Comments by "Tony Wilson" (@tonywilson4713) on "What's Going on With Shipping?" channel.

  1. AUSTRALIAN HERE As we got mentioned as one of the countries that has sold the rights to Ports to Chinese Companies I felt I should add to this. This all came form the Privatisation Ideology of our Economists who follow the same Chicago School economic ideology as is causing these problems all over the World. That ideology was part of what was called Reaganomics and Thatcherism in the 1980s. We called it Economic Rationalism and its now globally referred to as Neoliberal Economics or Chicago School Economics. 2 of the core ideologies of Neoliberal economics are privatisation of government assets and foreign investment. Australian economists are almost obsessed with foreign investment and will give any tax concession and any other concessions to foreign entities so long as money comes in. The problem is they never consider the money that subsequently leaves as profits. They also never consider the loss of security or soveriegnty. The sale/leasing of the Ports is in general HATED by the Australian people and it has NOTHING to do with it being Chinese. Its the simple fact we don't control our own points of entry.
    49
  2. Back in 1987 the USS Stark was hit by an Iraqi Exocet missile. The captain was relieved of command and court martialed. At the time of the missile strike it was late at night, the night time deck crew were in command and the captain was asleep in his cabin. I was in college and by chance took a USN ROTC class in navigation (cos I liked sailing). I asked the teacher and assistant who were both serving USN officers WHY was the Captain court martialed. Both didn't like the question but as a civilian they were very polite about it. They simply explained that when you are appointed a captain of ANY USN vessel you are 100% responsible for the actions or inactions of all those serving on your vessel. So irrespective that it was the night crew that made the mistake the Captain who had left them in charge was held accountable. Yes years, later it still puzzles me why commanding officers were never held accountable for the actions of personnel beneath then when it came to the issues at the Abu Ghraib and Bagram AFB prisoner scandals. it will be interesting to see how this goes.
    30
  3. HEY SAL minor correction and I only know this because I looked up this topic a few years ago because we generally refer to Captain Cooks famous vessel as the HM Bark Endeavor but also sometimes referred to it as the barque Endeavor because she was also a barque (3 masts). The STS Leeuwin II is a three-masted barquentine, (NOT brigantine) named after the Dutch galleon Leeuwin which mapped the south-west coast of Australia in 1622 Simple thing regarding ships with square rigged masts - Brig - 2 masts with BOTH masts square rigged. Brigantine - 2 masts with the foremast square rigged and the aft mast fore-aft gaff rigged. Barque - 3 or more square rigged masts, but the aft mast can be fore-aft gaff rigged. Barquentine - 3 or more masts with only the foremast square rigged and the rest fore-aft gaff rigged. There's are nuances to these terms and the interpretations are flexible. If you want to get confused by all of this go look up Wikipedia and include in your research Schooners. Ketchs and Yawls.
    27
  4. That's NOT his gift, its his superpower. Like Elon Musk - he's fortunate enough that there's a couple of areas he is actually good at or understands well and that convinces people he knows what he's talking about in everything else. In Zeihan's case he's very good at interpreting geopolitics and demographics. YES I have heard people say he doesn't understand either but every time I have asked those claimants HOW or WHY they never answer back. In Elon's case its his understanding of what technologies he can sell to the World and identify people who are capable of making that technology work. He proved that with SpaceX and Tesla. When he let those people he hired do their jobs they did goo things like the first Teslas and the Falcon rockets. When Elon himself got into those companies and started directing they produced crap like the Cybertruck and Hyperloop.
