back to article BBC: Monster cargo ship delivers '863 million tins of baked beans'

The BBC has sensationally quantified the cargo capacity of a new behemoth container ship as "863 million tins of baked beans". Auntie's penchant for describing very big, heavy, strong or long things in terms mere mortals can get their heads round is well known to Reg regulars. Last year, it described the constricting force of …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Pen-y-gors

    American Broadcasting Corporation?

    Why does the Beeb like to use units of measurement which are totally meaningless to its audience when trying to make things meaningful? Containers filling a public square in somewhere in North America? How big is a Times Square? is it as big as Trafalgar Square? Or as big as Machynlleth Town Square? And is a Brooklyn Bridge as heavy as Trefechan Bridge in Aberystwyth (pretty heavy, believe me, it's made of stone) or heavier than the new Severn Bridge? Please, please, please use comparisons we understand.

    1. Robert Helpmann??
      Childcatcher

      Re: American Broadcasting Corporation?

      This should not be a cause for complaint. Rather, look at it as an opportunity to unite both sides of the Atlantic through the Register Units of Measurement Program (RUMP). From now on, large weights should be expressed in terms of Brooklyn Bridges (bb) while masses of industrial building materials should instead be expressed in terms of Eiffel Towers (et). This is similar in concept to avoirdupois and troy measurements of weight. While it does nothing whatsoever to simplify the scales used to measure these things (especially as there are already official Reg UOMs for weight), there is nothing so unifying as confusion.

      1. GBL Initialiser

        Re: American Broadcasting Corporation?

        They already have us covered. El Reg has a "Vulture Central units" converter

        http://www.theregister.co.uk/Design/page/reg-standards-converter.html

      2. Euripides Pants
        Childcatcher

        Re: American Broadcasting Corporation?

        Uniting via the RUMP?!

        NO THANKS!!!

    2. NoOnions
      Flame

      Re: American Broadcasting Corporation?

      My guess is that the BBC knows it has a large Amercian readership. The average UK citizen will have heard of Times Square and the Brooklyn Bridge whereas the average American won't have a clue about Trafalgar Square, etc.* After all, all American TV shows and films have to inform the viewer that London is in England and Paris, France, etc.

      I agree though, it is slightly annoying.

      * A sweeping generalisation, I know!

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: American Broadcasting Corporation?

        "Paris, France, etc."

        I thought Paris was in Texas. Oh well.

        1. Stuart Castle Silver badge
          Paris Hilton

          Re: American Broadcasting Corporation?

          I thought Paris was wherever she wanted to be..

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: American Broadcasting Corporation?

        That's staggering! Americans can read English?

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Happy

          Re: American Broadcasting Corporation?

          The Chaser - English to American translator

          The Chaser boys have a go at American tourists.

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IX6K77zHwg

          Bill Maher, makes his point how dumb,ignorant and uneducated the majority of Americans are.And backs it up with facts. The ones who dislike and hate Bill Maher, are the same people who belong to that category of ignorant, embarrassing dummies. Thank You for watching!

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fys3MsKMpms

          Julian Morrow (Chasers War on Everything) interviews (very stupid, normal) Americans and asks questions about the world. The answers are hilarious, enjoy! Very funny.

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMC_ZZlGZkY

          For the smarter yanquies... and those in Queens Land, we suffer the Dumb Fuck Syndrome quite badly in Australia too.......

      3. mark1978

        Re: American Broadcasting Corporation?

        Perhaps the same way that whenever US dollars are quoted the conversion to Pounds is omitted unlike with every other currency.

      4. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: American Broadcasting Corporation?

        Alternatively, the BBC was just indulging in some lazy churnalism from the Maersk press release. Check the second photo on the page - it's Times Square:

        http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21432226

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: American Broadcasting Corporation?

      All part of the great Americanization program. Have you noticed what they've done to "BBC English"? The strange moratorium on the word aeroplane? I wonder how much longer they'll wait before feeling it's safe to start slipping in "airplane".

      Y'all have a nice day.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: American Broadcasting Corporation?

        Do get it right!

        It's "Y'all have a good one".

    4. Wize

      Re: American Broadcasting Corporation?

      "How big is a Times Square? is it as big as Trafalgar Square?"

      Not everyone in the UK knows how big Trafalgar Square is either (other than on a Monopoly board).

      I'm not sure and I've stood in it. Though that was pre-Olympics and I couldn't see a thing for the high fences.

      How about George's Square? Or if piled outside Stirling Library, does it reach the cone on the statue?

      http://comeheretome.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/well.jpg

    5. AceRimmer
      Facepalm

      Re: American Broadcasting Corporation?

