4 ms·

I mean the boat is located 90 minutes from Cairo. It’s not easy but Cairo has skyscrapers and a construction industry. Of course there is the “what is physical

by rtpg 6y ago

I mean the boat is located 90 minutes from Cairo. It’s not easy but Cairo has skyscrapers and a construction industry. Of course there is the “what is physically possible” and “what is politically doable” and there maybe a bit of a gulf there.

yellowapple 6y ago
I mean, heavy-lifting choppers are something that I'd also expect the average NATO or (former) Warsaw Pact nation to have, and it's arguably in their best interests to make sure a key shipping route is operational (and in Egypt's best interests to accept any help possible). Hell, Israel's close by, and I'm pretty sure they've got this sort of airpower in droves and are probably pretty heavily reliant on the Suez Canal; maybe instead of fighting with Egypt the Israelis could, say, pitch in and foster some good will? And further, it'll make up for the time when fighting between the two countries caused a Suez Canal blockage ;)
- lhorie 6y ago
  I mean, physical existence of a chopper vs its viability for this specific operation are very different things. Think of it this way: you may have a car, and you may even be familiar with installing and maneuvering a standard size tow. But that doesn't mean that I can just ask you out of the blue to come over and tow a prefab house that you've never handled before, then ask you to do it again a dozen times over (and on the double), and expect everything to go peachy.
  - eptcyka 6y ago
    FYI, it is in fact not necessary to start a comment with "I mean".
    - joshjdr 6y ago
      Nor “FYI”.
    - yellowapple 6y ago
      I mean, regardless of necessity it ain't like it hinders parsing of the comment, FYI.
  - yellowapple 6y ago
    Right, but in this context we're talking about countries with helicopters specifically intended to haul heavy things like shipping containers (and tanks, and trucks, and military base prefabs, and stuff). Keeping the analogy, it's like if you bought a Ford F-650 and your neighbors need help pulling some broken down semi (that's blocking the whole road) off the street in front of their house. And maybe you and your neighbor ain't on the best of terms, but you decide to at least offer to help anyway, because you need to use that street, too, and what was the point of buying that big pickup truck if you ain't gonna do truck stuff? In this case, you're Israel, your neighbor's Egypt, the street is the Suez Canal, the semi is a giant container ship, and your F-650 is about 23 CH-53-derived heavy-lifting helicopters.
    - NoOneNew 6y ago
      Average expected teu is 30k lbs on a ship. A 20ft container is already close to the redline of these helicopters on the average. You cant max these vehicles for more than an hour or so without needing repairs. A 40ft container cant even be considered. Nearly all containers are packed to the brim to ink out max goods shipped. The whole chopper idea is just a movie fantasy for this. Real life is not pleasant to armchair theory.
      - yellowapple 6y ago
