Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | ROOFLES's commentslogin

Well you cant just get rid of Gasoline in the refinery process. Crude oil essentially gets destilled. The different fractions are split based on boiling point/weight. Heavy fuel oil-> Diesel-> Kerosene->Gasoline-> Naphta-> Propane/Butane whatever. That is why making new Plastic is so incredibly cheap. You need (i think) ethylene to make plastic. Ethylene is a byproduct of oil refining. If no one buys it, the whole refinery grinds to a halt because you are not allowed to burn it anymore. They practically give this stuff away. Same thing would happen to gasoline. If fewer people need Gasoline, it will become crazy cheap since you cant really do anything with it, except burn it. So it really isnt that easy. IF you get rid of Diesel/Gasoline you will also get rid of the entire petrochemical industry.Elastomers, plastics, lubricants. A huge lot depends on the sweet dino juice.


Cracking and chain lengthening* were covered in my GCSE in chemistry, and given GCSEs are the UK school leaving qualification, anything in them can't be particularly difficult or mysterious in industrial practice.

Not claiming this would be free or anything like that, just that a well-known possibility exists.

* I forget the technical name, my GCSEs were 26 years ago


Plastic isn't a single material. Some plastic materials (e.g PE, polyethylene or PVC, polyvinyl chlorine, but also others that use ethylene derivatives as intermediates) require ethylene, but there certainly are plastic materials which are produced without any involvement of ethylene or other petrolium derivatives.


CNC Milled and suface brushed. I Think these screws are going to be used in some decorative Panels etc. Would be cost prohibitive to use these all over the Car.


This. It's obviously an interior fastener. Maybe they'll have a cheaper one without the logo for the airbag module or whatever. OEMs have spent untold sums over the year hiding interior trim fasteners using all manner of push and snap fittings. A few low trim vehicles have bucked that trend recently, to much savings of labor and tool/die cost and no apparent ill effect in the mind of consumers. And now everybody is testing the waters.


ZF 8HP is still a traditional torque converter transmission. Most high performance or high torque applications use that design. Dual clutch automatics or automated manuals can't take it.


Virtually every truck has an automated manual transmission, every EV 2-speed is a DCT, Porsche uses PDKs etc.


Every truck? Like which ones?

As an American (land of the pickup truck) I can't think of any


I think GP meant eighteen-wheelers and the like.


> American (land of the pickup truck)

More like SUVs with beds

But yes, sibling is correct, I'm talking about commercial vehicles.


Citation needed. By truck if you mean commercial truck (lorry, artic, etc.) then no, Allison still makes hydraulic automatics which are very common in vocational work the world over.


Tremec makes DCTs that are used in 800hp Mustangs and 1000hp Corvettes



That's nice of them! Too bad they don't offer repair for other speaker systems that are out of warranty, nor do they sell components for other repair shops to fix speakers that are out of warranty.


Non redundant fuel pump that doesn't even restart on power failure. Main engine shutting of when water pressure drops, backup generator not even starting in time AND shoddy wiring that offlines the whole steering system. Thats what i call GOATED engineering. props to Hyundai HI


> Non redundant fuel pump that doesn't even restart on power failure

The crew weren't using the redundant fuel pumps. They were using the non-redundant fuel line flushing pump as a generator fuel pump, a task it was never designed for and which was not compliant.

That it doesn't restart on restoration of power is by design; you don't want to start flushing your fuel lines when the power returns because this could kill your generators and cause another blackout.

> Main engine shutting of (sic) when water pressure drops

Yeah, this is quite bad. There ought to be an override one can activate in an emergency in order to run the engines to the point of overheating, under the assumption that even destroying the engine will cause less catastrophic consequences than not having propulsion at the time.

> backup generator not even starting in time

There were 5 generators on board. Generators 1 through 4 are the main generators on the HV bus side, and the emergency backup generator is on the LV bus side.

When the incident occurred, the ship was being powered by generators 3 and 4, which were receiving their fuel via the non-redundant fuel line flushing pump. These generators powered the HV bus, which powered the LV bus via a transformer. The emergency backup generator was not running, so the LV bus was only receiving power from the HV bus via 1 transformer.

The incident tripped the circuit breaker for this transformer, disconnecting the HV bus from the LV bus, resulting in the first LV bus blackout. This resulted in main engine shutdown (coolant pump failure) and an automatic emergency backup generator startup.

There is an alternate (backup) set of circuit breakers and transformer that could have energised the LV bus, but the transformer switches were left in the manual position, so this failover did not happen automatically and immediately. There were no company procedures or regulations which required them to be left in the automatic position.

