3 ms·
I don't even understand why a company would decide to build a boat in a location where it's impossible to transport it from there to the sea. The whole point of
by ralferoo 5y ago
I don't even understand why a company would decide to build a boat in a location where it's impossible to transport it from there to the sea. The whole point of building a boat next to a port is so that it can be dropped into the sea with the minimum of hassle.
An obvious solution would be to built it without the masts, move it somewhere closer to the sea and add the masts at the end. This seems far more sensible than removing a bridge.
- hughrr 5y agoI think the build must have been outsourced to software developers :)
- rosndo 5y ago>I don't even understand why a company would decide to build a boat in a location where it's impossible to transport it from there to the sea. It’s obviously not impossible to transport the boat to the sea. > This seems far more sensible than removing a bridge. Opening up the bridge is trivial, just look at it. There’s little chance they won’t open it up, as that’d just screw the local industry by placing a permanent limit on what they can build inland of the bridge. Instead they will most likely find a reasonable solution to safely and quickly dismantle the bridge and put it back together. This isn’t a hard problem to solve, and a lot of money is at stake.
- foepys 5y agoThere are multiple shipyards in Europe that were build hundreds of years ago and were never meant for ships of today's size. Procedures to get these ships out include dismantling structures (as seen above), deepening the river by digging up soil, and backing up the river. The last two procedures have severe impact on wildlife and sometimes farmers whose fields and pastures get flooded.