The idea of a small rubber ducky floating alone across the sea is both wholesome and sad.

@SAOS451316

10 ай бұрын

The sea carries them to shore eventually and people pick them up. They'd have quite a story to tell. :)

@zeked4200

10 ай бұрын

I don't think wholesome means what you think it does 😂

@scottjohnson9799

10 ай бұрын

"That is because you are crazy. It has no feelings." kzread.info/dash/bejne/gJ2smNZ8Y9ncmtY.html

@stinga_

9 ай бұрын

This is why the sea-level is rising. Because that's years of cars, ships , containers and airplanes.

@Krack2805

6 ай бұрын

@@stinga_ this is what happens when u dont graduate high school

So my dad was a sailor on a soviet merchant ship. One day they got a call that a Japanese ship lost some containers in a storm in some region nearby and to "avoid the hazardous area". Somehow, the crew 'misunderstood' this message to be "free foreign products in the area" and quickly dredged them up to find some undergarments and record players, soaked about halfway up but with the top half completely dry. So yes, they float and, as it turns out, are totally free for the taking.

@gp8666

10 ай бұрын

Idk sounds like an average post delivery

@everettstormy

9 ай бұрын

Yeah sounds like what I'd do

@denizalc2527

9 ай бұрын

Thats hilarious😂😂

@patrickfreeman8257

8 ай бұрын

Wow! Not quite as rewarding as a container filled with high quality Scotch, but still not a bad haul.

@Alex-pd8zi

5 ай бұрын

In Soviet Union VHS player had price about 1-4 year average salary. Could exchange it for used car or appartment.

Royal Navy submarines have also been known to hit containers that have submerged but are buoyant at a depth below the surface. An ex navy friend said who had served on subs

@neues3691

10 ай бұрын

It seems to be incredibly unlucky to hit such a container.

@joshl90

10 ай бұрын

Former, not ex*

@om7303

10 ай бұрын

@@neues3691 Subs when not on mission likely use shipping lanes for navigation

@jjsmallpiece9234

10 ай бұрын

@@om7303 ha, ha. Are there shipping lanes below the surface. I'll take that as a joke comment.

@jjsmallpiece9234

10 ай бұрын

@@neues3691 yes, but it happens

15 years ago I decided to move back from Australia and packed my entire life into a 20' container. Guess, what... the container was lost at sea 🤪

@nyalan8385

10 ай бұрын

Actually tragic

@JABN97

10 ай бұрын

That sucks. I guess we could say at least you yourself was not in there, so you have at least survived 15 years without your life? But for serious, sorry to hear that, must really suck. Stuff like couches and clothes can be replaced, but memorial stuff like pictures, souvenirs etc have such emotional value

@JohnnyWednesday

10 ай бұрын

If anything good has happened in the last 15 years? it may not have happened had your belongings not been lost - maybe you would have been somewhere else :)

@Croz89

10 ай бұрын

How was the insurance claim? Did they pay up pretty quickly or were they a PITA about everything?

@SethMethCS

10 ай бұрын

How much data did you lose?

I keep them in my garage, arrr

@ripnob

10 ай бұрын

Can i have one?

@ReikoTennosaar

10 ай бұрын

​@@ripnobsure mate!

@jeremynjoo4309

10 ай бұрын

Ok

@Puddin205

10 ай бұрын

Can I have one?

@jtgd

10 ай бұрын

Rrg

The next question that comes up is: Is there an "industry" that specializes in reclaiming containers lost at sea?

@jasonreed7522

10 ай бұрын

Probably depends on where they get lost, if a ship loses a container in a harbor or "inland" waterway its probably high priority to fish it put of the water so it doesn't disrupt normal operations. Otherwise its unlikely that enough get lost for a full on salvage industry to sustain itself on lost cargo. Maybe a generic ocean cleanup organization will activate fish up lost cargo containers when practical, but thats probably mostly contained to stuff close to shore. (Way easier to intercept junk in rivers than the open ocean)

@NielMalan

10 ай бұрын

I've had such an idea for a business venture: fly seach patterns with autonomous, solar-powered UAVs carrying magnetic anomaly detectors. If an anomaly is detected, get visual confirmation, then send out a salvage boat. A small boat's crew can attach buoyancy devices, tracker and a radar reflector while the backoffice traces the owner and determines if salvage will be profitable.

@quillmaurer6563

10 ай бұрын

This was my thought as well, especially given the suggestion of radar beacons. Getting them out of the water would be the best solution. But in most cases it probably wouldn't be economically viable to recover them, perhaps if close to shore or a whole load of them, but not a few individual containers here and there. Plus in most cases the cargo would probably be ruined by seawater and, even if something valuable initially, would have little salvage value. Extreme of this would be electronics, a container stuffed with laptops and smartphones is probably the highest value of any, but if it's been in the water and flooded they'd be ruined and nothing but E-waste. Though, just from an ocean safety perspective, a bounty could be incorporated as well, whoever salvages the container and brings it to shore gets the bounty plus the container and contents.

@NielMalan

10 ай бұрын

@@quillmaurer6563 One could probably auction off the contents of salvaged containers for a profit. While a distributor will not accept the cargo of a container that swam, there are people in the second-hand trade who might take the gamble that a portion of the cargo will be undamaged, or refurbishable. Cargoes like specialty chemicals in drums or lumber will be not be functionally affected, and the owners and insurers will happily pay salvage. There may also be environmental organizations who will fund the salving of hazardous cargoes that have no value.

@kyledavis4890

10 ай бұрын

I've seen some people make tiny houses out of the containers before.

I remember reading about the bath toys. They were nicknamed "Friendly Floaties" by the scientists and enthusiasts

@davidjellybaby

10 ай бұрын

Friendly Floatees was the product name

@tonys1636

10 ай бұрын

Plastic Ducks are still washing up on beaches, not always intact but with bite marks or damage, showing how indestructible plastic is in the oceans.

@kyledavis4890

10 ай бұрын

While, perhaps an ecological concern, those same rubber duckies gave scientists new insights into currents of the ocean

@onsokumaru4663

10 ай бұрын

RIP to sea life that choked on those unpleasant duckies

@auntysocialist

9 ай бұрын

​@@onsokumaru4663evidence? Or speculation that always involves worse case scenario to a highly exaggerated degree? You know, if it saves just ONE microbe!

