In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

WOW!!!!!

n/an/a Member Posts: 168,427
edited May 2009 in General Discussion
Under the post of "Aint that grand"... I said my hubby was fantastic.. with a heart of gold and as big as Texas... well I am re-phrasing that to be as big as North America....

On Saturday, we went to the flea market, and had a blast as usual... We got back to the car and he said to me... "I bought you something for your birthday... Now my birthday isnt till the middle of February, so he had me wondering what the heck it was all about... he handed me a black velvet cloth...and in the cloth was

a Colt .380 Government Model, Series 80.....It is so totally sweet... and so is he....
The pic doesnt do this justice as the gun is MINT... yes.. MINT... I dont think there has been 10 rounds shot thru it.... the medallion is bright gold in color....
I couldnt have asked for a more wonderful gift... He is one in a million... that sweet ole' biker dude...my rough tough creme puff.... Love ya baby..and thank you from the bottom of my heart....
Colt.380.jpg

Cute_skunk.gif

Lil' Stinker's Opinion
«1

Comments

  • n/an/a Member Posts: 168,427
    edited November -1
    THIS IS ABSOLUTELY INCREDIBLE. THESE YOUNG GIRLS WERE PHENOMENAL! Watch as the reaction of the guys in the audience escalates. In the beginning, they were just OK, but as the girls performed.....the audience went WILD with cheers.

    THIS IS ABSOLUTELY AMAZING. JUST WHEN I THOUGHT I HAD SEEM EVERYTHING THEY CAME UP WITH A CAN YOU TOP THIS ROUTINE.

    PERHAPS THE BEST PERFORMANCE I HAVE EVER SEEN..................

    I DID NOT SEE A SINGLE MISCUE IN THE ENTIRE PERFORMANCE



    Half time show at this year's Army-Navy basketball Game - Only the young could do this. CLICK ON LINK BELOW.


    http://tinyurl.com/y9rxtr7


    fixed it - sorry!

    Edit: Same link...just Tiny. [:D][;)]
  • n/an/a Member Posts: 168,427
    edited November -1
    Dont know if I could be on either level...


    showletterau1.jpg?





    Even after you see it, it is still hard to believe !

    Water Bridge in Germany .... What a feat!

    Six years, 500 million euros, 918 meters long.......now this is engineering!

    This is a channel-bridge over the River Elbe and joins the former East and West Germany , as part of the unification project. It is located in the city of Magdeburg , near Berlin . The photo was taken on the day of inauguration. To those who appreciate engineering projects, here's a puzzle for you armchair engineers and physicists. Did that bridge have to be designed to withstand the additional weight of ship and barge traffic, or just the weight of the water?




    Taken from wikopedia..

    The 918-metre Magdeburg Water Bridge (German: Wasserstra?enkreuz) is a navigable aqueduct water bridge in Germany, completed in October 2003. It bridges the River Elbe to connect two important German shipping canals; the Elbe-Havel Canal and the Midland Canal. The canals meet near Magdeburg on opposite sides of the river and lead to German's industrial heartland in the Ruhr Valley.


    Canal engineers had first conceived of joining the two waterways as far back as 1919, and by 1938 the Rothensee boat lift and bridge anchors were in place, but construction was postponed during World War II. After the Cold War split Germany, the project was put on hold indefinitely by the East German government.


    With the reunification of Germany and major establishment of water transport routes made the Water Bridge a priority again. Work started in 1997, with construction taking six years and costing _500 million. The water bridge now connects Berlin's inland harbour network with the ports along the Rhine river. The aqueduct's trough structure incorporates 24,000 tonnes of steel and 68,000 cubic meters of concrete.

    Until the opening of the water bridge in October 2003, ships moving between the Midland Canal and the Elbe-Havel Canal used a 12-kilometre, through the Rothensee lock, along the River Elbe and back up Niegripp lock.
  • n/an/a Member Posts: 168,427
    edited November -1
    01.50 hrs here..me and the missus have been having a few irish coffees tonight...a bad move on my part mixing pain pills and whisky[B)] i`ll suffer tomorrow no doubt...oh well, it`s been fun...talk to you all tomorrow afternoon[:D]
  • VinhlongVet71VinhlongVet71 Member Posts: 4,605
    edited November -1
    Its called a locke Beth,,, used for tranfering large ships from one large body of water to another large body of water that probably have different elevations,,, similar to the panama canal.quote:Originally posted by BlackRoses
    Dont know if I could be on either level...


    showletterau1.jpg?





