Of course. What is the point of building infrastructure if politicians and their corporate buddies can't pocket a few billion in public tax money? Can you even imagine such madness as building a bridge at cost and on schedule? Can you even imagine your country not being ten years late and three times over budget when they build, say, an airport for their capital? I can't.

10 times?? They wish! See how much UK rail costs compared to Chinese rail: https://youtu.be/i30ZNbG0QQ8?si=Yl71EabwWEVaIJDh

Reminds me of the time the US gov. took its sweet ass time to build a bridge in Appalachia, the local mayor then wrote to the USSR asking for help.

Wouldn't be surprised if all the worst stuff that people drumming on about the Saudi's world cup stuff start happening down there. They also have semi legal immigrants working for the lowest bidders with no quasm about sacrificing humans for profits.

Same as last time. Racism. And homeless genocide

With the Yemeni enforced blockade I was thinking about this too but with the Panama Canal and how it closing could be a massive boost for the Global South by making resource transportation very expensive and such things, but looking at it now it apparently is, or was recently, already being affected by draught losing one third of normal traffic. So I guess anything else impeding or slowing global trade in the next few months could have massive consequences when taken toghether with the other events.

That Soviet ship is 4000 tons, while this one have 115000 tons. Also from what i understand the Soviet ship hit the bridge with fairly light superstructure which got cut off. While this one here just rammed one of the central bridge support with energy enough for it to just crumble and half of the brigde fallen straight down because it lost support and the other half following soon after because losing the balance. It's clearly visible on this video, entire thing just crumpled like house of cards after the hit.

For comparison, photo of that accident in Ulyanovsk, you can clearly see the difference.

EDIT: i looked the Kuybyshev class of those ships and got a fun fact, out of 9 built, 7 are still in service and all under the old Soviet names.

A pretty substantial amount of the bridge is still standing, it was the center bit that went down

Also, that ship in the USSR that hit the bridge just hit the span, not the pier. "The span cut the deck house and the cinema hall". The pier is in many ways more fragile, and also more important.

But to answer your question, the Francis Scott Key bridge was structurally deficient. It also didn't have many anti-ship defenses (like dolphins), unlike other bridges. To add on to that, the MV Dali (and most modern container ships) is really heavy, and therefore had a lot of energy, almost all of which got transferred into the bridge. Not many bridges can survive a head-on with a container ship.

Burguer Americans say some shit like "anyone can build a bridge that stands, but only an engineer can build a bridge that barely stands". Cheaper is better right?

Well it directly hit the column, and this was a fully loaded container ship. I don't think any bridge would've survived that.

Keep in mind that the propaganda win here isn't that the bridge didn't survive being hit by a ship. It's that the work safety conditions, and this is on record the company that ran the port or the ship, I can't remember, the work conditions were so poor and the safety so poor and people so overworked that something like this was allowed to happen. And you tie that back in with the trained derailment and the continued overworking of the proletariat.

The ship is fucking

YUUUUUUUUUGE

The Soviet ship was about 4000 tons displacement, the Mv Dali was 150,000 tons displacement. Ships have gotten massive over the last few decades so it's possible that the Baltimore bridge could have remained standing after being hit by an older, smaller, ship like the Soviet one.

As i pointed out in another comment, i for one am used to this, i saw firsthand the stunning efficiency of neoliberal capitalism in building infrastructure projects: https://www.euronews.com/2020/10/31/berlin-airport-opens-10-years-late-and-three-times-over-budget

From the point of view of the finance sector and the stock markets it's not a horrible idea at all. What do they need industry or infrastructure for?