Imagine being a twilight-zone marine animal and seeing these huge metal structures like ships or cargo containers just falling past you out of nowhere.

@petermgruhn

10 ай бұрын

Fish Cargo Cult!

@JohnyG29

10 ай бұрын

As there is little light down there, they wouldn't see it coming.

@watchableraven3517

10 ай бұрын

​@@JohnyG29They could feel the negative pressure? I'm not sure how fish work

@Br3ttM

10 ай бұрын

"Why is that whale rectangular?"

@Uncle_Fred

10 ай бұрын

​@JohnyG29 whales and Dolphins might see it, especially near the surface. They're intelligent enough to notice it too. Must be a strange sight.

Slow down the lost containers from happening: Ports weigh each container as it comes in and check the bill of lading for it's stated weight by shipper, variation gets investigated if it's heavier by more than 500 kilograms and shipper gets fined the cost of the investigation. New bill of lading issued with accurate weights. Since the biggest cause of lost containers is improper loading due to inaccurate weights this will slow the losses. A float running up a tube with a spring loaded radar reflector mounted to the side of the container means it hits the water and the reflector is deployed by water coming into the bottom of the tube. As the container sinks lower the float lifts the reflector higher.

@paulgemperlein626

10 ай бұрын

Yeah companies just have no incentive to do it and this would also have to work no matter which side of the container ends up pointing up. I don't see it being cost effective (needs to be nearly free) and working for all four sides.

@JohnDlugosz

10 ай бұрын

* ... *its* stated weight... Remember: his/her/its are a matched set; none have an apostrophe.

@JohnDlugosz

10 ай бұрын

I think the cranes can automatically weigh each container every time it is shifted. When it arrives at the port, the weight can be noted automatically; don't rely on documentation that comes with the container.

@NareshSinghOctagon

10 ай бұрын

The float part is easy enough to get working on all four sides. Just install it on one of the two ends,make it strong enough to survive impact with the ocean,then have the tether long enought to counteract it getting wrapped around for whatever reason. Then just have the international community enforce these on containers,because screw corporations,ensuring that containers are made safer. A follow up would then be an international crane ship service that goes out and scoops up any containers that they can find,or outright puncture the daylights out of the container to ensure it sinks,with the bill being footed to the companies who dropped the container in the first place,because screw corporations two,screw harder.

@petermgruhn

10 ай бұрын

Steal the productive wealth in order throw more government at it. That's always worked in the past.

Another thing: good stowage isn't just good for preventing hazardous floaters, it also means that lucrative cargo isn't being lost, and it probably makes the crew safer as well.

I always recall the story of a woman who came to the US from China inside of a shipping container. Makes me wonder how many poor souls are lost in such travels being smuggled like cargo. R.I.P.

@rkenzie5235

10 ай бұрын

Oh jeez I didn’t even think of that!!!!! And the worst part is those people are undocumented so who even knows..?

@FC-qe1wl

10 ай бұрын

Q how many poor souls are lost in such travels being smuggled like cargo.? A Not enough

@thomasharris9059

10 ай бұрын

@@FC-qe1wlI’d rather have someone who travels the ocean sealed in a cargo container to get here as a fellow American than a moron who makes jokes like this.

@Blakkrazor69

10 ай бұрын

@@FC-qe1wl Q how many internet trolls get fed to hogs in the deep forest? A Not enough

@bobby1970

9 ай бұрын

​@@FC-qe1wlA lot of drowned people.

Send the navy after the floaters. It would be good exercise in hunting down tiny dangerous things and who wouldn't want to loose a torpedo on a container of rubber ducks!? Sometimes my brilliance exceeds that of Jeremy Clarkson himself.

@TylerTrailer1

10 ай бұрын

your brilliance has its own gravitational field

@BelaJuTe

10 ай бұрын

Your genius is almost frightening

@PakaBubi

10 ай бұрын

🤣🤣

@johnkeith8072

10 ай бұрын

You have no idea how much those torpedoes cost...

@BelaJuTe

10 ай бұрын

@@johnkeith8072 less then a sailing Yacht. Especially if you consider the training value

Is that shipping company ‘Ever’ not having issues on the high seas?

@KonradTheWizzard

10 ай бұрын

No, only on large rivers and canals. 😝

@kyledavis4890

10 ай бұрын

Don't forget sandbars, too!

@Br3ttM

10 ай бұрын

They're a large portion of a large industry operating globally, so issues will happen from time to time. Excluding that one really expensive incident, I have no idea how their record compares to the rest of the shipping industry.

@automation7295

2 ай бұрын

At this point, everyone are making fun of every company with ‘Ever’ in it's name.

I feel like your talking pace is back at what it used to be. I really love it when you speak at this pace!

Really long ratchet straps need to be used to secure the containers. Then hire a confident guy on each ship who’s only job is to keep waking up and down, twanging each strap and saying ‘that’s not going anywhere’

About 25 years ago, an offshore minicontainer (8'x6'x8') containing food supplies destined for a North Sea oil platform (NAA for those interested :) ) got swept off the back of the supply vessel, and floated around for about 7 months over winter, before being spotted, retrieved, and returned to its originator (who had already claimed loss from insurers). Needless to say, all the frozen food had to be thrown away.....

Good ideas here except for one problem. They’re losing about 1 container in 100,000 shipped. That means if you add $1 to the cost of ALL the containers, the cost per lost container is already $100,000 before any salvage operations.

1. Explosives is a terrible incentive for (a) terrorists to loot them, and (b) 1 in 10,000 to malfunction and start a chain reaction to blow up almost every container and sink the ship or destroy a port. 2. Anything involving batteries is expensive, prone to failure, and already said, in this video, to not work. 3. Corner reflectors on spring-loaded masts is only good if you have them in all four directions on each end. 4. Anything which lets water in faster, is useless if the cargo itself is bouyant, as pointed out in this video. 5. Anything which opens the doors after a week's immersion in salt water or after release from its anchor points (tie downs? the corners, whatever they are called) is just begging for thieves to trigger and get inside.