    24
  5. Australian engineer here: I'm formally trained and certified in both functional safety (TUV) and EEHA. Rupturing an LNG tank does NOT create a BLEVE, but it certainly makes one possible and that's because the LNG will quickly boil without any fire, ignition or explosion. I got into some ugly discussions over the BLEVE in Beiruit a couple of years ago and it certainly was a BLEVE. If you get into the details BLEVE is not that well defined but basically its when you have an initial fire or explosion that creates the boiling liquid and vapor cloud which then mixes with the surrounding air. That's the boiling liquid and expanding vapor cloud part of BLEVE. If you think about what a thermobaric bomb does which is to disperse the fuel, let it mix with the air and then detonate it that basically a BLEVE. There's was at one point a few really good examples on YouTube but they have been drowned out but the scumbags wanting attention and clicks. Of the few decent vids on thermobaric devices Ryan McBeth who's ex-US Military and is actually informative does a good one. If you search BLEVE on YouTube you get a bunch of older vids, but some are very good but also kind of scary. The best I know of is the BLEVE training video that's on the channel VideoSpikes as it explains what is going on. There's one from Mexico City and its a good example of the 2 stage nature of a BLEVE. At 0:58 there's the initial explosion and creation of the vapor cloud and then about 2 seconds later there's the fireball. Maybe the most frightening one is the "Atmospheric Storage Tank Explosion" posted by Mohamad Mahdi Amiri of what happened in Tehran in 2021.
    15
  6. I'm an Australian engineer who's been doing industrial control systems, robotics and automation for 35+ years and I am sure it was just the usual incompatibility with SHEEPLOVER software systems you guys wont stop using. Sorry mate but I have worked with quite a few Kiwi engineers and technicians. Some are proper DlCKHEADS who we wished you would keep on your side of the ditch, but you have others who are as good as any in the world. So I find it hard to grasp they had a software incompatibility unless you were listening tot he DlCKHEADS instead of the people who knew what they were doing. FYI - we have the same problem here in OZ. To often we let our DlCKHEADS make decisions.
    14
  7. I'm Australian and watch both channels. I'm actually an aerospace engineer with a pilots license and it was Juan Browne who put me (and others) onto this channel. What I like about Sal is that you actually get a much better picture of world trade from him than any of the business media because he talks about how the system works and what issues there are. I sort of wonder how many trade analysts watch him???? For pilots Juan is just brilliant in terms of "how do we learn from this." And yes for 2 guys who are NOT journalists they make journalists look as pathetic as we suspect they are.
    11
  8.  @ILuvRum  he didn't start out that way but over time YEAH he's another click-baiter. AND I will say the same about a bunch of commentary channels that I have recently unsubscribed from. At one point there were some great channels on political commentary and analysis and in the last 2-3 years they have all steadily chased the money with more and more click-baiting.
    10
  9.  @antilarge7860  I'll agree when he sticks to his areas of expertise (geopolitics & demographics) but more and more he's gotten outside those areas and NOT consulted people who are subject matter experts. Like in this case he should have discussed this with Sal. In fact that would be a damn good conversation because if you combined Peters geopolitical & demographic analysis with Sal's knowledge of global logistics that would be good.
    10
  10. ENGINEER HERE and I TOTALLY AGREE with your assessment of Peter as I have the same issue when he talks about engineering topics. He's great on geopolitics but lousy on engineering. Here's 2 examples. 1/2 to most of the time he talks about things like the Russian Oil wells freezing and being out of action for decades because the American experts have left Russia IS SIMPLY WRONG because he assumes that over the last 20-30 years NONE of the Russian engineers or maintenance people learned anything from operating those wells. Sorry but its an absurd idea that the American experts never trained the local Russians on how to look after their own oil wells and/or that the Russians never learned anything off the Americans. Second, Peter often mentions that Wind and Solar need 100% (or close to) of their lifetime costs up front compared to things like a nuclear power station or coal fired power station because those stations have fuel costs for the lifetime of their operation. Its actually true that when you look at LIFETIME costs Wind and Solar have most of those costs upfront because they have few costs after construction. BUT engineers and investors don't consider lifetime costs as much as they do CAPITAL COSTS which is the money you have to spend getting approvals, getting things designed, getting things constructed and then commissioned so that whatever it is your building can start earning money. In terms of CAPITAL COSTS wind & solar now annihilate nuclear and handily beat coal and other fossil fuels. Just go and look at the costs per Megawatt installed (and that word "installed" is really important). Where there is a leveling of that space are in the grid modifications to link the Wind & Solar to the power grid. I think Peter's problem in these areas is that he does NOT consult with good subject matter experts (SMEs) like the does in other areas. This is why he has certain figures that are way off. Its also likely his economics is skewed by the incredibly poor way economic is taught and that's a subject I have been researching for sometime because it has had huge effects on engineering but that's a much longer discussion. By the way - I'm Australian and love the channel. I was like many introduced to you by Ward Carroll another of the rare breed of YouTubers who endeavor to educate people.
