Ever Given - DIYers ideas ?

No, it never was. The wolf was no use covered up. In fact it was only a rather pathetic wolf, so it was made to appear much scarier than it really was.

That waqs what the soviet paid agitators were told to say, yes. It wasn't of course,. Weapons grade plutonium needs a specialised breeder. the plutonium from a bog standard power reactor is not very good for bombs

"The quantity of isotopes in the decay chains at a certain time are calculated with the Bateman equation. Both plutonium-239 and plutonium-241 are fissile, meaning that they can sustain a nuclear chain reaction, leading to applications in nuclear weapons and nuclear reactors. Plutonium-240 exhibits a high rate of spontaneous fission, raising the neutron flux of any sample containing it. The presence of plutonium-240 limits a plutonium sample's usability for weapons or its quality as reactor fuel, and the percentage of plutonium-240 determines its grade (weapons-grade, fuel-grade, or reactor-grade). Plutonium-238 has a half-life of 87.7 years and emits alpha particles. It is a heat source in radioisotope thermoelectric generators, which are used to power some spacecraft. Plutonium isotopes are expensive and inconvenient to separate, *so particular isotopes* are usually manufactured in

(wiki)

We have tonnes of the stuff stockpiled in sellafield, from processing other peoples reactor waste. Enough to power the UK for ten years entirely.

What we need to do is knock up a dozen reactors....and replace gas with nuclear, ditch windmills and solar panels...but we would upset some very powerful and rich people with towels on their heads (or cossack hats) if we did.

In the limit Britain has enough uranium to be totally self sufficient for years, albeit at a higher price than buying yellow cake on the world markets

Well that's how grown up BCP/DR works.

Pretend BCP/DR works by me noting that we haven't accounted for our standby office being unavailable, and being told "that will never happen".

I wonder where that particular director was when Covid hit .....

Ah, written by YAAT - yet another armchair theorist... In fact more research is done in hydrology labs on ships in tight spaces than is done on ships in open water...

..it being a matter of more concern...

large ships have been going through that canal for decades. I am more prepared to put it down to high crosswinds and a slightly under prepared crew.

Thinks like active bow thrusters would have been enough one feels...but I don't know the facts any more than wiki does...

Oh dear.

Out and about probably. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

But they have only been 'that large' relatively recently. (I think EG was ~4 years old).

They may well have also been contributory factors.

Can they use them when going under way?

Are they as efficient (sufficient) when you are under way?

And WiKi suggests that there is an effect of the stern being walked sideways when running in shallow water.

With a single prop or non counter-rotating propS you get this effect (the bottom of the prop being in more dense water than the top, let alone any counter effects due to the volume of water around in general or proximity to other objects) in any depth of water but the consequences are far less than in a narrow canal.

You often see people struggling with their hire boats, wondering why they won't handle when going astern (in particular) like their car in reverse.

Cheers, T i m

Quite. I remember minuting that "JUK noted an event causing the main office to be inaccessible might also have an effect on the standby office", for the inevitable witch hunt when it happened.

At the time I was actually thinking of flooding, or an extreme weather event. However Covid did the trick.

I wonder how the switch to WFH is going to hit the companies that were providing serviced backup offices ? Presumably they're the ones working Rishi and Boris to rubbish WFH at the moment ?

As large as the EG ?

Anyway, it's a f****ng waste of time to point to "last few decades" when we learn that the canal has to be regularly dredged and maintained. For all we know they may have skimped a few centimetres on dredging (that's more bonuses for the owners of the company) and that happened to coincide with the bad weather or whatever that caused all this.

Although - with the open admission I am not a sailor - 40mph winds don't sound that bad ?????

A 1300ft ship, stacked 120+ feet high.

Then, a wind blows.

What could go wrong ?

Paul

Quite.

The thing is, unlike a car (to any normally noticeable effect), a boat will suffer like a plane and 'slip' sideways if his with any level of crosswind.

To counter that you will often have to steer into the wind (rudder) and effectively 'crab' though the water / air.

That's fine when you have plenty of room around you but not so straightforward when in a narrow canal (or landing a plane on a runway).

