|
Jon, I am amazed at the whole situation only because I remember a time when China was a very closed society. Very little about Chinese society and it's people got out to us, save for the occasional National Geographic article, and that was washed by thier government . The fact that this may in fact be a "Publicity Gimmick" for his own capitalistic desires, is even more amazing then. Geographics, plays into my assessment only for this reason. By no means, do I advocate the foolish risking of life and limb in any endeavor.
Joe > Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 00:10:29 -0400 > From: jonw@psubs.org > To: personal_submersibles@psubs.org > Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Continuing saga of homebrewed Chinese sub > > > Joe, > > I don't see geographical location defining such characterization. > > It is foolish to undertake experimentation with projects that endanger > your life when you have no, or limited, knowledge about the subject. > This is true regardless of geography or financial means, and especially > true if your financial means are small. People in poorer countries have > been killed trying to tap electricity from power lines because they > didn't understand the concept of "grounding" or the amount of electrical > power they were dealing with. Did that make them innovative or > foolish? In this case, Alan James made contact with someone who had > access to the builder and was able to converse and translate Alan's > questions about the builders submarine. As Alan reported, the > translator Christina Hu stated, "He has no idea of real statistics of > how much pressure the submarine will take when in deep water." and the > reporter, Reinhard Krause, whom Alan contacted stated that he had "a big > concern when I met him." It seems rather obvious that the concerns > stated by the "arm chair critics" when this topic originally came up, > were justified. In fact the builder fabricated the submarine to get > attention for a host of other "inventions" that he has not been able to > find anyone to invest in. I have not seen him state in any press > release or interview that he wants anyone to invest in his submarine or > help him build a business to produce submarines. By his own admission, > it is a gimmick. > > I think your characterization of the Chinese fellow's efforts as > "anemic" is well stated, but disagree with your supposition that his > geographical location grants him an "A" for effort whereas someone > elsewhere would be a fool. I think rather than opportunity and > availability, the issue is one of knowledge. Anyone, anywhere, with the > same limited knowledge as the Chinese fellow in regards to submarines > might very well come up with the same resolution of using 55-gallon > drums or similar material for a submarine regardless of their > opportunity and availability to use better material. Conversely, anyone > with the knowledge most of us on this list have would not consider > building a 1ATM sub out of 55-gallon drums if for no other reason than > it not having any practical use. If knowledge negates building a sub > from 55-gallon drums because it has no practical value, then a person is > not a fool based upon their ignorance of submarines, but is foolish for > delving into something that they have limited knowledge about. > > You wondered what the Chinese fellow might do with our same level of > opportunity and material availability, which I assume also includes our > level of knowledge on the topic. My guess is that he would not build a > 55-gallon submarine of the same design. > > Of course there is another interpretation of your comments that I could > agree with, which is; he had the concept right, but a really bad design > that shouldn't be followed. As I have stated before, I think that if we > cannot separate "intent" from "form" we are not serving ourselves well. > People with the best of intentions can come up with bad solutions and we > have an obligation to cite it as such. Calling a duck, a duck, doesn't > equate to belittling it as a pigeon. > > Jon > > > > Joseph Perkel wrote: > > Hi Jay, > > > > Just happened to pop in again on you guys. I must say that from what > > I've seen from "my chair here" of the Vancouver meet, that it looks > > like it was the PSUBS equivalent of landing on the moon! How are you > > guys going to top that one?! > > > > The one redeeming quality of the Chinese fellow's anemic efforts, is > > that it is indicative of a much changed world. Give this guy an "A" > > for his audacious spirit, and wonder what he might do with our level > > of opportunity and material availability. Otherwise, if he were > > located here in the good ole USA, I'd think him a fool. > > > > Joe > > > > > ************************************************************************ > ************************************************************************ > ************************************************************************ > The personal submersibles mailing list complies with the US Federal > CAN-SPAM Act of 2003. Your email address appears in our database > because either you, or someone you know, requested you receive messages > from our organization. > > If you want to be removed from this mailing list simply click on the > link below or send a blank email message to: > removeme-personal_submersibles@psubs.org > > Removal of your email address from this mailing list occurs by an > automated process and should be complete within five minutes of > our server receiving your request. > > PSUBS.ORG > PO Box 53 > Weare, NH 03281 > 603-529-1100 > ************************************************************************ > ************************************************************************ > ************************************************************************ > |