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

["Jens Laland" <laland@artematrix.org>]

An objective of any institutional authority is to ensure that 'the past'
remains in control of 'the future'. Examples of this can be found within
the history of any field of engineering; where old, conservative
'admirals' (often promoted out of their own field of competence) have
opposed new ideas.

Despite this, any old (i.e. experienced) man deserve my respect.

What worries me more, is when (and if) those oldtimers simply delegate
their own job assignments over to any young (inexperienced, but
eager-to-please) type of engineer.

I am sorry to say this, but I started my own engineering career writing
technical requirements on the spud cans of jack-up rigs, while two
colleagues of mine wrote the steel grade requirements for downhole fishing
tools to be operated in the norwegian sector of the North Sea. Like me,
they did this on behalf of the old man, and what did we know about [...] ?

I don't know the destiny of my own 'paperwork', but I was later confronted
with a certain paper in a meeting with the engineering manager of Bowen
Fishing Tools (Houston, TX. 1985), who told me he had no intention to make
any tools to that specification simply to please the g¤d d@mn£d
norwegians.

This is part of my background, and it's not much I can do about it now,
but to make sure I never do anything like it, again.

Therefore:

I would claim that every bit and piece of documented submarine knowledge
(including reports on failures and accidents) from the past is equally
important to us as is any of today's classification type of design and/or
building rule pertaining to submarines.

Even history books and film footage (preferably first-hand documentaries)
is valuable sources of information in educating us on submarine design and
operation. And we could probably say the same about naval documents,
scientific papers (providing we know how to read them), relevant mailing
lists, as well as personal communication with experienced people, etc.,
etc..

And yes, we ought to consider ourselves a group pursuing amateur
activities to professional standards.

But such notion of "standards" should be of another nature than what a
certificate from ABS or any other classification party may represent (per
se).

We do research and conduct experiments, play with models, test ideas,
build in full scale, discuss, dip a teabag (or two), dive, disagree, and
have a whole lot of fun. And we try to comprehend for ourself why this has
to be like that, or that like this. And we do all this because it is our
money, our projects, our lives, and our hobby.

In all this I see a striking family resemblance with the early pioneers of
ham radio, where everybody was busy doing precisely what we are doing now:
building and operating our own 'technical entity'.

Unfortunately, due to limited bandwidths and fewer frequency bands
available for the radio amateur, today's requirements for any radio
communication equipment is very, very stringent - and this has resulted in
a drastic decline in the number of radio hams actually building their own
equipment.

Luckily for us, there is far more area and space available in the ocean
than on dry land (or in between electromagnetic transmissions). So why
entangle ourselves into more red tape than absolutely neccesary (at the
moment)?

I'm not for anarchy in any shape or form (far from it), but rather see the
logic and sense in most (if not all) of what has been said since I opened
this thread ( with what Vance promptly characterized as plain sulking :).

But I do not want to participate in generating self-inflicted restrictions
in the form of rules and regulations that eventually could end up in
nothing but ready-made, overpriced, certified submarine kits.

Instead, I will rather do my share of what I think we need, as a group,
and that is: a library of "RECOMMENDED Design and Building Practices" for
each type (or class) of submarine (or auxilliary system).

Such documents (even if part of the content should refer to other papers,
like ABS etc.) would probably not only serve our own purpose as a group,
but maybe also better consolidate our relationship with any said
authority.

Best regards,
Jens Laland




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