• SaltSong@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    31
    ·
    12 hours ago

    The fact that you are measuring speed in knots per hour invalidates your point.

    Please use a correct measurement, and try again.

      • SaltSong@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        8 hours ago

        I find that reasonably unlikely, unless it is a naval ship. I don’t think cargo ships go that fast unless empty, and highly motivated. Possibly not even then.

        Do we have a reliable source for this data?

        • Ilovethebomb@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Most naval vessels can do just over 30, if that. Cargo vessels spend most of their life below 10.

          50 knots means there’s some fuckery afoot.

          • SaltSong@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            I was under the impression that navy ships could go much faster, but didn’t because of wear and fuel consumption. I recall hearing about 60 knots, but I wouldn’t place even a small bet on it.

            Same for cargo ships, to a lesser extent. If an empty one felt a need to move, I’m sure they could get a little speed to them. But they aren’t built for it, and “saving money on fuel” is their prime directive.

            Although, as someone noted elsewhere, there don’t seem to be any actual measurements of speed. They turned around, and cranked the throttle, but we don’t know how far they were going in either phase.

            • Ilovethebomb@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 hour ago

              I’ve read claims that some nuclear aircraft carriers can go a lot faster than 30, but I suspect that’s bullshit.

              There’s also a phenomenon known as hull speed, where a displacement hull vessel takes an exponential amount of power to go slightly faster once you hit it. They’re also not going to have an engine that’s massively more powerful than they need, just in case.

              50 knots would outrun pretty much any large vessel on the planet.

          • apparia@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 hours ago

            Sure, but the gif doesn’t show 50 knots. The gif doesn’t show any speed actually, so I really don’t know where the 50 number comes from. But on the tracker the speed was 8.1 knots. Fast for a tanker, but totally believable.

        • apparia@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          5 hours ago

          My source is marinetraffic.com. Other AIS trackers also corroborate it.

          From the sounds of it the OP and most other articles are based on similar armchair research looking at trackers so I think it’s about as reliable as we’re going to get.

        • SaltSong@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          9 hours ago

          I’m being accurate. “Knots” is “nautical miles per hour,” as you correctly described.

          • 🌞 Alexander Daychilde 🌞@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            6 hours ago

            All you’re doing is being a grammar nazi to someone who at most said the equivalent of “$30 million dollars”, which is technically, thanks to the dollar sign, “thirty million dollars dollars”.

            You knew what they meant. I knew what they meant. Everyone knew what they meant. There was absolutely zero ambiguity, so you just come off looking like a prick.

          • marcos@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            9 hours ago

            If we are being really pedantic. Knots is a measure of distance, and the fact that people have been using that wrong for several centuries does not turn a rope tied at one point into a time-changing object.

            • SaltSong@startrek.website
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 hours ago

              Knots is a measure of distance, and the fact that people have been using that wrong for several centuries

              We’ve only been sailing for “several centuries.” How long was it a measure of distance before people started using it wrong?

            • 🌞 Alexander Daychilde 🌞@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 hours ago

              fact that people have been using that

              The way language works is that people use things and they become correct.

              There’s things I hate, too, like “yea” now being a spelling for “yeah”. But it’s useless to fight it.

      • NoblePutty@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        12 hours ago

        I think there point is that knots is not a measurement of distance over time so you can’t technically travel in knots per hour.