Very futuristic yacht design by Phil Pauley

It foils, flies and dives and has raise-able decks.
Nice inspiration for the future by Phil Pauley.
http://www.philpauley.com/
Video presentation:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=OR2f4hEtoyc

He has designed a sub biosphere for National Geographic.

And a sea orbiter floating island/yacht for permanent living on sea.

Here is his facebookpage:
https://www.facebook.com/pauleyinteract

He's involved in development of receptiondesk technology as well.

 

Look like it can do anything except exist.

Nice to see smoking ganja and drawing "Yes" album covers lives on somewhere.

 

I'm thinking those things would attract more sharks than dolphins and baleen whales. Maybe some jellyfish.

Just sayin'


Oh, and they wouldn't stay all super-clean and futuristic looking for long, moving very slowly in the ocean. Nothing does. They would be trailing 100ft long strands of seaweed and be covered with thick mats of dark olive drab algae, and barnacles...always the barnacles.

I wonder why offshore oil rigs are perched on massive steel columns and are a matrix of massive steel I-beams with people hunkered down in the center, instead of nice half dome sun-rooms at water level. Maybe it is all those waves and stuff.

 

A futuristic design, imo, is one that will be built in the future and we try to imagine today. I do not think "it" is never going to be built and therefore would not call it futuristic. It is a design that is currently "shocking" but after tomorrow (OK, tomorrow also is the future) will be completely obsolete. There are very classic designs that will last much longer than that.
Sorry, but I think so and you ask us, I suppose, opinions.

 

Thats the reality for sure.

In fact, that might be the basis for building one - a floating artificial reef that makes its living from sealife. I suppose you could hang oyster racks from it or something.

In the right location, it could generate its own power.

"Ocean thermal energy conversion (OTEC) uses the temperature difference between cooler deep and warmer shallow or surface ocean waters to run a heat engine and produce useful work, usually in the form of electricity.

Attempts to develop and refine OTEC technology started in the 1880s. In 1881, Jacques Arsene d'Arsonval, a French physicist, proposed tapping the thermal energy of the ocean. D'Arsonval's student, Georges Claude, built the first OTEC plant, in Matanzas, Cuba in 1930.[2][3] The system generated 22 kW of electricity with a low-pressure turbine.[4] The plant was later destroyed in a storm.[5]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_thermal_energy_conversion

 

Good points! Maybe such craft should be styled to look their best when fully undergrown? Could style it after that legendary island-sized turtle I suppose.

Of course, with all the swag they'd be dropping on these the could use that really expensive bronze alloy that is supposed to be immune to fouling as well as corrosion.

 

Some entertaining comments on this thread, very amusing.

 

Indeed. In the meantime some rather nice artificial island homes have been built using platforms, netting, and a huge bunch of empty plastic bottles. Trying to convince the Corps of Engineers it won't be an eyesore might take some doing though....

 

I thought the raisable flybridge shown in 32-th second of the presentation might be a feasible design. When berthing or on anchor you have a huge deck that can be held cool in hot climates.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OR2f4hEtoyc#t=32

 

Some futuristic designs survive the passing of years.
Frank Lloyd Wright (June 8, 1867 – April 9, 1959) house designs, for example, still look good. And most built in 1920s, 30s, and 40s. Still look 'modern".

But look at the tawdry plastic bubble and Mondrian Art style architecture from the 1960s. modern at the time, or faddish.

Look like slums today, anything BUT modern.

 

True.. Look at the Star Trek series with Captain Kirk.
Highly modern design then, but outdated now.

 

I think you are confusing the terms. You are talking about designs that were built at the time and today still look attractive and modern.
"Star Trek," "2001 Space Odyssey" have shown that what was designed in its day has absolutely nothing to do with what the future has become a reality, not to mention the technical nonsense in them we have been shown. But having said that, I want to express my admiration for these films.
A different topic: I see no incentive to spend my vacation in a submarine. And by the way, how is handled when that submarine is underwater?, because I see no stabilizing fins nor I think the propulsion system, under the hull as a surface ship, is adequate.

 

What if it were a YELLOW submarine? more attractive then?

 

That is probably the only feasible feature in that video. But it would come together with reduced seakeeping and safety in a seaway, increased weight, cost and probability of malfunction. The rest of the shown features (flying, diving, etc) makes no sense at all, neither technically, nor economically.

But it does make sense for the design studio, from the marketing point of view. In fact, we all have seen their video and are discussing it here.

 

When you are on a vacation and the seas get heavy, submersion is a very gentle way to get to the nearest harbor.
And if you have ever snorkeled or dived. The underwater world, especially tropical, is a very impressive experience. I agree if you say this diving feature will lead to: reduced seakeeping and safety in a seaway, increased weight, cost and probability of malfunction. But when submerged, it's very spectaculair experience.