    7
  11. Australian here - its just amazing that whatever Americans do they always find a way to OUT DO the rest of the world and that includes "f*cking up." Usually we tag along for this stuff, but thankfully this time you didn't invite us. 🫡
    7
  12. ENGINEER HERE (and I left a more detailed comment to Sal's pinned comment at the top) In a nutshell Peter is (as Sal points out) VERY GOOD at geopolitics. I find Peter's also fairly good at putting things into historical context, which (in general) is done so badly that it makes people like Peter look very good. BUT where I see Peter get things WRONG and wrong often is on the specifics of engineering and I gave 2 examples in the other comment. I'm less certain about your comment on demographics, because I don't know what your friends have said he gets wrong on that subject. When I have seen others criticise his demographic analysis and ask what's wrong - they usually fall flat or silent or both. I'm not a demographic expert by any means but what I can see (quite easily) is that demographics like economics is at a crossroads where there are 2 camps diving off. One has a very delusional "business as usual" attitude and one with an almost equally delusional "this is a catastrophe" attitude. I tend to think we are more in the middle of those and business will NOT continue "as usual" but we are NOT YET in the catastrophic state some(or many) claim either. However I would temper that with "We might NOT be in a catastrophic state, but if we don't start doing things that need doing we will be."
    6
  13. That's a great comment. I'm an engineer who works in industrial control systems and automation. That includes a lot of safety work because it includes things like emergency stops & emergency shutdown systems, safety gates, alarms, fire protection systems and all sorts of other stuff. I have even done some work on FPSOs, but nothing with trains. Its amazing how many times each year how close people come to catastrophe. What keeps us safe are the back up systems. When Sal got to that point about fires it was a massive face palm for me. Back in 2008/09 I worked on both the Varanus Island fire recovery project and also the Ngujima-Yin FPSO incident. One of the major issues with the Ngujima-Yin FPSO was the failure of the onboard fire system to work properly when the fire broke out from the gas compressor failure. It sounds like people are NOT learning from these incidents.
    5
  14. Australian here and you are 100% right. This is so typical of ALL THESE TYPES OF EVENTS. Every damn media organisation tries to become instant experts instead of actually ASKING experts and then shutting up while the experts explains what is what. We see this all the time.
    5
  15.  @djinn666  YEAH we could try but there's things called contracts and courts like to uphold contracts. We'd need to catch the Chinese doing something illegal (tax evasion, drug smuggling, people smuggling, whatever) or the courts will simply prevent it without a massive compensation package.