    Even after you see it, it is still hard to believe !

    Water Bridge in Germany .... What a feat!

    Six years, 500 million euros, 918 meters long.......now this is engineering!

    This is a channel-bridge over the River Elbe and joins the former East and West Germany , as part of the unification project. It is located in the city of Magdeburg , near Berlin . The photo was taken on the day of inauguration. To those who appreciate engineering projects, here's a puzzle for you armchair engineers and physicists. Did that bridge have to be designed to withstand the additional weight of ship and barge traffic, or just the weight of the water?
  • D1D1 Member Posts: 11,412
    edited November -1
    Whatever it's called, it's awesome. At first I thought it was a photoshop, but it ain't. Cool pic.
  • wlfmn323wlfmn323 Member Posts: 4,712
    edited November -1
    thats pretty awesome, it raises many questions in my mind tho.
    1, i take it the channel used to flo INTO the river?
    2, how do they get the water to flow up hill to the top of the "bridge"
    3, that engineering question is going to bother me for a a while,
    i want to think just the water weight, however the boat would press down on the water adding weight, but it would displace water as well. so i will have to do some research, or go nuts that seems the only choice.
  • e8gme8gm Member Posts: 1,277 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    To answer the original question, the bridge only had to be designed to carry the weight of the water. In order for the boats to float they displace the amount of water equal to their weight.

    I think.
  • River RatRiver Rat Member Posts: 9,022
    edited November -1
    You're correct, E8! Beat me to it. That's why a vessel's weight is referred to as "displacement."
  • tomahawktomahawk Member Posts: 11,826
    edited November -1
    looks like an oversize log flume at six fags...how are ya BR..did you finally get all you sentences wrote? "I will not be mouthy to a modulater ever again"[;)][:D]
  • slipgateslipgate Member Posts: 12,741
    edited November -1
    I do not think that is correct. The weight of the boats is also part of the total. What you are saying is that the mass of the boats goes away, as we all know is impossible. If you had this on a smaller scale, say a 3 gallon open bucket. Put it on a scale, then add a bunch of baseballs, the weight will increase with each baseball the actual weight of the baseball.

    In fact, due to wave action and the bobbing up and down of the ships, the downward weight of the ships would increase on the transition between down and up.
  • mousemouse Member Posts: 3,624
    edited November -1
    Yes that is truly incredible. What did it make me think? It
    made me think of how much blood our country has given to nations
    that now are prosperus in comparison. Our infrastructure is
    crumbling.[:(]
  • Saxon PigSaxon Pig Member Posts: 754 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Romans did it 2,000 years ago. Not as grand, but it was 2,000 years ago.

    http://www.avignon-et-provence.com/tourisme/pont-du-gard/img/pont-du-gard-12.jpg
  • Tailgunner1954Tailgunner1954 Member Posts: 7,734 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by slipgate
    I do not think that is correct. The weight of the boats is also part of the total. What you are saying is that the mass of the boats goes away, as we all know is impossible. If you had this on a smaller scale, say a 3 gallon open bucket. Put it on a scale, then add a bunch of baseballs, the weight will increase with each baseball the actual weight of the baseball.
    Put a hole in the side of your bucket (the channel on both sides of the bridge) than add your floating weights. Same but different, thing happens if you fill a glass with icecubes and than fill it to the rim with water. Note that the ice cubes are above the top of the glass? What will the water level be when the ice melts, lower, overflowing, or the same?
  • Colt SuperColt Super Member Posts: 31,007
    edited November -1
    Water + boat = total weight supported.

    Just because it is floating weight doesn't mean that it is vanished weight.

    Doug
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 23,637 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by slipgate
    I do not think that is correct. The weight of the boats is also part of the total. What you are saying is that the mass of the boats goes away, as we all know is impossible. If you had this on a smaller scale, say a 3 gallon open bucket. Put it on a scale, then add a bunch of baseballs, the weight will increase with each baseball the actual weight of the baseball.
    Baseballs float. If you had the bucket completely full at the beginning, the weight would remain the same. If the bucket was half full, the weight would increase until the water level reached the brim, and then it would remain constant.

    The canal structure has to be designed for a certain water level. So long as the water is maintained at that level, anything that floats can be put in it and the load will be constant.
    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • screwobamascrewobama Member Posts: 625
    edited November -1
    Just the weight of the water. The weight of the boat is not relevant because the boat will displace the amount of water equal to the weight of the boat up to a certain point.
  • JamesRKJamesRK Member Posts: 25,670 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    First time I've seen or heard of this thing. Impressive to say the least. Yeah, the Romans had their aqueducts a couple thousand years ago but they were just for moving water from one place to another.