How about a spring loaded radar reflector that pops up when wet for some time? Cheap metal sheets that don't need to stay in tact long and easy to retrofit

@paulgemperlein626

10 ай бұрын

"up" could be any of four directions, not sure how it would work without batteries and be cost effective, and pop up regardless of orientation

@jtgd

10 ай бұрын

Would it appear on radar/sonar? Tho?

@Urgleflogue

10 ай бұрын

@@paulgemperlein626 six

@stuartjohnston1086

10 ай бұрын

Good idea, you could also just use buoyancy to pop it up. Have an open drainpipe like structure with a movable buoyant insert. Water enters the bottom and pushes the insert up with the radar reflector on the top of it. the more the container sinks, the higher the reflector gets above the container. Net result is when the container is high in the water, the reflector is only just above it, when the container is very low in the water, the reflector is high above it. Cheap and low maintenance solution.

@markusr3259

10 ай бұрын

I was wondering this myself. Could sping loaded retro reflectors be attached within the stacking gap that would release and latch in place effectively hoisting a distress flag visible to radar with no energy requirements beyond the initial potential energy in the spring.

In 1984 a helicopter dropped a 40 foot container into Port Stanley harbour. It floated very high in the water and was easily towed to shore. Flotation was doubtless aided by the fact that the container was filled with empty beer kegs being sent back to Courage's brewery!

@somethingsomething404

10 ай бұрын

Why were beer kegs flying by helicopter?

@davidchilds9590

10 ай бұрын

@@somethingsomething404 there was no container terminal or dock - the CH47 Chinook helicopter was being used as a flying crane to transfer containers from the land to the ship at anchor.

As one of the yachties floating around the ocean in my boat i can assure you my own incompetence vastly outweighs any risk of a submerged container. The ocean is ridiculously huge, any resources spent preventing people from hitting lost containers would be far better spent on training and safety equipment for the yachts.

Parametric rolling is not stopped because of OoW whom are afraid of their captain, whom is afraid of losing his job when arriving late at the next port. I encountered this on an Abis Shipping D-class ship where the captain did not wanted to wait for the storm to cease. We ended up with enormous damage to the cargo and the ship plus we had to enter an emergency port for re-stowing the cargo. A very expensive lesson learned.

A well rounded look at this tricky old problem.

I wonder if a floating container is spotted where it's likely to be a hazard, do they try to salvage it or try to sink it, which is safer and/or cheaper?

@LegoWormNoah101

10 ай бұрын

It would depend on the nature of the cargo. If it's bath toys like in that 1992 incident or something that can be easily and swiftly replaced, or something like cars that are already totaled by the ocean, it can and probably will be sunken to save on money. On the other hand, if it's absolutely essential, like food, drinking water, emergency supplies, integrated circuits, crude oil, or other certain chemicals, there's an urge to salvage the container and ship whatever is unaffected onward to the destination

@Croz89

10 ай бұрын

@@LegoWormNoah101 What if you don't know what is in it? It's not always easy to find out especially if the markings are obscured.

@SchemingGoldberg

10 ай бұрын

@@LegoWormNoah101 I don't think they would try to save water-rotten food or salt-water contaminated drinking water. It's rare for the cargo to be able to survive being submerged in seawater for extended periods of time.

@b1laxson

10 ай бұрын

Based on what was in the TV Sea Patrol inspect then sink is likely. A small boat goes over and they look it over. Partly to get the registry number to call in about whoever lost it, whether others were lost at the time etc. Then a few penetrating rounds, which might be rifle or MG fire not cannon, to make the navigation hazard go away. In the show they were about to sink like that when someone noticed an jury rigged vent on it. They checked and it was immigrant smuggling so they almost killed those people.

@Debbiebabe69

10 ай бұрын

@@Croz89 You have to investigate a container before sinking it. Several containers filled with immigrants are lost each year, you would NOT want to be blindly shooting at a container full of men.....

The south east coast of Florida is covered in these containers. It is very expensive to take them away, but at times, they have valuable contents that the hotels and condo buildings do use.

@quillmaurer6563

10 ай бұрын

I think these are probably a standard case of maritime salvage, pretty much "finder's keeper's." This channel had a video discussing salvage law and a rare example with a whole ship, but I'm sure containers are far more common. Probably in most cases the owner just writes it off the moment it falls overboard and has no interest in recovery.

@tonys1636

10 ай бұрын

Anything washing up on a UK foreshore below the high water line becomes Crown Property as the Crown owns the sea bed up to 3 miles out. Permission has to be obtained to remove it from HM Customs and Excise as is classed as theft of Crown Property without or smuggling if sold on. Beachcombing above the high water line after a storm just needs the beach owners permission if not a public beach although a container or contents are the Insurance Company's property.

@johnl5316

10 ай бұрын

@@tonys1636 I am not aware of any crowns washing up on Florida beaches, but it might have happened

@random_silicates

10 ай бұрын

@@johnl5316 Our U.S. laws are often derived from traditional English law, with the individual state governments taking on the role of the Crown. The State of Florida owns the seabed itself from the high water line to three miles out. Different types of property on the seabed are administered under different laws, and it isn't immediately obvious to me as a casual Googler who would own a container that washed up on Florida beaches. For example, natural resources and historical shipwrecks in that three mile limit both belong to the state. But foreign military vessels that shipwreck in Florida waters continue to be the property of the foreign country, etc.

@LemonbreadSC

5 ай бұрын

@@tonys1636 the monarchy is doomed soon anyway

I’ve worked with shipping containers. All shipping containers have air holes. The hole prevent the container from imploding. Some containers carry hazardous chemicals that alter the air in the container, which intern causes the imploding. Hence the need for air holes.

@HOOOLD_ON

10 ай бұрын

You are full of sh!t. No shipping container has 'air holes' in them. The shipping containers are weather tight, not air tight. Your reference to '_hazardous chemicals that alter the air in the container, which intern causes the imploding'_ is false. Chemicals cant cause an implotion. And if 'some containers', as you put it, imploded on a regular basis, then a) we would hear about it. And b ) it would be forbidden to transport the chemical in present form and volume both by road, air and rail.