    5
  16. ENGINEER HERE: And I would love to come on your channel and discuss the issue of LESSONS LEARNED because across the entire world of engineering that is a monster issue that is NOT BEING ADDRESSED. FYI - I started with a degree in aerospace engineering but landed in industrial control systems and automation. That's a highly transportable skill set as almost every industry has computers with sensor connected to them and they run software to read those sensors and control things - power stations, manufacturing plants, mine sites, water treatment plants, traffic lights,...... and many other things. I have mostly worked in manufacturing and mining, but also have experience in water treatment, waste processing, oil & gas and power stations. Time and time again I have watched people make the same mistakes on projects after projects. Lessons are NOT being learned anywhere. Maybe on of the few times I saw it done well was when Colin Powell and others decided NOT to repeat Vietnam. Out of that came the Powell Doctrine, which I first heard about on a PBS Frontline documentary called "Rumsfeld's War." In it a General summarised it as having 4 key questions. What is the task? What are the required in manpower and machinery? Do we have the absolute support of the American people? When the job has to be done by? When that was used there was Gulf War 1 it was over in a month with its main objectives achieved - get the Iraqis out of Kuwait and make sure they can't come back. They pushed the Iraqis out of Kuwait and they had that famous battle where the Americans shot up all their trucks as they fled. By destroying all the trucks they removed the Iraqi capability to move anything around and armies have to move. When I first heard the Powell Doctrine explained it struck because it applies to ALL ENGINEERING PROJECTS. You have to start with a clear specification. You have to resource the project properly with money, men and machinery. You have to be in agreement that the solution is going to work. You have to have a firm date on when it has to be done and what it means to be done. If you look at the Apollo Program easily the most successful engineering project in history it had all those 4 things in place from the start. Land a Man on the moon and safety return him to the Earth. You have all the money, men and machinery needed. The American people said they agreed. The date was set -> end of the decade. Note that by the end of the 1960s Americans had been to the Moon 4 times (Apollo 8, 10, 11 & 12) and landed twice (Apollo 11 & 12). Further the technologies developed and then made available to American industry had paid via taxes back to the American people around $9.50 for every dollar spent on Apollo by the late 80s. That was the conclusion of an independent report commissioned by the AIAA during the aftermath of the Challenger disaster as people tried to get NASA abolished. This is NOT taught to engineers at all and EVERY project I have ever been on has missed at least 1 of those things. You'd all be amazed that engineers are NOT taught anything about project management in college. Yet this concept that Colin Powell came up with is so simple and it was based on LESSONS LEARNED from Powell's experience in Vietnam. AND YES when they threw it away as Rumsfeld and others did for the Invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan they both went tragically wrong and the effects of which we'll have to deal with for decades to come. AND YES when NASA has had projects with a lack of specific goals they have had issues like the Space Shuttle, like the Space Station and like the Launch systems meant to replace the Space Shuttle. So when you talk about LESSONS LEARNED its a much bigger issue than a broken wharf in Gaza.
    5
  17.  @dropbear9866  Go and read my comment regarding what happened in 1987 with the USS Stark.
    4
  18.  @taiwanluthiers  No cars come in fourth behind: - moto-cycle riders in third place who have to ride in among maniacs in cars; and - those amazingly brave guys who ride crocodiles across piranha infested rivers in second place; and - the pilots in first place of the Yokosuka MXY-7 Ohka rocket powered Kamikaze flying bomb. That thing was 100% fatal.
    4
  19. I'm Australian and started watching after Ward Carroll and Juan Browne recommended him. I haven't stopped watching. Its actually a far more important subject than most people realise because of how much stuff gets moved by sea. Australia is an island and almost everything we do goes by ship. People go by air but stuff goes by ship.
    3
  20.  @dropbear9866  To this day I still find it harsh but also fair. The thing that annoys me is that in many other services the upper echelons of power are exempt from the mistakes others make following their orders.
    3
  21. ​ @FoldedCloak  That's a good point but its also the same point people can make about Sal regarding shipping. I can say the same about many of the people I watch here on YouTube. the difference is Sal does NOT stray outside his area of expertise. I actually found Sal because Ward Carroll (Ex F14 RIO) pointed out his channel. Ward is an expert on Naval aviation NOT shipping so he linked people into Sal's work. That's where Peter Z goes wrong. He doesn't engage other subject matter experts (SMEs) as much as he should. However Peter is not even 1% as bad as the political commentators who are just 2 howling packs of clowns that yell at each other in ways that make any sensible dialogue impossible.
