Off Topic (1 Viewer)

The_Doc_Man

Happy Retired Curmudgeon
Local time
Today, 06:43
Joined
Feb 28, 2001
Messages
17,009
@UncleGizmo

The problem with putting anything on the batture (that section of the riverbank between the levee and the river itself) is that when the river is at flood stage in springtime, you need something to handle high water that might be 19 feet over the normal winter levels. That is because that 19 feet is official "flood stage." The river at non-flood stage moves something like 593K cu.ft./sec. (=4.44 million gallons/sec) and at the foot of Canal St. in New Orleans (that's the "main drag") the flow rate is about 3 mph. That is 18,500 TONS (U.S.A. standard) per second of water. At that point, the river bottom is 200 feet deep. The stress factors are tremendous and nobody wants to risk any major developments on the batture. Part of the problem is that south of the lake, we have no bedrock for at least 1500 feet so you need some humongous pilings. With our water table, building something massive can be a disaster.

There is a story about the Louisiana Superdome. When it was being built, an out-of-town contractor won low bid on the pile-driving contract. But they had done no tests of the soil So the day of the first piling arrives, they set up their equipment, drop the hammer on the first piling. On ONE stroke the piling slides all the way into the ground. They move the crane to pick up the next piling and the first one starts to float back up out of the ground. The supervisor calls his boss, the boss calls the Superdome Commission offices, and they pick up their equipment and people. They forfeit the penalty clause and revoke the contract. They knew they would go bankrupt to finish the contract because it would have taken two or three times the equipment and maybe 5 to 10 times as many pilings as they had estimated.

When you drive pilings in our area, you need to have at least two pile drivers. One drives while the other sets up the next piling to put on top of the previous one. As soon as the first driver is done he rotates the rig away while the other driver rotates in with a ready piling. It is almost like a ballet to watch the coordinated efforts of two giant pile drivers down here. The goal here is not to hit bedrock (because you almost can't), but to put enough pilings down to "float" the heavy stuff based on the bouyancy of a vertical stack of pilings. And of course, the "soupiest" soil is closest to the river or the lake where the water tables are highest so that is where you need the most pilings.

For that reason, building a luxury apartment complex on the river side of the levee is highly unlikely, though some apartments do front the River Road on the outside of the levees. When I was a kid, my neighborhood abutted the levees. I used to walk about a half of a block to get to the levee and hike for exercise. (And to take wildlife pictures - lots of water fowl in the area.) At night I could hear the propellers on the ocean-going tankers and freighters. I could tell by the sound whether they were loaded or empty because the ones riding higher in the water made a "slapping" sound or "splashing" sound whereas the ones riding lower just hummed and rumbled.

You told me they were the levees to keep the water back, the ones that didn't work in the hurricane debacle.
Just for clarification, I would have said those levees were LIKE the ones that failed. No river levee failed with a major breach that I recall but a half-dozen drainage canal levees DID fail badly at a time when rainfall was extreme. One of the company's night computer operators had an apartment across the 17th Street canal that breached and flooded what we call the Lakeview subdivision. He said it shook his apartment like an earthquake and the noise was horrendous. (He lost no property though due to flooding he had trouble getting in and out of there for a while.) The link is to a Wikipedia article and it includes an aerial shot of that location.


Most of the time we pump water into the lake because it has an outlet to the eastern end, called the Rigolets Pass. No problem to put large amounts of water in the lake other than it screws up certain types of fishing. From Lake Ponchartrain any water empties into Lake Borgne, which some folks think should be called Bay Borgne. Me? Don't care, I'm not that picky and the maps call it a lake at the moment. From Lake Borgne, the excess water directly empties into the Gulf of Mexico. The drainage from Lake Ponchartrain to the Gulf of Mexico is thus unimpeded by land. But storm surge can (and in the case of Katrina, DID) reverse the normal flow patterns through wind pressure.

What happened in Katrina was a multi-whammy. Some drainage canals were under extreme stress and failed. In other cases, such as nearer my home, the drainage canals weren't working right because the pumps had failed. Nobody was there to restart them, because the employees were released to head to the north shore of Lake Ponchartrain, which is slightly higher. The drainage canals, being INSIDE the levee system, don't themselves have levees. So the water just rose up from the canals and flooded the streets. To a level that at our house translated to about two feet of water inside the house. Took them three WEEKS to get the pumps running and because of the levees, you can't drain the canals UNLESS the pumps are running to lift the water over the levees.
 

Tera

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 20:43
Joined
Feb 2, 2019
Messages
1,056
What happened to the wall? Still building?
 

Steve R.

Retired
Local time
Today, 07:43
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
2,038
What happened to the wall? Still building?
Yes. I'm not a fan of the border wall. But the fact that one is being built demonstrates that the ability of the US President to have illegal entrants into the US removed is the result of our politicians not supporting effective border control. In theory, this issue was resolved in 1986.

As another quick historical aside. Programs to promote civil rights were passed into law in the 1960s. Yet here we are, were a very vocal tyranical minority is actually promoting racism under the Orwellian style claim of ending racism.

video clip: https://www.cbp.gov/border-security/along-us-borders/border-wall-system



20200616edsuc-a_s878x574.jpg
 

Steve R.

Retired
Local time
Today, 07:43
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
2,038
Particularly disturbing was the image of the Democrats who have embellished themselves with African garb. When it comes to images Democrats have no problems with screaming "cultural appropriation" and racism for symbols they don't approve of, yet they will grovel in "cultural appropriation" as a means of pandering for the vote.

The image below ironically came almost immediately after the Democrats condemned Trump for his bible photo-op. Democrats have no shame. They also must believe that the electorate can't link these two events together to discern the utter corruption of the Democrats. It is unfortunate that the electorate does not reject Democrats at the voting booth on the simple basis of disgraceful pandering for the vote.

