The U.S. military has started moving a pier towards the Gaza coast, a U.S. official said on Wednesday, one of the last steps before the launch of a maritime port promised by President Joe Biden to speed the flow of humanitarian aid to Palestinians.
The U.S. military opted to pre-assemble the maritime pier at Israeli port of Ashdod earlier this month due to weather conditions at the Gaza site where it will now be installed.
Officials hope the pier can be anchored to the coast of Gaza and aid can start flowing in the coming days.
“Earlier today, components of the temporary pier … along with military vessels involved in its construction, began moving from the Port of Ashdod towards Gaza, where it will be anchored to the beach to assist in the delivery of international humanitarian aid,” a U.S. official said.
How long does it normally take to build a pier for offloading commercial cargo?
It’s a military floating pier so a few days tops.
Is that normally how long piers of this type and size take for the military?
This type and size?
Well what are it’s exact specifications?
Yes, you’re right in that it’s probably quite a large one, but for military pioneers who’ve got a fire under their arse, a month is a loong time. (Edit I looked at images and it really doesn’t seem that big. Dk.)
So we can only assume no-one was in such a rush.
I agree with the earlier guy that this could’ve been managed faster, if there had been will enough to do so.
The capabilities of military pioneers are quite literally awesome. As in, generating a feel of awe.
https://www.britishbadgeforum.com/the-pioneer-corps-british-army-of-the-rhine-1943-46/
And that was 80 years ago. Capabilities have improved quite a bit since.
They had a something like a thousand Seabees out there welding in the middle of the ocean. This Pier has miles of welds. Just look at it. Every seam I’m sure is x rayed and pressure tested. You can see the thing from space.
The bridge was usable after 4 weeks then?
No. In less than a day. Some say 13 hours other sources 10. Hours. Hours. While in adverse weather conditions and under enemy fire.
https://www.reddit.com/r/HistoryPorn/s/rmorD1eiMv
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontoon_bridge
Id even know why I’m arguing this with someone who’s never talked to or even seen a military pioneer (or “combat engineer” as Americans like calling them.)
https://www.wearethemighty.com/articles/this-bridge-is-one-of-the-most-underrated-engineering-feats-of-wwii/
And for the more visually minded https://youtu.be/Lq1cbKnDdco?si=M5qSZP0DlYeBkEbT
They were literally portable bridges that could hold tanks and be set up in a “very big hurry”.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/Lq1cbKnDdco?si=M5qSZP0DlYeBkEbT
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
It says built in 13 hours but usable for traffic in 4 weeks, and I am trying to parse that.
There was a temporary pontoon bridge then, and then a more permanent bridge for traffic built? I ask because pictures I initially saw were quite larger than the initial bridge, which made me question the within a day time.
I suppose it depends if the Gaza pier is closer to the first than the second. While the Gaza pier is described as temporary, it seems built to handle high and continuous cargo traffic. I imagine constructing such a platform which is also seaworthy enough to be towed requires more tasks than a single lane pontoon bridge. I also wonder how much of the Gaza pier had to be adapted and customized compared to pre-fabricated bridge segments.
Given the difference in type of work, and prefabricated material I wonder if 4 weeks is reasonable or not still. An example of similar maritime construction would be useful I suppose.
Open for traffic as in “now not just for the military, here you go civilians, have at it, no need to go around anymore”.
It is written pretty weirdly but that’s what I’d say, because those portable bridges definitely don’t take several weeks to set up.
The point I think he and I are making is that if it was just about the capability of building such a bridge at full speed, it would’ve been ready sooner. Instead there’s probably quite a lot of politics going on.
I’m aware of the implication. I’m trying to find out if it’s reasonable. Two military projects completed at different speeds is partially compelling, but then I find it less compelling looking at the differences.
I honestly don’t know if a month to build this project is reasonable or not. I’m poking at reactions to find out.