    3
  22.  @cragnamorra  YES I noticed that one too. I think it was a typo because its simply idiotic to think a carrier can go that fast. A quick check says that 90knots is 166.68kmh or 103.6mph. Its so ridiculous that it has to be a brain fart or typo. FYI - I'm Australian but did my degree in Aerospace Engineering in America. In my last semester I did a class in nautical navigation (I liked sailing). It was a class hosted by the US Navy for their ROTC students. So it was a military class with USN officers for instructors. They were awesome too and treated me very well. It was a class that had the occasional civilian (like me). Its was in 1987 and at that time there were some very serious political differences between Australia and Indonesia. So I asked one of my USN instructors a few things. In that conversation I remember 2 things. 1) He assured me that America would not allow Australia to be touched because there's a couple of incredibly important US bases here. 2) Officially America could have aircraft carriers in Australian waters in 30 days. He told me quite seriously it would be less than 8. As an engineer I can do the calculation. In 8 days (192 hours) from San Diego to Brisbane which is 6260 nautical miles you only need to do 32.6 knots. In most cases San Diego would be the LONGEST distance as Hawaii, Japan & Guam are a lot closer. Published speed of Nimitz and Ford class carriers is simply put as "in excess of 30knots" but there are claims that its over 40knots. BUT THERE'S NOBODY saying anything over 50 let alone 90. So sorry the 90 knots just has to be a brain fart or typo. That said the actual disturbing thing is that NOBODY called him out on it.
    3
  23. Another aerospace engineer here and I agree. There's way too many people with no technical background at all pumping out technical opinions these days. Its at the core of why we just aren't solving a lot of problems. We really do need to start telling the clowns and idiots to shut up especially non-engineers on engineering subjects.
    3
  24.  @truegret7778  Buddy I have just had another clown berate me over being a spoiler for fully auto-piloted cars. I have actually spent the last 30+ years in control systems and automation. I know what it takes to write software to link sensors to actions and can unequivocally state that 99% of everyone who can program can't do that sort of work. They can't look at code and see what it does in the real world in real time. They can make some stuff work but the moment things don't work they are lost. I have no doubt they can make a car that will follow a winding road with near absolute perfection. The problem is what that system does when it encounters something NEW that isn't accounted for in the code. One of the most amazing aspects of the human brain is its ability to fill in gaps in the available information and adapt its experience at incredible speed. It also gets us into trouble at times like with pilots misreading something they see and their brain goes "UFO" because their peripheral visual system has labelled it as "out of the normal - potential threat." This is my beef with non-technical people and other ignorant types. Not only do they NOT understand these nuances and details BUT they aren't interested in hearing them. The idiot who ran this sub not only killed himself he killed 4 others BECAUSE details were inconvenient. Go ask your wife about the history of aviation and how many times untrained geniuses built planes that engineers with knowledge and experience said "DON'T do that!" and it ended tragically. Better still ask your wife what happens when over 21tons of mass going at supersonic speed rams into a flat surface? Then ask her about the geniuses at SpaceX and their brilliant launch platform in Texas. If she's wondering point out the fuel flow rate of a Raptor engine and multiply that by 33. I heard a great description of the sub-clown "Brilliant Idiot"
    3
  25.  @2Hard2Core  thanks
    3
  26.  @ericdunn555  100%
    3
  27. And there's a video here on YouTube that tells you how to pronounce Languedoc and its titled "How to Pronounce Languedoc? French Region Pronunciation"
    3
  28.  @brucelytle1144  Thanks for the sentiment but we sadly live in a world that feels like an asylum run by the patients. Here in Australia we are having this huge public debate over nuclear versus renewable power AND NOBODY in the media is asking any engineers. We just had our premier science organisation release their nuclear energy report and it was written by economists. Could you imagine if NASA was taken over by economists? I have been looking into this for a couple of years and I have found that its hardwired into economists that they believe that all other professions are problems that they have to manage. How many times has history shown that if you don't listen to people who have BOTH expertise and experience that it tends to go wrong? No one seems to learn that lesson.
    3
  29.  @Thomamps  That's a great point about where things get made. One of the things for any ship or tug boat is the engine and I just checked a couple of the smaller classes the USN navy has. Its latest tug-salvage-rescue boats the Navajo-Class has Wartsila Diesel engines which are Finnish. My bet would be is you'd find similar if you start going through the other classes. There'll be bits of stuff from all over the world. I'm actually Australian and have been looking at what our Navy is up to, which is how I know about the Navajo-class. One thing I picked up is the propulsion unit on the Virginia-class submarines is actually British. So your point about trucks is just as valid for ships.
