1,000 Boats To Push Flood Waters From Chao Phraya River

[serenitynow]

Yingluck spoke just after presiding over a ceremony in which an armada of more than 1000 small boats stationed in dozens of spots on the Chao Phraya turned on their engines in an effort to help propel water down the river.

It wasn't immediately clear what impact the effort would have.

- Associated Press / Oct. 17, 2011

http://www.stuff.co....flooding-at-bay

Actually, If enough of those little scorpion tailed boats churned up enough water you could get some evaporation. That is unless it's already a humid day, which most of these seem to be.

[GentlemanJim]

Yingluck spoke just after presiding over a ceremony in which an armada of more than 1000 small boats stationed in dozens of spots on the Chao Phraya turned on their engines in an effort to help propel water down the river.

It wasn't immediately clear what impact the effort would have.

- Associated Press / Oct. 17, 2011

http://www.stuff.co....flooding-at-bay

Well actually, it is immediately clear. Impact of effort on the river, ....zero. Impact on the CO2 levels of the Atmosphere...significantly more than had they not bothered.

[JetsetBkk]

Yingluck spoke just after presiding over a ceremony in which an armada of more than 1000 small boats stationed in dozens of spots on the Chao Phraya turned on their engines in an effort to help propel water down the river.

It wasn't immediately clear what impact the effort would have.

- Associated Press / Oct. 17, 2011

http://www.stuff.co....flooding-at-bay

Well actually, it is immediately clear. Impact of effort on the river, ....zero. Impact on the CO2 levels of the Atmosphere...significantly more than had they not bothered.

Did you read the message above or bother to gather more information before posting?

Which message above? yours? well of course I did. whats your point? My point stands good.

Firstly YOU are at fault for putting what you did. You should not have written that here. Regardless of where the idea comes from that does not alter the physics. It either works or it doesn't, and it doesn't.

I presume these boats are anchored, in which case all the water they are pushing downstream will have an effect - not "zero" as you say, but just how big an effect I wouldn't like to say.

[GentlemanJim]

Well actually, it is immediately clear. Impact of effort on the river, ....zero. Impact on the CO2 levels of the Atmosphere...significantly more than had they not bothered.

Did you read the message above or bother to gather more information before posting?

Which message above? yours? well of course I did. whats your point? My point stands good.

Firstly YOU are at fault for putting what you did. You should not have written that here. Regardless of where the idea comes from that does not alter the physics. It either works or it doesn't, and it doesn't.

I presume these boats are anchored, in which case all the water they are pushing downstream will have an effect - not "zero" as you say, but just how big an effect I wouldn't like to say.

Don't be silly. The drag of the monumental amount of the body of water the surface 'propellor' water will hit will absorb all of its kinetic energy within tens of meters. If you're not a classical physics or maths graduate don't try and answer with any authority. If you feel you could argue that surface water speed will change by several millionths of a knot by the time it hits the river mouth then go ahead. The practical change on the outflow of the river will be ...wait for it....zero.

[GentlemanJim]

Well actually, it is immediately clear. Impact of effort on the river, ....zero. Impact on the CO2 levels of the Atmosphere...significantly more than had they not bothered.

Did you read the message above or bother to gather more information before posting?

Which message above? yours? well of course I did. whats your point? My point stands good.

Firstly YOU are at fault for putting what you did. You should not have written that here. Regardless of where the idea comes from that does not alter the physics. It either works or it doesn't, and it doesn't.

Explain why I am at fault please?

Easy! you have brought up that others are 'deriding' the high level idea of 'someone'. Why have you done that? Because the simple fact is, just because of the standing of whoever came up with the idea does not mean it will work, and if a cities defences are based upon that fact if the idea does not work then it should be derided. You know why you are at fault, stop trying to be smart and just erase your posts.

Edited October 16, 2011 by GentlemanJim

[JetsetBkk]

Did you read the message above or bother to gather more information before posting?

Which message above? yours? well of course I did. whats your point? My point stands good.

Firstly YOU are at fault for putting what you did. You should not have written that here. Regardless of where the idea comes from that does not alter the physics. It either works or it doesn't, and it doesn't.

I presume these boats are anchored, in which case all the water they are pushing downstream will have an effect - not "zero" as you say, but just how big an effect I wouldn't like to say.