@American-Idiot-Charlie-Brown

9 ай бұрын

This seems unlikely to me

@lolzlolz102

9 ай бұрын

Why would a container implode??

@thomash8079

9 ай бұрын

@@lolzlolz102water pressure

@tannithbaggins

9 ай бұрын

The reason I found this video is because I wanted to know the likelihood of these containers imploding when sinking- this is the closest answer, thank you!

Imagine you're being trafficked through these things and your container goes over the railing falling onto the ocean and seeing the seals that keep the doors closed start failing, slowly rising water levels. Keep an eye on your children

I am a research engineer and 100GDT licensed master. I have a container design change idea that would solve the "problem" of floating containers. When researching the economic prospects of a patent application I learned that nobody has ever held a shipping company accountable for the damage caused by their container. If a yacht or fishing vessel hits a container they are always occupied with trying to save their vessel rather than diving on the container to get it's number. Most aren't even sure it was a container they hit. The only economic incentive for the shipping company is to avoid the loss of the container in the first place and preventing a customer claim.

And of course thanks for the awesome explanation, the lovely illustrations and the overall **really** great production quality! It shows that someone educated themselves about video production! 😉 Much appreciated!

Here is an idea...how about the conpany that lost the containers is heald reaponsible for cleaning up after themselves

@Croz89

10 ай бұрын

Then they just pass the cost on to the customers (or more likely the customers insurers) by declaring general average.

@kristoffer3000

10 ай бұрын

Capitalists are very very rarely held accountable so why would our governments that are essentially ran by capitalists start doing that now?

All containers should be required to be outfitted with a tracker instead of treating them as hazards, require that the company that lost them, retrieve it. Failure to retrieve a container before the tracker dies or if it sinks results in heafty environmental impact fines. They are more than just hazards to other ships.

@jonnywakefield8796

10 ай бұрын

Not possible or viable Cost, electrics ...

@Misophist

10 ай бұрын

@@jonnywakefield8796 That is, why it should be enforced by international law. I'm pretty certain, that even shipping giants like China would support the idea, if universal enforcement is ensured, so nobody can bypass it. And that is actually pretty easy: ban noncomplying shipping companies from entering your port ever again, and confiscate noncompliant containers found during unloading without reimbursement. You'll see the owners running for their money. Just a snarky side node: the countries that have a coast at the Baltic Sea, namely Germany, Poland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia have a long simmering time bomb at the bottom of the Baltic Sea: two wars, and the subsequent shoddy 'cleanup' by the British have let to hundreds of ships and gigatons of ordnance, both chemical and conventional disposed there. The ships often with remnants of toxic fuels in their bunkers, all rusting away. Much of it is in the waters of Poland, and the Poles can't make up their mind whether they should allow the Germans to clean it up, or shoulder the extremely expensive operation on its own. Now that is in the Baltics, where water isn't that deep. Now imagine the same situation with containers of highly toxic chemicals in the midst of the Atlantic. Can you imagine any country volunteering the expenses for that? That is, why it should stick to those that own the risk - the companies managing and ordering the transport.

@dougearnest7590

9 ай бұрын

I'm sure China - with such a splendid record of environmental responsibility - would jump on this idea in a hearbeat and pay all fines promptly with a minimum of hassle in the event they couldn't recover the containers promptly. Or maybe they'll just not care, and pass on the cost of the few fines they might have to pay to Wal-Mart, which will pass on the cost of the fine to the customers, who will continue to shop at Wal-Mart for all their chinese-made crap now that nothing is manufactured in America (or anywhere else) any more.

@Misophist

9 ай бұрын

@@dougearnest7590 1.) Like I said above: the US may enforce compliance by confiscating containers, that are not up to snuff. 2.) China isn't a communist country for some decades by now. It is hyper capitalist. By now, it is second up in the number of billionaires behind the US. You have to go after the shipping companies, not the countries. It is more about having the support for this in the international community. If all the important destinations in Europe and America enforce it, China will fall in. Sure, with an attitude like yours, it will never work.

@dougearnest7590

9 ай бұрын

@@Misophist I'm guessing you weren't burdened with an overabundance of intelligence, and I'm guessing in our current situation that could be cause of congratulations. Your last comment supports this, and proves you weren't imbued with much class, either. So, enjoy the kool-aid, and know the Peoples Liberation Army thanks you for shopping at Wal-mart.

if transmitters/gps tags are added to containers a salvage company could locate them and recover them before they become a threat to other ships.

@Chris-hx3om

10 ай бұрын

Good luck with that in the Southern Ocean!

@njipods

10 ай бұрын

not worth it financially. containers worth maybe 20-60k of goods most off the time (when not water logged mostly worthless after sinking). salvage opps would be 100s off k

@alexanderSydneyOz

10 ай бұрын

further problem: It seems the number of shipping containers on the planet is not known with the vaguest of certainty, but I will say something around 50 million. The cost of fitting all of them with GPS and locator transmitters would not be remotely viable if only 1000 or so go missing each year. And, as per the video, most of those likely sink quick quickly anyway and are unrecoverable.

The better way is for crews to use lashings that are more secure instead of all janky to save time and money. 🙌

@tamsinp7711

10 ай бұрын

And taller lashing bridges so that the topmost containers aren't only held vertically by twist-locks, possibly in combination with better lateral lashing.

