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

Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Luxury submarine yacht - how would it shape up if experts were involved



Marc,
I have to agree with Carsten, if you have millions available to spend - you can buy and install any "quality" in your megayacht, safety, stability, submerged toys, aircon, apear and disapear at any coast due to your range and speed, privacy, load capacity,  with "traditional means" -  so the luxury sub does not really offer any "additional luxury" for a luxury minded owner.

So the idea that a luxury submarine is a luxury upgrade over a megayacht is just wrong. This is why nobody has entered to buy a luxury submarine in 20 years of product being offered to the luxury segment.

A "submarine living space" is of no advantage if what you want to do is "living in luxury and independence" - it IS a advantage if what you want to do is "doing something in the ocean" what a surface ship is handicaped to do.

If you investigate shipwarcks like Carsten - a submarine is a far better tool than a surface vessel. If you need to operate without being interrupted by surface ship traffic, by weather changes, if you need to leave the ROV cable out during weeks, not spooling it back every time the weather gets nasty. If you want your boat being used as a giant liftbag, if you want a big store capacity in a relative small boat. If a lower locomotion cost, a lower aircon cost, a less costly stabilisation, less maintenance cost IS an issue because your pocket is NOT unlimited. Then a submarine can be a BIG advantage over a surface ship.

This is especially the case when you do operations where you normally have a small sub and a giant "support ship" with a crane that costs many thousands a day just to operate and looses most operation days waiting for better weather.

The reason why the ultra luxury segment was targeted in first place is probably just because people who are catering to millionairs in their normal life (gemologists, yacht designers, etc...) where the motor behind the scenes.

For me a typical example how "media hype" can create "false markets" that do not really exist.

Wil







2010/7/6 <MerlinSub@t-online.de>
Hi Marc,

Modern megayachts have cental door looking mechnismin, central alarm devices,
cameras on all deck and more satellit antenna communications systems to cry for help than the Nasa.

Pirats looking for cargo and cash. Megayachts have only credit cards and no cargo.

But weather is an issue..

vbr Carsten


"Marc de Piolenc" <piolenc@archivale.com> schrieb:
> Shame on you for wrecking my fantasy!
>
> Seriously, though, there's no reason why a more conventional sub
> configuration - one with a saddle casing - could not have a very big
> footprint in the harbor, plenty of deck area and even a landing pad
> (though the chopper will need to fly off before the yacht submerges). As
> for separate accomodations for the invisible crew, also possible with a
> greater subdivision of the internal space...which would also be good
> structurally.
>
> Big boat with small sub slung on deck works for underwater sightseeing,
> but not for escaping bad weather and pirates.
>
> Could we open up a File area for submarine fantasies and sub superyacht
> concepts?
>
> Marc
>
> On 7/6/2010 4:01 AM, MerlinSub@t-online.de wrote:
> > Hi Marc - I have seen many Superyacht-submarines concept the last 20 years.
> > One of them was my own concept in the early 90ies about 90 feet long.
> > Was shown as eye catcher on the superyacht show in monaco for teh yard I am working for at that time.
> >
> > Lot of intresst from : reportsmans. Not one of the rich guys was intresst in.
> >
> > "Looks small in the harbour.."
> >
> > " I need something with sunbathing are, whirlpool and helicopter landing pad.."
> >
> > " I like my private area and don't one to see the crewmembers - except the stewardess"
> >
> > Some answers from people normally owned megyacht.
> > Submarine designer should think about this answers before the get to there drawing boards.
> >
> > The superyacht-submarine "industry" is still waiting for the one rich guy building a autonomus submarine.
> > But this guy with the big pocket is still on dive station.
> >
> > Most of them are very happy with a big superyacht and a small submarine as tender.
> >
> > vbr Carsten
> >
> >
> > "Marc de Piolenc"<piolenc@archivale.com>  schrieb:
> >> A lot of derision was recently heaped on a submersible luxury yacht
> >> concept bruited by an Italian shipyard and reported by CNN. But
> >> something in the article struck me as a challenge to those "in the
> >> know." A spokesman for the shipyard said that they were looking for
> >> consultants.
> >>
> >> What if one or more of the leading lights of the personal submarines
> >> networks were tapped to advise these builders? What would he/they tell
> >> the yacht designers about the concept they have now, and what
> >> modifications would he/they recommend, and why?
> >>
> >> Although I am NOT a leading light in the field of personal submarines, I
> >> have fantasized for decades about a personal submarine large and
> >> comfortable enough for cruising, or even living aboard, and even done
> >> some calculations and formed some opinions. I would like to try
> >> launching the discussion, which I hope will be fruitful. Referring to
> >> the CNN report:
> >>
> >> http://edition.cnn.com/2010/TECH/innovation/07/01/concept.yacht.designs/index.html?fbid=owi0rlu2C1-
> >>
> >> It's fairly clear from the graphics that the outer hull of this thing is
> >> the pressure hull (portholes visible), not a "soft" external casing,
> >> which means that ballast provisions must necessarily be "hard" and
> >> located inside the pressure hull. That, and the sheer size of the round
> >> wiewports located just aft of amidships tell us that this beast, as
> >> conceived, is meant only for shallow submergence. The absence of
> >> internal stiffeners and bulkheads in the interior drawings reinforces
> >> this, and also dictates the use of an inherently stiff, thick hull
> >> shell, possibly of sandwich construction.
> >>
> >> That said, what advantages would the ability to submerge to a modest
> >> depth give the submarine yacht that might justify the vast additional
> >> cost of building a huge submersible? The most obvious is the ability to
> >> sightsee, to view the wonders of the shallows: reefs, lagoons... But
> >> this could probably be adequately provided by a glass-bottomed surface
> >> vessel. Handling rough weather is another advantage - one that
> >> absolutely requires the ability to submerge. Equipped with a snorkel,
> >> the yacht could use the full power of its diesels to make a rapid
> >> passage through even the roughest weather. Even though, snorkeling, it
> >> could not submerge below the convection zone of large surface waves, the
> >> power of its propulsion system, allied with powerful hydrovanes and an
> >> automatic stabilization system, would iron out most of the bumps and
> >> allow a fair body like the sub to power through a storm at over thirty
> >> knots. If the hull shape were optimized to minimize wave-making near the
> >> surface, it might do better still.
> >>
> >> There are disadvantages, of course, besides the greater expense of
> >> building the beast. Like water ballast, all fuel tankage must be
> >> internal, which makes venting, and protecting the passengers and crew
> >> against fuel fumes and spills, a major design task. At snorkel depth
> >> there's no problem because there is a continual influx of fresh air and
> >> aspiration of interior air into the engines and expulsion out the
> >> exhaust. With the boat completely buttoned up and on electric
> >> propulsion, the problem gets more complicated.
> >>
> >> The big viewports will have to be altered - I don't know of any outfit
> >> that could mold a one-piece acrylic port that large. The result would be
> >> mullioned, and might resemble a rose window more than a porthole.
> >>
> >> Best,
> >> Marc
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ************************************************************************
> >> ************************************************************************
> >> ************************************************************************
> >> 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
> >> ************************************************************************
> >> ************************************************************************
> >> ************************************************************************
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ************************************************************************
> > ************************************************************************
> > ************************************************************************
> > 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
> > ************************************************************************
> > ************************************************************************
> > ************************************************************************
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Internal Virus Database is out of date.
> > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> > Version: 9.0.829 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2932 - Release Date: 06/12/10 02:35:00
> >
>
>
>
> ************************************************************************
> ************************************************************************
> ************************************************************************
> 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
> ************************************************************************
> ************************************************************************
> ************************************************************************
>
>




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