When Aussies go for a drive

[ElectricBlue]

This is what Aussie engineers and tradies get up to, when they've got nothing else to do.

Driving across Darwin harbour.

 

[MrPixel]

And when they haul out, the steering wheel will still be on the wrong side.

 

[Rustyoznail]

Nah, it's not. Most people's preferred arm will be able to swing a bloody big knife easily outside the cab at any ravaging were bats.

 

[oneagainst]

The crocs?

 

[John_Vandermeer]

I guess you guys mates have a fixation with being “down under”

 

[oneagainst]

I guess you guys mates have a fascination with being “down under”

Mates cunts. Weren't you following the other thread? Though it's pronounced caaaaant here.

 

[John_Vandermeer]

Mates cunts. Weren't you following the other thread? Though it's pronounced caaaaant here.

Nope i wasn’t following.

 

[Rustyoznail]

I guess you guys mates have a fascination with being “down under”

That's a bit of a Furphy...

 

[John_Vandermeer]

That's a bit of a Furphy...

Hey… I was talking about down under Darwin harbour…

“Furphy”. You “cunts” are really making me dust out the Australian to English dictionary.

 

[Rustyoznail]

Our job here is done.

 

[oneagainst]

Our job here is done.

Time to crack a tinnie and see where the footy is up to

 

[gunhilltrain]

This is what Aussie engineers and tradies get up to, when they've got nothing else to do.

Driving across Darwin harbour.

That's a pretty impressive stunt, although those air tubes, among other things, limit it's practical application. But the problem has already been solved, more than a hundred years ago. Yeah, there are smaller ones, like that craft that collapsed while visiting The Titanic site. That could have been built better.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FAn0ixAXIAIL1uv?format=jpg&name=small

 

[gunhilltrain]

More Australian news. It does have something to do with deep waters, and I don't want to start another thread.

https://www.reuters.com/business/ae...s-first-navy-warship-foreign-port-2023-07-22/

 

[SimonDoom]

Bramblethorn does as much as one can to convince us that you people are civilized, and now this. Are they going to be drinking beer and singing Tie Me Kangaroo Down as they cross the channel underwater? Will the Wiggles be on hand to greet them at the far shore?

 

[Rustyoznail]

That's a pretty impressive stunt, although those air tubes, among other things, limit it's practical application. But the problem has already been solved, more than a hundred years ago. Yeah, there are smaller ones, like that craft that collapsed while visiting The Titanic site. That could have been built better.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FAn0ixAXIAIL1uv?format=jpg&name=small

Oh, it's a littoral combat ship...

That was a bit of a misread.

 

[gunhilltrain]

Oh, it's a littoral combat ship...

That was a bit of a misread.

The military is not happy unless they are coming with new names for weapons (excuse me, weapon systems). The terms destroyer or light cruiser are not good enough. Then, for convenience, they will use an acronym (APC for armored personnel carrier). Or they will name it after somebody. (Bradley is a lot simpler than infantry fighting vehicle.)

Fortunately, the British used the word tank so they could hide what they were shipping. (That's the story I've heard, anyway.) Now, of course, it's main battle tank.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tank

 

[Pureotica]

This is what Aussie engineers and tradies get up to, when they've got nothing else to do.

Driving across Darwin harbour.

As long as it doesn't result in a Darwin award, the effort has my support. It's one of those things that sounds silly enough that I hope they actually make it.

 

[ElectricBlue]

As long as it doesn't result in a Darwin award, the effort has my support. It's one of those things that sounds silly enough that I hope they actually make it.

What amazes me, is that they're doing it using the same truck used forty years ago, the one that used the snorkel.

There's also this:

Driving under water

 

[gunhilltrain]

What amazes me, is that they're doing it using the same truck used forty years ago, the one that used the snorkel.

There's also this:

Driving under water

That second one is sort of imaginative. Instead of gong to the water, they took the water with them.

