Re: QuickCam Submersible

[VBra676539@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/10/99 3:26:05 PM, jon@whoweb.com writes:

<<>why not use a video camera and transfer the footage when you get home.

I was suggesting using a video camera instead of a sub.  That might be just
to scope out an area to determine if its worth diving in, or as a cheaper
alternative to building a complete sub.  In such cases from the top of a
boat, you wouldn't be able to see what you were filming if you didn't have
a real time interface at the surface.  Obviously, cabling for power and
signal transfer would be required.

Jon>>

Not a bad idea for the bods on the surface boat, either. The folks who spend 
their time fiddling around with psub maniacs end up bobbing on the surface a 
lot while we go and play. A camera system gives them a sense of participation 
and can be used to film the sub playing around as well as be a back-up from a 
safety standpoint. (Whattaya mean he/she's been down for 3 hours?). Another 
hookup is to the sub itself. The original Perry commo system was an antenna 
wire for the sub's onboard radio, run to a surface float, which let the 
surface crew track the sub visually and have live audio. If the psub is on a 
tight budget, here's a double way to keep track. And if you're going that 
far, how about real-time video? Makes a tethered boat out of a free-swimmer, 
but is another way to keep in touch. Wives and lovers worry about us idjits.
Vance