[PSUBS-MAILIST] Ethical obligation to inform

Sat Jul 15 07:50:07 EDT 2017

Seems, poking a bee hive with a stick is bad!  Why do anything?  Alan just say  "In Canada, nobody bothers Psubs"    This all started because a group of attention seekers built a bathtub submarine for the wrong reasons.  I don't think (hope)  they will get hurt-- did you see the look on that kids face when he was having trouble--I bet he needed to change his shorts when he got to shore.  A good scare will stop them from continuing and maybe they will build a space ship out of a hot water tank, before something bad happens.Hank 

    On Saturday, July 15, 2017 5:36 AM, Alan via Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.org> wrote:

 Jon,any thoughts on where we want to go with this?My interest is that as Scott pointed out, other countries will follow the U.S.in this regard. This could well have a positive outcome in that what was a grey area that hadauthorities scratching their heads, can now be clarified & the regulationsquoted. It would make it easy for me & pacify the authorities here if I couldsay in America..... Do there have to be more rules or just a classification of submersibles as being under the same guidelines as other boats of a similar size?Regards Alan

Sent from my iPad
On 15/07/2017, at 2:33 PM, Phil Nuytten via Personal_Submersibles  <personal_submersibles at psubs.org> wrote:

Jon,My two bits for what it’s worth. Potentially hampering rules, legislation, regulations, etc., are just what we don’t need more of . . I am a life-member of MTS, but I think that Psubs  simply asking to be a ‘primary contributor’ would miss the point – BTW, who asked MTS  to become involved in subs – personal or commercial, in the first place?As as a commercial submersible manufacturer, Nuytco is already loaded with world-wide certification agency requirements – I’d hate to see yet another player get their foot in the door! Phil Nuytten  From: Alan via Personal_Submersibles Sent: Friday, July 14, 2017 1:33 PMTo: Personal Submersibles General Discussion Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Ethical obligation to inform OK get your point Jon on not being invited.Lets insist in our inclusion.Carsten is right. There are rules that manufacturers have to abide by in theboat building industry, that a private boat builder doesn't have to.You can point to ABS & GL as guidlines but if you make them rules nobodywill comply. I spent $3000- on technical advice just to interpret The G.L. rules& it would cost $100,000 to get a sub certified. So as Carsten says if you godown the "Rules " path, where does it end!In general society doesn't care too much if you kill yourself as long as you don'tinjure anybody else in the process. In N.Z. children can climb trees without a safety harness, helmet or net underneath. In America I read that over a 10 yearperiod 10% of members of the hang glider association died from accidents.If they were injuring others in the process that would be where the rule makerswould step in. As I have said, the only difference between a submarine & a smallboat with regard to the safety of others ( aside from passengers) is if somebody surfaced in the path of a speeding boat; so keep the law makers happy & just address that issue, perhaps include a ban on diving in shipping lanes!Cheers Alan  
Sent from my iPad
On 15/07/2017, at 3:30 AM, Jon Wallace via Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.org> wrote:

   Alan, 
 My thoughts. 
 Will Kohnen and I are not strangers, neither is PSUBS a stranger to MTS.  As organizations, we have attended their conventions and they have attended ours.  Therefore, I find it rather presumptuous for MTS to consider promoting rules affecting personal submarines without first notifying us that they were doing so and without inviting us up-front as a primary contributor.  Having heard of it second hand through the grapevine as it were, we are now suppose to feel assured that our input and contributions will be valued?  What weight is given to our input?  How do we resolve disputes?  Is there a voting system, or does MTS just accept/discard our contributions arbitrarily because they have "smart people who really understand submarines" on their committee?   Logic has to make sense in all directions so let's try reversing this situation.  How about PSUBS starts a committee to promote the rules and regulations we believe should be used as a guide for government agencies, and to be thorough we will include rules that affect commercial and research submarines as well because we want a unifying set of regulations.  Seamagine, Pisces, Nuytco, U-Boat Worx, Atlantis, and all research submarines such as Alvin will have to abide by the rules that PSUBS submits to the government...and by the way, we aren't going to ask representatives from any of those disciplines to join us but if they hear about this rule making activity via word-of-mouth then we'll tell them they can contribute their ideas.  Sound like a good, rational, logical plan?   I have reached out to the CG and US Navy more than once in the past 21 years to foster a relationship with PSUBS.  The only reaction I have ever gotten from them is that they are not interested in regulating personal submarines.  So why is MTS so intent on creating rules that restrict personal submarines?  That is not a rhetorical question.   Jon 

    On Friday, July 14, 2017 8:48 AM, Alan via Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.org> wrote:

    Jon, Scott said that if anyone wanted to contribute to contact Will Konen. Perhaps you could approach him on our behalf & convey our desire to be involved in the process. There were a couple of Psubbers involved in the submersible side of UI when I was there. I think Vance & Lance! Will had a slot to fill in the lectures & asked me to talk on Psubs ( I declined), so he seems to have a pretty positive attitude toward us. As he heads the submersible side of the UI he has been a target & questioned by groups like Coast Guard about "what do we do about submarines". They have been wanting him to draught regulations for years & he has been trying to avoid it.  In my thinking, the only real issue with submersible operations is surfacing, where a submarine may come up in the path of a surface craft. Perhaps some regulations on the support boat having to display a dive flag & be in communication with the submersible, or a buoy deployed from the  submarine prior to surfacing in autonomous use. In N.Z. you can make a small boat in your backyard & take it out in a howling gale & 5 metre swells, with the one proviso that you wear a life jacket; so I don't think making submarine rules regarding sea-worthiness would be  relevant. Alan      

 _______________________________________________
Personal_Submersibles mailing list
Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles

_______________________________________________
Personal_Submersibles mailing list
Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles

_______________________________________________
Personal_Submersibles mailing list
Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles

_______________________________________________
Personal_Submersibles mailing list
Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.whoweb.com/pipermail/personal_submersibles/attachments/20170715/36030136/attachment-0001.html>