      "Why does the Beeb like to use units of measurement which are totally meaningless to its audience when trying to make things meaningful?"

      RTFA

      I know there is a growing trend amongst hard of reading wing commentardship to prevent facts getting in the way of a decent rant but the BBC didn't make that comparison, that image was from Maersk

      As the text under the image states

      "This image from Maersk shows what 18,000 shipping containers look like in the wrong place"

      1. Z80

        Re: American Broadcasting Corporation?

        You're right, people don't take the time to comprehend things before they respond.

        BTW I don't think Pen-y-gors was being serious. Take it easy Ace.

        1. AceRimmer
          Gimp

          @Z80 Re: American Broadcasting Corporation?

          I'm thinking about removing the "Ace" and fully embracing my inner Rimmer

    6. Tom 260

      Re: American Broadcasting Corporation?

      To be (slightly) fair, I've seen and heard American sources compare large objects (typically the bigger asteroids, or ice shelves that have calved from Antarctica/Greenland) to various smaller US states, several of which I'd struggle to place on a map beyond generally north-eastern USA, let alone have an idea of their general size (though I believe there is one that's the size of Wales, give or take a few sheep).

    7. Eddy Ito

      Re: American Broadcasting Corporation?

      Speaking as an American, I can honestly say I haven't a clue how big Times Square is. Judging from the pictures, it's a lot like being in an overfull elevator only outside, unless you're unusually tall of course then it's more like a large overfull open air elevator. They might as well make comparisons to Bowditch crater. As for the Brooklyn Bridge, I've seen it from afar but never picked it up. While we're on the subject I've actually been in the Eiffel Tower but didn't take the time to estimate its mass.

      Now then, how big is a tin of beans? In sardines preferably, but I can convert from linguine and jubs.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        @Eddy Ito (Re: American Broadcasting Corporation?)

        I believe the correct unit of measurement for beans is "hill". (That is, according to my extensive research into bean measurement metrics, which consisted of watching Casablanca.)

    8. Diogenes

      Re: American Broadcasting Corporation?

      Probably quoting a press release & they couldn't be bothered converting to El Reg units

  2. banjomike
    FAIL

    ...terms mere mortals can get their heads round...

    Sorry, no. I cannot visualize "863 million tins of baked beans" any more than I can imagine lots of double decker buses balanced on top of a brace of stegosauruses (which according to the BBC were the size of a single decker bus).

    1. Grikath
      Pint

      Re: ...terms mere mortals can get their heads round...

      All I know is that that many beans would produce one mighty fart....

      Icon, because need need to was it down properly.

    2. Robin

      Re: ...terms mere mortals can get their heads round...

      How about 10 x 863 million student meals? Any easier?

    3. NightFox

      Re: ...terms mere mortals can get their heads round...

      Has the Beeb now officially dropped Olympic Size Swimming Pools from it's official units of measurement?

    4. Field Marshal Von Krakenfart
      Boffin

      Re: ...terms mere mortals can get their heads round...

      863 million tins of baked beans

      So how many Ann-Margret's could swin in that amount of baked beans?

  3. falsedan

    earth to moon is a bit further that reported ...

    closest around 350,000km, not 350km

    1. Fuzz

      Re: earth to moon is a bit further that reported ...

      ISS not moon

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: earth to moon is a bit further that reported ...

        That's not a moon!

  4. Tim 11

    too complex for us mere mortals to understand

    All I need to know is, is it bigger than Wales?

    1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge
      Pint

      Re: too complex for us mere mortals to understand

      According to my reckoning, it would require ~260000 million cans to cover Wales one bean deep, so 863m tins really isn't all that much. It would cover the City of London to about 4½ inches deep.

      1. Androgynous Crackwhore
        Thumb Up

        Re: too complex for us mere mortals to understand

        It would cover the City of London to about 4½ inches deep.

        Now that I'd like to see. Kickstarter?

        1. Dixie Nourmous

          Re: too complex for us mere mortals to understand

          But how much toast would that require ?

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Mushroom

            Re: too complex for us mere mortals to understand

            More importantly, how many of these ships would be required to drown the financial industry in their own waste products?

  5. Frankee Llonnygog

    Proper units

    Area vs area of Wales, and volume expressed as a number of whales, please.

  6. Vulch
    Mushroom

    Bang

    At a shade over 46km, that tower of containers would have been about the right height to get clipped by Fridays meteor in Russia.