        > Average expected teu is 30k lbs on a ship Yeah, average. That doesn't mean that every container - or even most containers - are loaded to that weight per TEU. Indeed, it's highly likely that they're not; the heavy containers are going to be toward the bottom, and the lighter containers are going to be toward the top. And there are probably a lot more light containers than heavy ones, because... > Nearly all containers are packed to the brim Volumetrically, yes. Not necessarily in terms of weight. Indeed, unless you're shipping gold ingots or something, "max goods shipped" necessarily means that you're more likely to run into volumetric limits first. Not to mention that the max container weight in practice is usually a fair bit lower than the ISO spec, since those containers have to get to their destination - which means traveling on roads and railways with their own weight limits (both for the whole vehicle and per-axle), and on vehicles that themselves are part of that limit (and themselves have limits of their own). And further, a container can only have so much weight stacked on top of it. > Real life is not pleasant to armchair theory. Indeed it is not, which is why when it comes to the containers themselves I'm speaking from experience as a professional in the supply chain / logistics field :) (But yes, admittedly my knowledge on military helicopters is less substantial, so if there's someone who's not an armchair theorist on that topic who wants to chime in, that'd be most welcome)
- chx 6y ago
  I am afraid you underestimate the weight of those TEUs and overestimate the capabilities of the Sikorsky CH-53 (which is what Israel has). That chopper has a max payload of 32000 lbs and a 40ft TEU has a max gross weight of 67500 lbs. Maybe you get lucky... but you'd need a lot of luck. Also, if they find this is feasible, you don't necessarily need Israel to get a few Sikorsky choppers there, at least the Incirlik air base must have some and the Sikorsky definitely has the operational range to cross over there on its own, Iran certainly has some, the Eisenhower last I checked a few weeks ago was near Italy and surely that group has at least a few Sea Dragons...
  - yellowapple 6y ago
    > That chopper has a max payload of 32000 lbs and a 40ft TEU has a max gross weight of 67500 lbs. Maybe you get lucky... but you'd need a lot of luck. 1. This assumes that the containers are actually loaded to their maximum gross weight. That doesn't seem likely; you're much more likely to run out of volume first - even if you're deliberately "optimizing" for as much weight in those containers as possible. 1a. This assumes that the heavy containers are at the top rather than the bottom, which would be backwards from how containers are supposed to be stacked (or even allowed to be stacked per your average safety guidelines around center of mass, stack limits, etc.). 2. This assumes that multiple helicopters can't work in tandem (which they can, from what I understand). So yeah, even if there are some containers that are too heavy to safely unload via helicopter, I strongly suspect that quite a few - most, probably - of those containers could be readily unloaded. And further, even if that ain't enough to get the ship moving again, it's at least a good start. > the Eisenhower last I checked a few weeks ago was near Italy and surely that group has at least a few Sea Dragons... Even better.
    - overscore 6y ago
      > 2. This assumes that multiple helicopters can't work in tandem (which they can, from what I understand). Do you mean two helicopters carrying a single slung load? That is not practised anywhere. Tandem loads in military terms refer to a single helicopter carrying two slung loads, one in front of the other. As far as I know, none of the helicopters mentioned above are rated for sling operations with 40ft containers.
saagarjha 6y ago
I think there's a canal there, actually.
- jebeng 6y ago
  There once was a canal there...now Evergreen Gulf. Or Gulf of Evergreen perhaps.

