The Captain Nemo float out
August 15, 2011 at 4:41 pm #1578
Let me continue to propose the “captain nemo float out” it is basicly building a “better yacht” that can stay in open ocean for long periods of time.
Yachts can not stay in open ocean for long periods of time as the wave action makes staying there quite uncomfortable.
Yachts are also built from materials that impose “light building” as principal design feature. This goes bad with basic seasteading needs like big tank volumes and store of big amounts of goods like food, spare parts, tools, fuel, water and similar.
In general a yacht is built for living in a marina and make short trips of no more than a few days crossing open water in favorable weather conditions.
We propose (and already tested) a vehicle that is the technical equivlent of a whale. A very heavy almost completly submerged body wandering worldwide at a speed of 7 knots with incredible low energy needs, capeable to live on resouces and opportunities that come up seasonally at thousands of miles distance.
This vehicle would be about “apartment size” hold a adequate living space for a single family be equally comfortable in harbor or at open sea, avoiding wave movements by cruising most of the time in snorkel mode. It would provide “leave coffee cup on the table comfort” even in the worst imaginable sea conditions.
It would be the “workhorse” of a new generation of ocean explorers and settlers who engage in activities like open water pod fishfarming, tuna rearing, wreck salvage, scuba tourism, mineral explotation, scientific data collection, tourism and similar.
This workhorse would be almost completly independent of infrastructure.
It would allow to have a lifestyle that is somewhere halfway between a yachtie, the moken, and captain nemo. It would allow to paricipate in existing yachting, use existing harbor and boating infrastructure when available. But on the long run it would work best as mobile complement of oceanic cities as proposed by seasteading.
concretesubmarine.comAugust 16, 2011 at 5:04 am #14662
That’s such a simple idea but so beautiful. Take out most of the problem with floating cities by simply putting them a couple feet below the surface during the storm I’ve got to say, I’d love to see some cost estimates. It would also probably be nice to have some data on different glasses/thicknesses, cost per sq. in and what depths they were rated up to. Really probably plastics as some seemingly opaque ones still pass through most of the spectrum that plants need, and they’re quite cheap. Would be interesting to estimate what one of these subs, perhaps in a fat bellied version with a large top and bottom large enough to have enough growing space on the top to grow all the veggies, fruits, tubers, grain, etc that a family would need to subsist, as well as perhaps some protein in the form of those giant bunnies and chickens (though obviously the sea can provide all your protein needs, still some variety is nice). You could construct a steel and plastic/plexi/glass greenhouse, or perhaps even use concrete for the grid which holds the panels, on the top of your boat. It could be on the surface most of the time to get light, and I’m pretty sure that even with moderate submersion it would still get plenty of light for most plants.
And it seems like larger versions of this idea would be great for certain fishing applications – for instance those alaskan crab fishermen. How much less sucky would that job be if instead of getting beat to hell constantly in freezing cold spray on the surface you were ten or twenty feet below it in the nice relatively dry and warm belly of your concrete cargo sub with nothing annoying to deal with except a bit of high pressure needed to keep the water from rushing up into the hole you pull the crab pots in through/drop the lines out. Also there’s the fact that injuries from swaying pots, people falling overboard, people slipping and hitting their heads in high seas, all of that stuff has to be one of the significant costs in that business in terms of insurance. For sure it means that people demand high salaries. I’d imagine if you could get the concrete sub anywhere near as expensive for the same number of cubic footage of pot and crab storage space (an extra benefit, you don’t need freezers you just store your crabs in your ballast tanks and never surface too far for too long) on a traditional ship, even if it was only a couple times more expensive per cubic feet of storage and had a decent speed (those boats don’t appear to go super fast) you could probably absolutely clean up between attracting deck mates for standard wages and not constantly bumping your insurance premiums.
