|
I remember my first post on this list in October 05, with Hurricane Wilma approaching. All excited about the prospects of my first concept,... a monstrously large ambient adaptation of Nemo's Nautilus. Eight long days without power eagerly anticipating what the list may have thought of my ideas, as outlandish as they may have been. Oh what an education I received from this list! In two years time, I had learned more about submersibles than any amount of a lifetime of self-study would have provided. Good, bad, and ugly, everything discussed on this forum has merit. Education is priceless and I have seen no other high end activity, (aviation included), where imagination and innovation combine to produce the results that I have seen here, few as they may be. No one should ever feel discouraged! This is the best gathering of minds on the subject at hand. Joe sopwith-baby.com > From: sjpearceqld@bigpond.com > To: personal_submersibles@psubs.org > Subject: RE: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Nautilus pictures/large subs > Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 09:14:10 +1000 > > Jon > > If you read Ian's post in the context in which he made, his comments refer > to 'certain Members' attitudes not the Founders attitudes. This makes your > defence of PSUBS as an organisation unnecessary. > > In Ian's defence and in relation to some of the attitudes a few list members > have expressed towards big subs you have 'missed it'. Given the time, I > could cut and paste pages of posts with negative or condescending reactions > to a proposed large sub or to a vessel under construction. Interestingly one > list member now investigating a potential hull for a large p-sub was the > leader of the pack sighting everything from problems with the depth of the > average harbour entrance to cost and maintenance factors associated with > larger boats. It's nice to see RJ has enjoyed an epiphany the road to > Damascus. :-) > > From the opposite point of view there are many list members that have been > excited and enthused by the emergence of the bigger subs and have responded > positively. > > As to my comment about the 'K Cult' it was after all tongue in cheek just > like my comment about Brent's biblical hair style and in fairness suggested > that a K boat was an accessible and affordable proven design with readily > available plans. It would be also fair to suggest that the convention > attendees in general and the longer term members would consist of a high > number of K boat devotees. I also note Psubs sell the plans. Although I > don't know a lot about him, I believe Kittredge and his boats were one of > the founding platforms associated with the inception of P-subs. Further, my > understanding is that the last convention was held in a location close to > his home and with his birthday in mind. Nothing wrong with that and as you > yourself stated to me in an email off list the organisation has to be > relevant to this core group some of which are experts in various ways. > > In every respect these members will find big subs don't represent their core > values and may not be of interest. Fair enough! My valid comment about a > mute response was really expressing my disappointment that someone like > Peter who has given up so much that most of us value, to achieve his goal, > should receive such a mute response. People like Peter and Carsten are our > Champions and should be celebrated just as much as Kittredge. I dear say if > it was RJ or another core conventionist launching a big sub the praise would > be lavish in comparison. > > This is just an opinion but in a nut shell Jon, it is a shame more list > members don't have the attitude you have demonstrated with respect to these > sub champions! > > Respectfully > > Steve Pearce > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-personal_submersibles@psubs.org > [mailto:owner-personal_submersibles@psubs.org] On Behalf Of jonw@psubs.org > Sent: Monday, 25 August 2008 4:15 AM > To: personal_submersibles@psubs.org > Subject: RE: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Nautilus pictures/large subs > > Ian, > > If there's been a negative reaction to the discussion of large home-made > submersibles, I guess I've missed it. From the perspective of PSUBS the > organization, I don't believe we have treated large subs any different than > small subs and I'm not aware of any large-sub projects that have been > restricted from using any of PSUBS resources. In terms of recognition, both > large sub projects that I'm aware of have received PSUBS awards. Carsten > Standfuss received a Kittredge Award for Euronaut, and Peter Madsen received > a Kittredge Award for Kraka. When Ray asks for 2008 nominations in > December, there is nothing to stop Steve, Ian, or anyone else from > nominating Peter Madsen for another award to recognize NAUTILUS. We have a > link to Carsten's Euronaut website at > http://www.psubs.org/projects/standfuss. On August 18, at 11:14am, I > received private email from Peter Madsen asking if I would put photos of the > FREYA scuttling and video of NAUTILUS on PSUBS. That work was complete > within 12 hours, the last edits being finished at 11:44pm. I don't recall > if I announced it that night or waited until the next morning, but I know I > sent an email out to the mailing list to make you all aware of it. The > video is at http://www.psubs.org/video and the photos are at > http://www.psubs.org/photos/madsen > > The announcement of Nautilus being put in water was made in May 2008 and it > looks to me like it got as much positive response from the mailing list as > any other announcement. Regarding Peter's statement on 8/22 encouraging > others not to be afraid of building big, what did you and Steve expect the > reaction to be? Surely you didn't expect that everyone would stop what they > were doing and retool to double or triple the size of their projects. I > didn't react to Peter's email for the same reason that Jim cited, in that it > simply isn't realistic for me to think of building something the size of > Nautilus or Euronaut. Peter says the workload is far from proportional with > the size. Ok, fair enough, but workload is only one element of the project > that has to be assessed. Time, money, facilities, equipment, and storage > location are all issues that are very proportional to the size of the > project. Building subs the size of Nautilus and Euronaut require resources > which are unattainable I suspect by the vast majority of people who frequent > this list. I thought that was obvious and therefore not necessary to expand > upon in a follow up to Peters email. > > > Jon > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-personal_submersibles@psubs.org > [mailto:owner-personal_submersibles@psubs.org]On Behalf Of irox > Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2008 6:25 PM > To: personal_submersibles@psubs.org > Subject: RE: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Nautilus pictures/large subs > > > > This is great vessel. Many thanks to Peter for sharing his findings, > experiences, pictures and videos. > > Peter, the information you just shared is *very* valuable to me - thanks! > Hopefully, I can buy you a drink sometime. ;) > > As for the mute response, I've observed a fairly negative reaction > to the discussion for large home made submarines on the list. At > some point somebody seems to have defined a psubs as only having one > or two occupants and can be towed behind a pickup truck, anything > else is not acceptable. This is certainly why I'm hesitant to > discuss large subs on this list. > > Sometimes I think maybe we should start another list where it's ok > to discuss large submarine issues. But I see psubs is quietly > changing, and new generation of psubs is being built and launched, > most of them can house the annual psubs convention. > > Stephen, you are also building a large sub? I'd love to hear > about it. > > Cheers! > Ian. > > > > > > ************************************************************************ > ************************************************************************ > ************************************************************************ > 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 > ************************************************************************ > ************************************************************************ > ************************************************************************ > |