[HN Gopher] Ever Given: Egypt agrees deal to release ship that b...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Ever Given: Egypt agrees deal to release ship that blocked Suez
       Canal
        
       Author : Aissen
       Score  : 85 points
       Date   : 2021-07-05 17:02 UTC (5 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.bbc.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.bbc.com)
        
       | bronlund wrote:
       | What happened to the rabbits?
        
       | sneak wrote:
       | Imagine having your goods delayed for weeks as the ship got
       | stuck... then delayed another few months because it got impounded
       | for being stuck.
       | 
       | The corruption of the Egyptian authorities around the canal is
       | astounding.
        
       | tomohawk wrote:
       | Ships transiting the canal are required to have an Egyptian pilot
       | on the bridge. Why isn't it more correct to say that that pilot
       | blocked the canal using the ship?
       | 
       | It seems like Egypt is just taking advantage of the situation and
       | their canal monopoly.
        
         | krisoft wrote:
         | > Why isn't it more correct to say that that pilot blocked the
         | canal using the ship?
         | 
         | It doesn't matter. The Suez Canal Authority - Rules of
         | Navigation Article 4, section 7:
         | 
         | "(7) Owners, mobilizers, charterers and/or operators bind
         | themselves responsible for any mistakes resulting from pilot's
         | advice or arrise by SCA personnel."
         | 
         | https://www.suezcanal.gov.eg/English/Navigation/Pages/Ruleso...
         | .
         | 
         | > It seems like Egypt is just taking advantage of the situation
         | and their canal monopoly.
         | 
         | Yes.
        
         | chrisseaton wrote:
         | Whatever the ship does, it's ultimately the captain's
         | responsibility.
        
         | Lammy wrote:
         | > their canal monopoly
         | 
         | An alternative is technically possible since Israel has
         | contiguous territory between the Mediterranean and Red Sea:
         | https://www.businessinsider.in/science/news/the-us-had-a-pla...
        
           | paxys wrote:
           | Because another complex geopolitical nightmare is exactly
           | what that region needs..
        
           | ben_w wrote:
           | A plan which involves 520 nukes of 2 megatons each, putting
           | it roughly in the same ball park as some of the Project Orion
           | proposals.
           | 
           | I mean, you might accidentally solve the Middle East peace
           | process if nobody wants to live there any more, but I don't
           | think it will be a popular solution to either that _or_ the
           | Suez monopoly...
        
             | munk-a wrote:
             | Well Israel might be pretty excited since the plans take
             | that canal through the Gaza Strip which is an area that the
             | government has wanted to displace elsewhere for quite some
             | time.
        
           | baybal2 wrote:
           | The straight of Tiran, and Aqaba are still largely under
           | Egyptian control.
        
             | gpt5 wrote:
             | The straight of Tiran are open to all ship traffic. Last
             | time Egypt tried to impose a blockade on them, Israel
             | considered it as an act of war which resulted in the six
             | day war (where Egypt lost control of all the Sinai
             | peninsula up to the Suez Canal.
             | 
             | Aqaba is a Jordanian port.
        
               | marc__1 wrote:
               | For those curious, the list of books that cover the
               | geopolitics of the Suez Canal (way before the current
               | one) is extensive and include:
               | 
               |  _Blood and Sand: Suez, Hungary, and Eisenhower 's
               | Campaign for Peace_
               | 
               |  _The Suez Crisis: The History of the Suez Canal's
               | Nationalization by Egypt and the War that Followed_
               | 
               |  _1948: The First Arab-Israeli War_
        
         | ceejayoz wrote:
         | I'd thought the ship lost power - which wouldn't have been the
         | pilot's fault - but it looks like that early claim got
         | retracted.
        
           | Freestyler_3 wrote:
           | Last I heard it was two pilots, one junior and a senior. The
           | senior said to go faster because they were losing control,
           | the junior disagreed because it would be way above max. speed
           | (but a ship this big needs a lot more speed to deal with
           | wind) so they argued and the captain didn't make a decision.
           | Then it all went down slowly without being able to do
           | anything about it.
        
             | denton-scratch wrote:
             | "Enough speed"
             | 
             | Steerageway - enough speed for the rudder to work.
             | 
             | There's a reason you don't have two captains on a ship,
             | even when there is an admiral on board. Having two pilots
             | seems to be a bad pattern.
        