Don't be silly. The drag of the monumental amount of the body of water the surface 'propellor' water will hit will absorb all of its kinetic energy within tens of meters. If you're not a classical physics or maths graduate don't try and answer with any authority. If you feel you could argue that surface water speed will change by several millionths of a knot by the time it hits the river mouth then go ahead. The practical change on the outflow of the river will be ...wait for it....zero.

You clearly have little basic physics education. Please check out Newton's third law of motion. The effect of what they are doing will not be zero.

[GentlemanJim]

No I do not have any basic physics education at all. I have a 1st in Physics with pure maths as an accompaniment. As I said if you want to try and measure the practical output at the river mouth in millionths of a knot then go ahead, the fact is the practical output to the man with a measuring stick will be zero. Care to argue on this properly??? The boats have achieved nothing, ...fact..

[JetsetBkk]

No I do not have any basic physics education at all. I have a 1st in Physics with pure maths as an accompaniment. As I said if you want to try and measure the practical output at the river mouth in millionths of a knot then go ahead, the fact is the practical output to the man with a measuring stick will be zero. Care to argue on this properly??? The boats have achieved nothing, ...fact..

So you admit that the effect will not be "zero", as now you are saying the "practical output ... millionths of a knot".

That was my point - the effect of these boats will not be zero, but it may be very small.

[cloudhopper]

The moored hulls are obstructing the flow and actually causing water upstream to pile up higher. A river is not a pipe and any water accelerated by the props will pile up immediately downstream and then outward in all directions including back upstream. The net effect is actually negative and a complete waste of energy, machinery and manpower.

[bkkjames]

So what was the nett result of this exercise-all I saw was news of another industrial estate going under in ayuthaya (sp) yesterday?

[Who, me ?]

No I do not have any basic physics education at all. I have a 1st in Physics with pure maths as an accompaniment. As I said if you want to try and measure the practical output at the river mouth in millionths of a knot then go ahead, the fact is the practical output to the man with a measuring stick will be zero. Care to argue on this properly??? The boats have achieved nothing, ...fact..

So you admit that the effect will not be "zero", as now you are saying the "practical output ... millionths of a knot".

That was my point - the effect of these boats will not be zero, but it may be very small.

The effect was to make the clowns that are supposed to run the country look like they are doing something. It was another opportunity to make a photo op, and to waste more energy in blah blah blah.... Those morons who were busy to stage this useless event would have been better trying to bring supplies to those in need, to try to rescue some desperate Thai who have lost the few thing they had. The amount of fuel that was turn into smoke for nothing would certainly have been better used in carrying goods and people. But this not great on pictures.....

[FOODLOVER]

No I do not have any basic physics education at all. I have a 1st in Physics with pure maths as an accompaniment. As I said if you want to try and measure the practical output at the river mouth in millionths of a knot then go ahead, the fact is the practical output to the man with a measuring stick will be zero. Care to argue on this properly??? The boats have achieved nothing, ...fact..

So you admit that the effect will not be "zero", as now you are saying the "practical output ... millionths of a knot".

That was my point - the effect of these boats will not be zero, but it may be very small.

The effect was to make the clowns that are supposed to run the country look like they are doing something. It was another opportunity to make a photo op, and to waste more energy in blah blah blah.... Those morons who were busy to stage this useless event would have been better trying to bring supplies to those in need, to try to rescue some desperate Thai who have lost the few thing they had. The amount of fuel that was turn into smoke for nothing would certainly have been better used in carrying goods and people. But this not great on pictures.....

Word +10

[metisdead]

No matter how veiled the insinuations are, do not go there.

2) Not to express disrespect of the King of Thailand or anyone else in the Thai royal family, whether living or deceased, nor to criticize the monarchy as an institution. Speculation, comments and discussion of either a political or personal nature are not allowed when discussing HM The King or the Royal family. Discussion of the lese majeste law or lese majeste cases is permitted on the forum, providing no comment or speculation is made referencing the royal family. To breach this rule will result in immediate ban.

Posts have been removed.

[JayBangkok]

Yingluck, in her Commodore ball cap, is, like Helen of Troy, the face that launched a thousand ships...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXbPvYpEFFM

.

I think you must be referring to the farce that launched a thousand quips!

Edited October 17, 2011 by JayBangkok

[BabySun]

@jetsetBKK

I share your views about this topic.BUT! - this thread is not about physics!This is about politics.

ThaiVisa is going into politics.

[AleG]

@jetsetBKK

I share your views about this topic.BUT! - this thread is not about physics!This is about politics.

