aggiehawg said:

---

Okay herewe go on the insurance question.

Quote:

---

A marine protection and indemnity insurer confirmed it is part of coverage for a container ship that hit a bridge in Baltimore, collapsing the bridge and causing unknown damage at this time.

"We can confirm that the ship Dali is entered with Britannia P&I Club," the marine mutual said in a statement to BestWire. "We are working closely with the ship manager and relevant authorities to establish the facts and to help ensure that this situation is dealt with quickly and professionally."

---

Quote:

---

Grace Ocean Pte Ltd. owns the Singapore-flagged container ship "Dali," and Synergy Marine manages the vessel.

"Reinsurers will bear the bulk of the insured cost of the collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore," said Matilde Jakobsen, senior director, analytics, AM Best. "Liability cover for most shipping vessels is provided through protection and indemnity insurers known as P&I Clubs."

Jakobsen said the P&I segment is dominated by the members of the International Group of P&I Clubs, which collectively insure approximately 90% of the world's ocean-going tonnage. As part of the International Group's pooling arrangements, member clubs mutually reinsure each other by sharing claims above $10 million.

Additionally, the group buys general excess-of-loss reinsurance cover up to $3.1 billion in the open market, Jakobsen said.

"While the total cost of the bridge collapse and associated claims will not be clear for some time, it is likely to run into the billions of dollars well above the $100 million attachment point for the GXL contract," she said.

"The insurance issues due to the collapse of the bridge will take a long time to determine and may involve several lines such as property, cargo, liability, trade credit and contingent business interruption.

The claim will likely involve several insurers, reinsurers, subrogation, and legal issues and will serve to add to the increasing challenges in reinsurance availability."

---

More HERE for those interested.

---

Sounds familiar-

"Vessels like these are insured through Protection & Indemnity Clubs. There are 12 in the International Group and this one was entered with Britannia. The IG Group pools losses at various levels beginning at $10M. They are mutuals but are reinsured via Lloyds and other markets. This vessel was classed by NK."

somehow i have a feeling we/the feds will pay 100% for this, and they will never go after any insurance monies.

C@LAg said:

---

somehow i have a feeling we/the feds will pay 100% for this, and they will never go after any insurance monies.

---

Plus 10% to the BIG guy.

Insurance will pay. The feds are pandering because people don't know any better. Who paid for the towers?

The contingent business interruption will be interesting.

bigjag19 said:

---

Insurance will pay. The feds are pandering because people don't know any better. Who paid for the towers?

The contingent business interruption will be interesting.

---

Yeah, I hadn't even thought about those yet. How many ships are trapped in port? Thirty? Forty?

Robin's Dry Dock holding on line 1.

bigjag19 said:

---

Insurance will pay. The feds are pandering because people don't know any better. Who paid for the towers?

The contingent business interruption will be interesting.

---

I have this feeling they clear the way for maritime traffic before the end of April. There is too much lost revenue sitting there for the channel not to be open.

aggiehawg said:

---

bigjag19 said:

---

Insurance will pay. The feds are pandering because people don't know any better. Who paid for the towers?

The contingent business interruption will be interesting.

---

Yeah, I hadn't even thought about those yet. How many ships are trapped in port? Thirty? Forty?

---

Y'all are assuming the limitation gets busted, and it very well might but still.

C@LAg said:

---

BadMoonRisin said:

---

It said that the pilot and likely most of the crew were drunk when the MV George Perry was struck.

Im not sure if that it follows that it's inherently dangerous for a ferry to cross shipping lanes.

---

nope . seattle has several major ferry routes that cross through commercial traffic for both the Ports of Seattle and Tacoma.

---

Houston/galveston is one of the busiest waterways on earth and I am pretty sure most here have ridden the bolivar ferry

Sea Speed said:

---

C@LAg said:

---

BadMoonRisin said:

---

It said that the pilot and likely most of the crew were drunk when the MV George Perry was struck.

Im not sure if that it follows that it's inherently dangerous for a ferry to cross shipping lanes.

---

nope . seattle has several major ferry routes that cross through commercial traffic for both the Ports of Seattle and Tacoma.

---

Houston/galveston is one of the busiest waterways on earth and I am pretty sure most here have ridden the bolivar ferry

---

I said nope in response to the prior comment. as in "nope" it is not dangerous.

not sure why you think what I said was controversial.

Sea Speed said:

---

C@LAg said:

---

BadMoonRisin said:

---

It said that the pilot and likely most of the crew were drunk when the MV George Perry was struck.

Im not sure if that it follows that it's inherently dangerous for a ferry to cross shipping lanes.

