Richard Hammond's Engineering Connections - (S03E03) Super Tankers.

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 28 лис 2012
  • The contents in this video belong to the BBC and I am only posting this up for entertainment purposes. I do not claim any rights on the video.
  • Розваги

КОМЕНТАРІ • 75

  • @KidTheFail
    @KidTheFail 7 років тому +2

    this is my new favourite series, I guess I don't need sleep.

  • @AnnoosTarik
    @AnnoosTarik 10 років тому +2

    I love this show

  • @animefightsremastered3219
    @animefightsremastered3219 7 років тому +1

    This is really fun to watch whilst doing an engineering Course

  • @thfreakinacage
    @thfreakinacage 2 роки тому

    36:25 "Look what you've done to my bloody shed man!" :P

  • @borregoayudando1481
    @borregoayudando1481 Рік тому

    haha, James May explored the free surface effect in The Grand Tour later in a Mercedes estate.

  • @joshuahadams
    @joshuahadams 8 років тому +7

    That ancient engine is some Dwemer shit.

  • @xCage88
    @xCage88 11 років тому

    i am being entertained while learning

  • @jayive34
    @jayive34 11 років тому

    I am learning, while being entertained

  • @nakulgote
    @nakulgote 11 років тому

    Thanks.

  • @RangerHouston
    @RangerHouston 5 років тому

    24:30 reminds me of that time on Top Gear with the hot tub car...

  • @CockatooDude
    @CockatooDude 10 років тому

    Nice.

  • @nakulgote
    @nakulgote 11 років тому

    Thanks. Will google it.

  • @Gooberpatrol66
    @Gooberpatrol66 6 років тому

    man that song playing at 21:13 is really cool

  • @themightiestofbooshes9443
    @themightiestofbooshes9443 5 років тому

    man i love steam i get so many good games at fantastic deals

  • @theimperiumofman102
    @theimperiumofman102 6 років тому

    29:50 it starts playing Armada by Two Steps From Hell.

  • @shotforshot5983
    @shotforshot5983 5 років тому

    How do they clean out the salt deposits from distilling the salt water? What I imagine is multiple tanks used in sequence, so ones not being boiled can be flushed??

  • @CockatooDude
    @CockatooDude 10 років тому

    The explosion wouldn't be nearly the size of a nuclear explosion but it it would be a sight to behold.

  • @b.hagedash7973
    @b.hagedash7973 7 років тому +1

    Reminds me of an incident told to me by an engineer who operated on one of the British warships sent to the Falklands in 1982. They reportedly ran into a huge school of krill in the south Atlantic and the cooling systems that relied on salt water were so thoroughly blocked up that they were dead in the water for more than a day while things were disassembled and purged. My favourite part of the story is that the entire ship apparently smelt like a seafood buffet for the rest of mission.

  • @TheMrDaniable
    @TheMrDaniable 11 років тому +1

    2:58 Hahaha :D

  • @fuzzface8252
    @fuzzface8252 6 років тому

    If you put water in a vacuum and boil it like he does, if you let it go longer, it will actually freeze.

  • @joepellettere7255
    @joepellettere7255 7 років тому

    he does like that "tie" comment, doesn't he?....:)

  • @rmay000
    @rmay000 10 років тому +3

    i think it's fair to refer to N2 as "nitrogen" the same way you refer to O2 as "oxygen", though.

  • @mattpet7913
    @mattpet7913 6 років тому

    He kind of spoiled that the gas was turned into a liquid when he said that the insides were cooled to -166 celsius.

  • @Sheehy223
    @Sheehy223 10 років тому +8

    Was this filmed before or after he rolled that van on top gear?

  • @wimberlyjack
    @wimberlyjack 6 років тому

    Alot of thermodynamics going on here.

  • @elduderino7519
    @elduderino7519 7 років тому

    @36:51 Richard "No Sheds" Jackson-Hammond

  • @synapsesuicide4372
    @synapsesuicide4372 5 років тому

    It weighs something like 113,000 tons (226,000,000 lbs)

  • @alexpaumen3937
    @alexpaumen3937 5 років тому

    Back To The Future sound effect 4:50-4:56

  • @TheMonkeyboy420
    @TheMonkeyboy420 11 років тому

    the only inert gases are the noble gases like radon and helium..

  • @jbmazhar2000
    @jbmazhar2000 11 років тому +2

    did he say 10 kg, I hope he was joking

  • @hafizuddinmazlan4854
    @hafizuddinmazlan4854 7 років тому

    i hope you can give the subtitle

  • @PeteCswampy
    @PeteCswampy 6 років тому +3

    what yield of atomic bomb is he referring too?

    • @nickmagee-brown739
      @nickmagee-brown739 6 років тому +1

      Pete C does it matter? It is to give teenagers an idea of the energy it holds......

    • @bradmiller2329
      @bradmiller2329 5 років тому

      Hiroshima is the usual standard.

  • @TrueBlueEG8
    @TrueBlueEG8 5 років тому

    26:55 and I can not lie.....

  • @schwanzelstock1071
    @schwanzelstock1071 6 років тому

    Av-gas in 2 stroke works rather well.............. Till your piston crumbles in the exhaust port and the crankshaft broke into 2 pieces

  • @rumneyjoe
    @rumneyjoe 11 років тому

    i like top gear.

  • @myster.ejones1306
    @myster.ejones1306 6 років тому

    If it's so flammable, then at least paint it in dazzle camouflage, painted bright yellow just shouts " Shoot Me!" To any pirate with an R.P.G.7. ☺

    • @bradmiller2329
      @bradmiller2329 5 років тому

      I don't think even a SOMALI pirate wants to be next to a nuclear bomb going off.

