Dale A. Raby
Editor/Publisher
The Green Bay Web
http://www.thegreenbayweb.com
We're on the same course here, I was thinking if we standardize a personal PVHO that can either be built as a one seater or two, as you suggested, then machinery and support pods can be added and the whole thing wrapped up with sexy outer hull. This way the builder could have a wider selection of performance attributes, from traditional to next generation LTW fliers. Consider the PVHO is your main course, now what side dishes would you like with that sir, today we're having a special on our 24 and 48 volt battery pods, you can have those with standard lead acid or our chef's choice the sealed coil type, we also have a lovely fresh digital instrument package and Co2 scrubber that is my personal favorite, or maybe you'd like to take a look at the motor list first? I've been told we serve the best Psub in town here! Doc Warrend Greenway wrote: > I was thinking modularity on length. What do you think Doc? A PSUB that uses a > simple repeating pattern over length? Cut and paste to length to suite your > needs and budget? The only real reason I suggest this is that you could have > battery and ballast pods in banks to get variations on dive time by increasing > length and adding the next series of pods. The shortest length would be, maybe, > 4 meters and that would give you on set of battery pods, air, and ballast tanks. > Is this the kind of modularity you were thinking of? I also like your dive time > of 6hrs, ours could be 1.5 units long? Hhmmm. > > Warren. > > > Warren, et al > > > > Another point to consider may be to design in modular flexibility in the initial phase > > so the OSS can be easily upgraded or modified for individual tastes. The major components > > we're looking at are all based on tried and true technology but we are also opening the doors > > for personal ingenuity in order for the sport to progress. > > > > 1. Length; 4-5 meters? > > 2. Diameter; 1m? > > 3. Speed ; 4-10knts? > > 4. Range or dive time; 6hrs? > > 5. Safe dive depth; 100m? > > 6. Size windows; ? porthole or dome? > > 7. Exterior shroud for hydrodynamic efficiency? > > 8. End cost less any outside labor; $20-30k? > > > > > > Just thinking out loud, here's a few concepts I've been playing with using StrataVision3D 5.0 > > http://www.bionicdolphin.com/tom/source/subs.html > > > > Doc > > > > > > > > OK. You have a lot of opinions. :) Ready to help compile that list of those interested > > > > > and the skills they bring to the table? A landlubber is perfectly suited. Furthermore, > > > you seem to grasp the situation perfectly. I don't think we need to worry about a new > > > server at this point, but I have a server I would offer to the cause if it ever got to > > > that point. What I would like to see is everyone who has expressed interest to either > > > post their wish-list or e-mail them to myself or you...:) So we can compile a preliminary > > > spec. It will probably change a bit as time goes on, but it will give us a place to start! > > > Please, all, spec the following: > > > 1. Length > > > 2. Diameter > > > 3. Speed > > > 4. Range or dive time > > > 5. Safe dive depth > > > 6. Cost window > > > 7. Further comments > > > > > > It seems like lead acid is the power source of choice. I can handle a PWM speed control, > > > so I don't think we need to worry about potentiometers or anything like that. Batteries > > > and motor should probably be stored outside the pressure hull. Steel seems to be the > > > pressure hull material of choice. Gauges and electronics should be left flexible, to > > > accomodate a variety of tastes, needs, and budgets. > > > > > > Let's agree to use DXF for electronic drawings and TXT or HTML for text. > > > > > > Warren. > > > warrend@decagon.com > > > > > > > > > > Good Evening all, > > > > > > > > I just read all the posts since this morning... wow! You've been busy. > > > > > > > > OK... here goes. Carsten had some good points. I think if I spent > > > > hours on end burning the midnite oil and then saw that somebody was > > > > selling the plans in the back of Popular Mechanics... and getting rich, > > > > I'd be furious. > > > > > > > > Now... open source does not necessarily mean the project could not be > > > > turned to profit making. There are lots of people making money from > > > > Linux, after all. I also wonder how we might control anyone who did > > > > decide to take the OSS design and start building and selling it... > > > > copyleft documents would not do.... as such documents do in fact allow > > > > one to reproduce and sell it. We need rather, a patent on any > > > > intelectual property in the design to do this. > > > > > > > > I think that the best way to control commercial use of the project would > > > > be to design it such that it would not be commercially viable. I.e.: a > > > > one person submersible could never be used to "give rides", and the > > > > potential market for such a machine would be negligible. Liability > > > > would kill it before the first dozen had hit the water. > > > > > > > > The other thing is that it should be stressed concept only. The idea > > > > would be for people to build their own machines to the specifications in > > > > the project documents... not for anyone to try to market a kit to be > > > > assembled. > > > > > > > > If we produce the plans and the documentation... this material could and > > > > most certainly would be copyrighted. It could be distributed free of > > > > charge in electronic form. Just the fact that we would be giving it > > > > away free would discourage competition. > > > > > > > > A separate list with url... well, it certainly could be done, but how > > > > big a monster is this going to become? Do we need a new list? Do we > > > > need a new server... possibly with a forum? Right now this is all new > > > > and exciting... like the new girl in school... but the early interest > > > > may fade as the drudgery hits. > > > > > > > > A camel has been described as a horse designed by comittee... but then, > > > > a camel is a pretty impressive piece of technology. Even though God > > > > likely did not consult a comittee upon finalizing the two or three > > > > designs, the concept is still valid. I think that this would function > > > > best if somebody would take charge and start assigning tasks as soon as > > > > possible. > > > > > > > > We perhaps need to compile a list of who is interested. We could easily > > > > form our own mail list and take it off the psub list... but you know > > > > what? I suspect that even those not participating would find the > > > > project of interest and it would be a simple matter to set filters up to > > > > shunt anything with "OSS" in the subject line to a specific location. > > > > > > > > A wish list might be one of the first things to be enumerated... just as > > > > soon as we know who we are. > > > > > > > > This could work. For some reason I don't understand, there seems to be > > > > quite a bit of commeradery here... and little or no bickering. > > > > > > > > OK, enough from the landlubber. I've already put out my "wish list" and > > > > mentioned how I think I might be able to help. I'm going to sit back > > > > and watch until somebody tells me to go out and get an original copy of > > > > the plans for Trieste or something. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dale A. Raby > > > > Editor/Publisher > > > > The Green Bay Web > > > > http://www.thegreenbayweb.com > > > << dalesignature.gif >> > > > > > > -- > > > ______________________________________________ > > > http://www.linuxmail.org/ > > > Now with POP3/IMAP access for only US$19.95/yr > > > > > > Powered by Outblaze > > -- > ______________________________________________ > http://www.linuxmail.org/ > Now with POP3/IMAP access for only US$19.95/yr > > Powered by Outblaze
|
Dale A. Raby Editor/Publisher The Green Bay Web http://www.thegreenbayweb.com |
