|
SelenicMartian posted:OSHA from 1782. Is this some kind of record for rum fatalities? This was a little hard to understand how it was written, so I looked up the sinking for clarification. Apparently a lighter is a flat-bottomed barge. The captain realized that the ship was leaning over too far and ordered the guns rolled back to the side to even the ship out (they were rolled into the center of the hull initially so the ship would only slightly roll), but the lower deck gunports weren't properly secured and the crew aboard the lighter was trying to load barrels of rum onto the Royal George through them. Water rushed in through the open gunports before the ship could be evened out and it rolled over and sank.
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 13:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 17:49 |
|
|
That makes more sense than my interpretation, which was that the lighter crew was somehow loading so much rum onto the ship, unnoticed, that the weight of the rum was the straw breaking the camel’s back.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 14:05
|
|
|
"It's easier this way guv, we don't have to haul the barrels up so high"
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 14:42
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:That makes more sense than my interpretation, which was that the lighter crew was somehow loading so much rum onto the ship, unnoticed, that the weight of the rum was the straw breaking the camel’s back. The weight probably was a defining factor, as it kept the ship from evening out like they intended to do by rolling the cannons back into place and eventually enough water flooded in that they couldn't right the ship. Apparently the lighter actually kept the ship from sinking immediately, as it was caught underneath and shoved down into the water first. 900 people died in the sinking (including 600 women and 30 children). One of them was Rear-Admiral Richard Kempenfelt, who was using the Royal George as his flagship at the time; he was writing in his cabin and the rolling ship jammed the doors so he drowned. The captain on deck, Martin Waghorn, was thrown from the ship but rescued. The ensuing court martial officially declared that no individuals were responsible for the sinking, and instead decided that the ship was in a "general state of decay" and the hull must have broken under the weight of the cannons being rolled to one side. Modern interpretations put the blame on Lieutenant Philip Charles Durham, the officer of the watch at the time of the sinking, for allowing water to accumulate on the gundeck until so much of it was sloshing around (think carrying a 5 gallon tub of water and feeling the weight of the water shift it in your hands as it sloshes back and forth) that it compromised the stability.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 15:56
|
|
|
Just came across this oldie:
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 19:43
|
|
|
Eh she's got glasses on
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:That makes more sense than my interpretation, which was that the lighter crew was somehow loading so much rum onto the ship, unnoticed, that the weight of the rum was the straw breaking the camel’s back. Not knowing that a lighter was another boat I thought it meant that they were dumping rum over the side to lose weight, and the lower density of the alcohol affected the buoyancy of the boat enough take it past the point of no return. I mean that'd probably take a lot of rum, but we are talking about a military ship in the 1700s so it didn't seem entirely out of the question at first thought.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 20:19
|
|
|
moist turtleneck posted:Eh she's got glasses on You're actually supposed to wear safety glasses over your glasses, because normal glasses don't cover nearly enough to prevent little shards of metal from getting into your eye.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 23:16
|
|
|
A White Guy posted:You're actually supposed to wear safety glasses over your glasses, because normal glasses don't cover nearly enough to prevent little shards of metal from getting into your eye. At my work, we have side shields people can add to their glasses. The glasses are supposed to be safety rated, but nobody checks.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 23:42
|
|
|
If you squint hard the metal will catch in your eyelashes before getting to your eye
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 23:45
|
|
|
Safety Squints.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 23:51
|
|
|
A White Guy posted:You're actually supposed to wear safety glasses over your glasses, because normal glasses don't cover nearly enough to prevent little shards of metal from getting into your eye. So you are saying I could have metal eyes? METAL EYES!
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 23:53
|
|
|
My dad has metal eyes. Parts of the sclera have turned brown due to the fragments rusting.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 00:23
|
|
|
Burning_Monk posted:So you are saying I could have metal eyes? METAL EYES! Ive had metal splinters in my that started rusting before. Had to go to the Dr. and he picked them out with a hypodermic needle.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 01:42
|
|
|
JB50 posted:Ive had metal splinters in my that started rusting before. Had to go to the Dr. and he picked them out with a hypodermic needle. Must've been a quack since there's no dermis in the eyes!
