Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet
Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals
Baltimore Bridge collapse after ship collision 125
- Thread starter Tomfh
- Start date
-
1
- #501
So Nukeman, you have now successfully verified that different articles and sources can yield slightly different answers.
Congratulations!
I remember seeing Dec 14, 2014 as launch date for Dali. But whether It is Dec 14 or 27, 2014, it is still launched in Dec 2014, and is substantially built/complete (near 100%) at that time, and sea trials have officially begun.
If it does not float or leaks, it immediately fails sea trials on day 0.
Congratulations!
I remember seeing Dec 14, 2014 as launch date for Dali. But whether It is Dec 14 or 27, 2014, it is still launched in Dec 2014, and is substantially built/complete (near 100%) at that time, and sea trials have officially begun.
If it does not float or leaks, it immediately fails sea trials on day 0.
Nukeman, I just gotta ask, why does it matter so much to you, whether the official Record Build Date is Dec x, 2014 or Jan x, 2015, or March x, 2015?
Your Wikipedia data posted is Not Offical Record Information for Dali, and you have not provided any official goverment/ certification authority documents supporting those dates!
Buildings and ships are built over a period of time, and offical build date is a record date and nothing more. The subsections of a ship are assembled and fabricated before hull is laid. Thus technically Dali was built mostly in 2014, and perhaps earlier for parts and raw materials.
But again, all we should be concerned with is whether the sister ships were built about the same time, at same ship yard, to same design specifications. But even then, it could have been different crews on each ship or different suppliers/vendors.
Your Wikipedia data posted is Not Offical Record Information for Dali, and you have not provided any official goverment/ certification authority documents supporting those dates!
Buildings and ships are built over a period of time, and offical build date is a record date and nothing more. The subsections of a ship are assembled and fabricated before hull is laid. Thus technically Dali was built mostly in 2014, and perhaps earlier for parts and raw materials.
But again, all we should be concerned with is whether the sister ships were built about the same time, at same ship yard, to same design specifications. But even then, it could have been different crews on each ship or different suppliers/vendors.
-
1
- #506
Wikipedia uses public records, many of them are official public records. Which of the linked to material that concerned the construction of MV Dali that are linked to in the Wikipedia article are wrong? If they are wrong, and you have a source, you can edit the Wikipedia page, right now, or add to the article Talk page to ask someone else to do so.
There's no need to snivel about whatever personal grievance there is against Wikipedia. Don't like what it says because you know for a fact that it is wrong about something? FIX IT.
There's no need to snivel about whatever personal grievance there is against Wikipedia. Don't like what it says because you know for a fact that it is wrong about something? FIX IT.
Point is, everything you read on the internet has to be taken with a grain of salt, and pass the BS Filter......... I see conflicting information all the time between sources of information, and plenty of errors.
I recommend not blindly believing everything you read on the internet.......
But again, I have some beach front property for sale...................
Perhaps Boeing has been too reliant on Wikipedia as their primary source of information for Starliner?
I recommend not blindly believing everything you read on the internet.......
But again, I have some beach front property for sale...................
Perhaps Boeing has been too reliant on Wikipedia as their primary source of information for Starliner?
Nukeman948
Electrical
Raid.
Politicians and news media often use inflammatory language to sell a story or win a vote. It proves nothing and only works on weak minded people.
Ships are often launched before final outfitting so they can free up the dry dock to start the next ship. "Launched" does not mean "complete". The only places I have found that give a launch date also give a different completion date.
The build date means absolutely nothing to me but accuracy means everything. No one else here seems to care about the build date either but you have brought it up a few times and always get it wrong. I only posted to correct that and question your comments on sea trials because no one else has mentioned sea trials being done for the Dali.
You won't accept anyone else's source but you refuse to offer any sources of you own to back up your claims.
Everything you have posted has been taken with a grain of salt. As you recommend, I refuse to blindly believe you because you offer no evidence.
