Hacker News Reader

Comment by hgomersall | Hacker News Reader

I was wondering after watching the video whether there could be an emergency bridge closure protocol if a ship veers off its intended course. It naively looks to me like there would be sufficient time to log the course deviation and stop vehicles from entering the bridge with lights and sirens and stuff.

View on HN

According to AP, the ship was able to issue a mayday and passengers of the bridge were warned: https://apnews.com/article/baltimore-bridge-collapse-53169b3...

> The operators of the ship issued a mayday call moments before the crash that took down the Francis Scott Key Bridge, enabling authorities to limit vehicle traffic on the span, Maryland’s governor said.

I don't know how long "moments" was, but presumably about as much warning as any automated system could provide.

It seems pretty clear from the video that something like this actually happened. The only vehicles left on the bridge at the time of impact were stationary emergency services vehicles with flashing lights. So it would appear they knew it was imminent and cleared the bridge (although they underestimated the extent of the damage the impact would cause).

Fucking Rocket boat...

Okay, story time. So, my brother was a law student in SF. He had a class on maritime law. They took at field trip to the Mare Island DHS office (I think) to learn more about the implementation of all the law they were learning.

So, they learned, in response to the Cosco Busan oil spill (I think), DHS decided to put in a warning system that would track all the boats in the Bay and then alert the DHS office if any of them were going to crash into Frank's Crab Shack again. Look at the trajectories, guess the time, send out an alert to the whole office. Years are spent on this system, millions of dollars, lots of studies, yadda yadda yadda.

The warning system they decided on, because this is the government and they know about lawyers, is that the whole office is going to have red flashing lights and a very loud voice come over the intra-office speakers saying 'CRASH IMMINENT". And then it'll just blare that notice until the S/W decides that the crash ain't happening anymore.

So, my brother there and they are taking the tour and the alarm goes off and ... no one does a damn thing. And he's thinking that this is really strange. And the tour guide they have looks at the group of law students and explains the above. And then the tour guide goes and says ' but they forgot about the fucking Rocket Boat'

So, in the Bay at that time, there was the Rocket Boat tour. You get on at Pier 39, you go on a tour at really high speeds, bumping your clam chowder out along the way. And to scare the tourists at the end, the pilot heads straight for Pier 39 and then turns away at just the last second. Tourists are scared, but happy, a bit wet. Everyone has a good time.

Except for the DHS office and their automated crash system. Every. Single. Time that the Rocket Boat decided to scare the tourists, the alarm system would sound.

So, since this is the government and you certainly cannot turn this millions of dollars system off now, nor can you really really be certain that the Rocket boat driver didn't actually just pass out from all the beer-only lunch he just had, the workers at the DHS office just had to endure the booming alarms and lights. Multiple times a day, nearly every day, all year long.

So, I think an automated system is a great idea. But, for the sake of all the DHS drones: Please, make the system smart enough to deal with the Rocket Boat.

Why don't they just fine the shit out of that rocket boat company every time they pull that outrageous prank? Or throw someone in jail. Who thinks that is in any an ok prank? Can you imagine someone doing that in a car? Its just a prank bro!

I mean, I'm not the lawyer, my brother is. But I'll speculate all the same.

I don't think that they are actually doing anything illegal [0]. It seems to be perfectly fine to pilot your boat anywhere you want to. Even if that means it looks like you're gonna run into the pier. It's not like they ever actually did run into the pier anyways.

Also, per other conversations with my brother, maritime law is not like 'normal' law. When we say that the US constitution is the supreme law of the land, that isn't just a turn of phrase. That literally mean 'the land'. Not the ocean. Maritime law is, from what I remember, the oldest law we have. And as such, things in maritime law aren't what you'd think.

Like, if you want to impound a boat, they have these really really comically large boat-cuffs that you have to use. And you have to do these strange legal gymnastics to actually impound a boat. Because, well, it's a boat. You can just take it over the horizon and effectively the captain will just never be seen again. It's not like the land where it's hard to get to another jurisdiction. In a boat, it's really easy. That's kinda the point of a boat.

Things like credit and ownership also work really funky too. Like, if you own the boat, but aren't actually on the boat when it goes out to sea, you're really just kinda hoping that the captain comes back. Not just due to freak storms, but also you really have to trust the captain. So things like credit and how money works on the sea are just different. Because it's so damn easy to just not come back.

If any real lawyers want to join in, please do. Again, I'm not a maritime lawyer, my brother is.

[0] To note here, the Rocket Boat company went bust in 2019, apparently. They're trying to bring it back, but seem to be struggling with the aftereffects of covid and whatnot.

What you describe sounds like international waters, close enough to the pier to matter would be within US territorial waters. So if the relevant laws are not there it is purely a domestic issue.

