No, I’m saying your characterization of it is wrong, and I’m not even really sure what the point is.

How can my characterization be wrong when it follows directly by what was reported by Newsweek:The point is the Dali was expected to continue in a straight line not make an abrupt 13 degree change in direction which went against what you said earlier:

None of the Dali crew has yet to be allowed to talk to the media, even though they cannot leave the country either. They are a bunch of ignorant kids from chithole countries who know better than to find out what happens when you displease the FBI.

It takes an effort of delusion to not see what is right in front of ones eyes. The ship rudders right, as soon as the power comes back on the first time, drifts until it is in precise alignment with the key support column, comes to a complete stop, then throttles dead ahead into the column causing maximum damage. Then the whole bridge fails as the engineers knew it would. Chalk up one for the Peoples' Liberation Army and the US traitors who help them, like the Jew media which announced 'no foul play' even before NTSB boarded the ship the next day. How would they knew even before they could listen to the Black Box?

The bridge columns were probably designed to take a pretty good size glancing blow but not a 100,000 ton battering ram, which would crack the concrete foundation down to bedrock.

Seizing the controls of a Hyundai ship built in 2015 would be childs play. Put a WAN wifi router somewhere in the hull and you can do it with a Play Station joystick from a van on shore. Cripes.

We're suggesting you're misrepresenting what that tracking data actually shows... You can't even define "instantly" or "abruptly" on a time/distance scale. How much time passed between the ship going off track, and colliding with the bridge? What was the distance?

Here's the timeline and real-time video OP never shows, not his deceptively sped-up version...
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/wit...dge-2024-03-26

Yes, shoot the messenger. Again, explain why I'm wrong but not my source.I said almost instantly. No one can define those word on a time/distance scale because they are not defined that way. They simply mean an arbitrary short period of time.Assuming the Dali was going 9mph, the distance was around 1660', so about 126 seconds for impact.

Your video is even more damning, China shill. The speed is irrelevant. The sharp turn which aimed the ship at the column is what's important. Then why does the ship throttle dead ahead into the column after it was parked harmlessly next to it for minutes, as soon as the power comes back on? You just ruined your whole nonsense argument, traitor.

Someone fukced up?

Are you retarded? The ship never throttled up, it was simply parked next to the bridge pillar where the underwater explosives were placed. You can clearly see the explosion just before the ship was intentionally damaged by the falling bridge.

You’re so dumb you don’t realize this was never about the bridge, it was about the contents of the containers near the bow of the ship.