Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


Useless Information


BubbaG2000 e2
7 767 1
20 Oct 2008 4:38PM

Quote:Quote:By my calculations...

QE2 - 34.2 miles per gallon per person. Somebody even more bored at work can correct me if they wish.

This has turned into a QE2/Titanic thread!Actually the more important figure is person-miles per gallon. (Sorry, my mistake - the mpg per person per gallon figure is meaningless.. and therefore ideal for this thread! )

But the 34.2 figure is correct for PMPG.

OK. let us assume a generous 12mpg for a large 4x4 on the school run with two passengers (mum + brat). We get a comparable figure of 24 PMPG.

So the QE2, for all its luxury, is a "greener" way to travel than a 4x4. We can, and no doubt will, argue about whether the correct parameters have been used. Should we include crew in the QE2 calculation - after all they are only there to serve the passengers. What if Mum has more than one brat in the 4x4.

So much to think about here..............

As for QE2 -v- Titanic (which is larger), we have already had that discussion. No clear cut answer. QE2 is longer, Titanic is heavier.

............................ who's snoring at the back there?



But then... would the ship not do less MPGs with more people in it adding to the weight? (just being picky Wink).

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

keith selmes 11 7.1k 1 United Kingdom
20 Oct 2008 4:39PM

Quote:**** is an acronym.

that really is useless on account of not being true.
Carabosse e2
11 39.7k 269 England
20 Oct 2008 4:41PM
Indeed so. It's from the Old English word 'scitan'. Smile
keith selmes 11 7.1k 1 United Kingdom
20 Oct 2008 4:43PM
I didn't want to say that in case it was useful.
User_Removed 12 7.3k 6 United Kingdom
20 Oct 2008 4:43PM
Don't argue with CB - when you're talking s**t, nobody knows more Grin Grin Grin
digitall e2
8 238 6 Wales
20 Oct 2008 4:45PM
Who invented the word "Hindsight" it's of no use to anyone.
Carabosse e2
11 39.7k 269 England
20 Oct 2008 4:45PM

Quote:would the ship not do less MPGs with more people in it adding to the weight


As the ship itself weighs about 48,000 tons I'm guessing a few people extra would not reduce fuel consumption hugely.

If you assume an average of 75 kilos per person, 3648 passengers and crew would weigh 273.6 tons........ a mere 0.57% of the ship's weight.
keith selmes 11 7.1k 1 United Kingdom
20 Oct 2008 4:53PM
the myrmidons are no bottle ale houses
NickParry e2
9 1.0k 79 Wales
21 Oct 2008 9:49AM
The plural of fish is not always fish.
Nigeyboy e2
6 537 United Kingdom
21 Oct 2008 9:58AM
Seeing as we are on about Ships . . .

The word POSH is also an accronym.

In the days when you used to sail by steamship to Australia / the Far East etc, if you had plenty of wedge, you would book your state rooms POSH. This meant on the outward leg of ther journey, you stayed on the cooler Port side of the ship (ie away from the sun for the hot part of the day), and on the home leg it was the Starboard side - Port Out - Starboard Home.
NickParry e2
9 1.0k 79 Wales
21 Oct 2008 10:01AM
The year 532BC was not know as 532BC to those who lived in 532BC.

Nick Smile
phaz99 7 26 1 Scotland
21 Oct 2008 10:28AM
Cats can be left or right pawed.
Elemobe 6 36 1 United Kingdom
21 Oct 2008 11:22AM
Here's some useless info:

I have just spent 5 minutes trying to work out if my foot really is the same size as the distance from elbow to wrist (read first page of thread). Hubby walked in (we both work from home) to find me sitting at computer with my leg up and foot on arm to measure!!!!

"Working hard?" and he walks out.

ROFL!!


Hmmm,

now to think of other useless info to share.
keith selmes 11 7.1k 1 United Kingdom
21 Oct 2008 12:03PM

Quote:The word POSH is also an accronym.
No, thats another one that isn't.
dwilkin e2
8 24.3k United Kingdom
21 Oct 2008 12:14PM

Quote:No, thats another one that isn't


Yup - I call this sort of thing a backfill - someone invents an explanation for a word that sounds slightly plausible, and eveyone assumes it to be true. Like, for instance, Fornication Under Consent of King - load of rubbish!

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.