Catamarans have something extra....
 

"KLC Lewis" wrote in message
et...


However, I accept the challenge you yourself proposed: You
now have 15
minutes to come up with a better idea.


'Breather tubes' in all eight corners.
However, they must be designed to not let rain water in. And
the reefer units would need some kind of insulation in them.

SBV

Catamarans have something extra....
 

"Scotty" wrote in message
. ..

"KLC Lewis" wrote in message
et...


However, I accept the challenge you yourself proposed: You
now have 15
minutes to come up with a better idea.


'Breather tubes' in all eight corners.
However, they must be designed to not let rain water in. And
the reefer units would need some kind of insulation in them.

SBV




As has already been pointed out by others, shipping containers are not
airtight or watertight, and fail to sink only because of the buoyancy (if
any) of their contents. "Breather Tubes" to let more air out, or more water
in, will not solve the essential problem. Clock's still ticking.

Catamarans have something extra....
 

"KLC Lewis" wrote in message
...

"Scotty" wrote in message
...

"KLC Lewis" wrote in


My idea was not "always
loaded containers." It was to always load them



Hooh Boy!



Clock's ticking, bubbie.

tick, tock, tick,
tock...Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzttttt !

Catamarans have something extra....
 

"KLC Lewis" wrote in message
et...

"Scotty" wrote in message
. ..

"KLC Lewis" wrote in message
et...


However, I accept the challenge you yourself proposed: You
now have 15
minutes to come up with a better idea.


'Breather tubes' in all eight corners.
However, they must be designed to not let rain water in. And
the reefer units would need some kind of insulation in them.

SBV




As has already been pointed out by others, shipping containers are not
airtight or watertight, and fail to sink only because of the buoyancy (if
any) of their contents. "Breather Tubes" to let more air out, or more
water in, will not solve the essential problem. Clock's still ticking.


Well, I gave you half an hour and you've still not come up with a better
idea. Guess you lose, eh? :-D

Catamarans have something extra....
 

"KLC Lewis" wrote in message
...

"KLC Lewis" wrote in message
et...

"Scotty" wrote in message
. ..

"KLC Lewis" wrote in message
et...


However, I accept the challenge you yourself proposed: You
now have 15
minutes to come up with a better idea.


'Breather tubes' in all eight corners.
However, they must be designed to not let rain water in. And
the reefer units would need some kind of insulation in them.

SBV




As has already been pointed out by others, shipping containers are not
airtight or watertight, and fail to sink only because of the buoyancy (if
any) of their contents. "Breather Tubes" to let more air out, or more
water in, will not solve the essential problem. Clock's still ticking.


Well, I gave you half an hour and you've still not come up with a better
idea. Guess you lose, eh? :-D

Scotty was having a battle of wits with a witless twit. How can he possibly
lose? You were un-armed.

Catamarans have something extra....
 

On Sun, 26 Aug 2007 11:23:47 -0500, "KLC Lewis"
wrote:

It doesn't require a mighty leap of logic for one to
then assume that you are opposed to the idea of requiring containers to
sink. Ipso facto, you are in favor of them remaining afloat, where they can
do harm. If you have a better solution to the problem, post it.

I would like topoint out that the boxes are not watertight. If the
stuff in the container is dense, it will sink. If it is filled with a
lot of foam packing, It won't sink.

Casady

Catamarans have something extra....
 

"Neal" wrote in message ...
Scotty was having a battle of wits with a witless twit. How can he
possibly lose? You were un-armed.


And yet he still lost. Hard to believe, innit?

Catamarans have something extra....
 

"Richard Casady" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 26 Aug 2007 11:23:47 -0500, "KLC Lewis"
wrote:

It doesn't require a mighty leap of logic for one to
then assume that you are opposed to the idea of requiring containers to
sink. Ipso facto, you are in favor of them remaining afloat, where they
can
do harm. If you have a better solution to the problem, post it.

I would like topoint out that the boxes are not watertight. If the
stuff in the container is dense, it will sink. If it is filled with a
lot of foam packing, It won't sink.

Casady

Yes, this has been pointed out. Which is why I proposed requiring ballast
(or otherwise adjusting the buoyancy) so the container would sink if the
cargo would otherwise prohibit sinking.

Catamarans have something extra....
 

On Sun, 26 Aug 2007 11:44:39 -0400, "Neal" wrote this
crap:


Hey, if he wants dumber, he can always read and study the posts of some of
the more......proficient? posters of this group.
One who has more, is worth more, and is better at everything comes
immediately to mind. Also, one from a bay-area in Kalifornicatia.


Are you talking about Jon-boy?




I'm Horvath and I approve of this post.

Catamarans have something extra....
 

On Sun, 26 Aug 2007 11:54:37 -0500, "KLC Lewis"
wrote this crap:

However, I accept the challenge you yourself proposed: You now have 15
minutes to come up with a better idea.


How about a game show like Hollywood Squares, but with kids? Gary
Coleman could host.

I've been waiting to use that line.







I'm Horvath and I approve of this post.