@awakeningEmpath

10 ай бұрын

@@tamsinp7711 or maybe some netting to help the container ship actually contain the containers instead of leaving a trail of polluting hazardous metal boxes across the oceans, just cos they're insured for losses

@tamsinp7711

10 ай бұрын

@@awakeningEmpath problems with that suggestion: 1. The netting would need to have a very high breaking strain (as would its means of attaching) to withstand the force from multiple containers each weighing 20-40 tonnes. That sort of strength would make each net very heavy. If you've ever seen footage of container stacks swaying in rough seas, you'll realise how many the nets would have to take the weight of. 2. You would need multiple sizes of netting for each bay above deck due to different stacking heights. That would require secure storage for all of the nets not currently in use. 3. Netting would have to be removed before each unloading/loading operation. The nets, once removed would need to be stored somewhere. Given the weight of the nets, this would require additional cranes on the dockside; also additional time before and after loading/unloading. Considering how many TEUs of containers are handled by ports each year (in 2009 the figure was something like 450 million TEUs handled; the total number of shipping containers worldwide is about 65 million), the number of containers lost each year is relatively low (average for 2020-2022 was 2301 per year; that is about 0.003% of all containers, or 1 in 28,000), although still problematic. My suggestion of taller lashing bridges to ensure that all containers are lashed, not just the first 5 tiers above deck, would be simpler and more effective. It would also be cheaper than your suggestion for netting and wouldn't impact the available deck space, nor would it delay unloading/loading operations in port.

One solution could be a plug, with chain or rope attached to it on one end, and on the other the cargo ship (or the next container). whilst on the cargo ship, the plugs would remain at their place, making the container water tight. Once they fall off, the plugs will come out and the containers will sink. Provided the cargo lets them. Additionally perhaps there could be a rule that you mist fill a container in away that it can contain only certain amount of floating cargo, like only 1/3 of rubber ducks. So the self floating containers will sink as well after their plug has been removed.

@Gangakinartheke

10 ай бұрын

I think that will require you to implement the plugged sealing system on the containers after they are docked. So, they are not fully weather-proof before that. How is that going to work? If you make it weather-tight it will resist water for some period anyway

@Sonnell

10 ай бұрын

@@Gangakinartheke I think it is very simple: A hole on the container, a chain and a plug. By default, like on a truck, the container is plugged with its own plug. But when a container has been put on a cargo ship, the crew is responsible to pull out the plug, and plug the container next to it with it. So every container would be plugged with an other containers plug. Wo when they fall off, plugs would come out. But while on the road, the container would be always sealed. On ships and trucks, the crew is already responsible to check every container regularly, so they would be responsible for the plugs. Super cheap, and simple solution.

@grizwoldphantasia5005

10 ай бұрын

Won't help when the cargo itself is bouyant.

@Sonnell

10 ай бұрын

@@grizwoldphantasia5005 Still, helps in most of the cases, and does it easily and cheaply. Also, I addressed this in my original comment already. This could be easily done by regulating the proportion of the self floating contents within every container.

@Croz89

10 ай бұрын

The latter might be tricky for the current system to work with, no purchaser is going to want to pay for 3 containers when they only need 1. So you'd need to find a way for low density and high density cargoes to be mixed and then separated again at either end, which would obviously still add cost but would probably still be cheaper.

fridays are my favourite day already but you make them even better

idea: explosives. I mean, its a terrible terrible idea. but its an idea.

@paulgemperlein626

10 ай бұрын

Haha just put a bunch of sodium in each container, what could go wrong

@HugeRademaker

10 ай бұрын

20.000 TEU on board a vessel. No. Don't add explosives please.

I remeber containers washing up on the south coast. Locals were dragging motorbikes out of them.

@ripnob

10 ай бұрын

romania

Great content as always. Thank you

addicted to this channel

Just make it very easy to sue the carriers for large damages even with partial information, then the companies will comission a reliable solution.

The Canadian Navy likes to hit sea containers with their ships when leaving Halifax a fair bit.

Fascinating, and something I'd never considered.

Thanks for the information.👍👍

What an awesomely simple video. I love this channel

@awakeningEmpath

10 ай бұрын

Its such an incredible video I can hardly contain myself

@drockjr

10 ай бұрын

@@awakeningEmpath omg that joke definitely hit rock bottom

Please do a video on the rubber ducks

Another absolutely fantastic video

Just subbed and I’ve been inside one of these containers. Yes they are heavy but if they get lost out at sea it all depends on if the freight inside keeps it floating longer or makes it sink quicker

A passive reflector based system like Recco that is used to find skiers in avalanches would be a cheap solution. Then vessels at risk of submerged containers could invest in the detector equipment while others wouldn't be obliged to bear the cost.

@WarttHog

10 ай бұрын

I was thinking of this. How expensive could summer radar retro reflectors cost? And they don't need any batteries! I think the problem would be that when almost (or completely) submerged, improving the radar signature isn't enough because they're probably going to be completely occluded by waves. Maybe design a system where they raise up as the container sinks?

@Debbiebabe69

10 ай бұрын

But who would be obliged to cough up the massive cost for the reflectors? The system you mentioned - RECCO reflectors - costs around 30 USD per piece. You would need at least 4 of them on a container to account for the fact containers can sink any way and so you dont know what parts would be underwater. So 120 USD per container, meaning someone would have to pay 120 MILLION dollars for every million containers they own. Shipping at the moment is in dire straits financially, a cost like that could cripple the industry.

@Br3ttM

10 ай бұрын

@@Debbiebabe69 The cost of that wouldn't be significant, it's having them all get broken off or caught on things that would be the issue.

@cf453

9 ай бұрын

@@Debbiebabe69 Shipping SAYS it's in dire straits financially. If you actually go look at the books, certain subcompanies are making record profits. Don't fall for the oldest trick in the book.

@DajesOfficial

9 ай бұрын

​@@Debbiebabe69 its only 5% of a container price - not catastrophic. Especially considering that a wholesale price would be several times smaller.

The only thing I can think of is perhaps fitting radar reflectors to the corners of the containers. It wouldn't be perfect but radar reflectors are entirely passive. Just shaped pieces of metal. So building them into the design o the container wouldn't be that hard. There is the fact that radar reflectors would always be functional but I don't think there would be any downside to making containers and their transports even more visible to radar.

@jasonreed7522

10 ай бұрын

I definitely agree that radar retroreflectors would be an easy solution, even if not perfect. The radar beam still has to actually hit the container, but a retroreflector would atleast return a lot of the energy that strikes it back to the source making it appear to be way bigger than it is. (Hopefully enough to actually count as a target to most systems) I think the only real downside to them would be when cargo ships are in close proximity thats a lot of retroreflectors returning alot more energy than normal. (Not sure how much return energy a typical radar is capable of recieving without issues.)

I witnessed and took photos of a shipping container that got hit by a water spout 4 stacks of containers around 10 or 12 high, slowly leaned over to the side, then crashed into the ocean. Most bobbed for 30 seconds then slowly disapeared below the surface, a couple floated around for 5-10 mins before going under. I can tell you as a captain, this is the one atory that keeps us up at nigjt during a crossing. Ive crossed the Gulfstream dozens of times at night on autopilot with radar and never once have seen a deadly lurking container. The stories always go that during a crossing a boat hits a container, it damages the boats center board or keel, they take on slightly more water than the pumps can handle and slowly sink. I literally have always added extra equipment just for this situation.

this is a good video rubber duck!

I think a better solution would be to have slightly imbalanced containers. Maybe this screws up moving the containers around, but maybe not to much. What this does though when a container goes overboard is make it naturally adopt a tilt in one direction. Have the up door in the up direction have one of those devices that detects water, but instead of just allowing the water in, it could unlock and open the door. Then all the buoyant cargo can just float away and the container goes to the bottom.

@quillmaurer6563

10 ай бұрын

I had a similar thought of a piece in the door latch that dissolves or corrodes when submerged in sea water, after a day or so submerged the doors open. I've heard of some ships with watertight doors having a similar (faster-acting) system that releases the doors automatically to close by gravity or springs if the ship begins to flood, very fail-safe. From what I recall from an Oceanliner Designs video about Titanic, those doors had float mechanisms that released the doors in a similar manner. Problem with such a design - for either a watertight door or container door - is that something that dissolves quickly when submerged would likely still slowly dissolve just from the moisture and humidity of the maritime environment.

@Misophist

10 ай бұрын

Be careful of what you wish for. This might be an interesting solution for bathing toys and empty beer kegs. But would it be for LNG-containers too? Or containers containing hazardous chemicals, like technical lubricants, cooling fluids, etc.? Would you really want to scatter those about into a large area?

@jakubznojemsky4936

10 ай бұрын

That might render possible cargo recovery impossible. Risk of accidental opening would rise. Also wouldnt it mess with crane operators? Because it would have inertia way outside from center while you need throw lot of these around ASAP. It might help with collision risk though.

Very interesting. As a follow up it would be informative to see what shippers and their insurance carriers do, for example do they attempt to quickly send out vessels to survey the area where the containers fell, do they ever attempt salvage, do navies/coast guards purposely try to sink them to avoid the dangers you highlighted, etc.

This was a very interesting video lol. Thanks!

Probably wouldn't work, but they could be equipped with a strobe light that gets powered by using seawater as an electrolyte. Unfortunately, there's so many containers out there that any technological solution won't be economically viable.

I wonder if you could determine whether a container would sink, float, or barely float before it actually sinks, and only fit trackers to dangerous containers. I also wonder if you could instead use the tracker (receiver?) to send a signal to open/detach the doors of the container and free the cargo, allowing the container to sink all the way down.

@Leychen

10 ай бұрын

Containers are locked and sealed with pretty crude locking bars, an auto-open function for these tens of millions containers worldwide would require expensive and complicated machinery which takes valuable space inside the container and it would most likely be a nightmare to repair that each time some forklift driver tossed around the container. Also cargo is often strapped down inside the container to prevent it from moving around so just opening the doors won't even help much. But i think it would be possible to put a tracker in all containers who are under a certain weight to track the ones which are dangerous to float for a long time.

Are there any efforts to recover lost containers? Wouldn't tracking them make recovery a more effective or potentially profitable operation?

@awakeningEmpath

10 ай бұрын

container salvage & reclamation is probably an untapped market

Embedding a metal half cube retroflector in the top of the dips in the corrugated walls might make them more visible to radar, even if just a small section is above water

What about magneto-acoustic resonators? They pick up radio waves of a given frequency, and then return a radio signal to the sender. These are ultra-cheap, completely flat (so they aren't in the way), and require no power source. With how sensitive modern radars are, you don't need to reflect that much of the power to get detected, so you can get away with a sub-optimal antenna. So even though the sender's radar wavelength is far too long to be fitted inside a reasonably sized sticker or screw-on tag, you can simply chose an antenna size making the radar's wavelength an appropriate multiple of the antenna's length. Yes, you'd lose a lot of efficiency, but we just need to give a ship enough warning to change course a few meters. A larger ship needs longer warning, but will also have a stronger radar with fancier signal processing mounted higher up, translating into more time to avoid the obstacle.

@harriehausenman8623

10 ай бұрын

that sounds like it could work, actually! 🤗

I was on a 47 foot Jeaneau sailing boat on a voyage from Jamaica to Mexico and then on to Kemah, Texas, the captain being my brother warned me while on my watch to be careful of lost containers. That was the summer of 2002. Very hard to see especially at night.

Simple float bouy that shows where the submerged object is

@terryboyer1342

10 ай бұрын

Or it releases a radar reflector when exposed to sea water?

@KingTFD

10 ай бұрын

​@@terryboyer1342they're always exposes to sea water

@paulgemperlein626

10 ай бұрын

What do you mean by float buoy? Like it would inflate?

@whiteonggoy7009

10 ай бұрын

@@paulgemperlein626 a float on a rope to show where it is.bit like a bouy over a wreck.we had flashing lights on life rafts soon as we was in the water

@paulgemperlein626

10 ай бұрын

@@whiteonggoy7009 I'm struggling to imagine what this would look like when stowed and how it would deploy. Keep in mind each container has to have one and rope has other possible issues with things getting tangled up

Watched a documentary on ppl who try to enter ports secretly by hiding in these containers. After watching this?!…. new fear unlocked.

An interesting presentation. Thanks! I like the idea though, that the rubber ducks escaped their steel container.

Is there a data available regarding how many pleasure crafts collide with containers? There was a Robert Redford movie about this some years ago.

I guarantee a lot of people just saw these containers as those things that float ashore to get looted, never thought it was such a problem until now!

@capt.bart.roberts4975

10 ай бұрын

We had a boat load of flooring pine, lost overboard about ten years back, ended up on beaches from Littlehampton as far East as Eastbourne.