To counter this side-slip you can be proactive and reduce the level of 'windage you expose to the wind (reducing the side profile) or add a keel or centre / dagger / lee boards to increase the resistance to sideways movements.

The problem with any fixed solution is that it generally increases the draught (and therefore restricting the minimum depth of water you could otherwise operate in) and in the case of a full length keel, how easily you can steer (a long deep keel making you want to just go in a straight line).

This can also work against you if you are trying to make progress against any tidal flow as that makes the 'crabbing' effect against the wind even more difficult.

So, the chances are the Ever Green doesn't have any particularly deep keel (it would prevent it getting into some docks and canals) and certainly wouldn't have any other centre / dagger / lee boards and with the side profile like as block of flats, could easily be blown sideways, especially if not able to counter that by increasing the effect of any keel by going faster (given the csa of the keel was fixed and it's effect related to it's speed versus the other loads).

If it had side / bow thrusters I'm not sure they could be used whilst under way or be very effective if they were used.

Some very manoeuvrable vessels have twin Voith Schneider Propellers or Azipods (so can be propelled in any direction and rotate on the spot). ;-)

The positive affect of a centre / dagger board is best demonstrated when trying to dinghy sail into / across the wind with it up and then putting it down. It's like being on rails versus just being blown sideways. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

Once again random handwavey armchair ArtStudent nonsense.

Do you really think they dredge the *edges* of a canal where no ship is supposed to be?

Did you really only learn that they dredge it regularly, just now?

Do you really think they are so stupid as to let a boat that size even enter without there being sufficient clearance? Not everyone is an Art Student.

Even Egyptians can have a few competent engineers you know

Try standing up in one. Its a serious force especially on 'high sided vehicles'

Other way around. With the huge decline in numbers of warheads in the US and former USSR, there is an embarrassing surplus of weapons grade plutonium.

The USA and Russia had agreements on diluting it ultimately for civil use, but that went t*ts up in 2016.

The UK has several tons of it, almost certainly more than enough for the modest increase proposed.

Although that is mainly because the rudder is aft of the prop. So that going forwards, it directs a "jet" from the prop sideways. Not so effective when the prop is "sucking".

If it were 'mainly' that, why does the stern of the boat always go to the *same* side (for that boat) when starting to go in reverse (most obviously), often irrespective of the rudder position?

Yes, a rudder is more effective when the boat is stationary and the prop pushing water past the rudder rather than pulling it (that wasn't in question), it was why when they put it in reverse, it goes

'Prop walk' is even used pro-actively to help walk a vessels stern away from the dock when departing, rather than dragging along the bank / dock / quay till you get sufficient way / distance to be able to actually steer away from it (given the stern will go towards the bank when you steer away from in most cases).

Have you ever noticed a single prop driven / rudder steered boat seems to prefer to turn in one direction (or will turn better in one direction)?

Not quite so obvious on an outboard driven boat as the thrust itself is being steered directly (although the same effect will be in play).

Cheers, T i m

Car ferries around my neck of the woods are often described by their captains as ?balloons floating on the water.

They have poor resistance to side winds and even with bow thrusters they often can?t dock in Ardrossan if the wind is a bit too strong.

Tim

I thought it was something to do with passing the Port (glug glug) to the left, around the table

Nope. why is erosion of parts of the east coast of the UK accelerating in recent years ?

This looks to be as good / logical explanation as any (referred to elsewhere):

"In the early days of boating, before ships had rudders on their centerlines, boats were controlled using a steering oar. Most sailors were right handed, so the steering oar was placed over or through the right side of the stern. Sailors began calling the right side the steering side, which soon became "starboard" by combining two Old English words: stéor (meaning "steer") and bord (meaning "the side of a boat").

As the size of boats grew, so did the steering oar, making it much easier to tie a boat up to a dock on the side opposite the oar. This side became known as larboard, or "the loading side." Over time, larboard?too easily confused with starboard?was replaced with port. After all, this was the side that faced the port, allowing supplies to be ported aboard by porters."

:-)

The bare copper cable in 6242Y cable should be called a cpc not an earth.