Seems pretty simple - sonar/lidar devices that detect dangerous ship vectors, the bridge already had gates and traffic control from some of the pictures.

Probably cheaper to do, than even the loss of one or two containers off of that container ship. Never mind the cost in human lives.

This was exactly what I was thinking, too. Systems could be set up to monitor the trajectory of objects moving around a structure and then alerting and closing bridges or tunnels.

How could the cost of this possibly be justified?

Why would it be expensive? Traffic lights and sirens are cheap. The Tasman bridge apparently stops traffic for all large ships https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tasman_Bridge

Also had a disaster. "The Tasman Bridge gained national attention following the Tasman Bridge disaster. On 5 January 1975, the bridge was struck by the bulk ore carrier SS Lake Illawarra"

And will you also be revealing the cost of stopping traffic versus the expected loss of what it prevents?

How many people would need to die for it to be justified in your eyes? Or maybe just focus on the potential loss of cargo from trucks on the bridge, if that helps you.

How many? It depends on the opportunity cost of installing and maintaining whatever half baked thing (lights, sirens, computer vision, AI, barriers) it is OP is envisioning on how many thousands of bridges versus the frequency of issues it will prevent. This calculation is done all the time but not so much by the "if it saves only one x" crowd of clever solution proposers.

> whatever half baked thing (lights, sirens, computer vision, AI, barriers) it is OP is envisioning

Do you think OP should have produced a formal proposal with input from industry experts and detailed cost and risk mitigation figures before submitting a comment on an internet forum?

Either that or another ten seconds of rumination.

There's no requirement for you to be pleasant on an internet forum, but there's no reason not to be either. Snark is rarely becoming.

> It depends on the opportunity cost of installing and maintaining whatever half baked thing (lights, sirens, computer vision, AI, barriers)

I love how we jump to AI when all we need is 4 cameras and a dude with a pair of eyes...

Wait until you learn how train barriers worked not so long ago

Large bridges like this in Europe already have lights and sometimes barriers to allow them to be closed if there are very high winds, or a vehicle collision.

Adding a system that turns the lights red doesn't seem so expensive, it existed in Denmark in 2001 when a ship almost hit the Great Belt Bridge:

Road signs and barriers, normally used to slow traffic in bad weather [1]

(Autotranslation of [2])

> The VTS system (Vessel Traffic Service) must monitor and guide the ships, so that ships approaching the West Bridge and parts of the East Bridge can be avoided. In the event of danger of hitting the bridges, the navigators must trigger an alarm in accordance with detailed rules. The most critical are two bridge sections on the East Bridge over the connection spans to the anchor blocks (each 1-2 kilometres). If a ship is heading in there - where there are no artificial islands - the alarm must be given four minutes before approaching - so that the bridge section can be cleared. On the West Bridge, the warning time is not so critical, as you can see in good time if a ship is on the wrong track. The system operates using three radars, two infrared video cameras and two photosensitive ditto plus a standard VHF antenna system (see graphic). The station is continuously in contact with all ships over 50 gross tonnes and with a mast height of over 15 metres. The ship's call number, name, cargo, destination, draft, mast height, etc. are registered on arrival at the reporting lines, and when the ship and station are contacted on VHF channel 11, the ship is automatically marked (tracked) and provided with the call number, course and speed. At the same time, the computer goes in and calculates course and speed for the next 10 minutes, which can be seen as a yellow line in front of the radar signal, which is shaped like a tuft of wool. If a ship does not want to report, goes astray or refuses to follow the VTS navigator's instructions, the VTS station disposes of one of the fleet's rejection vessels, which has the authority to give orders to the foreign masters.

[1] https://www.google.com/maps/@55.3498198,11.1018692,3a,75y,26...

[2] https://web.archive.org/web/20090116051425/http://ing.dk/art...

Out of curiosity, how much is a human life worth in these calculations?

LMGTFY:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_of_life

United States

The following estimates have been applied to the value of life. The estimates are either for one year of additional life or for the statistical value of a single life.

    $50,000 per year of quality life (the "dialysis standard",[39] which had been a de facto international standard most private and government-run health insurance plans worldwide use to determine whether to cover a new medical procedure)[40]
    $129,000 per year of quality life (an update to the "dialysis standard")[41][40]
    $7.5 million (Federal Emergency Management Agency, Jul. 2020)[5]
    $9.1 million (Environmental Protection Agency, 2010)[42]
    $9.2 million (Department of Transportation, 2014)[43]
    $9.6 million (Department of Transportation, Aug. 2016)[44]
    $12.5 million (Department of Transportation, 2022)[45]

"We want to make the bridge safer for the users"

Reply on news.ycombinator.com