Submarine Yacht project

Yes, just for yachting purpose a 2 hull sub must be really big (around 1000 tons) or the living space gets the feeling of a "tunnel system" more than a "yacht ambient" so for small submarine yachts it is better not to fracture the space but maintain it in one piece. At the moment i am planning to seize up the concept another factor 10 this will allow 2 hull concepts.

What i am going for is that entering the submarine you get the feeling of being in the inside of lightful well ventilated yacht - very different to the "cave ambient" of a military sub. The foto below of the 20 ton sub (2.4m diameter) gives more or less the idea.

For the 200ton sub i am building the interior ambient will have even more light and a feeling of "space". At the moment i can not show you fotos of that as i am only done in raw building so interior is not finished yet. When done it will look wide and luxury class...


http://concretesubmarine.com

 

I can't wait

I live by San Fransisco, will we be able to come to the docking of the sub your building when it arrives?

 

concrete submarine yacht delivery

Hello safffff,

Ian, (the owner) is a really nice guy and he is assembling a team of "helping hands" right now. Please contact me at e-mail and i give you the mail to contact Ian.

Keep also in mind that the arrival in California may still take its time.

What i promised was a raw building time of 12 months (we kept it) and a budget frame (for raw building) of 331 Euro/ton (we kept it).

The building was the part i can control entirely so there is little third party interference that can bring up delays.

What comes now is a 150m movement to the water. We got a building site that far from water by administrative decision from our shipyard.

Of course the shipyard has the means to make this movement, the problem is they are changing the management right now. So there might pass weeks where we can not go on with the movement.

What comes then is the coastguard part. As it has been mentioned in this forum building a 200 ton private submarine in colombia is a project that rises some delicate questions. All our papers and permits (for building) are OK. But it is still a "experimental boat" and getting a permit for navigation and a flag might still be subject so some delay.

Recent changes in US laws "drug interdiction act" made the flag and registaration question a much more important one.

In fact shipping a half finished submergible hull with no flag to california could be interpreted as a crime with 15 years of jail. It is still possible to own and navigate a registered and flagged private submarine - but basicly the burden of prove is reversed. You must show that you are NOT a smuggler and can be captured if you fail to do so...

All in all there are still a lot of things to do that go far beyond proper nav lights and propeller adaption - and there are third parties that can cause big delays in the process.

Cheers
Wil
concretesubmarine.com

 

Suggestion, get a GPS tracking system that can be view via web. Give codes to Coast Guard, DEA, etc... That way they know you are not smuggling anything...

 

In general i am not a big fan of "improving interdiction efforts" by "cutting back civil rights" - bugging homes and private boats ... i think boater community should insist in liberty of boat use and boatbuilding...there are better forms of being a "good ambassador of your sport" and cooperate with authorities so that our sport is not mis-used by the bad guys - which is finally in our common interest.

Cheers,
Wil

 

Assisted Surveillance

Couldn't agree with you more on that one Wil.

Cheers, Tom

 

I re-iterate the comment I made last December about this project

"I think that the forces of International Maritime law and Insurance will have an interest in something that might cause a lot of grief to their precious clients.
Imagine the damage to any boat over 30 ft in length bearing down on 20 tons of mostly submerged concrete at 15 knots or so.
I know that most coastal authorities (even in out of the way third world countries) are very upset at any craft that might require them to launch a rescue team at great expense and risk to life (try leaving Chile on balsawood rafts these days). "

This, and a few other observations I and others have made about the difficulties of actually "using" such a craft over the last 12 months will be starting to rear their feathered heads about now.

 

Imagine being in that dark tube poking your head out every few minutes looking for the Kobayashi Maru bearing down. Imagine doing it in pitching seas and a pouring rain driven by wind, then being totally at the mercy of the other crew standing a good watch AND understanding in another language that the thing that looks like the back of a blackfish actually has people aboard...
Fun projects but please don't go anywhere in these things.

 

Check this out: http://www.heartcoherence.com/stellatedtetra/
Ask Michael Sheppard how to make concrete twice as strong and not crack.

 

Hello rwatson,
The last discussion about the topic "should the fierce forces of international maritime law bann a certain yacht design or yachting mode from the open oceans..." Was some years ago when the first catamaran type boats started to circumnavigate the globe...(among that my fellow austrian countrymen Wolfgang Hauser with Taboo1 a 10m kat...)

This discussion was also up in certain circles when single handed sailing started to be a trend...

As far as i am aware of the "fierce forces of world wide open sea control for private use" did not do so well until now - and i hope it will stay so for a while....so that we can enjoy free boat design and free yachting.

Maybe i sail the sub to melbourne - australia has non restrictive laws...on boat design...as far as i know...

I am also happy that colombian naval authority DIMAR is commited in its practical permit politics to create a "positive ambient for new naval developments" - as it is ordered by the colombian law.

For me as a person that has choosen colombia as second home this is a wise and visionary approach - especially taking into consideration that the country is just stepping out of a bloody drug war that has been won by a fierce politics of "democratic security" that has rescued civil rights and pushed back the cartels at the same time.

This is one of the reasons why colombian authority can count on my loyalty and cooperation - they do a great job doing the right thing for the right motive.

Cheers,
Wil

 

A very interesting group of comments Wellmer - but inclined to miss the original points raised, I feel.

Australia , like every other modern maritime nation offers port facilities on a commercial basis, and insists on financial guarantees from boat owners.
I cant even store a 26 foot trailer sailer in a yacht club marina without 5 million dollars of third party insurance. How are you going to get this behemoth into any civilized berthing facility without the requisite insurance cover ? It sure isnt the type of craft you can pull in on a secluded beach.