by rtpg 6y ago

yellowapple 6y ago

I mean, heavy-lifting choppers are something that I'd also expect the average NATO or (former) Warsaw Pact nation to have, and it's arguably in their best interests to make sure a key shipping route is operational (and in Egypt's best interests to accept any help possible). Hell, Israel's close by, and I'm pretty sure they've got this sort of airpower in droves and are probably pretty heavily reliant on the Suez Canal; maybe instead of fighting with Egypt the Israelis could, say, pitch in and foster some good will? And further, it'll make up for the time when fighting between the two countries caused a Suez Canal blockage ;)

lhorie 6y ago
I mean, physical existence of a chopper vs its viability for this specific operation are very different things. Think of it this way: you may have a car, and you may even be familiar with installing and maneuvering a standard size tow. But that doesn't mean that I can just ask you out of the blue to come over and tow a prefab house that you've never handled before, then ask you to do it again a dozen times over (and on the double), and expect everything to go peachy.
- eptcyka 6y ago
  FYI, it is in fact not necessary to start a comment with "I mean".
  - joshjdr 6y ago
    Nor “FYI”.
  - yellowapple 6y ago
    I mean, regardless of necessity it ain't like it hinders parsing of the comment, FYI.
- yellowapple 6y ago
  Right, but in this context we're talking about countries with helicopters specifically intended to haul heavy things like shipping containers (and tanks, and trucks, and military base prefabs, and stuff). Keeping the analogy, it's like if you bought a Ford F-650 and your neighbors need help pulling some broken down semi (that's blocking the whole road) off the street in front of their house. And maybe you and your neighbor ain't on the best of terms, but you decide to at least offer to help anyway, because you need to use that street, too, and what was the point of buying that big pickup truck if you ain't gonna do truck stuff? In this case, you're Israel, your neighbor's Egypt, the street is the Suez Canal, the semi is a giant container ship, and your F-650 is about 23 CH-53-derived heavy-lifting helicopters.
  - NoOneNew 6y ago
    Average expected teu is 30k lbs on a ship. A 20ft container is already close to the redline of these helicopters on the average. You cant max these vehicles for more than an hour or so without needing repairs. A 40ft container cant even be considered. Nearly all containers are packed to the brim to ink out max goods shipped. The whole chopper idea is just a movie fantasy for this. Real life is not pleasant to armchair theory.
    - yellowapple 6y ago
      > Average expected teu is 30k lbs on a ship Yeah, average. That doesn't mean that every container - or even most containers - are loaded to that weight per TEU. Indeed, it's highly likely that they're not; the heavy containers are going to be toward the bottom, and the lighter containers are going to be toward the top. And there are probably a lot more light containers than heavy ones, because... > Nearly all containers are packed to the brim Volumetrically, yes. Not necessarily in terms of weight. Indeed, unless you're shipping gold ingots or something, "max goods shipped" necessarily means that you're more likely to run into volumetric limits first. Not to mention that the max container weight in practice is usually a fair bit lower than the ISO spec, since those containers have to get to their destination - which means traveling on roads and railways with their own weight limits (both for the whole vehicle and per-axle), and on vehicles that themselves are part of that limit (and themselves have limits of their own). And further, a container can only have so much weight stacked on top of it. > Real life is not pleasant to armchair theory. Indeed it is not, which is why when it comes to the containers themselves I'm speaking from experience as a professional in the supply chain / logistics field :) (But yes, admittedly my knowledge on military helicopters is less substantial, so if there's someone who's not an armchair theorist on that topic who wants to chime in, that'd be most welcome)
chx 6y ago
I am afraid you underestimate the weight of those TEUs and overestimate the capabilities of the Sikorsky CH-53 (which is what Israel has). That chopper has a max payload of 32000 lbs and a 40ft TEU has a max gross weight of 67500 lbs. Maybe you get lucky... but you'd need a lot of luck. Also, if they find this is feasible, you don't necessarily need Israel to get a few Sikorsky choppers there, at least the Incirlik air base must have some and the Sikorsky definitely has the operational range to cross over there on its own, Iran certainly has some, the Eisenhower last I checked a few weeks ago was near Italy and surely that group has at least a few Sea Dragons...
- yellowapple 6y ago
  > That chopper has a max payload of 32000 lbs and a 40ft TEU has a max gross weight of 67500 lbs. Maybe you get lucky... but you'd need a lot of luck. 1. This assumes that the containers are actually loaded to their maximum gross weight. That doesn't seem likely; you're much more likely to run out of volume first - even if you're deliberately "optimizing" for as much weight in those containers as possible. 1a. This assumes that the heavy containers are at the top rather than the bottom, which would be backwards from how containers are supposed to be stacked (or even allowed to be stacked per your average safety guidelines around center of mass, stack limits, etc.). 2. This assumes that multiple helicopters can't work in tandem (which they can, from what I understand). So yeah, even if there are some containers that are too heavy to safely unload via helicopter, I strongly suspect that quite a few - most, probably - of those containers could be readily unloaded. And further, even if that ain't enough to get the ship moving again, it's at least a good start. > the Eisenhower last I checked a few weeks ago was near Italy and surely that group has at least a few Sea Dragons... Even better.
  - overscore 6y ago
    > 2. This assumes that multiple helicopters can't work in tandem (which they can, from what I understand). Do you mean two helicopters carrying a single slung load? That is not practised anywhere. Tandem loads in military terms refer to a single helicopter carrying two slung loads, one in front of the other. As far as I know, none of the helicopters mentioned above are rated for sling operations with 40ft containers.

saagarjha 6y ago

I think there's a canal there, actually.

jebeng 6y ago
There once was a canal there...now Evergreen Gulf. Or Gulf of Evergreen perhaps.