 
Last edited:

Uncle Gizmo

Nifty Access Guy
Staff member
Local time
Today, 12:43
Joined
Jul 9, 2003
Messages
11,626
Ah! Now we know what Elon is planning, tunnels to undermine the "wall"..

I wonder, if Elon has been approached by "Hector Salamanca"..
 

The_Doc_Man

Happy Retired Curmudgeon
Local time
Today, 06:43
Joined
Feb 28, 2001
Messages
17,009
I am not about to say that the wall is going to be effective. The problem with static walls throughout history is that they never worked. Hadrian's Wall, the Great Wall of China, the Maginot Line - three big-name cases of static wall defenses that proved porous. They failed for different reasons, perhaps, but they have in common that they didn't keep out those that they were intended to block.

We have the problem that, on a global scale, the USA is an "attractive nuisance." This is the legal language that in the USA relates to having a feature on your property that causes people to attempt to get to it. That phrase is most commonly used when you have a swimming pool in your back yard and suddenly EVERYONE from many streets away is your friend, even people you don't know.

They do their best to get where they weren't actually invited. You have all sorts of bad things happen, such as children drowning in your pool, or strangers diving in and peeing in your pool, plus increased rate of spreading disease due to higher localized population density. A tall fence and warning signs are the preferred method for the local problem. The border wall is a partial defense for the global problem. But it is acknowledged that attractive nuisances can only be partially blocked from abuse by intruders.
 

Steve R.

Retired
Local time
Today, 07:43
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
2,038
Static defenses never work. There is always a way to circumvent a static defense.

Static defenses, in terms of illegal entry, are pointless. Once someone gains entry into the US, they can't be deported anyway based on existing laws and the failure of political will.

The solution, as I see it anyway, would to have a proactive program of immediate deportation deportation for any illegal entrant into the US, wherever they may be in the country (US). Regretfully the ability of those managing entrance into the US has been severely curtailed under a variety of excuses to the point that someone who is here illegally essentially can't be deported.

This (inability to act) is now affecting regular law enforcement in a serious way. We are seeing the emergence of de-fund the police efforts, eliminating cash bail requirements, and what appears to be political decisions to prevent the police from actually protecting property and businesses. Moreover, there is the emergence of the "Ferguson effect" where police are increasingly cautious to act under the possibility that they will be unjustly prosecuted for their actions.
 
Last edited:
Local time
Today, 04:43
Joined
May 22, 2010
Messages
2,190
They are a deterrent at best.

Try climbing Nancy Pelosi's wall. You will be staring down the barrel of the second amendment pretty quickly. Regardless of race color or creed.
 

NauticalGent

CopyPaster of the First Order
Local time
Today, 13:43
Joined
Apr 27, 2015
Messages
2,892
I think the best way to deal with this is to deny non-citizens any benefits that come with citizenship. Remove the lure and the fish will quit biting.
 

Steve R.

Retired
Local time
Today, 07:43
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
2,038
I think the best way to deal with this is to deny non-citizens any benefits that come with citizenship. Remove the lure and the fish will quit biting.
This should be part of any immigration solution, but as with any solution, there will be loop-holes.

What about a non-citizen woman who gives birth to a baby that is automatically a citizen. Shouldn't she get governmental assistance? (The law needs to be clarified to eliminate the granting of automatic citizenship at birth when the woman is a non-citizen). One of the claims that could be made is that the non-citizen mother is taking care of a US citizen, therefore the mother should receive assistance and be allowed to remain in the US. After all, you can't deport the citizen child.

Somewhat more difficult to incorporate into a solution concerns welfare payments. Here we get into dissecting federal and state laws. If a state wants to give welfare money (collected by the state through taxation) to a non-citizen, there is nothing wrong with that. As a state's right issue, this would also apply to other state actions that are a benefit to non-citizens, such as driver licenses, professional licenses and so on. The federal government, to a degree, is out-of-the-picture. Theoretically, state's could adopt laws and policies that do not allow non-citizens to receive state governmental assistance. The obvious concern; too many states are purposely granting non-citizens equivalent rights to citizens, making citizenship essentially meaningless.

The federal government however is in-the-picture when it gives the states grant monies. The complication with granting state's federal money is that the origin of that money becomes "muddled" (co-mingling). Theoretically, the federal government can mandate that a state can not disperse federal funds to non-citizens. Unfortunately, the will of the politicians at the federal level to impose such restrictions seems absent.
 
Last edited:

The_Doc_Man

Happy Retired Curmudgeon
Local time
Today, 06:43
Joined
Feb 28, 2001
Messages
17,009
The will of politicians at the federal level is to get re-elected. If they think the bleeding heart types will vote for them if they are nice to illegals then they will be nice to illegals.
 
Local time
Today, 04:43
Joined
May 22, 2010
Messages
2,190
How to shift Two stick 6+4 Spicer Transmission Peterbilt 359

Skip to 6:12 if you just want to see him shift.

 

Micron

AWF VIP
Local time
Today, 07:43
Joined
Oct 20, 2018
Messages
3,113
Interesting. First vid, channel logo is 8V92. I wonder if that means anything to anyone else besides me? That engine probably went out of production around 1996 so the truck in that vid ain't new!
P.S. - the turbo isn't screaming, it's whistling. Could be an intake or boost side leak, or compressor wheel issue, or it's over-boosted, or... Anyway, 3 sticks is just nuts. I did learn how to shift a Fuller RTO915 and RTO913 in case that impresses anyone.
 
Local time
Today, 04:43
Joined
May 22, 2010
Messages
2,190
You can tell by his relaxed hands and arms his been doing this for a while.

Real truck drivers don't use their windshield wipers, he looks around the drops. 🤣
 
Last edited:

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top Bottom