@Croz89

10 ай бұрын

It's a legitimate salvage I'll have you know!

What about if the ships and yachts could use sonar sensors, in addition to the radar sensors? The sonar sensors would work underwater to detect the floating containers

@cideltacommand7169

9 ай бұрын

That is expensive military equipment, and even if you had the money to install, those they wouldn't probably sell it to you as it can be used to track submarines ( even though they rarely use active sonar) Also it would be too expensive to mount sonar devices on containers, that's probably worth 5 times the cargo inside anyways

@yewo.m

9 ай бұрын

@@cideltacommand7169 Okay, I didn't know that. Thanks for the info

When my grandma lived in Alaska she found some of the toys that washed up onshore from the containers that spilled she still has them today it's pretty cool

So a man made equivalent of icebergs to yachts?

Maybe it would be an option to attach some slender buoy to the container that gets disconnected when the container is in the water for a while (but stays attached with a kable or so) and uprights itself with a radar reflector on top? Might be a bit of a challenge to engineer that reliably, low maintenance, cheaply and lightweight/compact at the same time ^^

@vylbird8014

10 ай бұрын

Or put the transmitter on the inside, activated by water on three of four sensors placed on each face - so once the container is half-submerged, then it'll start transmitting. A minimal power signal, but enough to be picked up a kilometers away and set off a 'container hazard, reduce speed' alarm. Won't happen though. Another hundred dollars worth of equipment per container? That'd be too much.

Those Rubber Duckies went into the extra large bathtub!

@harriehausenman8623

10 ай бұрын

🤭 good one

How about a location beacon that is activated when the box gets low in the water? Or Maersk, Evergreen et al set up a search system for fallen boxes that finds the floaters and darts them with trackers. Cost effective argument is good PR and creates a way for their ships to avoid floaters.

What about a salt water degradable part in the door locking mechanism that can be replaced when the container is packed? If the doors break open after a month in the ocean, buoyant cargo can escape and the container will sink. If it's a small part of the lock that has to be there to close the container and preferably breaks upon opening, it will be both relatively cheap and easy to replace and impossible to forget to install a new one. You could also have red colored metal equivalents of the part for long term land-side use.

I think a water soluble system that activated a spring loaded flag would be great! Basically you’d just need 4 per unit. The mechanism that prevents the flag from springing could be made from the same materials that the seals on the doors. This would ensure that they erode at the same relative rate. Therefore they would spring out at roughly the same time that the container is at its most dangerous @casualnavigation

@General12th

10 ай бұрын

I like this.

Add a transmitter to the roof of the container in between the slots. This transmitter would have a saltwater degradable switch, which will turn it on. Another idea is to attach a automatic inflation device to increase visibility similar to that of a buoy. Another good idea is to design the container to punch holes in itself at a certain time, in order to get the container to sink more quickly.

I think that an international trade agreement should require it to be the shipping company’s responsibility to either keep debris out of the water, fetch it if it does get into the water, or pay a hefty fee if they leave any in the water. This way they will be economically incentivized to keep cargo on the ship in the first place or to collect it.

Some thoughts for containers that float on the surface for extended periods: Change the loading and construction so that the container will always float end down. An 8x8x40 container that has 5% of its volume above the surface, floating with one of the long sides up, would have just under 5 inches of the container above the water. If you change it so that the end is always up, that same 5% would become 24 inches above the surface, giving it increased visibility and radar signature. Second, with the container always floating in the same orientation, you could put a boom that would extend from the end when the container falls into the water. So take the 2 feet above water from the previous container, and then put a boom adding an extra 5 feet of height, with something highly visible on the end, and you now have a flag or ball 7 feet above the water's surface. Third, you could change the container construction to deliberately give it a bigger radar cross section. For example, build all the edges to function like the radar reflector "balls" that are 3 plates set at 90° angles to each other. Another thought is to build the above-surface end of the container to be highly visible to satellites, so lost containers can be easily located by general mapping or specialized search satellites and then picked up by recovery vessels. I am not saying this would actually work, and even if it could work it probably wouldn't be economically viable, but I am just writing down thoughts so I figured I would include it.

@adamt4742

10 ай бұрын

the problem with loading a container like that is when it gets put on a semi eventually either the axle weights will be way wrong (so they will have to unload and reload every container), and the other problem is that isn't really possible with (most probably) loads.

@awakeningEmpath

10 ай бұрын

polystyrene padding would help with boyancy until it can be retrieved / scuppered

A container of Twinkies was lost at sea in 1971, washed ashore on a Pacific island and was rediscovered in 1975. The contents were in perfect condition, and supplied the citizens of New Caledonia with free treats until finally running out in 1987. The desperation that followed sparked civil conflict which threatened to spread throughout French Polynesia until authorities in Paris were able to negotiate the long-forgotten yet remarkably successful Baguette & Brie Accords.

Maybe a "chain-link fence cage" that gets placed over the ship's top and containers after they are loaded and tack welded in place? Could even be done in multiple small sections to make removal and attaching easier.

Some type of spring loaded, high visibility flag, on an extendable boom that can be triggered by sustained seawater contact. Mounted on each corner so no matter the attitude of the container in the water, some will be visible.

Tilt door collapse mechanisms. If the container becomes unstable beyond a certain degrees of rotation, the door locking mechanism or hinges become less stable, potentially leading to door removal and buoyant materials to leave the container?

I wonder if a forward facing sonar device could be attached to yauts to detect this. Would also allow them to detect reefs and other hazards.

Spring-loaded whip aerials with a corner reflector at the tip, rigged so that normally they're flush with the container side but if the lashing is improperly removed the aerial will deploy the corner reflector. Not perfect

place weights in the cargo or design the container so that the container has a fixed highest point when floating. in other words make it so that the same corner always sticks up. then just add the device with a floater attached at the needed height and make it so that the floater turns the device on once the whole container is submerged deep enough

Some kind of radar reflecting beacon/buoy could be attached to the outside of the container door in a small box, with a few meters long rope. Let's say that the sealing of this box opens after about 48 hours of direct seawater contact and lets the buoy swim over the serfice. With this technology, the container becomes visible on the radars, wich is enough for smaller vessels, to avoid collisions. And it's also independent from every source of energy, because the shape of the buoy itself provides visibility on the screen.

