TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

It is physically impossible to exceed the weight limit for a Small Flat Rate Box

376 点作者 MVorlm大约 3 年前

24 条评论

jmyeet大约 3 年前
What many may not realize is that there&#x27;s a thriving industry in sending passengers on planes for the sole purpose of them taking things from A to B.<p>Years ago, you could get discounted flights to Europe where you couldn&#x27;t check in any luggage. Why? That allowance was taken up by documents for various clients. This was usually quicker than any courier services at the time.<p>I&#x27;ve had friends who worked in the oil and gas industry. One story I was told was where parts were desperately needed to repair a drill bit on a gas platform. The best option? Someone would fly halfway around the world, drive to a particular factory, wait for the parts and then fly back. This was cheaper and faster than any courier service, even if you spent $10,000+ on the ticket.<p>This was exacerbated because a person with 200lb of machine parts could walk through customs where a shipment might get stuck in customs for weeks. And each day of non-operation cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.
评论 #31130171 未加载
评论 #31130619 未加载
评论 #31131796 未加载
评论 #31132092 未加载
评论 #31130862 未加载
评论 #31130451 未加载
评论 #31129837 未加载
评论 #31130110 未加载
评论 #31129829 未加载
评论 #31131249 未加载
评论 #31131462 未加载
评论 #31131642 未加载
评论 #31130679 未加载
评论 #31132474 未加载
评论 #31130783 未加载
评论 #31132683 未加载
评论 #31160051 未加载
评论 #31133000 未加载
评论 #31131352 未加载
评论 #31130777 未加载
评论 #31132218 未加载
评论 #31132119 未加载
评论 #31132675 未加载
评论 #31132919 未加载
评论 #31132248 未加载
评论 #31130813 未加载
评论 #31132166 未加载
nkurz大约 3 年前
While the tweet is correct (&quot;It is physically impossible to exceed the 70-pound domestic weight limit for a small flat rate box&quot;) the shortened title here which omits the word &quot;small&quot; is very misleading. The USPS offers a variety of sizes of flat rate boxes (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.usps.com&#x2F;ship&#x2F;priority-mail.htm#flatrate" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.usps.com&#x2F;ship&#x2F;priority-mail.htm#flatrate</a>), all of which have the same 70 lb weight limit. It&#x27;s only the &quot;small&quot; that cannot be overweight. The two mediums and the large can exceed the limit with dense contents. Perhaps the title could be changed to omit &quot;physical&quot; and add back &quot;small&quot;?
评论 #31128216 未加载
评论 #31128902 未加载
perihelions大约 3 年前
An implosion-type nuclear weapon can compress matter to some multiple of the density of osmium.<p>This isn&#x27;t useful for USPS box packaging; I just think it&#x27;s neat.<p>edit: Also, inertial confinement fusion plasmas go up to about 1,000 g&#x2F;cm³,<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;aip.scitation.org&#x2F;doi&#x2F;full&#x2F;10.1063&#x2F;5.0008231" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;aip.scitation.org&#x2F;doi&#x2F;full&#x2F;10.1063&#x2F;5.0008231</a> (<i>&quot;Unified first-principles equations of state of deuterium-tritium mixtures in the global inertial confinement fusion region&quot;</i>)
评论 #31129402 未加载
评论 #31129542 未加载
评论 #31129876 未加载
ortusdux大约 3 年前
I have a 115lb shipment of small metal parts that needs to be across the country before Wed. Both FedEx and UPS quoted me ~$750 to ship it in a 12&quot;x8&quot;x8&quot; OSB box via 2-day shipping. Fedex one rate boxes have a weight limit of 50lbs. The small boxes are $31&#x2F;ea to ship. I just finished breaking the shipment up into 3 parts. Heck, next day would be ~$300.
评论 #31129597 未加载
评论 #31129067 未加载
评论 #31129634 未加载
评论 #31129243 未加载
评论 #31129155 未加载
radicality大约 3 年前
Semi related - a few months ago, while not fully sober, I was aimlessly browsing through Amazon and ended up owning a set of two 1.5inch cubes - one aluminium, one tungsten.<p>It’s kind of a silly purchase considering it’s a lot of money for 2 metal cubes, but it’s honestly very impressive just how heavy that small cube is - both objectively, and when compared to the aluminium cube. Also makes for a great talking point when having guests over.
评论 #31117503 未加载
评论 #31130103 未加载
评论 #31132633 未加载
deepspace大约 3 年前
Since I discovered the availability of anvils on Amazon, I have always wondered about the economics of shipping them.<p>Right now, I can order a 66lb &quot;Happybuy&quot; anvil for $153 with free prime shipping. One assumes that the $153 includes the cost of shipping it all the way from China in the first place.<p>For comparison, a similarly sized anvil from a reputable local dealer costs $949 plus tax and shipping at the lowest rate (UPS standard) is $93.
评论 #31130707 未加载
评论 #31129772 未加载
评论 #31132764 未加载
评论 #31130328 未加载
评论 #31129297 未加载
评论 #31129506 未加载
评论 #31131952 未加载
评论 #31129812 未加载
评论 #31131272 未加载
needle0大约 3 年前
This reminds me of a guy in 2007 whose curiosity got him to cram around 34kg (75lbs) worth of lead bricks into the Japanese postal service&#x27;s ExPack 500 flat-rate envelope, which had a supposedly &#x27;impossible&#x27; limit of 30kg (66lbs) and were usually not checked for weight when sending. The post office clerk wrestled with it and eventually agreed to ship the thing. He didn&#x27;t actually send it though.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;sites.google.com&#x2F;site&#x2F;fluordoublet&#x2F;%E3%83%98%E3%83%B3%E3%81%AA%E7%A7%91%E5%AD%A6&#x2F;expack500-%E3%81%AB%E9%89%9B%E3%81%AE%E5%A1%8A%E3%82%92%E8%A9%B0%E3%82%81%E3%81%A6%E3%81%BF%E3%81%9F" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;sites.google.com&#x2F;site&#x2F;fluordoublet&#x2F;%E3%83%98%E3%83%B...</a><p>A few years later, the ExPack was deprecated and replaced with the LetterPack envelope, which now has a limit of...only 4kg (8.8lbs). Hah!
评论 #31134997 未加载
tyingq大约 3 年前
On the other end of the spectrum is lightweight, but bulky stuff. I sold things like this for a time, some time ago. Would get a fair amount of grief from customers who would use the simpler UPS&#x2F;Fedex calculators on the weight only and complain that I padding shipping prices. But UPS and Fedex charge &quot;dimensional weight&quot; for these types of shipments, and you have to use a more complicated formula.
评论 #31129520 未加载
TheJoeMan大约 3 年前
I once purchased lead weights online, and they came packed tessellated in a flat rate box. Shipper definitely got their money’s worth.
评论 #31116998 未加载
bombcar大约 3 年前
The flat rate envelope used to be a bit cheaper than that small box - and the small box fits inside the envelope with a bit of work - no tape!
评论 #31128900 未加载
Blackthorn大约 3 年前
That said, it sure wasn&#x27;t fun for the mail person when they had to deliver me those two boxes of lead ingots.
评论 #31128942 未加载
评论 #31128585 未加载
评论 #31128877 未加载
评论 #31129687 未加载
anonymousiam大约 3 年前
Couldn&#x27;t read the Twitter post with NoScript, and didn&#x27;t want to turn it off, but I verified the claim. Forgive me for working in cubic inches, but those are the unit measures specified on the USPS web page: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;store.usps.com&#x2F;store&#x2F;product&#x2F;shipping-supplies&#x2F;priority-mail-flat-rate-small-box-P_SMALL_FRB" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;store.usps.com&#x2F;store&#x2F;product&#x2F;shipping-supplies&#x2F;prior...</a><p>So the volume of the box is 82.6669921875 cubic inches. Assuming we&#x27;re shipping a block of Tungsten at 0.7 lb&#x2F;in^3, then our shipment would weigh 57.86689453125 lbs, which is less than 83% of the maximum allowed weight of 70lbs.<p>I wonder how closely my results agree with the Twitter post...
评论 #31130346 未加载
评论 #31130216 未加载
评论 #31130239 未加载
post_break大约 3 年前
These are amazing for shipping bullets. Not loaded, but for reloading. My mailman hates me but they keep the costs down.
评论 #31130430 未加载
mc4ndr3大约 3 年前
Don&#x27;t forget the packing peanuts. About a ton per cubic centimeter of product.
rondrabkin大约 3 年前
Did in person deliveries via plane quite a bit in the 90s. Was working for the worlds largest semiconductor company.<p>Most staggering example was trying to get a very very small box of engine controller CPUs from Penang Malaysia to an auto plant outside of Philadelphia to get there before 8am shift start. Only way to make it work was hand carry from Penang through Singapore to Anchorage, clear customs and then rented Learjet to Philly.<p>Penalties for late delivery were massive. In this case had we been a couple hours later would have resulted in cascading loss of production resulting in auto union people needing to work during their summer shutdown and quite large cost.<p>Semiconductors are different from other parts. They take a long time to manufacture. And, sometimes you think you&#x27;ve made them but they just die for whatever reason. If you want to make a new factory it takes years too. I wonder if the auto companies have learned to keep some semiconductors around just in case. Oh wait. No.
AdamJacobMuller大约 3 年前
&quot;for those of you who have seen those firsthand&quot;<p>I feel old.
jl6大约 3 年前
Reminds me of AOL CDs offering 1000 hours a month of free internet.
评论 #31133401 未加载
PaulHoule大约 3 年前
A laser fusion system can compress materials to a density higher than Osmium but it doesn&#x27;t stay that dense for very long.
评论 #31129221 未加载
lsh123大约 3 年前
Hassium has higher density and would exceed the limit but only for 10 secs or so ;)
SergeAx大约 3 年前
Can&#x27;t we increase the density of a metal by forging or high-pressure casting?
评论 #31133608 未加载
yeetsfromhellL2大约 3 年前
Jesus reading this thread makes me think I should go into the courier business.
planetsprite大约 3 年前
One could add material from neutron stars and exceed the weight limit easily
a9h74j大约 3 年前
On Earth.
评论 #31121171 未加载
Taniwha大约 3 年前
But I need to shop a small neutron star .....