    1. Mister_C

      Cosmic Jengo

      Good job nobody had tried to stack them then, would've made quite a din when they tumbled

  7. Silverburn
    Holmes

    And the name of this ship is...?

    <-- his skills are required, apparently...is the Triple E the class, or the name?

    1. Jedit Silver badge
      Headmaster

      "is the Triple E the class, or the name?"

      It's the class, obviously. You see it, and you go "Eee, that's a big ship!"

      1. Pen-y-gors

        Re: "is the Triple E the class, or the name?"

        Could we please have a suitable photo to illustrate how young ladies on the beach compare in size to an Eee

  8. JDX Gold badge

    A billion tins of beans

    Not any easier to get one's mind around... a billion is too many to conceptualise.

    1. Silverburn

      Re: A billion tins of beans

      I'd have been more impressed if they'd quoted the volume in the number of actual beans. Utterly irrelevant, but impressive all the same.

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    bit dubious about 18,000

    I work in shipping and that may be a little on the high side. Largest extant per wiki (don't have official figures to hand) is currently about 15,000 and teu figures are fudgable. Weight is significant.

    Perhaps more imporatantly, the shipping industry is run mainly by morons who sell at lows and buy, and commission massive newbuilds, at the peak of the market (from wiki, "In February and June 2011, Maersk awarded Daewoo Shipbuilding two US$1.9 billion contracts ($3.8bn total) to build twenty of the ships").

    Going by that, the current bubble is about to burst. Caveat emptor.

    1. lglethal Silver badge
      Go

      Re: bit dubious about 18,000

      I'm going to guess they've gone with the total ship volume which is naturally not the entire cargo area (small things like engines, crew accomodation, the tower, etc tend to get in the way...

      18,000 total size, 15,000 actual cargo carry ability. Sounds about right to me...

      1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

        Re: bit dubious about 18,000

        18,000 teu is how many they could stack and be within the height and sight line limits

        15,000 teu is how many they could hold at typical average container weights

        If next years christmas popular present is made of lead it will be lower, if there is a big craze for bubble wrap it will be higher

  10. Syed
    Facepalm

    And if you...

    ... lay the containers out flat they would cover an area the size of Felixstowe (or thereabouts).

    1. graeme leggett Silver badge

      Re: And if you...

      I thought Felixstowe was already covered by containers.....

  11. Captain TickTock
    Boffin

    How many olympic-sized swimming pools...

    would you need to hold all those baked beans

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Coat

      Re: How many olympic-sized swimming pools...

      ...and how many Roger Daltrey dolls would you need to sit in them with their loofah's?

      Mine's the one with meaty, bouncy things in the pockets, and no they're not made of horse!

  12. Richard 81

    When I read that article I just new El Reg was going to have a go.

    I'll admit they did labour the point a bit.

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    "It's the size of Texas, Mr President."

    Well, it worked in Armageddon.

  14. ukgnome

    70's Maths question of the day

    Each bean is approximately 0.5 cubed -

    An Olympic swimming pool must be 50m x25m x2m

    Therefore approximately 5 billion beans fit in the pool.

    The question is how many pools would 863 million tins of baked beans fill?

    I do know that there are on average 328 beans per can.

    **Please show your working out in the margins

    1. I like noodles
      Thumb Up

      Re: 70's Maths question of the day

      This is excellent news my presumably small friend.

      From this I can work out how many olympic swimming pools fit on the boat, and thereafter I'll clearly always be able to work out how much of any damn thing I can transport on this boat at any point as long as it's sizeable enough to be measurable in swimming pools. Or if it's the same size as a bean.

      As long as whatever it is is no longer tinned of course.

    2. frank ly

      @ukgnome Re: 70's Maths question of the day

      We're all wondering: How do you know how many beans there are in a can? Furthermore, what size of can and what brand?

      1. ukgnome

        Re: @ukgnome 70's Maths question of the day

        Because ex-IT bod and welsh superhero told me

        captain beany

        The Captains Wiki page

        Although according to the Heinz website the answer is actually 465 beans per standard 415g can (approx)

        I guess I got my can sizes wrong

        1. pepper
          Coat

          Re: @ukgnome 70's Maths question of the day

          I think you got canned there...

  15. TeeCee Gold badge
    Happy

    "....you could fit 36,000 cars or 863 million tins of baked beans."

    I reckon that comes out as 277-and-a-bit Olympic-sized swimming pools. Anyone care to calculate the ship's displacement in pools to give us the number of additional poolfulls required to sink it?

    Assuming that standard TEU size to be correct[1] and the number of same the thing can carry to be accurate.

    [1] Apparently the height of a TEU is a bit of a moveable feast.