[sub]
[/sub]
[/sub]
-
1
- #509
LionelHutz
Electrical
Transformer vibration damper - In case anyone doesn't know, the part of the transformer in the picture with the brace is the enclosure box around a dry type transformer. This type of box is just a lighter gauge steel basically there to provide voltage protection from the transformer. These boxes have little structural strength and are made using big sheets of flat steel. It's possible it could take very little input energy to cause one of the panels on such a box to start vibrating. Typically, little effort is made to ensure panels don't vibrate against each other where they bolt together either.
I have followed the tread since the beginning but not read everything in detail. But I have one question.
Early in this there were some statements regarding this being intentional. I am not interested in different conspiracy theories, but has there been any reliable information regarding this not being an accident?
Early in this there were some statements regarding this being intentional. I am not interested in different conspiracy theories, but has there been any reliable information regarding this not being an accident?
Nukeman948
Electrical
Great post.
How could anyone think that "excessive vibration was caused by transformer 1, and not the engine" while ignoring the fact that the vibrations weren't happening while in port with the transformer still operating and the main engine shut down?
We need more people with critical thinking skills and fewer "rumor" spreaders.
[sub]
[/sub]
[/sub]
-
2
- #514
Nukeman948 said:
Nukeman948 said:
Nukeman948 said:
Nukeman you need to provide solid evidence that supports ALL of your quoted claims above, otherwise you are just spreading rumors.......
Excessive Vibrational Noise Posts like the ones quoted above, provided my limited
the ability to come up with something this site really needs.Currently we have a
️ for great posts, but we have nothing for any lower quality of post. I recommend more emoji options for different qualities of post. We could have emoji's for all letter grades. That way, the poster gets crowd sourced feed back on his posts, so he will know what the majority think, and perhaps act appropriately. Rather than having these word salad battles with all the excessive vibrational noise 
Back to Gallagher Days when he envisioned a dart system to identify poor drivers. If you collect too many darts, the Police would pull you over and ticket you, and remove your darts.
More lawsuits...
-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates
-Dik
-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates
-Dik
I wonder how the 1851 General Average Limited Liability Act works with State Law vs Federal Law?
Lawyers on both sides win, no matter which side wins the cases.
I also wonder what effects, if any, the previous Dali allision with the pier at the Port of Antwerp, and subsequent repair, had on the propulsion/steering/hull system? Could this been a contributor to the excessive vibrational issues cited in lawsuit? The video link is below.
Lawyers on both sides win, no matter which side wins the cases.
I also wonder what effects, if any, the previous Dali allision with the pier at the Port of Antwerp, and subsequent repair, had on the propulsion/steering/hull system? Could this been a contributor to the excessive vibrational issues cited in lawsuit? The video link is below.
Alistair_Heaton
Mechanical
"General Average is a principle of maritime law that essentially establishes that all sea cargo stakeholders (owner, shipper, etc.) evenly share any damage or losses that may occur as a result of voluntary sacrifice of part of the vessel or cargo to save the whole in an emergency."
It doesn't seem, off hand, that General Average applies to the damage to the bridge as little of the cargo was lost and none of it intentionally to save the cargo or the ship. If they had tossed the containers overboard to avoid taking on water, then General Average would apply. I presume from 1851 they would also include cutting off the masts to avoid capsize as a voluntary sacrifice of part of the vessel.
Limitation of Liability Act of 1851 looks more applicable - it appears to say the value of the ship and cargo is all that could be taken in a lawsuit as long as the loss was a surprise to the owners. In the case of the Titanic sinking, all that remained were the lifeboats that had been lowered and some cargo that was put into them and the value of those was all that was available to collect.
It doesn't seem, off hand, that General Average applies to the damage to the bridge as little of the cargo was lost and none of it intentionally to save the cargo or the ship. If they had tossed the containers overboard to avoid taking on water, then General Average would apply. I presume from 1851 they would also include cutting off the masts to avoid capsize as a voluntary sacrifice of part of the vessel.
Limitation of Liability Act of 1851 looks more applicable - it appears to say the value of the ship and cargo is all that could be taken in a lawsuit as long as the loss was a surprise to the owners. In the case of the Titanic sinking, all that remained were the lifeboats that had been lowered and some cargo that was put into them and the value of those was all that was available to collect.
Similar threads