  • @Mellow985
    @Mellow985 11 років тому

    Yes it is, N2 gas is unreactive.

  • @NoozeCat
    @NoozeCat 10 років тому

    Suomi mainittu!

  • @MrRandomcommentguy
    @MrRandomcommentguy 8 років тому +2

    It's a bit misleading to say a single spark could ignite liquid aviation fuel - you can drop a lit cigaratte into a bucket of jet fuel and the cigarette would go out... There has to be a mixture of oxygen and fumes from the fuel to ignite easily.

    • @markseale3235
      @markseale3235 7 років тому

      won't there be fumes coming from the the bucket?

    • @JohnDoe-zg6fq
      @JohnDoe-zg6fq 7 років тому

      Simon Coles Great job. You didn't pay attention at all and then decided to comment. You're officially that guy.

    • @lloydevans2900
      @lloydevans2900 6 років тому

      Depends on what sort of aviation fuel you are dealing with. The Empire flying boats referenced here were not jets - they had propellers driven by radial piston engines. Those use avgas, which is just as volatile as gasoline - meaning it vaporizes easily and can be ignited by sparks. This is after all exactly what happens inside the engines that use it as fuel.
      You are however correct about jet fuel, which is rather different to avgas. Jet fuel is still a liquid hydrocarbon fuel, but with a much higher boiling point, since jet engines don't use carburettors and hence don't need a volatile fuel. Jet fuel is closer in composition to diesel, and the US Air Force actually have trucks which can run on either diesel or jet fuel, or a mixture of both if necessary.
      The high boiling points of either jet fuel or diesel also give them high flash points: the temperature at which the vapour above the liquid becomes flammable. This does indeed make them much safer - a lit cigarette won't ignite jet fuel or diesel, and an electric spark won't ignite them either.

  • @mastergx1
    @mastergx1 6 років тому

    17:55 10 Kilos? You wuss. My Mrs' suitcase weight twice that when we last went away!

  • @Master1906
    @Master1906 10 років тому

    lol it's the smoke that stops the gas from burning...

  • @mattmopar440
    @mattmopar440 11 років тому

    I wonder how long a ship like that could run (sail) if it running off that Huge amount of stored liquid, months years ???

    • @nikhil-kulkarni
      @nikhil-kulkarni 6 років тому +1

      mattmopar440 That is not possible because if it would start using the fuel in the tanks the level of fuel would go on decreasing bringing the 'free surface phenomenon' into picture. The tanks should either be full or almost empty.

    • @bradmiller2329
      @bradmiller2329 5 років тому

      I'd guess years, maybe decades.

  • @earlpettey
    @earlpettey 10 років тому +1

    considering the fact that it would explode more like a fireballs *poof* (though way more impressive than just going poof), instead of a solid matter explosion of KAFUCKINGBLAMMOTHERFUCKER!!! (yea, they sound kinda like that...ok not really) it would end up creating a fireball a few hundred feet wide and turning the ship into the largest floating bonfire youve ever seen for a few seconds.

    • @tinyrodent2821
      @tinyrodent2821 7 років тому

      but the tanks are air tight, so surely if they set on fire the gas cannot escape causing the top of the tank to explode off, sounding like a bomb

    • @tinyrodent2821
      @tinyrodent2821 7 років тому

      however though as he said it cannot set on fire, because there is no oxygen

    • @sixstringedthing
      @sixstringedthing 7 років тому

      Old comment I know, but... that's not how explosions work. It doesn't matter if the explosive material is solid, liquid or gas. What's important is the amount of energy contained within it, and how quickly that energy can be released in an exothermic reaction. That supertanker carries 136 megaliters of highly volatile liquid hydrocarbons in steel tanks under high pressure. Hammond wasn't joking with the "55 nuclear bombs" comment in the intro... a runaway explosive reaction on that ship would vaporise it and everything else withing a pretty wide radius in just a few seconds, and the pressure wave would creatively rearrange the internal organs of anyone unfortunate enough to be within the blast radius. Obviously they purge the tanks before putting the tanker in dry dock because a mistake there could literally flatten an entire port. :)

  • @MrManniG
    @MrManniG 11 років тому

    Not at all... At very high temperatures it ist possible for N2 to react with Oxygen to an NOX Molecule...

  • @florisvernooy1416
    @florisvernooy1416 10 років тому +2

    2:59 I didn't come her simply to feel small

  • @andylane7142
    @andylane7142 5 років тому

    A little sad that there is little scientific rigour on this type of program. Nitrogen is most certainly not an inert gas. It is in fact a highly reactive Element responsible for a good deal of the explosives we currently use.

  • @skydoosher
    @skydoosher 11 років тому

    c'mon bro

  • @nakulgote
    @nakulgote 11 років тому

    Nitrogen is not inert.

    • @bradmiller2329
      @bradmiller2329 5 років тому

      Then every table of periodic elements is wrong.

  • @chkn10ders
    @chkn10ders 7 років тому

    No

  • @navisolim
    @navisolim 7 років тому

    so they are nuclear powered?

  • @walterwhite7092
    @walterwhite7092 10 років тому +2

    This show/series is too basic for adults and too high level and wrong for children... it needs retooling.

    • @laurispiksis6144
      @laurispiksis6144 10 років тому

      yeah if the kids are idiots, and dont forget teens.

    • @nickmagee-brown739
      @nickmagee-brown739 6 років тому

      It needs ratings mate, plus it is designed to attract those of gcse and a level age into engineering, which has dropped off the scale in the u. K.

  • @williamhannigan9627
    @williamhannigan9627 3 роки тому

    The deadpan observation bioinformatically warm because wednesday wailly slow down a broad ghost. rainy, likeable cold