping the brakes in an operable state.
79
Many_Negotiation_46420 hr ago
+25
... yes. Yes they are literally responsible for that.
Not mayter how you cut it, its negligence. Etiher they:
A) did not properly research the critical safety components of their ship and used and installed an incorrect part for the purpose
Or (and to my knowledge this is what actually happened)
B) Neglected maintenance of the main fuel pumps and instead chose to cut corners and use the backup pump as the main pump.
Both of those are negligence that led to a fatal accident. You can't compare this to comsumer grade machinery. Its industrial, specialized equipment that the owners are fully liable for malfunctioning.
Also, im not positive but im pretty sure you could be held liable if your self installed brakes fail on your car, causing an accident.
25
orbitaldan20 hr ago
+8
Not exactly, they are responsible for having processes for things like that to be discovered and fixed on a reasonable schedule, and then for carrying out repairs/remediation on the findings of those processes. They don't have to know it personally, they just have to make time and funding for people who do to check up on things. If that was something that industry best practices wouldn't have caught, charges likely wouldn't have been filed, or would be readily dismissed once it reaches court.
8
IamHydrogenMike20 hr ago
+10
\> the flushing pump was not designed to automatically restart
The engineers aboard the ship should have known this and should have had a way to fix it or to get around it without crashing into a bridge. The company that owns the boat should have had a policy around what happens when this happens, and made sure it was effective.
10
drhunny19 hr ago
+8
Somebody installed a completely wrong pump into a safety-critical system. My guess is that getting the correct one and installing it would have caused a couple days of delay (receive, install, inspect, signoff) and they decided to just plug in the wrong one and falsify the paperwork for the inspection so they could make their schedule.
8
Intrepid_Table_859319 hr ago
+7
I’m almost willing to bet it was done as a temporary fix then when the time came to put the real part in they got told it’s working fine we’re not spending x dollars on something that’s functioning.
44 Comments