  16. Podsgrove

    what is the length and width of this ship measured in Standard London Buses?

  17. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    ..or about one years worth of beans

    http://www.heinz.co.uk/ourcompany/aboutheinz/trivia

    ..but since the UK makes them..and the UK eats them, it'd be a bit pointless putting that many cans into

    shipping containers and onto such a vessel.

    maybe they could quantify that number in a different way - eg how many charity bean baths would that number fill?

    better than the Daily Mails coverage...they'd have said how many illegal immigrants could hide in aforementioned containers.

  18. Charlie Clark Silver badge
    Thumb Up

    Me like

    A can of beans is a handy proxy for both size and weight. Anyone know the appropriate conversion ratio for SI Jubs? Also, how many Chuck Norrises are required to move these chuffing ships?

    1. Steve the Cynic

      Re: Me like

      "how many Chuck Norrises are required to move these chuffing ships?"

      One. And he can move all of them at once.

      1. John H Woods Silver badge

        Re: Me like

        with an eyelash

  19. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Very disappointed

    They should have said how many Olympic-sized swimming pools could be contained in the ship.

    Or would they make it sink?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Very disappointed

      Holy shit! Do they make our Olympic-sized swimming pools in China now?

  20. Steve I
    Go

    Beats me...

    I couldn't picture that much baked beans, until I calculated that it was enough to fill one of the new breed of super-sized container ships.

  21. Lars Silver badge
    Pirate

    Too many eggs in one basket

    There was a program about Emma Maersk some years ago where people from Maersk where discussing how big those ships could become. Technically much bigger but according to those chaps insuring the cargo has become a limiting factor. The value of the cargo is just frightening for the insurance companies.

    1. graeme leggett Silver badge

      Re: Too many eggs in one basket

      These Triple E's will still be smaller than Seawise Giant (aka Happy Giant, Jahre Viking and Knock Nevis) an oil tanker with 3 times the cargo capacity by weight.

      Also, these big ships are inflexible, they can't fit through some of the major worlds waterways or dock in many harbours. If wikipedia is to be believed the Triple E can't use any port in either North or South America

      1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

        Re: Too many eggs in one basket

        Doesn't matter.

        Big ships are needed when you have to go a long way, China-Europe cheaply.

        Smaller ships are efficent enough on the shorter China-Canada route

        Then you have to do something with the cargo. If you offload 10,000 containers in Felixstowe or Rotterdam you can have the stuff anywhere in Europe quickly and cheaply.

        If you unloaded all of that in Long Beach it would be expensive to truck it to Chicago - so multiple routes with smaller ships going to more cities makes sens for a bigger low density continent.

        1. GrahamT
          Boffin

          Re: Too many eggs in one basket

          Chicago is a bad example. It is a major inland hub for container trains. The US loading gauge allows double stack trains, (two containers high) so huge mile long trains take the containers to the container yards in Chicago, relatively cheaply, where they are shunted off to trains to other inland hubs (or Canada) or put on trucks for local or express delivery. Long Beach to Chicago takes about 5 days by DS train.

          As a Japanese shipping line, we are as likely to use our biggest ships transpacific as to Europe.

      2. Lars Silver badge
        Coat

        Re: Too many eggs in one basket

        Seawise Giant (aka Happy Giant, Jahre Viking and Knock Nevis) just a memory and not a good one. Long gone.

        However speaking of insuring the cargo the oil is cheep as hell compared to what those containers contain.

  22. Joseph Haig
    Coat

    Is it gas powered?

    1. Lars Silver badge
      Coat

      @Joseph Haig

      "Is it gas powered?" One Wärtsilä diesel, 100.000 hp and one huge prop. PS. why not check Wikipedia before asking.

      1. Joseph Haig

        Re: @Joseph Haig

        Well, um, it was, sort of, a joke so, ...

        Oh, forget it.

      2. Field Marshal Von Krakenfart

        Re: @Joseph Haig

        Don't worry Joseph, I got the joke, although the icon should have been a clue Lars.

  23. Z80

    863 million actual tins or the contents of 863 million tins arranged to make optimal use of the available space?

    I need to know.

  24. GrahamT
    Headmaster

    Without being toooo pedantic...

    "The standard "twenty-foot equivalent unit", measuring 6.1m long, 2.44m wide and 2.59m high" Actually, the clue is in the name; a TEU is exactly 20' x 8' x 8'6". Metric units are an approximation. Actual containers vary a bit from this: High-cubes are taller; 40 foot and 45 foot, are naturally longer; Reefers are refrigerated, so need a power point while on board, so only a limited number can be carried; then there are flat-packs, open-tops and Out-of-gauge loads. Bog standard 1 TEU containers are used as a unit of measure but you would never get a ship full of them.

    I remember when 5000 TEU ships were considered the behemoth's knees, now we are using many 8000 TEU vessels, but we are not likely to follow in Maersk's wake yet, especially in the current economic climate.

  25. mark 63 Silver badge
    Joke

    big?

    these ships are not that big.

    Space. now thats big

    You may think its a long way down the street to the chemist, but thats just peanuts to space!

  26. Neil B
    Boffin

    I saw a super-massive cargo ship off the coast of Torquay (of all places) last week. It was so huge, even on the horizon, that it actually looked unreal, just a vast squatting grey silhouette dwarfing the oil tankers parked in its wake.

  27. David Lewis 2
    IT Angle

    18,000 shipping containers. Now that would make Microsoft a bl**dy big floating data centre!

    Power & cooling would be OK. Network connection might be a problem though! Undersea fiberoptic cable?

    Interestingly, if it was in international waters, who would have juristiction over the data and applications hosted on it? Maybe it will be a "Mega" ship!

  28. Rustident Spaceniak
    Pint

    Funny if you think...

    that - by a very rough estimate - you could feed all of Great Britain for a couple of days with the load carried by one such ship. And there's a lot more than one of comparable size berthing at British ports each day (including non-food ones of course). Kinda puts international trade into perspective.

    Then again, we don't all want to live on beans...

  29. Dan Deufel
    Boffin

    Can we cut the chatter and get on to things that really matter? Such as:

    What is the cruising speed of this vessel in "furlongs per fortnight" or "angstroms per jiffy"?

    What is the gravitational attraction in "micro-newtons" between the ship (sans baked beans) and a snow flake at a distance of "182.2 Smoots"?

    What is the Orbital Period of Crows around the Nest in nano-light-years?

    1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

      23.5 knots = 72 692.4362 furlongs per fortnight

    2. pepper
      Mushroom

      Took a bit.

      Lets just remove the fact that ships are bound to a sea, and unlikely to be found in space. If said ship would be found in space, then the gravitational attraction between said ship, and a particle of snow(how did it get up there and what was it thinking?!), and ruling out any annoying gravitational body's in the area, then the attration in newton should be 0.00000275436 over a distance of 182.2 Smoots when using the averaged Smoot for 1.70 Meters.

      Or in Micro Newton: 2.75436646909

      Also not that I used the unladen ships weight.

      But, we should launch this ship into space, just be sure!

      1. Field Marshal Von Krakenfart
        Headmaster

        Re: Took a bit.

        Fixed it for you...

        182.2 Smoots plus or minus one ear

        1. pepper

          Re: Took a bit.

          The ear, it always gets me!

  30. Billa Bong
    FAIL

    "Each will contain as much steel as eight Eiffel Towers"

    So "none" then...

    1. PT

      Re: "Each will contain as much steel as eight Eiffel Towers"

      Correct, sir - the Eiffel Tower is made of wrought iron. For what it's worth, it weighs 7,300 tons.

  31. Lars Silver badge
    Coat

    Of ships and sails and sealing wax

    As Jobs poor tin of a ship joke had its time, now have a look at what old man Maersk has (or had) a Nautor Swan. The difference between a landlubber and a seaman.

  32. Anonymous Coward
    IT Angle

    How large a can of baked beans?

    Are they the Costco gallon-o'-beans sized cans?

    I demand answers!

  33. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I know I am slow of reading but...

    How does 60 miles worth of containers (30 trains x 1 mile x stacked 2 high) = forty-six and a half kilometres?

  34. HipposRule
    Happy

    Maersk's own measurements

    Obviously they haven't heard of baked beans, they say 3.64 billion iPads. (http://www.worldslargestship.com/)

  35. mini-me
    Happy

    What about the BBC's asteroid comparison last week...

    I still haven't got over the "olympic swimming pool" from outer space that narrowly missed us.

    A wonderful image of Michael Phelps flippering up and down in outer space, silently cruising between the Earth and the moon - made me smile.

  36. Stoneshop
    Boffin

    Stacked

    The answer is 46,620 metres, which by our reckoning represents 13.32 per cent of the orbiting outpost's average height of 350km above terra firma

    They could have put the containers on end, in which case you'd reach 109.8 km (784285.7 linguini, 11910.19 double-decker buses, 794 brontosauruses). And Felix Baumgartner wouldn't have needed that balloon, he could have climbed the stack and basedived.

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like