    This thing might qualify as a loch or a canal, but it doesn't really look like either to me. They might have to come up with a new word to describe this thing. I don't know how it works but my guess is it uses a series of lochs to move vessels up to and down from it. Whatever they call it, it is amazing. I'd hate to have to navigate it.

    The first question which comes to my mind is "what are they moving to make it worth half a billion euros?"
    The road to hell is paved with COMPROMISE.
  • JamesRKJamesRK Member Posts: 25,670 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    The weight of a boat is so insignificant it couldn't possibly matter in a structure that size. Now if they let a ship go through it ..

    I think Don McManus and screwobama have it right. When you talk about a ship's tonnage, you are talking about the volume of water it displaces.
    The road to hell is paved with COMPROMISE.
  • Marc1301Marc1301 Member Posts: 31,895 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I see some wet baseballs coming up![;)]
    "Beam me up Scotty, there's no intelligent life down here." - William Shatner
  • 1fisher1fisher Member Posts: 1,012 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    I think that you have to figure in the weight of the boats due to the long, narrow shape of the canal bridge. Yes, the boat displaces the same amount of water, but that water would have to be displaced outside of the bridge for there to be no effect on it's structure.
    Don McManus basically has it right - if the water level in the bridge stays constant, there is no change in weight. But - I think that the shape of the bridge will not allow that displaced water to get out the ends easily, so the water level in the bridge will actually rise as a boat passes through (increasing the weight on the structure.
  • slipgateslipgate Member Posts: 12,741
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by 1fisher
    I think that you have to figure in the weight of the boats due to the long, narrow shape of the canal bridge. Yes, the boat displaces the same amount of water, but that water would have to be displaced outside of the bridge for there to be no effect on it's structure.
    Don McManus basically has it right - if the water level in the bridge stays constant, there is no change in weight. But - I think that the shape of the bridge will not allow that displaced water to get out the ends easily, so the water level in the bridge will actually rise as a boat passes through (increasing the weight on the structure.


    How do you figure that the weight will remain the same as long as the water level does? A boat and water do not have the same density, therefore they have difference weights.

    As far as the ships being insignificant, this is also not true. The boats pictured are undoubtedly 30-50 tons. That is significant.

    To all those that think the boats weight dissapears; this is more a question of common sense than a question of physics. Obviously their mass and hence weight DO matter and DO figure into the equation. The weight measured under the bridge were it on a scale will increase exactly per whatever weight is added to the water. Are you saying that if the boats sunk, THEN their weight would be added because they were not floating?

    Water does not have magical properties as some of you apparently think. It is not like filling a balloon with helium. Mass is mass and gravity acts upon mass.

    Again, this is a question of common sense!
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 23,637 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by slipgate
    Again, this is a question of common sense!

    Obviously not common enough.
    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • mateomasfeomateomasfeo Member Posts: 27,143
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by BlackRoses
    Dont know if I could be on either level...



    Really?

    You on the level here?
  • n/an/a Member Posts: 168,427
    edited November -1
    The bridge, with lockes on either end of it, is an impressive sight....and absolutely beautiful....


    quote:It
    made me think of how much blood our country has given to nations
    that now are prosperus in comparison.

    This country is falling because of our own greed, our own stupidity....its not another country's fault...
  • JamesRKJamesRK Member Posts: 25,670 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by slipgate
    As far as the ships being insignificant, this is also not true. The boats pictured are undoubtedly 30-50 tons. That is significant.
    The boats pictured are not boats. They are SHIPS.
    The road to hell is paved with COMPROMISE.
  • mateomasfeomateomasfeo Member Posts: 27,143
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by JamesRK

    The boats pictured are not boats. They are SHIPS.





    Hey you old salty dog, give me the definition of ships and boats. I'm all ready with ya on pistols and revolvers...
  • FrancFFrancF Member Posts: 35,278 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Leave it to the German's. With there education standards in building and engineering It's no surprise they love a challenge.[:)]
  • ontherocksontherocks Member Posts: 58 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Some people :-|

    Boat displaces water, water disperses over X amount of area. The smaller the area the higher the water table.

