[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [PSUBS-MAILIST] submarine kit-builder's society rules



Wil et all,

The trouble is that I think that we will be fighting a losing battle.  I think that we are similar to, but way behind, the aircraft industry.  We are in the “microlight division”.  No need for regulation but I think to defend it we are going to have to police it ourselves long term.   We should be aiming for a P-Subs license and getting support from the Coastguard and Maritime services from various countries.  When I first started sCUBA in the 60’s we were all self taught, made our own etc.  I went to Europe and could not get a tank filled without a ticket and came back home and first thing I did was get a basic SCUBA ticket.

I think that we are headed that way.  We can fight it or we can show responsibility and get a “microlight sub” classification.  I believe that Yacht / boat builders can get a design done and get their boats surveyed without having to have it done by Lloyds, ABS etc.  I think if we adopt that as an attitude and we can get new designs, concepts etc whether the “f---“ word the “C—“ word or in conventional steel etc we might just get a viable game plan listened to.  I think this is a fairly good road for P-Subs to go down and develop and has merit.  Why have to follow the same rules and costs as a Ship or airliner which is where the big rule boys come from.   I think that if we put together a set of rules and approached one of the approval bodies, just one of them might see reason to reduce their costs for a lesser approval and support us.   If I were in charge of their marketing and new business I would certainly sit up and listen. 

My proposal would be to have a set of calcs that can be followed or a minimum FEA programme that can be used for unusual shapes.  Perhaps if it is an unusual design then a couple of tests of models supported by a full pressure test.  If a registered engineer did the calcs or signed them off we could get a rating like they rate countries A+,  AA+, A-,  BB whatever.    The emphasis needs to be on proving the design by pressure test.  If we set a 1.5 times test instead of the 1.25 and 1.3 with an inspection afterwards supported by weld X-rays then shouldn’t that be recognized?  So what do you gurus think.  We need to get it so it does not cost a bundle but gets some recognition, and show that we are a responsible group.  The biggest concern is liability and I know that engineers are notorious nowdays for diving for cover.

 

So am I gooing to get shouted down or have you older members already shelved that idea? 

  Hugh

 

From: owner-personal_submersibles@psubs.org [mailto:owner-personal_submersibles@psubs.org] On Behalf Of Wilfried Ellmer
Sent: Monday, 7 June 2010 4:48 p.m.
To: personal_submersibles@psubs.org
Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] submarine kit-builder's society

 

Hello Jon,

I am absolutly not confused. I know that my projects are "outside class" i have no problem with that as there are good and ethical reasons for my project for being and staying outside class.

I have no need and no intention to be "class near", "almost class", or any of the other fussy concepts i have heard about here.

Class by definition is something where you are in or out - you can not be "half in" as you can not be "half pregnant" if you are not stamped and certified (and willing to pay the price for the paper ) you are out - just have the spine and live with it.

I would say that for the reasons Phil pointed out, the private sub builder segment has a intrinsic need to be out of class, stay out of class, and defend that space with the good arguments that exist to do so.

Wil


2010/6/6 Jon Wallace <jonw@psubs.org>


Hi Wil,

It sounds like you may be confused about what we are saying in regards to certification authorities.  To be clear, we do not propose that home-builders should spend the thousands of dollars necessary to get a piece of paper declaring a sub is "certified".  We never have suggested that or considered it a requirement.  As Carsten stated in his email, we say, get a copy of ABS, read it, understand it, build to it.  If you do so, the chances are pretty good that you have a safe and reliable submersible on your hands.

Jon

 

Jon,

I do not really believe in your thesis that tecnology leadership comes from "administration societies" and that they do a solid research and development miles ahead of us. Even in our overadministrated times leadership comes from motivated individuals who push the fronties it - administration always follows.

I am not "anti standard" or "anti classification" i am against the satanisation of the "outside class status" as "unsafe", "unprofessional", "unreliable" etc...

The fact that currently there is a life outside classing agencies for private subs is the "air supply" of our sport. To fill a a private submarine builder forum with arguments to cut this air supply and regulate our sport out of existance - is not a wise course of action...



************************************************************************
************************************************************************
************************************************************************
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
************************************************************************
************************************************************************
************************************************************************

 

 

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 5177 (20100606) __________

 

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

 

http://www.eset.com



__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 5177 (20100606) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com