               | alexeldeib wrote:
               | Ironic, considering the opposite is true for planes.
               | Although I do believe only one is typically in
               | control/"pilot" at any given time. Not to mention
               | autopilot and flying vs shipping conditions
        
               | redis_mlc wrote:
               | > Ironic, considering the opposite is true for planes.
               | Although I do believe only one is typically in
               | control/"pilot" at any given time.
               | 
               | In US civilian flying, one is the pilot flying and the
               | other is the pilot non-flying (usually operates radios,
               | etc.) They usually alternate landings. Pilots study
               | Cockpit Resource Management (CRM) to improve
               | communications.
               | 
               | The Pilot in Command (PIC) is responsible for the flight
               | (not ATC.)
               | 
               | Airplanes can be towed on the ground. Not sure how
               | responsibility is assigned. It's pretty common for
               | wingtips to collide during ground-handling, which grounds
               | both planes.
        
               | laurent92 wrote:
               | If you know anything about it:
               | 
               | - Do you think the shipping culture has lower standards
               | about working together, as catastrophes are less
               | traumatic and thus, there is much less public pressure
               | into having clean responsibilities?
               | 
               | - Do you think the shipping industry would benefit from
               | the pilots' CRM, a mandatory training introduced in the
               | 1970 to better manage moods and teamplay between pilots?
        
               | nradov wrote:
               | Many shipping companies have adopted "bridge resource
               | management" practices, adapted from the aviation
               | industry. They do work when used but there are still many
               | small companies with inadequate crew training and a lack
               | of professionalism.
        
         | RegnisGnaw wrote:
         | The captain is always in command and is responsible for the
         | ship. The pilots assume command with the approval of the
         | captain only. The captain can withdraw the approval at any
         | time.
         | 
         | Holland America has an good FAQ on this topic:
         | https://www.hollandamerica.com/blog/technical/what-does-the-...
        
           | dkdk8283 wrote:
           | While technically correct I would (reasonably) expect the
           | captain to only exercise this in extreme circumstances.
           | Asserting control in an ambiguous situation can be a
           | difficult decision.
        
           | perl4ever wrote:
           | In the article the spokesperson for the insurer is quoted as
           | saying:
           | 
           | "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. Such
           | controls include the speed of the transit and the
           | availability of escort tugs."
           | 
           | In other words, they do not accept that the simple rule of
           | the captain being responsible for the ship is all there is to
           | it, case closed.
           | 
           | I'm not saying they are/were right or wrong, just that they
           | are not a random pseudonymous person on the internet who's
           | ignorant of the shipping industry and can be dismissed the
           | same way.
        
             | skeeter2020 wrote:
             | Isn't that exactly what they are saying? It was in response
             | to the SCA statement about how the ship was going too fast
             | and inadequately controllable; they responded that while
             | the responsibility ultimately lies with the captain, he was
             | under the guidance of SCA staff and tugs for speed and
             | piloting, not a drunk teenager whom they had no influence
             | over, which is how the SCA has tried to frame this from the
             | beginning.
        
       | perihelions wrote:
       | The article doesn't mention what happened to the crew of the
       | ship. Are they still holding them captive [0] prior to this
       | settlement agreement? Does this agreement liberate them?
       | 
       | [0] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/apr/19/ever-
       | giv...
        
       | denton-scratch wrote:
       | Why does this boat have "Evergreen" written in big letters on its
       | hull?
        
         | qotgalaxy wrote:
         | Why does this post have "denton-scratch" above it?
        
         | xdennis wrote:
         | Evengreen, the company, prefixes the names of its ships with
         | "Ever". Some other examples in the Evergreen G-class are Ever
         | Golden and Ever Genius. More:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evergreen_G-class_container_sh...
         | 
         | Had Ever Aim gotten stuck it would have been a lot funnier:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evergreen_A-class_container_sh...
        
         | ksdale wrote:
         | That's the name of the shipping company.
        
         | sschueller wrote:
         | That is the name of the company that owns the boat. Ever given
         | (the name of the boat) is also written on the side of the boat.
        
           | denton-scratch wrote:
           | Ta.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-07-05 23:00 UTC)