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 01:44
|
|
|
JB50 posted:Ive had metal splinters in my that started rusting before. Had to go to the Dr. and he picked them out with a hypodermic needle. I had a friend that had a piece of metal stuck in his eye from using a file. You could see it sparkle when you pointed a flashlight at it. The doc used a scalpel to pick it out. My buddy said it was the most uncomfortable process ever. The doc used numbing drops so it didn't hurt, it was just freaky as hell. He always wore safety glasses for metalwork afterwards.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 02:47
|
|
|
I had a relative who showed up to church with suit jacket, dress shoes, shirt and tie, and their side shields still on. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 04:14
|
|
|
Three-Phase posted:I had a relative who showed up to church with suit jacket, dress shoes, shirt and tie, and their side shields still on. Look, man, those revivals can get pretty wild. Safety first.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 05:05
|
|
|
Code Jockey posted:This is amazing and if this violates OSHA, I don't want to be in compliance Did you miss the zillion times itt people share stories about how pallets are bloodthirsty murder devices? can you even imagine how many people probably became smears on the streets between cuts in that gif?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 08:08
|
|
|
Three-Phase posted:I had a relative who showed up to church with suit jacket, dress shoes, shirt and tie, and their side shields still on. Were trousers included as well?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 10:10
|
|
|
Three-Phase posted:I had a relative who showed up to church with suit jacket, dress shoes, shirt and tie, and their side shields still on. Eye protection sounds like a sensible choice when seeing the glory of the coming of the lord.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 10:49
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:The weight probably was a defining factor, as it kept the ship from evening out like they intended to do by rolling the cannons back into place and eventually enough water flooded in that they couldn't right the ship. Apparently the lighter actually kept the ship from sinking immediately, as it was caught underneath and shoved down into the water first. Wait, what? Two thirds of the personnel onboard at the time were civilians? I'm surprised by that. I would have thought, at the time, it would have been only about double the complement if that, with the extras onboard being sweethears/wives or whores. Where's the extra 300 civilians coming from?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 11:13
|
|
|
Hyperlynx posted:Wait, what? Two thirds of the personnel onboard at the time were civilians? I'm surprised by that. I would have thought, at the time, it would have been only about double the complement if that, with the extras onboard being sweethears/wives or whores. Where's the extra 300 civilians coming from? Wikipedia posted:There were also an estimated 200–300 relatives visiting the officers and men, 100–200 'ladies from the Point [at Portsmouth], who, though seeking neither husbands or fathers, yet visit our newly arrived ships of war', and a number of merchants and traders come to sell their wares to the seamen. tl;dr: Whores. Platystemon fucked around with this message at 11:52 on Jul 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 11:50
|
|
|
It's estimated that around 1200 people total were aboard the ship, which normally would have a crew of about 850 officers and men. Along with the women and children and merchants aboard, there was a large number of civilian workmen performing repairs at the time of the sinking. 255 people were saved, including 11 women and 1 child.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 14:09
|
|
|
GotLag posted:Eye protection sounds like a sensible choice when seeing the glory of the coming of the lord. Well, you don't want the lord coming in your eyes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 14:40
|
|
|
You never know. Jesus might bust out his whip again.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 14:46
|
|
|
Not OSHA, but too good not to post somewhere: Police say Vermont crash prompted by GPS order to turn: quote:MENDON, Vt. (AP) - Police in Vermont say a car ended up almost vertical when the driver swerved quickly in response to her GPS ordering her to "turn around." 
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 16:03
|
|
|
Amazing. Turn by turn GPS navigators has been around for what, almost ten years now, and people still haven't learned not to take the instructions literally.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 16:13
|
|
|
DrBouvenstein posted:Not OSHA, but too good not to post somewhere: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5lbShWEGQ0
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 16:16
|
|
|
mostlygray posted:I had a friend that had a piece of metal stuck in his eye from using a file. You could see it sparkle when you pointed a flashlight at it. The doc used a scalpel to pick it out. My buddy said it was the most uncomfortable process ever. The doc used numbing drops so it didn't hurt, it was just freaky as hell. He always wore safety glasses for metalwork afterwards. Those numbing drops were probably liquid cocaine...
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 16:17
|
|
|
I am oddly fond of this short horror film version. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdyknT4uchM
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 16:21
|
|
|
My friend's dad isn't allowed to be near an MRI machine because he was a fabricator on Indonesian merchant ships and never wore safety glasses. Apparently metal shards in eyes are fairly common, even ones you can't feel them, and the doctors would prefer not to have them bounce around inside your eyeballs when they lie you under the giant magnet.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 17:10
|
|
|
Dillbag posted:My friend's dad isn't allowed to be near an MRI machine because he was a fabricator on Indonesian merchant ships and never wore safety glasses. Apparently metal shards in eyes are fairly common, even ones you can't feel them, and the doctors would prefer not to have them come flying out of your eyeballs when they lie you under the giant magnet.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 19:00
|
|
|
Shady Amish Terror posted:I am oddly fond of this short horror film version. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdyknT4uchM that was so very satisfying.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 19:14
|
|
|
GotLag posted:
 Aftermath of witnessing the power of God without side shields. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 19:41
|
|
|
xergm posted:
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 19:48
|
|
|
DrBouvenstein posted:Not OSHA, but too good not to post somewhere: Every now and then she gets a little bit lonely and he never comes 'round. . The aforementioned relative was wearing trousers. Three-Phase fucked around with this message at 01:03 on Jul 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2016 00:59
|
|
|
DrBouvenstein posted:Not OSHA, but too good not to post somewhere: I can't be the only one here super impressed by the tensile strength of that wire right?
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2016 01:14
|
|
|
Shady Amish Terror posted:I am oddly fond of this short horror film version. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdyknT4uchM this is an extremely good video series
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2016 01:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 17:49 |
|
|
Sammus posted:I can't be the only one here super impressed by the tensile strength of that wire right? 1/2" utility grade galvanized strand guy wire has a minimum breaking strength of 25,000 lbs.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2016 01:20
|
|