ThaiVisa is going into politics.

Oh, it is about physics.

Here's some science for you, Newton's First: The velocity of a body remains constant unless the body is acted upon by an external force.

In the last video I saw the boats in mid river keeping position against the river flow with their engines, not anchored to a bridge or anything else.

If an object being propelled through a medium, say... I don't know, river water, stays in the same position it is because the thrust equals the drag, that is the push from the propeller in one direction equals the push from the water in the other. In short, boat in river, push = X, drag = X therefore the net result is ZERO energy added to the river, whatever water those boats are pushing back is canceled out by the water the hulls are slowing down.

I wonder if the Science Minister even heard about Newton.

[BabySun]

@jetsetBKK

I share your views about this topic.BUT! - this thread is not about physics!This is about politics.

ThaiVisa is going into politics.

Oh, it is about physics.

Here's some science for you, Newton's First: The velocity of a body remains constant unless the body is acted upon by an external force.

In the last video I saw the boats in mid river keeping position against the river flow with their engines, not anchored to a bridge or anything else.

If an object being propelled through a medium, say... I don't know, river water, stays in the same position it is because the thrust equals the drag, that is the push from the propeller in one direction equals the push from the water in the other. In short, boat in river, push = X, drag = X therefore the net result is ZERO energy added to the river, whatever water those boats are pushing back is canceled out by the water the hulls are slowing down.

I wonder if the Science Minister even heard about Newton.

You have heard,but you do not understand it.You dont have a grasp of it.

[AleG]

@jetsetBKK

I share your views about this topic.BUT! - this thread is not about physics!This is about politics.

ThaiVisa is going into politics.

Oh, it is about physics.

Here's some science for you, Newton's First: The velocity of a body remains constant unless the body is acted upon by an external force.

In the last video I saw the boats in mid river keeping position against the river flow with their engines, not anchored to a bridge or anything else.

If an object being propelled through a medium, say... I don't know, river water, stays in the same position it is because the thrust equals the drag, that is the push from the propeller in one direction equals the push from the water in the other. In short, boat in river, push = X, drag = X therefore the net result is ZERO energy added to the river, whatever water those boats are pushing back is canceled out by the water the hulls are slowing down.

I wonder if the Science Minister even heard about Newton.

You have heard,but you do not understand it.You dont have a grasp of it.

You are right, I have no idea what you are talking about.

[FOODLOVER]

@jetsetBKK

I share your views about this topic.BUT! - this thread is not about physics!This is about politics.

ThaiVisa is going into politics.

Oh, it is about physics.

Here's some science for you, Newton's First: The velocity of a body remains constant unless the body is acted upon by an external force.

In the last video I saw the boats in mid river keeping position against the river flow with their engines, not anchored to a bridge or anything else.

If an object being propelled through a medium, say... I don't know, river water, stays in the same position it is because the thrust equals the drag, that is the push from the propeller in one direction equals the push from the water in the other. In short, boat in river, push = X, drag = X therefore the net result is ZERO energy added to the river, whatever water those boats are pushing back is canceled out by the water the hulls are slowing down.

I wonder if the Science Minister even heard about Newton.

"I suspect that the key is to keep the speed of the boats only slightly higher than the existing flow of water in the river. This way the effective Reynolds Number will be low enough so the "flow" of the boats relative to the river will be laminar (governed by friction) instead of turbulent (producing mixing, agitation, and wakes). The Reynolds Number should vary directly with the relative speed and inversely with the "channel" width between adjacent boats in a complex relationship. The length of the boat, defining the effective channel length, also plays a role".

Step Dads a Physicist with a PhD from Stanford and this was his opinion. (Not in fluid dynamics)".I believe that any experienced fluid dynamicist should be able to work out an approximate solution based on flow in an open channel". He added. So why was this not done before they started this endeavour?

Always ask the smart dudes!

Edited October 17, 2011 by FOODLOVER

[GentlemanJim]

@jetsetBKK

I share your views about this topic.BUT! - this thread is not about physics!This is about politics.

ThaiVisa is going into politics.

Oh, it is about physics.

Here's some science for you, Newton's First: The velocity of a body remains constant unless the body is acted upon by an external force.

In the last video I saw the boats in mid river keeping position against the river flow with their engines, not anchored to a bridge or anything else.

If an object being propelled through a medium, say... I don't know, river water, stays in the same position it is because the thrust equals the drag, that is the push from the propeller in one direction equals the push from the water in the other. In short, boat in river, push = X, drag = X therefore the net result is ZERO energy added to the river, whatever water those boats are pushing back is canceled out by the water the hulls are slowing down.

I wonder if the Science Minister even heard about Newton.

You have heard,but you do not understand it.You dont have a grasp of it.

You are right, I have no idea what you are talking about.

A;eG

It starts to hurt your head when you continue to bang it on the wall, we need to stop or we will end up like the more mentally challenged on here, who seem to think that the boats actually made a change to the river. I never cease to be amazed that in the effort of trying to prove they are clever, people on here will argue until they are blue in the face that they are right. The fact is that the neanderthals can say what they want about their kindergarten understanding of Newtons laws (it is an achievement at least that they have heard of Newton), the fact is if we cannot measure the difference because it is so minute and small then for all intents and purposes, with regards to flood relief the effect is zero. If the pedants cannot understand that then they belong in the back patting club for the Science Minister. The waste of resources in this case is simply staggering. If the neanderthals continue to fight back AleG, we better just leave them as they will drag us down to their level of intellect in the end.

By the way @ BabySun

Can you explain what you mean in your one liner, "you have heard but you do not understand. You don't have a grasp". Please enlighten us to the thought processes that led you to make that statement. Please describe exactly how the laws of Newton in this case are going to be applied, considering ALL the variables, that will show that the river water could be measurably speeded up in outflow at the mouth of the river.

[webfact]

Flood center: boats push 5-10% of flood runoff out to sea succeeded;Nakhon Sawan should see water recede in 7 days but months for Ayutthaya /TAN_Network

[GentlemanJim]

Flood center: boats push 5-10% of flood runoff out to sea succeeded;Nakhon Sawan should see water recede in 7 days but months for Ayutthaya /TAN_Network

So the Ministry would have us believe that these boats moved an extra 250-450 Cu M per SECOND down the river and out to sea? Or perhaps it was that they started Operation Crutch It at Peak High Tide, and the subsequent falling in water levels was due to the tide going out. It just beggars belief that the Government feed this garbage to it's people.

[Buchholz]

So the Ministry would have us believe that these boats moved an extra 250-450 Cu M per SECOND down the river and out to sea? Or perhaps it was that they started Operation Crutch It at Peak High Tide, and the subsequent falling in water levels was due to the tide going out. It just beggars belief that the Government feed this garbage to it's people.

450 Cu M per second is apparently "a relatively small amount"......

In an attempt to speed the flow through waterways towards the Gulf of Thailand, authorities organised around a thousand boats to line up with engines running on the Chao Phraya, Bang Pa Kong and Tha Chin rivers.

Yingluck, speaking from the banks of the Chao Phraya in Nonthaburi province, north of Bangkok, said the boats' propellers would move only a relatively small amount of water but that the measure was still "worthwhile and efficient".

AFP

http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Thai_capitals_barriers_hold_but_floods_still_menace_999.html

Edited October 17, 2011 by Buchholz

[Insight]

It just beggars belief that the Government feed this garbage to it's people.

No it doesn't

[Robby nz]

I noted on Tele that most of the boats involved had pretty orange Yingluk flags no doubt given to them.(Hope they were given money for fuel)

Now if all the money spent on these flags had gone to the flood victims........but then that would not have been such good publisity for the lady.

[MaxYakov]

@jetsetBKK

I share your views about this topic.BUT! - this thread is not about physics!This is about politics.

ThaiVisa is going into politics.

Oh, it is about physics.

Here's some science for you, Newton's First: The velocity of a body remains constant unless the body is acted upon by an external force.

In the last video I saw the boats in mid river keeping position against the river flow with their engines, not anchored to a bridge or anything else.

If an object being propelled through a medium, say... I don't know, river water, stays in the same position it is because the thrust equals the drag, that is the push from the propeller in one direction equals the push from the water in the other. In short, boat in river, push = X, drag = X therefore the net result is ZERO energy added to the river, whatever water those boats are pushing back is canceled out by the water the hulls are slowing down.

I wonder if the Science Minister even heard about Newton.

"I suspect that the key is to keep the speed of the boats only slightly higher than the existing flow of water in the river. This way the effective Reynolds Number will be low enough so the "flow" of the boats relative to the river will be laminar (governed by friction) instead of turbulent (producing mixing, agitation, and wakes). The Reynolds Number should vary directly with the relative speed and inversely with the "channel" width between adjacent boats in a complex relationship. The length of the boat, defining the effective channel length, also plays a role".