    2
  30. I actually came to this channel from Sub Brief.
    2
  31.  @cragnamorra  That's a good point on the drones. What he may have meant was that the drones would run out of range. Either way its an incredible brain fart on his part and as I said the fact NOBODY called it out is even more damning.
    2
  32.  @cragnamorra  You'll love this bit on my first nav class. As it was a military class the moment the teacher walked in the guy nearest the door called "Officer on deck" and all the ROTCs snapped out of their seats to ramrod attention. The Lieutenant slowly walked up the aisle towards the front and suddenly stopped next to me. I was still seated wondering WTF was going on. He looked down at me and very seriously said "You must be the civee. We get your type doing this class every so often." It was kind of intimidating, but that was probably the point. By about the 3rd or 4th class I had joined in the stand to attention. Eventually he again stopped by me and told me I didn't need to stand at attention. By that stage I had picked up a little on the language and simply said something like "Sir. If they have to stand so will I. Sir." I didn't try and make a thing off it as I was just trying to fit in. What I found out later was how well that simple act was appreciated. After that both officers who taught us and the ROTCs all treated me well and it ended up being one of my favorite classes to look back on and I wished I had been able to do another semester and do the second nav class (there were 2).
    2
  33.  @CoffeeAndPaul  Good comment. I've done some work in Australia's oil & gas sector and all you've said about refineries lines up with our situation. The problem I have had with Peter is that he's making a huge claim that significant parts of the Russian system will fail because the American and other Foreign expertise has left. There's no doubt that if any technological sector suddenly has a bunch of people leave (especially when they are from the higher levels of expertise) that it has a negative effect, but that negative effect is also countered by what the local people have learned from those experts. I work in control systems and no matter what industry I have been in I've had to help train the "natives" who will spend their lives working on the pile of stuff I've delivered. I know from experience that if you don't want ugly phone calls in the middle of then make sure the locals know how to diagnose things and where possible FIX things. I just find it totally implausible that the Russians have NOT learned from those Americans and others who've been there for most of the last 20 years. The question should be HOW MUCH they have actually learned and HOW WELL they can apply it? I can't answer that but you probably can.
    2
  34.  @cragnamorra  Yeah it was a simple thing but the respect that I got back left an impression that has stuck. On the course I did. We started with a lot of basic chart work and plotting courses around harbours. We then did a pile of celestial navigation. Our main project was plotting the course using basic principles from New York harbour (or the Chesapeake??) to just off the coast of Britain. That included using a Great Circle Chart to get the intermediate positions and then translate that onto the Atlantic charts. We had to pre-prep a couple of star fixes as well. When I went to the chief and asked why the emphasis on celestial when GPS was at that time accurate to about 1m for the military (there was no actual admission but it was certainly under 10m). He said something I have never forgotten and its an incredibly important thing across ALL OF THE ENGINEERING FIELDS - Calibration. He said "The stars don't move." Yes we know they shift but his point was we know exactly where each star is and will be for 1,000s of years to come. What he explained is that the stars are 100% reliable while sensors and computers can make mistakes. He then pointed out "If you have to fire off a nuclear armed weapon you better know where its going to go and to do that you need to know where you are in the first place." He told me that ANY SHIP armed with nukes checked its GPS against the sun & stars every 4 hours, while the rest did it 1 or twice a day (I forget which). As I said it was one of my favorite classes, because of how much I ended up learning.
    2
  35. Yeah - well I'm an engineer who's worked in industrial control systems, robotics and automation for 35+ years and I have no doubt Automation impacted your business BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT ITS MEANT TO DO. You should know better than most that NOBODY goes and spends money on upgrading unless there is PROFIT TO BE MADE and I am certain that some fraction (possibly small) of those profits have ended up in your bank account.