This is just a freaking awesome idea man, and it’s great to see that you already did something with it. It was probably some fellow like yourself that took the first sled and tried sticking axles and chunks of rounded tree trunk under it
EDIT: Btw, those aren’t pictures of the actual interior are they? I’m assuming they’re pics of similarly sized private jet interiors, but if your really did it up that nice then I hope you’re already selling these suckers as yachts
Oh and with a large enough ship and an application that left it hanging out in the same area for long periods of time I bet it would be profitable to rig up the anchor cable (or perhaps a regular ole cable and some equipment for quickly and securely bolting it into a bit of sea floor stone to cut down on the electric cost of hauling up an anchor which can hold the sort of large model I’m thinking of) as a tidal generator. Sure youg et what I mean, but your craft has a lot of buoyancy and might possibly be in one area for a long time, so it would almost be a crime not to harvest that energy. Maybe it would even be enough to run your basic electric needs on a house sized model, maybe even to store up some electric against future engine use.August 16, 2011 at 5:25 am #14664
The man would like “to see some cost estimates” and “some data on different glasses/thicknesses, cost per sq. in and what depths they were rated up to.” Chop, chop! He seems ready to go with cash in hand.August 16, 2011 at 9:07 am #14666
Is it so unexpected to see people with cash at hand? My ultimate goal is seaseateading too, and my capital is 4 times what it was lasy year, and my credibility is more than 3 times what it was last year and i am planning to go with at least this pace for next say…5-10 years before taking action, though if i see something that suits my taste and make me say ‘ok this is gonna work’ i wouldn’t mind investing too… I do have some basic designs on seasteads but when i tried to get into detail, i plainly saw that i just won’t be able fund it, and i am not intending to earn money from what i build by selling it so, instead of looking for investors i just decided to live for money(my presence here is just for hobby and motivation for now) at least for half a decade and left designing to a later time. I’ll have more funds and stuff will be cheaper by then, i’d advise everyone to do the same unless you re expecting to sell what you build. I wish you best of luck Wil i hope you can sell those subs and improve them so that perhaps one day i might become a customer for you.August 16, 2011 at 10:05 pm #14675
Um…. wow. That’s such a simple idea but so beautiful. Take out most of the problem with floating cities by simply putting them a couple feet below the surface during the storm…
When talking about protection from wave damage we should have clear that one thing is being protected from wave hazard and sea sickening movements what happens inmediatly when you are submerged – and the other thing is how deep in the ocean you might notice the pass of big waves.
Wave hazards come from 2 factors:
1) breaking crests that can hit a structure with hundreds of tons of force
2) Hog and Sag, bending and torsion, forces which appear when a ship is supported by water (and bouyancy) at one end and in the air at the other end. Those forces can break a ship or lead to fatigue. They make a ship stamp and roll.
If you leave the math and wave amplitude thing apart, you can easyly understand that neither wave crests nor hog and sag can exist anymore as soon as you have a thin water layer closing above you, even when this layer is just a foot deep. The structure will be supported uniformly by water at its whole length and this uniform support leads inmediatly to a much calmer behavior.
This is what a diver experiences when he jumps from a rocking surface boat – there is inmediatly this incredible calm uniformly supported floating status when you go below the surface it dos not start gradually dozends of meters down – it is just below the surface. No wave is HITTING you anymore no wave is pushing you and your equpment around as it is the case when you swim on the surface. The only thing you experience below is a kind of current that changes direction with every wave. So you can “percieve the wave movement” when you have a visual reference to the sea bottom. If you don`t have this visual reference you will not notice the movement.
I know a lot of divers that are suceptible to seasickness in a rolling diveboat and they are always the first to jump overboard – once you are below seasickness is gone.
I experienced this in extreme form at Malpelo Island which is a island in the pacific 500 km off the coast of Colombia between Cocos and Galapagos – you have those real big pacific waves comming in directly towards a volcanic rock face. There is no doubt that any ship no matter the thickness of its steel plating would be hacked to small pieces within minutes. The divers jump overboard far from the rocks and swimm below the surface directly towards this rockfaces – this is where all those beautiful fishes are. You hang there 1-2m below the “hackzone” relaxed enjoy the smooth waiven of the waves comming in, you can feel the real big suckers in your ears, as the waterdepth changes while the crest goes trough. It is a wonderful place to mediate about the fact why nature never developed a surface swimming animal for the open sea – maybe living below is just so much better.
The other experience i can contribute is the experience i had with the submarine yacht prototype – while i had the sub on its anchorplace and was tooling around inside i closed the hatch to avoid questions from courious visitors – i was there for an hour or so and when i opened the hatch i noticed that a storm had come up, several trees felt down, sailing yachts in the 30 foot range where calling SOS, and the local rescue crew was busy to assist. – I did not even notice the storm. And the hull was still on the surface exposing the sail (tower) and the central rounded part of the hull a bit above the surface. Obviously this did not present enough wave and weather attack surface to make the hull rock and roll.Sub on anchorplaceInside the sub on anchorplaceDiver below breaking wavesStructural weakness of a whale body no stifness required as supported by buoyancy
The difference between being hit by the waves on the surface and being supported completly by liquid is paramount – this is why whales have structural weak bodies compared to a ship, they can live with a lot less structure.
Modern shipbuilding is including ballast tanks into the design to deepload the vessel when necessary to avoid excessive bending in the violent surface layer and get a more uniform hull support.
The question how deep is deep enough is most of all a practical question – i would say a few feet is enough for leaving your coffee cup on the table in 99% of the sea states you will experience, 10m will be enough for leaving the coffee cup on the table in the perfect storm. What means that there is no need to go beyond a depth where a decent snorkel is still possible.
I know that there are people theroizizing that big waves reach deep down in the ocean – the point is theirs hazardous and seasickening action depends on intermittent air/iquid contacts with the hull – and those are gone inmediatly below the surface. What is left below is waiven that does no harm and no seasickness – any diver can tell you that.
concretesubmarine.comAugust 16, 2011 at 10:36 pm #14677
ellmer – if the yard was sold what happened with your 200 ton shell?
“Leadership and do-ership are not the same thing”August 17, 2011 at 3:48 pm #14710
That’s such a simple idea but so beautiful…. I’ve got to say, I’d love to see some cost estimates.
The cost estimate question has a short answer. We can do (and have done) that kind of project at 331 Euro ( 477 USD) per ton of displacement.
This is a “general livng space cost per cubic meter” that is on the same price level as living space cost in the european and US housing market.
concretesubmarine.comAugust 17, 2011 at 7:26 pm #14720Winkerson wrote:
…. It could be on the surface most of the time to get light, and I’m pretty sure that even with moderate submersion it would still get plenty of light….
When you have the viewports uplooking so that light can enter from above you get a well lighted interior that exceeds the light conditions in the belly of a surface yacht or in a business jet. Have a look at the videos below:
to check light inside the hull.
concretesubmarine.comAugust 18, 2011 at 5:06 pm #14771
… harvest that energy….
The captain nemo float out unit has a lot of opportunities to offer. As it is the tech equivalent of a whale it can operate in terms of energetics like a whale. This means for a 200 ton unit as shown in the pictures the propulsion need is not more than 40 horsepower. This means you can experiment with alternative energy sources that only crank out a few kilowatts and still have the energy and propulsion needs of your living space bubble covered. What comes to mind is micro trubines, sterling engines, electric propulsion, hybrid and fuel cell propulsion – from the car market, etc. etc…
On the other hand you have a store capacity of around 100 tons in 200 ton displacement unit. This means like a whale you can refuel in one part of the world (the arctic) and then do business in another part of the world thousands of miles away without refueling. For a submarine yacht this would mean take opportunities like travel to venezuela or saudia arabia and bunker the fuel need of a year at very low prices.
On the other hand you could harvest the enegy from waves by simply hauling a pelamis unit behind your submarine yacht. You also could harvest stream energy while anchored with the large propeller.
concretesubmarine.comAugust 21, 2011 at 10:13 pm #14839Shouri wrote:
Is it so unexpected to see people with cash at hand?
It is not really unexpected to see people with cash at hand – but it does not only take an investor who has cash, it also takes people who have the guts to take road bumps to push a project forward – money is the least complicated part of it.
The more complicated part is finding a building site where you can build in peace and make it happen without third parties interfering with the project .August 24, 2011 at 8:05 pm #14729
….And it seems like larger versions of this idea would be great for certain fishing applications – for instance those alaskan crab fishermen. How much less sucky would that job be if instead of getting beat to hell constantly in freezing cold spray on the surface you were ten or twenty feet below it in the nice relatively dry and warm belly of your concrete cargo sub with nothing annoying to deal with except a bit of high pressure needed to keep the water from rushing up into the hole you pull the crab pots in through/drop the lines out. …
Crab fishing basicly reduces to a simply task: to put heavy objects (the cages) on the ocean floor and recover them later. When it comes to recovery of heavy objects from the ocean floor the technique invented by Howard Hughes Glomar Explorer for recovering the Soviet Golf-II Class submarine is certainly a model to go.( project jennifer).
Due to the lack of wave action the recovery is easier and the tube trunk is shorter also, the trim tanks can work as lifting device.
Beside crab fishing recovery of heavy objects has also a application in wreck salvage, mining, and other applications. For this it is best to split the pressure hull in spheres, go for a 2 hull concept, and have a mid section as a dive bell with a moon pool.
Such a boat could make a living as a recovery and salvage unit .
A good and realistic overall picture how salvage, recovery, mining, from a submerged vessel is happening is painted in James Cameron`s film Abyss.
We just propose a more mobile and streamlined vessel than the “submerged rig” presented in the movie.
concretesubmarine.comAugust 24, 2011 at 8:42 pm #14896shredder7753 wrote:
ellmer – if the yard was sold what happened with your 200 ton shell?
According to the law the hull is a private property within another private property and therefore completly independent. It should not be affected. As a measure of caution we moved it 150m to the waterline to be able to slip into the water and get out easyly and quick whatever should happen.
concretesubmarine.comAugust 28, 2011 at 12:55 pm #15025Winkerson wrote:
…. hanging out in the same area for long periods of time…
The Captain Nemo float out is the technical equivalent of a whale. Therefore i would expect that most owners would handle the hull and do business in a similar way as a whale does. Whale studies suggest that those animals use so little energy for locomotion (only 50 horsepower for a 200 ton body) that it would be the same for them from a energetics perspective to stay on one spot or to wander planet wide. Therefore whales live on opportunities that come up on different spots of the blue planet thousands of miles away, they feed in the arctic then travel into the tropics to give birth without refueling.
A submarine yacht could do the same. As it has a load capacity that is superior to any similar ship ( a 200 ton boat has 100 ton load capcity) you can for example travel to Venezuela tank the fuel needs of a year where diesel is cheap and then go somwhere else to do business there – maybe mining submarine diamond sands in front of africa or salvaging a shipwreck you discovered.
You might use a submarine yacht in a similar way as business jets or megayachts are used. You travel constantly from business opportunity to business oportunity beeing free of anybodys rule set, tax authority, traveling worldwide – maybe without having a lot of people aware where exactly on the globe you are at a given time.
concretesubmarine.comAugust 29, 2011 at 8:43 pm #15048
Hey, going to see a 47 foot concrete boat,
the boat-owner has already agreed to take me on as “crew”,
we’ve already discussed the potential of me buying the boat also.
Anyhow it is currently on the dry,
owner was saying how when it was at anchor,
during heavy storm it would get dragged across the lake,
even though he had made a mooring ball with pellet-anchors weighing several hundred pounds,
potentially I could make some ferrocement bruce anchors that could weight a lot.
So I’m thinking one of the potential solutions is to make it a submersible boat, a “Captian Nemo Float Out”.
I’m thinking that to reoutfit it, have to seal up the little openable windows, make a hatch like entrance,
could then put in submarine windows, such as large ones at the bow for seeing forward, and little ones at the sides for passenger views.
then installing ballast tanks, with manual and automatic pumping.
One issue, is that this boat has a “dagger-board” I’m not sure if it goes completely through the hull, or only part-way, so that would probably have to sealed up to go through the hull, or some kind of water-tight dagger-board box could be used, though I’m not sure how.
Is there any other tasks that might need to occur to complete the reoutfitting?
BTW, the owner was thinking of replacing the diesel engine with electrical, which do you think is better?
Anyways I’ll have to discuss this with the owner tommorrow, though for the sake of keeping it at anchor he’d probably agree.
I was thinking once this boat is ready, and samta and I are getting ready to go, I could sail down a smaller concrete-boat from collingwood, could be more manageable for his occasional use. Though perhaps he’ll want to keep it, then I’ll have experience with making a captain-nemo float, and I’ll be able to reoutfit the 32ft concrete boat more easily.
In any case, I’ll be sure to gain experience with whatever repairs or alterations occur.
calm aware desire choice love express intuit moveAugust 29, 2011 at 9:10 pm #15073
two points to have in mind – pressure resistance of the hull. Only round hulls cooking down to an arch load case can resist pressure. Second point streamlining – a boat hull is only streamlining well when floating on its construction waterline. Nevertheless you can go with a 2 hull concept similar to phoenix which means having a ordinary surface boat and build a pressure hull inside of it. (two hulls). WW2 subs where built that way.
On the other hand – making a surface boat dive is a bit like making a car fly – it can be done but is problably more expensive than making a airplane in first place. So i would recommend to take the boat and live there while building a dedicated sub hull.
Efficient sub hulls are whale shaped not surface boat shaped.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Posted on at