Step Dads a Physicist with a PhD from Stanford and this was his opinion. (Not in fluid dynamics)".I believe that any experienced fluid dynamicist should be able to work out an approximate solution based on flow in an open channel". He added. So why was this not done before they started this endeavour?

Always ask the smart dudes!

I suspect that the key is to keep the speed of the boats only slightly higher than the existing flow of water in the river.

Except that their speed relative to land was zero. So their speed relative to the river water was completely dependent on the current's speed. BTW, current speed near the banks is relatively slower than elsewhere in the river. As far as Reynolds number, channel width, etc probably have little application in this 'experiment', compared to the other factors.

My 'smart dude', Sir Isaac Newton . says that the mooring lines would have provided most of the opposing force to the prop wash force. This is illustrated by comparing the mooring lines' tension magnitude and direction with the engines off (normal current opposing force on the boat hull) and the tension/direction of the mooring lines with the engines on (accelerating water, rearwards). I don't know how the off-shore boats were being moored, but I'd say they were somehow tied to a fixed mooring. Current speed-matching and directional stability would have been a problem, otherwise. I did see one off-shore tug that was moored to a concrete pile and many boats tied-up at shore.

Edited October 17, 2011 by MaxYakov

[BabySun]

@AleG, - all boats are anchored or tied to each other,if some were not - it was skippers fault.The last line of your post #406:was it about physics,about politics? I read it as an insult!(insults are not allowed by ThaiVisa regulations unless they are politically motivated?),you did not insult me,you are insulting minister in the office!

@GentlemanJim - read post # 409 by "Foodlover";from me - ChaoPraya main channel is very deep(20-30 mtrs) and it works like tube catching boats propellers small currents - to SiamBay which is quite near.

in my old post I said - 10% of the river flaw,I did not make big error in my estimation.All boats power was like 100MW.Pumps at new airport have 1MW each and flow 10cubic mtr/second(each) - the fact!,you can verify it,go to airport and ask or read another thread in TV.

[MaxYakov]

@jetsetBKK

I share your views about this topic.BUT! - this thread is not about physics!This is about politics.

ThaiVisa is going into politics.

The notorious Political Science contradiction.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

The effect was to make the clowns that are supposed to run the country look like they are doing something. It was another opportunity to make a photo op, and to waste more energy in blah blah blah.... Those morons who were busy to stage this useless event would have been better trying to bring supplies to those in need, to try to rescue some desperate Thai who have lost the few thing they had. The amount of fuel that was turn into smoke for nothing would certainly have been better used in carrying goods and people. But this not great on pictures.....

Indeed, this above was the real "impact" of their charade.... Thanks for saving me and many of the rest of us the trouble by putting it so succinctly...

Someone above likened this episode to the story of Hans Christian Andersen, presumably re his story "The Emperor's New Clothes," which is fitting one for this farce.... I'd liken it more to Browning's "The Pied Piper of Hamelin," where appropriately, the "creatures" are all led into the river.

[GentlemanJim]

@AleG, - all boats are anchored or tied to each other,if some were not - it was skippers fault.The last line of your post #406:was it about physics,about politics? I read it as an insult!(insults are not allowed by ThaiVisa regulations unless they are politically motivated?),you did not insult me,you are insulting minister in the office!

@GentlemanJim - read post # 409 by "Foodlover";from me - ChaoPraya main channel is very deep(20-30 mtrs) and it works like tube catching boats propellers small currents - to SiamBay which is quite near.

in my old post I said - 10% of the river flaw,I did not make big error in my estimation.All boats power was like 100MW.Pumps at new airport have 1MW each and flow 10cubic mtr/second(each) - the fact!,you can verify it,go to airport and ask or read another thread in TV.

No it does not act like a tube.

Yes the river is 20-30M deep, now just think about that for a moment. If the boats got rid of an additional 5-10% of river water, that means the boats would have had to accelerate out to sea an additional amount of water, every second, equivalent to a minimum of 1m-to a maximum of 3m in depth across the whole width of the river. Do you honestly believe that? If it were achieved it would have given some of the best surfing waves for water sport fanatics in Thailand in living memory. The whole thing is garbage, give it some serious rationale thought will you.