Carnival Triumph Breaks Loose From Moorings in Shipyard

[MasterNotCommander]

normally the owner of the pier...which could be BAE or someone else.

 

also see

 

http://www.maritime-executive.com/article/UPDATE-Damaged-Carnival-Ship-Triumph-Breaks-Away-From-Alabama-Dock-2013-04-04/

 

more of a factual recitation of what happened.

 

Whilst I don't know the exact domestic law in the USA relating to commercial ports and drydocks, I'm almost certain that the operator (BAe) will have a process in place to regularly inspect the bollards and will have a published maximum rating for them.

I have seen some pretty awful bollards in my time, and some excellent ones.

[Tonka's Skipper]

Whilst I don't know the exact domestic law in the USA relating to commercial ports and drydocks, I'm almost certain that the operator (BAe) will have a process in place to regularly inspect the bollards and will have a published maximum rating for them.

I have seen some pretty awful bollards in my time, and some excellent ones.

 

 

You are indeed correct. However having the required program and actually doing the inspections and tests are to different things!

 

 

 

AKK

[smeyer418]

Whilst I don't know the exact domestic law in the USA relating to commercial ports and drydocks, I'm almost certain that the operator (BAe) will have a process in place to regularly inspect the bollards and will have a published maximum rating for them.

I have seen some pretty awful bollards in my time, and some excellent ones.

the normal legal rule in the US is the owner of a property(here a pier) has a non-delegable duty to maintain that property (pier) in order for it to preform the intended duty(docking a ship is an intended duty of a ship pier). They can by contract delegate the maintenance but the ultimate liability still would be retained(although they probably could get indemnification from the lessee). Its that simple. You sue everyone and sort out the liability afterwards but the owner is responsible, even if the lessee fails to maintain it because they-the owner- still has to supervise that is why the responsibility cannot be legally delegated.

BTW the builder may have an out as the statute of limitations may have expired for them.

[waldocruiser1]

Now I have not read all the posts on this thread, so if it was addressed let me know.

 

When the Triumph broke free last week or so, why didnt they just start it and drive it back to the dock?

 

I thought the engine fire was just a fuel return line, and no big problem?

[big_duck]

Now I have not read all the posts on this thread, so if it was addressed let me know.

 

When the Triumph broke free last week or so, why didnt they just start it and drive it back to the dock?

 

I thought the engine fire was just a fuel return line, and no big problem?

 

Probably didn't have the right qualified people on board.

[MrPete]

Now I have not read all the posts on this thread, so if it was addressed let me know.

 

When the Triumph broke free last week or so, why didnt they just start it and drive it back to the dock?

 

I thought the engine fire was just a fuel return line, and no big problem?

 

Are the bridge crew even in board? How come the ship is still on the side it was blown over to?

[gtalum]

Now I have not read all the posts on this thread, so if it was addressed let me know.

 

When the Triumph broke free last week or so, why didnt they just start it and drive it back to the dock?

 

I thought the engine fire was just a fuel return line, and no big problem?

 

Starting a cruise ship engine isn't like hopping in your car and turning the key. Also, as has been noted, the bridge and engine room crew likely weren't aboard.