@vaibhavpatil1719

9 ай бұрын

Use RFID tags, they reflect radio waves transmitted by readera

Rubber seals that cover holes in the container, designed to pop inward or open as a vent when water pressure is applied. Cheap, easy to manufacture and install on existing containers.

@zpvnrt

10 ай бұрын

Covered at 5:00 - doesn't work if the contents itself buoyant.

@pablor3138

10 ай бұрын

@@zpvnrt agreed, but it would solve a big part of the problem, it is not a single solution for sure.

@petermgruhn

10 ай бұрын

And rot and need constant inspection.

@pablor3138

10 ай бұрын

@@petermgruhn rubber doesn't rot and inspection is mandatory anyway for containers.

@kristoffer3000

10 ай бұрын

@@pablor3138 Rubber doesn't rot but it does dry out

A good enough reason to invest in a sonar system, if one hasn't, already got one.

Random ideas. A passive tracking device that reacts to radar and sends out a ping when hit with a radar or sonar wave. A device that's powered by salt water. A coating that is easier to detect with radar or is far more reflective, making the radar signature of the surface area that's actually exposed seem much larger than it is. A device that unlocks or opens the doors or releases the hinges when submerged or water reaches a certain level inside the container to allow the cargo to escape the container so the container can sink and the cargo does what it does.

Since most containers don't float, how about a slightly costly solution for those that do. Like based on cargo. Or a mechanism to open the doors after prolonged submersion

one day i wish someone could tell me why they don't just use giant nets or strong (metal) 'ropes' to tie containers down better. there's got to be a MILLION ways to cheaply, easily & effectively prevent it. instead of just bloody stacking boxes like toddlers

@Sn00ky128

10 ай бұрын

Well, they use metal wires to attach them to on another and the container ship. They have also strapping points, where they also can be attached. They aren't just stacked on top of one another.. That would indeed be childish.

@paulgemperlein626

10 ай бұрын

Yeah, they are secured but at some point when a ship is tipping, it's better to let them just fall off rather than catch a wave and take the whole ship down with them. Also, it's somewhat rare and probably covered by insurance. The companies that would have to implement your suggestion are the large entrenched shipping companies and I don't think they have much incentive to drive up costs experimenting with or adopting new innovations that might solve this problem.

@RoBert-ix6ev

10 ай бұрын

Casual Navigation has a video on this topic,as well.

There's an _excellent_ movie with Robert Redford called _All is Lost_ which follows the journey of his character alone on the open ocean and what happens after he hits a submerged container. I think you might have alluded to it in your intro

The merchant marine are mining the ocean! As a former yacht racer, we race all night. Nothing would keep us from doom.

My solution would be to fine the shipping companies for negligence.

@marshallsayre5015

10 ай бұрын

That is not a solution.

@zpvnrt

10 ай бұрын

@@marshallsayre5015 might not be a solution; however, a few fines and I bet the transport industry will find a solution.

My idea is a spring-loaded simple radar reflector on top of containers, triggered by a hydrostatic release half way up the container. This is not foolproof as it doesn’t work if the container stays flipped over in the sea, and I have no idea how practicable this is, but I think this is a fairly low cost proposal.

@earthwormscrawl

10 ай бұрын

My thoughts exactly. As an engineer, I would say that it's very practical, but he cost would be the determining factor. And not just the initial cost of the indicator, it wold need maintenance periodic testing.

Lots eventually wash up onto shores and can be a mix of people looting them or requires cleanup

I would have tought a good first step in resolving this problem would be to: 01. Place a number of specialised recovery ships at strategic points around the world; these would be paid for by a specific levy on each container movement. 02. A container that goes overboard triggers a GPS signal mounted on in the container. This beacon gives its current co-ordinates based on satellite triggernometry. 03. The nearest recovery ship sets off to recover the containers. 04. The GPS signal works on a specific frequency that is tied in to port authorities / coastguards / monitoring stations and whatever frequency sea captains monitor,; this would work, in principle, much like the squak codes used by the aviation industry. The point is, recovery authorities would be scrambled; warning services would be alerted and ships would be warned to steer clear. This is effectively a "fire brigade for the oceans". Recovered containers, of course, are removed from the oceans and so will not pollute them. Obviously, this would need to be co-ordinated and legislated for atan international level. Would the system be perfect? Of course not. Would it make a significant contribution to minimising danger and pollution? Very possibly.

You could use the devices that only let water through after X time has passed to activate the locating device only when the container is most dangerous (like aircraft black boxes that only start trasmitting after being submerged)

@schnellboothabicht

10 ай бұрын

There are batteries that only produce electricity when salty seawater enters the casing and reacts with the alkalines in the plastic shell, that would be the most obvious solution to this problem imho.

@bobthegoat7090

10 ай бұрын

That is to complicated and too expensive. Would never get implemented because of cost.

@paulgemperlein626

10 ай бұрын

Yeah, best that there be a mechanism so that the device knows it's one of the low-floating containers before it activates. And even then, it could just be a local radio transmission to keep things cheap but still warn nearby vessels. Would actually be even cooler that way cause then people could decide to just avoid it or attempt salvage

@paulgemperlein626

10 ай бұрын

@@bobthegoat7090what would be too expensive? It's just a simple electronic with a few sensors and some sort of radio transmitter. If anything, the trouble would be reliably keeping the battery charged

@grizwoldphantasia5005

10 ай бұрын

Doesn't help when the cargo itself is bouyant.

Do those yachts have sonar systems that could pick debris like that out? I imagine that the weight vs utility might be a reason they don't, but surely most ships could mount a simple surface proximity sonar, if they don't have one already (I assume, without any research, that they would already).

Just imagine how many stowaways and trafficked people have drowned after their containers fell off a ship.

Incredible video. Question, is it possible to have a slightly submerged radar pod in the front of small vessels that would allow them to navigate around potential hazards like this?

Great video thank you.. A captains worst nightmare finding one of these. Great explanations. 🛥🥂