    2
  36.  @Hotblackdesiato4242  Its actually how I found the channel. The YT creator who recommended Sal is Ward Carroll and ex-USN Tomcat RIO
    2
  37. ​ @wgowshipping  On your next video you should highlight the failure test of carbon fibre and glass fibre hulls that Carl Ross posted 10 years ago. He posted 2 videos titled Collapse of Composite Submarine Pressure Hulls Collapse of Carbon & Glass Fibre Tubes under External Hydrostatic Pressure. I have no idea who Carl Ross is (or was) but there's 2 things to note about those videos. 1) How sudden the failure is. If you look at how titanium fails its much like any other metal there's deformation eventually followed by failure. I am an engineer (aerospace) but did my first year in mechanical and we did that stuff in the lab. Most of the failure videos of things being crushed or bent in a hydraulic press show that but they also often show the sudden failure of carbon fibre composite materials. So you and other are most likely right the people in Titan probable had no warning it was all about to fail other than hearing a lot of cracking. 2) the Carl Ross videos show very little damage to the Carbon fibre tube other than what looks like a crack down the side. What people need to understand is that it was done in a small pressure test rig NOT the open ocean so there was very little water to keep applying pressure once the tube failed. I have done work in the petro-chem industry and other places where they pressure test pipes with water. If something does let go during a hydrostatic test there's no explosion of water because its incompressible. That test cell Carl Ross used has very little water in it so there's not a lot of volume to rush into the test model and do lots of damage. It just had enough water to break the cylinder.
    2
  38. I'm an engineer who's worked in industrial controls systems, robotics and automation for 35+ years. I have NOT worked in the the sort of automation you are talking about but your argument holds true across every other industry I have worked in. Its NOT impossible to install automation into existing systems but it can be a lot harder. I know because I have done those sorts of jobs. Its always better to start with a clean sheet. The other thing you are right about is that automation rarely eliminates the need for workers. In many cases automation is used to do those repetitive jobs that people don't want to do because they are so repetitive OR because they can be damn dangerous OR bot repetitive and dangerous which can be a very bad combination.
    2
  39. AEROSPACE ENGINEER HERE - Sorry Sal but you have gotten your nuclear reactor COMPLETELY BACKWARDS. To all the reason aerospace engineers understand the nuclear options are because we'd like to build a Lunar Base. It was an aerospace engineer Kirk Sorenson who used to work for NASA and who was tasked with working out how to power a Lunar Base. From that Kirk kicked off a massive part of the nuclear discussion with his advocacy of Molten Salt reactors and Thorium fuel. I have also worked in Australia's nuclear industry on the mining side and as part of that we did an induction course that covered the full nuclear energy cycle from ore in the ground all the way through to spent fuel buried back in the ground. Also one of my workmates used to be a US Navy nuclear power plant technician/operator on aircraft carriers. FOR SHIPPING there is currently only 1 option and that is civilian versions of existing naval nuclear reactors. So for American commercial ships with nuclear power THEY WILL HAVE to use a CIVILIAN VARIANT of the GE Power reactors currently used in US Navy submarines and aircraft reactors. ALSO most of the Small Modular Reactor technology is based on Naval reactors. ALSO until the money is spent to actually develop commercially usable Molten Salt Reactors then just like with SMRs people need to stop making STUPID claims about using them. Sorry mate, I love your channel and watch it all the time but on this you are 100% WRONG. I you want I would happily do a video with you explaining these technologies.
    2
  40. I didn't enjoy this video Sal, because the topic is ugly, damn ugly and its ugly for several reasons. - There's no need and no gain for the Houthi to do these things. - There's no gains for anyone else to allow these things to happen. Its an ugly subject with innocent people getting killed for no reason. So I can't enjoy this video but that doesn't mean you don't deserve a thumbs up for showing us these facts
    1
  41. On your next video you should highlight the failure test of carbon fibre and glass fibre hulls that Carl Ross posted 10 years ago. He posted 2 videos titled Collapse of Composite Submarine Pressure Hulls Collapse of Carbon & Glass Fibre Tubes under External Hydrostatic Pressure. I have no idea who Carl Ross is (or was) but there's 2 things to note about those videos. 1) How sudden the failure is. If you look at how titanium fails its much like any other metal there's deformation eventually followed by failure. I am an engineer (aerospace) but did my first year in mechanical and we did that stuff in the lab. Most of the failure videos of things being crushed or bent in a hydraulic press show that but they also often show the sudden failure of carbon fibre composite materials. So you and other are most likely right the people in Titan probable had no warning it was all about to fail other than hearing a lot of cracking. 2) the Carl Ross videos show very little damage to the Carbon fibre tube other than what looks like a crack down the side. What people need to understand is that it was done in a small pressure test rig NOT the open ocean so there was very little water to keep applying pressure once the tube failed. I have done work in the petro-chem industry and other places where they pressure test pipes with water. If something does let go during a hydrostatic test there's no explosion of water because its incompressible. That test cell Carl Ross used has very little water in it so there's not a lot of volume to rush into the test model and do lots of damage. It just had enough water to break the cylinder.