 

[Pureotica]

That's a pretty impressive stunt, although those air tubes, among other things, limit it's practical application. But the problem has already been solved, more than a hundred years ago. Yeah, there are smaller ones, like that craft that collapsed while visiting The Titanic site. That could have been built better.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FAn0ixAXIAIL1uv?format=jpg&name=small

At the Titanic's depth, when things go wrong, they go really wrong, and instantaneously. People inside that sub probably never knew it happened. The pressure is unimaginable that far down.

But anything built for that depth probably belongs in the experimental category. I'm more than happy to experience the Titanic vicariously through photos. The risk-reward calculus doesn't add up, even if I had the money for the tour.

Perhaps ironically, one of the Titanic's chief competitors was the Lusitania. Takes sinking the competition to a whole new level.

Prior to Lusitania's sinking, American sentiment was broadly pro-German in the early stages of WWI. Had that torpedo missed, we might live in a very different world. But then again, it might be a world where a certain mustachioed Austrian never came to power, so possibly an improvement. I don't like to speculate overmuch, but history's little coincidences are strange when you think about it.

 

[gunhilltrain]

At the Titanic's depth, when things go wrong, they go really wrong, and instantaneously. People inside that sub probably never knew it happened. The pressure is unimaginable that far down.

But anything built for that depth probably belongs in the experimental category. I'm more than happy to experience the Titanic vicariously through photos. The risk-reward calculus doesn't add up, even if I had the money for the tour.

Perhaps ironically, one of the Titanic's chief competitors was the Lusitania. Takes sinking the competition to a whole new level.

Prior to Lusitania's sinking, American sentiment was broadly pro-German in the early stages of WWI. Had that torpedo missed, we might live in a very different world. But then again, it might be a world where a certain mustachioed Austrian never came to power, so possibly an improvement. I don't like to speculate overmuch, but history's little coincidences are strange when you think about it.

I have heard that the submersible was badly constructed. I'd have to check the sources for that. How much did each person pay to be on that thing? It wasn't a cheap ride.

Word War I: I guess every war is "unnecessary," but that doesn't stop them from happening anyway. I think the United States (the government anyway) was itching to get into it, and the Lusitania was only one of the reasons. Then, when it did declare war, it took nearly a year to get any significant ground forces there. Maybe the British naval blockade was the decisive factor that defeated the Germans. So it was close, with the Russians leaving and the Americans entering at the same time, but I can't say the Americans were absolutely the deciding factor.

I assume that if Germany had won, if would have put off Nazism, maybe for a long time, maybe forever. But there were a number of far-right movements in that era (Spain, Italy). I can't say exactly what would have been going on in Germany by the 1940's. Maybe there would have been peace, maybe there would have been some other pretext for war. Maybe there would have been far-right, fascist-type movements in England and France looking for revenge. I'm not sure a single torpedo did it all.

 

[Bramblethorn]

At the Titanic's depth, when things go wrong, they go really wrong, and instantaneously. People inside that sub probably never knew it happened. The pressure is unimaginable that far down.

But anything built for that depth probably belongs in the experimental category.

Yes, anything at that depth is inherently dangerous, at best a calculated risk, but Stockton Rush and his four victims would probably still be alive today if not for his hubris and greed. He wasn't trying to get there first, just to do it on the cheap, and he was more concerned with silencing the people who were warning him of the risks than with reducing those risks:

https://www.newyorker.com/news/a-re...submersible-was-an-accident-waiting-to-happen

 

[gunhilltrain]

Sorry, we really drifted a long way from Australian underwater cars. Well, I sort of "helped" with references to submarines and submersibles. That led to the Lusitania, which at least was on the water (although it was a lot bigger than a car). But World War I and the Nazis? One of the manifestation of Godwin's Law, and I fell right into it.

 

[Duleigh]

And when they haul out, the steering wheel will still be on the wrong side.

I don't know why he's doing this, by the time he's done we'll have a railroad built there from LA.

 

[gunhilltrain]

I don't know why he's doing this, by the time he's done we'll have a railroad built there from LA.

The issue of how to get there from L.A. was resolved a long time ago, and quite well I think. (When did they start painting a kangaroo on the tail?)

https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/33ce...0_2721/master/4530.jpg?width=620&dpr=1&s=none