---

nope . seattle has several major ferry routes that cross through commercial traffic for both the Ports of Seattle and Tacoma.

---

Houston/galveston is one of the busiest waterways on earth and I am pretty sure most here have ridden the bolivar ferry

---

Absolutely, and if you head to the Redneck Riviera, the crossing of Mobile Bay (Fort Morgan to Dauphin Island) as well

C@LAg said:

---

Sea Speed said:

---

C@LAg said:

---

BadMoonRisin said:

---

It said that the pilot and likely most of the crew were drunk when the MV George Perry was struck.

Im not sure if that it follows that it's inherently dangerous for a ferry to cross shipping lanes.

---

nope . seattle has several major ferry routes that cross through commercial traffic for both the Ports of Seattle and Tacoma.

---

Houston/galveston is one of the busiest waterways on earth and I am pretty sure most here have ridden the bolivar ferry

---

I said nope in response to the prior comment. as in "nope" it is not dangerous.

not sure why you think what I said was controversial.

---

Calm down, I was agreeing with you.

Fall92 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

bigjag19 said:

---

Insurance will pay. The feds are pandering because people don't know any better. Who paid for the towers?

The contingent business interruption will be interesting.

---

Yeah, I hadn't even thought about those yet. How many ships are trapped in port? Thirty? Forty?

---

Y'all are assuming the limitation gets busted, and it very well might but still.

---

I am not sure how this actually works as maritime law is not in my bailiwick but Legal Vices, who has been a maritime lawyer for years mentioned something about ship owners having limitations on liability. He promised a live thread on Monday explaining the intricacies here for insurance questions and how they process those claims. He lives in Korea (has for three decades) so not sure what time but if I stumble upon it in advance, I will let you folks know. Time differences and all and he is still practicing full time.

Legal Vices usually has a maritime Mondays wherein he discusses maritime disasters from the past. That is interesting to me. Jeff is not political and doesn't find that interesting as to US politics He prefers his maritime stuff and live streaming trials.

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

---

I had completely forgotten where they exiled him. His time to shine, I guess.

Jennifer and Marcel do NTSB briefing live now.

You might buy some Mary Kay from Jennifer but seems like she struggling with this.

Get to the meat lady.

Seems to be Marcel's first time doing any public speaking since middle school.

21 POB + 2 Pilots.

Crew being interviewed today. Pilots interviewed tomorrow.

Data from VDR shows:

01:24 in channel at 8kts

Alarms sound.

VDR goes dark from power loss; but VDR Audio keeps recording on battery backup.

01:26 VDR comes back online

Pilot requests tugs. Drops port anchor.

01:27 Pilot calls out on VHF that they lost all power and approaching bridge; results in traffic closed on bridge

01:29 SOG 7kts

01:29:33 Allison w/ bridge

----

Jennifer says they don't know what caused the power outage.

Prelim report out in 2 - 3 weeks.

Media key in on no tugs angle; and asking stupid questions generally like does the crew have food and water onboard?

NTSB seems unprepared generally and have a lack of general maritime knowledge you'd expect from someone leading this massive of an investigation.

Did Jordan Peele get a job at NTSB now?

This was not a terrorist attack nor a cyber attack, IMO. Too many variables. Current, winds, tides, how the ship was loaded and when they left the port as a small example. Many more variables.

Maritime law is wonky. Under Robins Dry Dock, in order to recover economic losses the plaintiff must have suffered some physical damage to property in which the plaintiff has a proprietary interest. Robins Dry Dock v. Flint, 275 U.S. 203 (1927). There is a big exception under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 that was applied in the Deepwater Horizon.

In this situation, the ships offshore have suffered no physical damage. Nor have the facilities that can no longer receive vessels. Thus, their purely economic losses will likely not be recoverable. Robins Dry Dock comes into play when there are collisions on the Houston Ship Channel which has been closed for collisions several times over the years.

C@LAg said:

---

YouBet said:

---

And I just can't imagine the physical strain he had to go through to get that baby out of him. His butt must be ruined! Do they make a love stitch for your cornhole?

---

you joke, but there is a whole subgenre of fantasy and porn called mpreg (male pregnancy) with lots of art, fiction, vids about men getting pregnant and giving birth via posterior and front dangling exits.

---

Ugh, Texags Knows Stuff.

aggiehawg said:

---

This was not a terrorist attack nor a cyber attack, IMO. Too many variables. Current, winds, tides, how the ship was loaded and when they left the port as a small example. Many more variables.

---

I don't think anyone with more than two cells thinks this was an attack.

I'm sure it's given a few people ideas though.

