|
Hi, Dan . . . your points are good ones. I
reread my initial post and realized I had forgotten to make the connection
between a technically capable sub on the one hand and a more immersively (new
word) capable sub on the other.
Without a doubt whichever boat we choose to
design/build/use would have to be a competently executed
project.
I was attempting to say that unless a subber is
experiencing his u/w environment in a stimulating fashion, the chances of
returning to that environment become less likely. And an
artist (that is technically astute) is usually more inclined to design
something that responds to the emotions rather than the concept
of simply being there. Clearly the physics remains the
same.
I understand the suspicions surrounding
"canopies". I was referring only to compensated cockpits, not one-ats. I
can just imagine a one-eighth inch thick Chipmunk canopy on a sub, even a wet
one. Yikes.
The SEE, BE PART OF, IMMERSE MYSELF INTO,
ABSORB, BE SURROUNDED BY was intended only to compare one type of sub with
another, not scuba. Skinny dipping while diving is really the
ultimate!
Cheers,
Rick
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 6:06
AM
Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] I Disagree
Rick
Hi Rick and Mark,
Rick,
I see many of your points, agree with some
and disagree with others. There is quite a difference in a ambient sub
and a one atmosphere sub, in the levels of art and engineering
acceptable. Other then having propulsion, breathing air and a
ballast system, they're different animals. Art can have a greater role
in a ambient sub but don't let it get in the way of good
engineering.
I agree that a sub, and the experience, has to be
comfortable and interesting to make one want to come back for more, i.e.
keep it in service. That part of a design, I don't consider art
though. You got it correct in your second posting. Good
ergonomics! That's far more in the engineering field then art.
For a small sub, of course the view is
important. The better the view........ Well the BETTER THE
VIEW!!!! That's probably the most important sense that gets stimulated
in a sub dive. What you can see. If we could all have a window as
Jules Vern Nautilus did, that would be great, but it's not possible.
There are budget constraints that limit the type of view port and physical
constraints governed both by laws of physics and the properties of the
materials available. Again, engineering related topics.
Granted in a ambient pressure sub they aren't
as great of a factor.
There is a reason most subs look similar.
It's the practical design that is practical to build at an acceptable
cost. To dream as an artist isn't going to get a sub built, as you
alluded to. Granted, art is a great thing. It does sometimes
inspire an engineer to build something he would have never though of, but it's
the engineer that gets it done. I think we agree there.
When I hear someone describe a sub with a canopy,
I get suspicious. The word canopy brings to mind a sleek streamlined
Plexiglas enclosure like on a jet fighter aircraft. This may be
fine for a airplane but it's more of an artists description then an engineers
description of a view port that is holding back many pounds of water pressure
or many pounds of air pressure and be built on a P-sub budget.
You also wrote: I want to SEE,
BE PART OF, IMMERSE MYSELF INTO, ABSORB, BE SURROUNDED BY the first
hundred feet Then why do it in a sub? Your a diver!
The only way to get more absorbed in your surroundings then that is skinny
dipping! Why a sub?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark,
One of my driving forces that keep me going
through the three and a half years of construction was the wanting to "see
what's down there." That's one of the factors in me deciding on a sub
but the challenge of the build was still greater. I
already restored a car and was half of an airplane build along with
countless other projects. The sub was something I pondered
for eighteen years and it was time.
Also, I think Rick and I agree on most
points. We're just looking at it from two different angles.
Dan H.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 5:20
AM
Subject: RE: [PSUBS-MAILIST] I Disagree
Rick
I?m afraid I have
to agree with Rick. A dry ambient pressure sub suits MY needs also. I agree
that for the engineers out there, there must be a certain pleasure in
designing and building a sub and it is a great achievement, but if your not
interested in what is under the ocean wouldn?t your time be better spent
designing a car or plane or something you are actually interested
in
Mark
-----Original
Message-----
From:
owner-personal_submersibles@psubs.org
[mailto:owner-personal_submersibles@psubs.org] On Behalf Of Rick and
Marcia
Sent: 23 September
2004 06:36
To:
personal_submersibles@psubs.org
Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] I Disagree
Rick
I liked your response.
Let's look a little further . . .
Regarding your post, we are, in
fact, in agreement. Here are some quotes from my own
post:
"Unfortunately, artists don't (usually) make good
builders"
"a
dry, ambient pressure boat suits my needs perfectly" (emphasis on
MY)
"The
engineering mentalities will get their boats built. The rest of us
with much prettier ideas . . . well, we'll see you at the
dock."
Just to clarify, if a
builder/user relegates his/her design to the technical aspects of
engineering, and ignores the engineering of the human/machine interface, it
is to their peril.
BTW, for those unfamiliar with
the field, engineering is simply one of the most creative professions
out there. I'm putting emphasis here on human engineering
(ergonomics).
More than just using the proper
coloured lights in an instrument panel, it also includes the measure of
stimulus in the brain's pleasure centres. The intensity,
consistency, and repeatability of pleasure derived from an
experience (diving in a sub) will determine whether the subject (the sub
pilot) will return for more. Like the rats whose pleasure centres were
electrically stimulated whenever they pressed a lever (they collapsed from
"pleasure"), the sub pilot will return for more if his/her pleasure
centres are stimulated appropriately.
It begs the question: Do we want
a creation that we will enjoy? That we will have a long lasting
experience with? "Enjoyment" and "long lasting experience" are, as
illustrated above, quantifiable and expressed in the final product in a
tangible form: Whether the user continues to use the product or shelves
it to go onto something better.
So, the above is really a
fancy-pants way of saying you need to enjoy the sub piloting or you won't
repeat the experience. And why won't you repeat it? The
experience WAS NOT VIVID ENOUGH.
p.s.: before becoming an artsy I
studied engineering. I'm intimately familiar with the process of
quantifying human needs.
----- Original Message -----
Subject:
[PSUBS-MAILIST] I Disagree Rick
Sure, esthetics are important
in build almost anything the eye can see, but it's the engineering that
gets the job done. The artist part in a sub is way back there
somewhere. Behind a whole bunch of
engineers.
If not for the
engineering, we'd all be OOOH-ing and AAAH-ing over pictures and
sculptures of subs and none of us would have anything to actually
dive in.
Heck, if all you want is a
panoramic view of the first 100 feet, SCUBA dive and spend your sub
money on a towel to dry off with
afterwards.
||| I've
been diving since 1974. A submarine redefines the underwater
experience. I've been under ice, worked commercially,
night/wreck/current/shark/manta rayed and fed wolf eels by hand and
more. All truly wonderful but, even that gets trite (for me) after a
while. Maybe I'm jaded.
The appeal of a sub
is either to go past SCUBA depth, and for a longer time then SCUBA
allows, or dive and stay in a dry
atmosphere.
||| For
those with those priorities these assumptions are
true.
if you want to dive without
getting wet and live to do it again, you better be a damn good engineer
first off.
Truth be told, most people
that actually build a sub do it for the challenge of the build
||| Again,
another assumption. I'm the parent of three young children. I
don't need more challenges! What motivates me is simply the
passion whose genesis was derived from a story I read in
1966.
|