    1
  42. Its a great idea Sal. I just have 1 question how do I get my nephews and niece to read a magazine when they don't even know what a book is? Yes they're zoomers.
    1
  43.  @therealrobinc  I 12/ agree because there's a disparity among the services and that's a subject that needs addressing. Also holding senior political people accountable is also a serious issue.
    1
  44.  @lisizecha9759  And your point is?????? Cos I got that. Duh.
    1
  45.  @roderickcampbell2105  yeah yeah what ever 🥱🥱
    1
  46. When the title of a military operation DOESN'T make sense then you know we are being BULLSHlTTED.
    1
  47. Reagan and Milton Friedman famously said the most scary words are "I'm from the government and I'm here to help". I think we need to re-phrase that. Which of these do you think best sums up what's happened? a) I'm an economist and I know how to manage everything by doing nothing and NOT letting anyone else do anything so that we can let the market decide. b) I'm from a Think Tank and have been thinking how to make my life better at your expense. c) I'm a consultant and I'm here to rearrange your life so my other clients can make money from the chaos. e) I'm from the government and I'd like to help you but I can't do anything unless the economist, Think Tanker and consultant say I can. d) ALL OF THE ABOVE.
    1
  48. ​ @FoldedCloak  Agreed. just the other day I saw a video that looked back on something Jon Stewart said over 10 years ago not that long after 9/11. Jon pointed out that 24/7 news has to hype stories up and fill the vacant space with opinion because there's just NOT enough interesting FACTUAL things to keep audiences engaged 24/7. He said 9/11 was perfect for their business model because it allowed opinion and hype to fill the air and keep people engaged. This is a major problem in the world right now. I'm an engineer and we have to deal with facts. Its the very nature of our profession. We don't get to do conjecture or things go badly - the Boeing Max-8 being a good example but there are others. In just the last few days I have seen several news stories on energy (wind/solar & nuclear). AT NO TIME was an engineer interviewed on any of these programs. In one on nuclear (by DW in Germany) they had 3 people on. One was an Austrian physicist who has done some work in nuclear, but the other 2 were a political science professor and the other a consultant with a degree in Chinese Language & Literature with a masters in International Studies. You'd think DW being German would have easy access to plenty of German Engineers including those form the German nuclear energy industry. I see this sort of media behavior constantly.
    1
  49. If you want IGN0RANCE look no further than any and every economist on the planet. Look what the godfather of modern economics Milton Friedman says. "There is one and only one social responsibility of business–to use it resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game, which is to say, engages in open and free competition without deception or fraud" - Milton Friedman Does the great Milton Freidman say that CEOs, CFOs and other managers have to care about the effects of their decisions on other companies or society in general? Do these clowns think Elon Musk gave a damn about the future of America when he backed Donald Trump or was he looking after the juicy contracts SpaceX gets via NASA? Do these clowns think any of the Think Tanks funded by billionaires write reports and produce videos and do lectures doing anything other than promote what those billionaires funding them want? Does John Stossel (like all media these days) push any story other than those that help get attention and clicks and subscriptions and therefore EVERYTHING he does is in his own self interest?
    1
  50.  @LantanaLiz  Buddy I am only repeating what a US Navy officer explained to me in respect of the USS Stark incident in 1987.
    1