search results matching tag: bridges

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds

    Videos (752)     Sift Talk (29)     Blogs (110)     Comments (1000)   

Norway’s $47BN Coastal Highway

siftbot says...

Tags for this video have been changed from 'The B1M, Norway, E39, Highway, Fjords' to 'The B1M, Norway, E39, Highway, Fjords, bridge, tunnel, submerged, suspension' - edited by Eklek

18 Teachers In Oklahoma Calling It Quits

eoe says...

It's a conflict of interest.

Why help fund an education that would provide people with tools to realize how much you're fucking them?

That's like asking someone on the other side of a river who stole your money for money to build a bridge.

They'd be insane if they didn't laugh them out of the capital.

Drachen_Jager said:

This is how you build an electorate that will vote Republican.

Rapid Bridge Replacement

Rapid Bridge Replacement

jmd says...

Those signs are the result of a different crew and I'm sure they only wait till after it is done building to do the final measurments, and then they need to submit paper work to get the sign requested and made which could take a while.

I would be interested in knowing what the hell they were doing on the second weekend. They did an awful lot of passes and tarping, and you can also see what looks like dirt, but in the end the cement bridge is still whats exposed.

wtfcaniuse said:

All that work and they didn't change the clearance sign.

Mordhaus (Member Profile)

Buttle (Member Profile)

CCTV: Cyclist falls into gap on lift bridge

BSR says...

That bridge was built to weed out the stupid. Luckily the rescuers give her one more chance to try again.

Zawash (Member Profile)

Troll Bridge - Official Trailer - a Discworld Fable

Zawash (Member Profile)

Black Child Abducted and Assaulted by White Supremacists

C-note says...

Bed time stories and nursery rhymes have covered vast topics thru out humanity. Ring around the roses, London bridges, Old Mother Hubbard, etc.. etc.. are all rooted in dark truths, but they are sung to babies, toddlers and kids. The Trail of Tears, The Holocaust, The Middle Passage, Armenian Genocide have their place..

Count yourself as one of the lucky if you have the privilege of never having to worry about a group of angry white men dragging yourself or your child off to some sadistic fate.

Cyclists Tempt Darwin

ulysses1904 says...

Two things I learned living next to Amtrak rail in Mystic, CT, unless you're near a road crossing they are dead silent until they are right up on you or blasting their horn. So I learned never to walk on the tracks with your back to train traffic. Also it's easy to forget that they are a lot wider than the rails themselves. I was sitting on a rail bridge drinking a beer, heard a train coming and assumed I had plenty of clearance. I look up at the last second and realize I'm going to get killed, jumped down onto a bunch of boulders at the last second. Painful lesson that I never forgot.

Turkish T129 ATAK helicopters conducting a drill

bcglorf says...

On the chance your 'jokingly' isn't obvious, MLK, Ghandi and Mandela's causes ALL had support from those willing to use violence, aka better weapons would help.

Malcolm X would be the next most prominent figure beside MLK. Indian independence wasn't won with peaceful hunger strikes alone, and again lots of violence in South Africa.

Ghandi even bridged the gap to working alongside the effective army fighting for India's independence:
" I would rather have India resort to arms in order to defend her honor than that she should in a cowardly manner become or remain a helpless witness to her own dishonor.
But I believe that nonviolence is infinitely superior to violence, forgiveness is more manly than punishment, forgiveness adorns a soldier."

Speaking more to the point of America today, pretty much no civil war has been fought exclusively with civilians on one side, and the government, police, army and all other branches of the state united on the other. The reason being that if that kind of unity within the government against the civilian population exists, you ALREADY have tyranny.

In America, the example would be if a president or a particular political party decided to try for tyrannical over reach, would the American public be better equipped to resist that with or without guns? In civil war, guns give power to the majority of public opinion that would need to be there otherwise. In a nation with an unarmed public, whatever the majority of soldiers side with is likely gonna win. With an armed populace, the civilian opinion matters more.

I think it's an overall modest observation, and one that really doesn't in anyway make it obvious that the modest benefit is worth the costs. That is another matter, but you can't factually claim that there isn't a meaningful difference between an armed and unarmed population when facing civil war.

newtboy said:

You mean like MLK, Ghandi, or Mandela did?

Perhaps an extremely well armed fanatical populace with little to lose paired with impossible terrain and nearly zero resources to steal has that chance against some less advanced enemies....but again, I'm talking about Americans.
Americans have zero chance to win or draw against the U.S. military. None. Nada. Zilch. A temporary standoff with disastrous consequences is the best I've ever heard of, that's a loss.

Near miss

SFOGuy says...

May not have been a deliberate act; head down, looking into a cell phone, stepping off the bridge to use the head (toilet)--no watch, no radar alert---and then you have a lot of mass moving really pretty darn quick and a collision course.

fuzzyundies said:

This looks like a game of high-stakes chicken. There are a set of international collision regulations (COLREGS) that every cadet all over the world has to learn by heart to gain a certificate of competency.

Sometimes these rules are inaccurately reduced to "right of way" rules. In fact, the rules oblige actions on all ships in a potential collision situation: one will be the "stand-on vessel", and the other will be the "give-way vessel": obliged to make an early and obvious maneuver to avoid the collision, in a prescribed direction (generally turn to starboard). The ships involved can instead get on the radio and negotiate a different plan, but absent that, these are the rules.

One rule governs overtaking, where the vessel being overtaken is the "stand-on vessel" and the vessel overtaking is the "give-way vessel". Another governs crossing, where in a crossing path situation the vessel which has the other ship to port (on the left, looking forward) is the "stand-on vessel" and the other is the "give-way vessel".

So in the situation we see in the video, the ship in which we are standing is clearly to port of the other vessel and so would be the "give-way" vessel. It should have made a slight starboard turn much much much earlier to pass behind the other vessel.

Except what if the other vessel overtook this ship and passed in front? This happens sometimes, where a vessel in a hurry and in the "give-way" position decides to make an early change to put it in the "stand-on" position and force the other ship to move. This is what's known internationally as a "dick move" and probably criminal.

Unless we have the full radar track for both ships we can't know who was at fault. Since they thankfully didn't collide, the MAIB won't have to figure this out and send anyone to jail.

ant (Member Profile)



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon