A U.S. naval blockade of the Strait of Hormuz went into effect Monday at 10 a.m. EST at the direction of President Donald Trump, but in a matter of hours, the blockade was breached without incident by at least four Iran-linked vessels, BBC reported Tuesday.On Monday, Trump said that he had instructe...
So you think a ship that was moving at maybe 5 knots/hr instantly turned around and in less than 30 minutes accelerated past 50 knots/hr?
I don’t know where you’re getting any of that from. It was travelling at 8 knots before and after the turnaround. The bit in the animation where it slows and drifts almost due south is actually marinetraffic not having AIS data for that period so it just interpolates between the two known positions. Maybe I should have made that clearer.
That turnaround period is also close to
3.5(edit: 2.5) hours, not 30 minutes.According to the same data the ship is now close to the Strait of Hormuz that it passed through yesterday; it seems pretty clear it did not get where it wanted to go.
The fact that you are measuring speed in knots per hour invalidates your point.
Please use a correct measurement, and try again.
…that…that is the correct measurement
I think per hour is already a part of the definition of knot (hence 50 knots not per hour). I think they are just being pedantic.
I’m being accurate. “Knots” is “nautical miles per hour,” as you correctly described.
If we are being really pedantic. Knots is a measure of distance, and the fact that people have been using that wrong for several centuries does not turn a rope tied at one point into a time-changing object.
We’ve only been sailing for “several centuries.” How long was it a measure of distance before people started using it wrong?
People have been using knots for a few millennia.
So you think a ship that was moving at maybe 5 knots instantly turned around and in less than 30 minutes accelerated past 50 knots?
I find that reasonably unlikely, unless it is a naval ship. I don’t think cargo ships go that fast unless empty, and highly motivated. Possibly not even then.
Do we have a reliable source for this data?
Most naval vessels can do just over 30, if that. Cargo vessels spend most of their life below 10.
50 knots means there’s some fuckery afoot.
I was under the impression that navy ships could go much faster, but didn’t because of wear and fuel consumption. I recall hearing about 60 knots, but I wouldn’t place even a small bet on it.
Same for cargo ships, to a lesser extent. If an empty one felt a need to move, I’m sure they could get a little speed to them. But they aren’t built for it, and “saving money on fuel” is their prime directive.
Although, as someone noted elsewhere, there don’t seem to be any actual measurements of speed. They turned around, and cranked the throttle, but we don’t know how far they were going in either phase.
I’ve read claims that some nuclear aircraft carriers can go a lot faster than 30, but I suspect that’s bullshit.
There’s also a phenomenon known as hull speed, where a displacement hull vessel takes an exponential amount of power to go slightly faster once you hit it. They’re also not going to have an engine that’s massively more powerful than they need, just in case.
50 knots would outrun pretty much any large vessel on the planet.
Sure, but the gif doesn’t show 50 knots. The gif doesn’t show any speed actually, so I really don’t know where the 50 number comes from. But on the tracker the speed was 8.1 knots. Fast for a tanker, but totally believable.