    Go to a marina, jump in the water and toss a scale under any boat you wish. If you really wanted to see where the weight went you would have to monitor water level.
  • JamesRKJamesRK Member Posts: 25,670 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    The level of water in the canal shouldn't change. It probably works similar to the Panama canal. The ship pulls into the first loch. when the water level in that lock is equal to the next lock in the series, the doors are opened and the ship pulls into the next lock, and so forth until it gets into the last loch. The last loch is filled with water until it is equal to the level of the canal and the doors are opened and the ship proceeds on a level plane into the canal.
    The road to hell is paved with COMPROMISE.
  • select-fireselect-fire Member Posts: 69,446 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Pretty cool.. now where are the bikini's?
  • JamesRKJamesRK Member Posts: 25,670 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by mateomasfeo
    Hey you old salty dog, give me the definition of ships and boats. I'm all ready with ya on pistols and revolvers...
    Some vessels are in a gray area and could go either way, and in some cases it's a matter of semantics, such as submarines and patrol gunboats, but a generally accepted definition of a boat is a vessel which can be loaded onto another vessel.

    Most seagoing blue-water vessels are ships.
    The road to hell is paved with COMPROMISE.
  • glynglyn Member Posts: 5,698 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Its a water bridge not a lock.There are several in europe and in the UK altho much smaller,most of them built in Victorias era when the canal era was prevelant.A lock is different,ship moves into a contained area,gates close behind it and water is added or taken out to raise the vessel or lower it.As for weight distribution,depends on the vessel,if a completely empty hull was floated thru there then the water displacement would weigher heavier than the ship,but if it is heavily loaded then it probably weighs more than displacement.
  • allen griggsallen griggs Member Posts: 35,509 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Deutschland uber Alles!
  • JamesRKJamesRK Member Posts: 25,670 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    At the risk of sounding like a wiseass, if the ship weighs more than the displacement it will sink.
    The road to hell is paved with COMPROMISE.
  • machine gun moranmachine gun moran Member Posts: 5,198
    edited November -1
    The water will displace out the ends of the viaduct, and the weight supported will remain the same. There is no such thing as a static heap of water which remains alongside a barge, or in front or in back of it. Water levels itself. The only increase in effect is from a fast-moving vessel, which will cause a rise in pressure around the hull, and is how pressure-sensitive fuses on mines work.
  • e8gme8gm Member Posts: 1,277 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    If a ship pulls into a lock such as the Panama Canal and the gate is closed behind it, the weight of the ship and water are a constant. If it were physically possible to remove the ship from the lock once it was full would the remaining water weigh the same? No. The weight of the ship displaced the missing weight.

    Fill a five gallon bucket to the rim, place it on a scale and weigh it. Then float a base ball on the water, the displaced water flows over the rim and out of the bucket. The bucket's total weight remains the same because the baseball weighs the same as the water that flowed over the rim. If the base ball sinks then the weight of the bucket will increase because the ball weighed more than the water it displaced.
  • mousemouse Member Posts: 3,624
    edited November -1
    BlackRoses; I didn't mean that it was any other countrys fault.
    Was just making an observation on the contrast I've been noticing
    lately.
  • RtWngExtrmstRtWngExtrmst Member Posts: 7,456
    edited November -1
    The amount of water displaced by the boat would be distributed over the length of the canal. Not like the baseball in a bucket of water at all. In the bucket, adding a baseball increases the total weight by the weight of the baseball.
  • JamesRKJamesRK Member Posts: 25,670 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Some of us are trying to complicate what is a fairly simple thing which has been figured out by the engineers before we got there anyway.

    The water level in the canal or water bridge does not go up or down when a ship enters or leaves. A ship is not picked up and set into the canal or water bridge. It enters and leaves by a series of lochs where all water displaced by the ship is already displaced in the loch. The ship enters and leaves on a level plane with the same water displacement all the way.

    By the way, I make no claim to being an artist (unless somebody wants to buy some pictures). [:D]

    xxxxxx1.jpg

    xxxxxx2.jpg

    xxxxxx3.jpg

    xxxxxx4.jpg

    xxxxxx5.jpg

    xxxxxx6.jpg

    xxxxxx7.jpg

    xxxxxx8.jpg
    The road to hell is paved with COMPROMISE.
  • arraflipperarraflipper Member Posts: 1,255 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    The Hennepin Canal in central Illinois is 102 years old. It crosses a couple rivers and had aqueducts to float the barges over the river. Most of the barges were pulled by mules, and the canal was dug with mules pulling a dirt slip. If the levee broke there were water gates that would stand up from the flow of water rushing over them to seal the canal from draining out. No where as big or grand but it is still there 102 years latter.
Sign In or Register to comment.