Work out how to remove munitions from lakes - win £45,000
Discussion
How hard could it be? Switzerland will pay you 50,000 Swiss francs for coming up with the best idea of how to remove tonnes of munitions that have been dumped in its lakes.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cdd7y3nm09lo
So, collective PH brain, this is a chance to submit the winning solution and buy a few sheds.
Personally, I think it's got to be almost entirely remotely done, because there is the suggestion that much of what has been dumped is still live....
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cdd7y3nm09lo
So, collective PH brain, this is a chance to submit the winning solution and buy a few sheds.
Personally, I think it's got to be almost entirely remotely done, because there is the suggestion that much of what has been dumped is still live....
Then you have the question of how to transport the live and potentially highly unstable munitions to somewhere where they can be made safe and/or disposed of?
There was a series of documentaries on BBC 4 a while back about how Portion Down operates, one of them detailing how poison gas shells from WW1 were made safe. It's a very slow, methodical process that costs a lot of money to do safely.
There was a series of documentaries on BBC 4 a while back about how Portion Down operates, one of them detailing how poison gas shells from WW1 were made safe. It's a very slow, methodical process that costs a lot of money to do safely.
Freeze the whole lake, then using a few big helicopters lift the lake, bombs and all, up out and fly it to a remote location that no one cares about like Russia and drop it there.
If you want to keep a lake there then you might have to freeze another similar sized one and do a swap.
While the water is out go and pick up any bombs that didn't stay in the giant ice cube.
If you want to keep a lake there then you might have to freeze another similar sized one and do a swap.
While the water is out go and pick up any bombs that didn't stay in the giant ice cube.
Seems to be a similar problem as the munitions from the SS Montgomery wreck.
A lot of money has been spent looking at that and no easy answer found.
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=18...
A lot of money has been spent looking at that and no easy answer found.
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=18...
Load all the ammo onto an old barge, sink it in the middle of the lake... Light blue touch paper.
(Some old shipping containers might come n handy)
NB: IF all else fails, contact International Rescue... Brains & TB4 would sort out this dilemma.
(Some old shipping containers might come n handy)
NB: IF all else fails, contact International Rescue... Brains & TB4 would sort out this dilemma.
Edited by Milkyway on Sunday 18th August 11:29
CoolHands said:
In modern times ‘common sense’ is much ridiculed.
Yet common sense would tell me this was a f
king stupid thing to do from the get-go. Yet it only dawned on them many thousands of tonnes later. Clever.
Not credible, is it? They may have believed it would not explode but they knew it would,eventually, pollute the lakes as the shell casings etc decayed. They didn't care.Yet common sense would tell me this was a f
king stupid thing to do from the get-go. Yet it only dawned on them many thousands of tonnes later. Clever.Tango13 said:
Then you have the question of how to transport the live and potentially highly unstable munitions to somewhere where they can be made safe and/or disposed of?
There was a series of documentaries on BBC 4 a while back about how Portion Down operates, one of them detailing how poison gas shells from WW1 were made safe. It's a very slow, methodical process that costs a lot of money to do safely.
There was a series of documentaries on BBC 4 a while back about how Portion Down operates, one of them detailing how poison gas shells from WW1 were made safe. It's a very slow, methodical process that costs a lot of money to do safely.
"Contract Porton Down to dispose of them".I'll take my cheque in Swiss Francs please.
It's actually 50,000 francs divided between the best three entries. If they use a novel solution that nobody has yet thought it would deserve far more money, especially if the idea is from somebody who is an "inventor" type but has no commercial operation to exploit the idea being put into action.
What a totally stupid thing to do in the first place though.
Best way to get rid of munitions is to use it. Even if there was no training benefit they could have dug a hole, chucked it in and lit the match. A few tons at a time, job done.
It reminds me of those tyre reefs, which fking idiot thought that was a good idea.
I despair at the stupidity of humanity.
Best way to get rid of munitions is to use it. Even if there was no training benefit they could have dug a hole, chucked it in and lit the match. A few tons at a time, job done.
It reminds me of those tyre reefs, which f
king idiot thought that was a good idea.I despair at the stupidity of humanity.
ChocolateFrog said:
What a totally stupid thing to do in the first place though.
Best way to get rid of munitions is to use it. Even if there was no training benefit they could have dug a hole, chucked it in and lit the match. A few tons at a time, job done.
It reminds me of those tyre reefs, which fking idiot thought that was a good idea.
I despair at the stupidity of humanity.
When Singapore surrendered during WW2, the commander there signaled Whitehall to ask what should be done with their ammunition stockpile. Churchill signaled back that the traditional method was to fire it at the enemy.Best way to get rid of munitions is to use it. Even if there was no training benefit they could have dug a hole, chucked it in and lit the match. A few tons at a time, job done.
It reminds me of those tyre reefs, which f
king idiot thought that was a good idea.I despair at the stupidity of humanity.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff