Public response to J. Shawl

[Rick Lucertini <empiricus@sprint.ca>]

Jonathan Shawl wrote:

(Did he ever . . . !!!)

I'll try to insert sub related material in every one of my rebuttals.  How does THAT set the
tone  ;-)

This IS a sub list?  But, John's got some good points that, IMHO, need addressing out in the
open.  Ray, delete it if you want to!

> I'm starting to get a mental picture of this group, so I thought I would share it to see
> where I stand.    [snip]      This might get me flamed

Yep . . .

> [snip]
>  My
> point is I'm getting
> a little frustrated. When I first found this site I thought it and the people in it would
> contain more detailed
> technical info on safe, affordable, Personal sub building techniques.  I thought there would
> be more good
> "how to" info presented in a organized way for the people that need it.

In terms of details, you are about to be overwhelmed with them.  As soon as I re-shoot all the
sub material directly to my hard drive instead of onto video tape (still can't believe I did
that) you will get very hi-res images that Ray hopefully will be posting to the site.  Depends
on relevance and what his server can handle. Penetrators, electrical, viewports, conceptual art,
etc.  As far as formulae, I have a few visuals of those including volumes of every imaginable
shape including toruses, cones, elipses, double hulled cylinders, sections, arcs, etc.

> I mean there some
> very basic questions
> being asked, and the people can't find the answers, or they get too many different ones,
> something it lacking here.

It's quite possible that the questions aren't focused enough.  If a question such as: "What are
the tolerances of acrylic when subjected to deltaP's of . . . ", then, the chances are that one
of the more experienced members will respond very closely to what the questioner is looking for,
but, as always, with the usual caveats . . ."it's your butt so check out everything we say
first".  Ignore litigation for the moment.  It's just common sense.  Besides, who wants the
guilt of knowing that after giving someone a solution to some problem, they killed themselves
because they forgot to sink their hull on unmanned trials?  Provide answers, yes, but, teach how
to think critically (notice I didn't say logically) as well!

As for some of the more generic answers, sometimes there's so MUCH room for conceptual design
that it's really tough to zoom in on the "correct" answer.  Vis a vis, my passion for visibility
vs. the passion for a 1-atm. boat.

As far as diving to deep depths is concerned I personally couldn't give a rat's gluteus maximus
as to whether I dive into the inky black or not.  Would I do it?  Absolutely!!!  I'm just not
motivated to do it from something I built in my backyard.  Some of us have bailed out from great
depths, some of us have saved lives, dived to over 1,000 ft. and some of us have been badly
injured.  But, we're sharing, not to brag, but to save a life, teach, motivate, add humour or
simply to mingle about subs.  It's called bench racing or hangar flying.

I've been researching sub design for well over 20 years and have been a rated diver for 25
years.  I know my diving physics inside out and backwards - and so do MANY of the members of
this list.  But, I can't hold a candle to someone like John Brownlee who specializes in optics.
That's his field.  Or Gary Boucher or yourself in terms of field experience in subs - you own
them and use them!!!  I won't even get into Phil Nuyten's Curriculum Vitae. It's too scary!  And
he's still alive.

> Don't get me wrong, there is good info out there in the group, but to much time is spend on
> philosophical ideas
> and how to get around the time proven ways of  safe sub building for the sake of personal
> expression or art or
> something. Yes there are countless ways it could be done. Would it not be better for the new
> comers to subs to
> see info that has narrowed down the field of possibilities so he is more likely to be
> successful in his efforts?

Not necessarily.  I think if you take a REALLY good read at what people are saying, safety is
the number one issue on this list.  Lurking behind every member's eyes is the possibility that
he or she may die a horrible death or be severely maimed in a diving accident.  Allowing the
imagination to roam is invaluable from a neophyte's perspective because it serves to educate,
not restrict.  We INVITE neophytes, and the pro's, to intermingle and share.  We are all
mentors.

Let the imagination roar, then find out what works.  This is an epistemological principle that
is cherished by educators around the world.  Why?  Because it allows the little boy or girl in
all of us to shriek with delight at the POSSIBILITIES of what can be done. IGNITE the passion,
THEN bring in the mature adult mind to qualify and quantify.  That's how beauty evolves into
function.  The architect starts and the engineer finishes . . . and the architect gets pissed
off   :-D    It took me years to reconcile those two parts of myself: the artsy and the
logician.

[snip]   >If we can't think logically and build only save subs, then people will get hurt,

Remember that logic is not necessarily common sense.  Recall the scientist who, after severing
the limbs off of a frog, came to the logical conclusion that, when the Pavlovian bell rang, and
the frog stopped hopping, it was because frogs become deaf after so many amputations.  A very
sound conclusion from a "logical" standpoint.

Encourage critical thinking, not logic.  Logic is merely a subset of critical thought.  Logic,
by definition, is rigid; critical thought is global, flexible and allows the neophyte to shape a
broader world view.  Critical thought is also a more powerful tool by orders of magnitude.
That's how we develop common sense - it is simply a parallel processing mode formed from a
gestalt based on unbiased, open observation.

Not meaning to be offhanded, but, has anyone noticed the correlation between failed marriages
and the engineering profession?  It is rampant with "logical" male thinkers who haven't got the
foggiest notion of how women think.  The "logical" position in a failing relationship is to
examine one's own feelings - very far from "logic", isn't it?  Well, isn't THAT a stupid
response?    ;-)     Completely illogical.

> [snip]    I'm not sure if any one out there gets
> what I'm trying to say.
> I hope I'm not the only one that feels this way!
> If you can identify with what I am trying to say drop me a note at, shawl@torchlake.com

Nope, I personally will address this within the group, Bucko!  You have a valid viewpoint and I,
for one, am glad you aired it. I know from personal communications with you that you are a
sensitive person and really do have people's safety at heart.  IMHO, we all crave safety.

> That way I will know if I am wasting my time here or not.

Never!  It's nice to get off technical issues once in a while and learn something about the
PEOPLE we're involved with.  I'd feel safer diving in a sub with you if I have a sense of who
you are.  Psubbers are great, but, I like the people inside them better.

> PS   The one design philosophy I liked best is the KISS principal, now go out and KISS you
> sub design.
>         Keep It Simple Stupid!
>         I just thought some of you would agree with that one at least.    ;-)

Yep!  That's why I LOVE ambient dry subs and ambient hard shell suits  :-D    Sooooo easy to
build!

--
Rick Lucertini
empiricus@sprint.ca
(Vancouver, Canada)

"Most people die with their dreams still inside them."