The LV bus also powered the fuel line flushing pump, so this pump failed. As a result, generators 3 and 4 started to fail (being supplied with fuel by a pump which was no longer operating). The electrical management system automatically commanded the start of generator 2 in response to the failing performance of generators 3 and 4.

Generator 1 and generator 2 were fed by the standard fuel pumps, which were available. One main generator is capable of powering the entire ship, so there was no need to start generator 1 as well; this would have just put more load on the HV bus (by having to run the fuel pump for generator 1 as well).

Instead of the automatic transformer failover (which was unavailable), the crew manually closed the same circuit breaker that had already tripped, 1 minute after the first LV bus blackout.

This restored power to the LV bus via the same transformer that was originally powering it, but did not restart the fuel line flushing pump supplying generators 3 and 4 (which were still running, but spinning down because they were being fed fuel via gravity only). This also restored full steering control, but this in itself was inadequate to control the vessel's course without the engine-driven propeller.

The main engine was still offline and takes upwards of half a minute to restart, assuming everyone is in place and ready to do so immediately, which was unlikely.

The emergency backup generator finally started 10 seconds later (25 seconds too late by requirements, 70 seconds after the first LV bus blackout).

Generator 2 had not yet gotten up to speed and connected to the HV bus before generators 3 and 4 disconnected (having exhausted the gravity-fed fuel in the line ahead of the inoperative fuel line flushing pump), resulting in an HV bus blackout and the second LV bus blackout. With only the emergency backup generator running on the LV side, only one-third of steering control was available, but again, this was inadequate without the engine.

3 seconds later, generator 2 connected to the HV bus. 26 seconds later, a crew member manually activated the alternate transformer, restoring power to the LV bus for the second time.

The collision was preventable:

- It is no longer a requirement that the engine automatically shuts down due to a loss of coolant pressure. It was at the time the vessel was constructed, but this was never re-evaluated. If it were, the system may have been tweaked to avoid losing the engine.

- If the transformer switches were left in the automatic position, the LV bus would have switched over to being powered by the second transformer automatically, and the engine coolant pumps and fuel line flushing pump would not have been lost.

- Leaving the emergency backup generator running (instead of in standby configuration) would have kept the LV bus energised after the first transformer tripped, and the engine coolant pumps and fuel line flushing pump would not have been lost.

- If the crew had opted to manually activate the second transformer within about half a minute (twice as fast as they reactivated the first one), and restarted the fuel line flushing pump, a second blackout would have been avoided, and the engine could have been restarted in time to steer away.

This shows the importance of leaving recovery systems armed and regularly training on power transfer procedures. It also illustrates why you shouldn't be running your main generators from a fuel pump which isn't designed for that task. This same pump setup was found on another ship they operated.


Ah so the crew modified the Generator to use the flush pumps instead? i really don't understand that. Why would using the flush pumps even be a viable alternative? were the normal pumps broken or was this just how the ship was built?


It saved them time on switching the fuel they were using. Within US waters they were required to either burn cleaner fuel or scrub the dirty (high-sulfur) diesel fuel they would use in open waters.

They didn't have a fuel scrubber and they didn't want to spend the time flushing the dirty fuel out of the fuel lines to switch to the clean fuel, so they bypassed the fuel lines and fuel pumps for generators 3 and 4 and used the fuel line flushing pump as a fuel pump to feed generators 3 and 4 with clean fuel (marine gas oil) instead.

They would then presumably start generator 1 and/or generator 2 once in open waters, feeding them with the regular, cheaper, dirtier diesel fuel, and shut down generators 3 and 4.

Bypassing the fuel lines and fuel pumps for generators 3 and 4 made them prone to the very failure they experienced.

The ship would not have been built this way; it wasn't up to code.


i stopped counting how often Time Machine randomly stopped working on my wifes Macbook to our NAS. What a garbage software.


Our infra runs on 2 12-Year old shitbox Poweredges. so yeah most is just overkill.


Cool! It's still purpose-built hardware, but cool to hear such stories. Do you use colocation in a data center?


No we don't. Demand isn't that high, we don't need to serve thousands of users. It's just manuals, firmware downloads, datasheets etc. For customers.


Probably because the regular boring car stuff is not even made by car companies anymore LMAO. The steering racks are made by Bosch or maybe ZF. Brakes come from Brembo. ABS module and its software is Bosch aswell. same goes for brakebooster, EPS pumps, AC compressors, and airbag controllers. I think the only electronics Tesla develops and manufactures are EV power electronics, infotainment, ADAS&Co and the drive motors.


We're talking about software here, not hardware.


If you take a VW Golf, you'll find the ECU and all of the software running the car is built by Bosch too. Essentially they sell VW a kit which needs to be mounted on a vehicle platform. Tesla is likely one of the only companies for better or worse that don't follow this model.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: