Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Ambient Vs. 1-Atm Quandary

[Steven Mills <cirtemoeg@juno.com>]

Hello Pierre "drama" Poulin,

If it would make you feel better, if I build Aquasub to specs, it will be
the only ambient sub with "training wheels" at 3meters or should I
say training pontoons.

' Be my luck if it turns out like one of those grocery carts with the
crippled
wheel and just turn in circles.  "AquaCart" !

You all can have a good laugh at my expense.

cheers, --Steve


On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 14:42:33 -0500 "Pierre Poulin" <pipo305@hotmail.com>
writes:
> Well, for my 2k canadian dollars budget, it was either an ambient or 
> a 
> diving dry-suit... But I love the ambient and all the experience I'm 
> getting 
> from it. It's much more forgiving when you make a mistake and I also 
> have 
> the oportunity to build all myself. There is not an inch on that 
> boat that I 
> did not weld, grind, cut, drilled, tapped...
> 
> I know it may look like a very small project to some but for me, 
> it's my 
> sub... What else is there to say?
> 
> Whatever knowledge or experience I get from building BIG, I will 
> gladly pass 
> to anybody in this group.
> 
> I don't really know why I'm saying all this but it make me fell good 
> inside. 
> sorry...
> 
> Pierre "drama" Poulin
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >From: NeophyteSG@aol.com
> >Reply-To: personal_submersibles@psubs.org
> >To: personal_submersibles@psubs.org
> >Subject: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Ambient Vs. 1-Atm Quandary
> >Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 13:34:29 EST
> >
> >In a message dated 3/16/04 7:48:39 AM Pacific Standard Time,
> >DJACKSON99@aol.com writes:
> >Watching the current builders bring their subs together is very 
> >motivational,
> >but your ambient design is of special interest to me.  Ambient 
> Rules!  :)
> >Not just a bit biased are we Doug? ;-)  I've noticed over the 
> months that
> >ambients tend to be viewed almost like ... [struggling for terms] 
> Jr. PSUBs 
> >or
> >"almost" PSUBs, but not in a truly maligning way by any means.  I 
> actually 
> >envy
> >everyone who's building an ambient in terms of cost and complexity. 
>  
> >Generally
> >speaking you'll have your boats in the water far sooner and 
> >less-expensively
> >than the rest of us.  Because my planned operational envelope is 
> >essentially
> >the same as for ambients ... up where there's light and the risks 
> of 
> >bailout
> >are less ... mine would be an ambient were it not for my desire to 
> have it
> >hydrobatic.  When I made the transition to a 1-atm design, 
> *everything* 
> >just got a
> >whole lot more complicated, costly and long-term.  Therein lies my 
> >quandary.
> >
> >It's a war between truly loving the image I have of what I want (my 
> UPS) in
> >all its glorious complexity & capabilities and the desire not to 
> have to 
> >wait
> >what I'm now projecting as a multiyear project, both in terms of 
> design and
> >affordability, before actually getting wet. [minor tantrum in the 
> >background ...
> >pay no attention to the crazy hippie engineer]
> >
> >I love the added time (72hrs) and depth capabilities (now 300' 
> operation
> >range) that the transition to a steel pressure hull and 1-atm 
> design 
> >brought.
> >Having a maximum diameter of 28" tapering to 18" for a pressure 
> hull (steel
> >mummy-bag), means I also get a great safety margin in terms of 
> depth 
> >capacity
> >(1200+') with the same 1/4" steel as larger diametered craft with 
> lower 
> >ratings.  I
> >also thoroughly enjoy the design process ... [raising hand] "Hi.  
> My name 
> >is
> >Shawn.  I'm a design addict."  I *know* it's a viable design and 
> within my
> >abilities to achieve eventually, and I want it so bad I can taste 
> it.
> >
> >But, I'm also enough of a study of at least my own nature to also 
> know that
> >the sooner I get something in the water, the less frustrating that 
> path 
> >will be
> >... and the greater the likelihood of my staying with it.  So, I'm 
> >seriously
> >considering taking a sidetrip on my design path and building a 
> >non-hydrobatic
> >dry ambient version first.  I can build and use the same 
> exostructure
> >(thrusters, control surfaces, ballast system, etc.) but without the 
> 
> >pressure hull and
> >life support requirements of the 1-atm design.  Since my design 
> >incorporates
> >the ability to jettison everything from the pressure hull except 
> emergency
> >ballast, theoretically, the transition from the dry ambient to a 
> 1-atm 
> >would be a
> >matter of swapping out the pressure hulls w/life support.  Am I 
> making 
> >sense?
> >Thoughts, suggestions?
> >
> >Warm Regards
> >Shawn
> >
> >
> >*****
> >
> >"Call nothing thy own except thy soul.
> >Love not what thou art, but only what thou may become.
> >Do not pursue pleasure, for thou may have the misfortune to 
> overtake it...
> >Live in the vision of that one for whom great deeds are done ..."
> >
> >Man of LaMancha, D. Wasserman
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> MSN Messenger : discutez en direct avec vos amis !  
> http://messenger.fr.msn.ca/
> 
> 


________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!