TexasRebel said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

This was not a terrorist attack nor a cyber attack, IMO. Too many variables. Current, winds, tides, how the ship was loaded and when they left the port as a small example. Many more variables.

---

I don't think anyone with more than two cells thinks this was an attack.

I'm sure it's given a few people ideas though.

---

I hope so. Have seen some doozies out there.

If it has not been discussed, one of the pilots is the docking pilot and one the harbor pilot. The docking pilot puts the ship on the pier and the harbor pilot brings them in and out. The docking pilot apparently rides until they are below the bridge in this particular harbor. Docking pilot wouldn't really have any responsibility in this situation but he would be immediately in contact with the tugs as he works with them the most and in several ports is actually an employee of the tug company and working as a tug captain for 10 years is a minimum requirement.

East coast ports use docking pilots but the other ports in the US do not b

What's your thought on whether dropping the port anchor pulled the bow to port and directly into the bridge piling?

Where would anchors be position on a vessel like this?

All four corners?

TexasRebel said:

---

Where would anchors be position on a vessel like this?

All four corners?

---

Anchors would be located on the port and starboard bow. No other anchors.

Seems like an aft anchor option might be useful if you can avoid the screws.

Some reporter asks questions about rumors of fuel quality issues. NTSB lady says they've taken fuel samples.

Sea Speed said:

---

If it has not been discussed, one of the pilots is the docking pilot and one the harbor pilot. The docking pilot puts the ship on the pier and the harbor pilot brings them in and out. The docking pilot apparently rides until they are below the bridge in this particular harbor. Docking pilot wouldn't really have any responsibility in this situation but he would be immediately in contact with the tugs as he works with them the most and in several ports is actually an employee of the tug company and working as a tug captain for 10 years is a minimum requirement.

East coast ports use docking pilots but the other ports in the US do not b

---

Which tugs? Not doubting you I just did not see any.

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

What's your thought on whether dropping the port anchor pulled the bow to port and directly into the bridge piling?

---

I think their fate was already set. They were only 2 ship lengths away from the span when they dropped the anchor going 7ish knots. It doesn't appear that their COG changes at all from the AIS data either. At that speed and with the presumably muddy bottom they are just dragging a weight. Also, it depends on how many shots were paid out. I do wonder if :26 was when the order was given to drop anchor or when they actually dropped anchor because thats 2 very different things.

Once they started getting set down on it, they were going to hit it either head on or broadside imo.

aggiehawg said:

---

Sea Speed said:

---

If it has not been discussed, one of the pilots is the docking pilot and one the harbor pilot. The docking pilot puts the ship on the pier and the harbor pilot brings them in and out. The docking pilot apparently rides until they are below the bridge in this particular harbor. Docking pilot wouldn't really have any responsibility in this situation but he would be immediately in contact with the tugs as he works with them the most and in several ports is actually an employee of the tug company and working as a tug captain for 10 years is a minimum requirement.

East coast ports use docking pilots but the other ports in the US do not b

---

Which tugs? Not doubting you I just did not see any.

---

The pilots are monitoring the channel traffic at all times. I wouldn't doubt that the docking pilot gave a heads up to the tugs they just used that they may be needed. If those tugs don't have a job they probably returned to the pier to get some rest. It takes a bit for them to fire up their engines and make their way over. I'm saying that the docking pilot would have a very easy line of communication with the tugboat, not that the harbor pilot wouldn't be able to call them though. In my opinion, the docking pilot wouldn't simply be giving whatever assistance was necessary to the harbor pilot.

Last thing said was that the ship has restored electrical power so they are not sitting out there DIW.

Also worth noting that in the ~ 5-minutes that elapsed from when they lost main propulsion to hitting bridge they only lost ~1kt / 1.2 mph of momentum.

Still question whether they had the anchor hanging and ready to go when the order to drop the anchor was given or whether they potentially knocked emergency power offline again at 1:27 from having to bump the windlass.

In any event like you said it probably wouldn't have mattered at the end of the day.

The pilot probably faced a Hobson's choice to drop the anchor, or count on getting steering back and steer out of it.

I think you have to drop anchor. You can't count on something that may not happen. In that moment you know you don't have power and you're getting set down on to the bridge. Imo the options are do nothing and get crucified or do anything and everything at your disposal to try and avoid disaster and know you did everything in your power to stop it. I know in the event of an incident everything I do will be heavily scrutinized so even just the appearance of trying to do something to try and avoid disaster is ideal.

Also they may have had the anchor riding on the brake so no need to bump the windlass, not sure how they operated. When I was on a sea going ship we could drop anchor without power because it was ready for letting go any time we were maneuvering.