All the Coastguards from Chili to Mexico are very averse to "risky" new ventures, (odd bits of "legislation" notwithstanding). From the rescue costs, to damage to civilian craft - you are going to be flat out convincing them to let you go for a test cruise, let alone make any substantial voyage.

The Navy won't be inclined to let an untried and massive vessel out amongst their expensive toys without some kind of financial guarantees.

Even moving the thing to the water is going to be a major administrative exercise in liability cover, and you are going to need some big funds to cover the exercise. The crane or transport company will not be keen pay for the personell cover involved.

Sure, everyone is very friendly and supportive while you are tooling around in a big shed out of everyones way, and perhaps paying some bills.

When it comes to really getting out in the water, you will find that there are very few officilas who are going to stick their professional careers on the line no matter how innovative and interesting your project is.

 

Hello rwatson,

You think like a manager - in fact you must be a good one. In Management you always have a "posible problems to come up" list, and i have to give you that your "problem list" is quite complete, very acertive, well informed, and in fact it is almost exactly the one i am handling myself.

This "problems to come up list" is normally corresponded by a "strategies to resolve upcomming problems" list.

It seems to me that here is the point where we differ most - you conclude that the issues are imposible to overcome - i think they can be resolved - in fact i am good on track to do so.

To speak with Gorbatschov there are always things that are "part of the problem" and things that are "part of the solution".

I agree completly with you that insurances and standardisation in shipbuilding, is one of the core issues for ANY experimental boat.

The less "standard conform" your boat is the more "friction potential" with the established sistem your project has.

The political problem is, that if you implement "complete coverage of standard" you kill innovation. Or to to say it catchy - the poison is in the DOSE. So a wise shipbuilding politics will accnowledge the need and right of existance for both tendencies standardisation and innovation, control, and freedom, and will be focused to applie the right dose in the right segment.

So the real interesting question is: is there enough space of manouver to do this - and this depends widley on the country you are talking about, the acting persons and their "interpretation" of the laws, their "perception" of the involved risks, etc...

There was a political tendency to whipe out catamarans by applying a "capsize insurance" on catamaran yachts that would cover "supposed rescue efforts" ...

Being successful this initative would have limited yachts to "monohulls" for ever - i am glad that a much more moderate set of ideas finally implemented itself and we can enyoy catamarans on large scale today. What finally has changed was the "interpretation" and "perception" of capsize-ability and risk - seeing all those catamaran yachts touring around without "capsizing on a dayly base" took the wind out of the "prohibit that nonsense right away" - fans sails.

So you see such fluffy things like "interpretation" and "perception" can finally make the difference. Therefore for me any negative "interpretation" of "submergeability in private hands" is part of the problem - any positive discussion "part of the solution".

I do not agree that Navy and Coast Guard are rightaway "part of the resistance" i know a lot of nice navy and coast guard officials with a genuine love for the sea, a healty interest to push new frontiers, and they are "part of the solution".

You are surley right that nobody will put his career on line to get obstacles out of my way. So yes, the heavy lifting to get the permits, to build it, to put it into water, to show that this is enjoyable yachting in open ocean with a plus compared to surface yachts, - this is all my task.

But i think you should not only see the forces that are "part of the problem" there are also powerful forces (and people) that really want to see it happen and succeed - i found some allies on that way and i am doing just fine...

On this forum i have heared the words "i hope you succeed" several times. Fact is i already succeeded to apply submarine yachting in practice, to show the feasibility of the concept in a long term real world trial - and i am not allone in this.

What i now need to do is "publish the concept" establish a "movement of dedicated submarine yachties" rise financial, political, technical, support, get the muscle to overcome the resistance of the establishment.

I see Ian's boat as a important tool to do so.

If anybody wants to join me in that task - you are welcome!



If i missed a raised point - please let me know which one...

Cheers,

Wil
concretesubmarine.com

 

Well, maybe it is difficult, but it seems that some people are already doing it. (And then in Europe, full of regulations…)

http://www.vimeo.com/976560

These guys are not there yet, but they are getting close and it seems that they know what they are doing.

http://www.euronaut.org/

 

Actually, Wellmer, RWatson is not trying to kill off innovation, just giving you a "head's-up" on the kinds of problems you may well face. For myself, I sincerely hope you succeed, and so does everyone on this thread.

 

Milan,
Thanks, for mentioning the projekts of my "brothers in submarine yacht movement", Denmarks submariner Peter Madsden and Germanys u-boot engineer Carsten Standfuss.

In fact each of them represents a special segment in submarine yachting and each of those projects point to a possible future.

Peters last project "Nautilus" is of special interest because Peter literally lived in his submarine while building it. (and found a nice girl that moved in...)

On the other hand Carsten Standfuss is building "Euronaut" mostly as an extension of his interest in exploring and documenting historic shipwrecks in weekend expeditions. Most of those are in areas of intense ship traffic, so he could not anchor a boat - put on a dive flag and explore the wrecks. The need for a "submerged dive base" was born that way.

ancient kayaker,
-----------------

I know that watson is not going to shut down yacht building innovation globally - no man on earth would have the power to do so - and that is part of the solution.

rwatson,
----------

A intelligent Manager once told me - don´t talk about the problems - talk about the solutions.

If you check my concept you will find that it is consistently designed to avoid exactly the friction areas you are pointing out.

I do not need berthing and docking - the hull can stay afloat - all is designed for afloat repair - with a "estimated general lifetime of 200 years" and yes, the twin keel would even allow to pull it in on a beach in extreme cases. It is basicly designed to stay out of "yacht club marina" and be anchored in a open bay so will not be plagued by the 5 million dollars insurance your 26 foot trailer sailer is subject to.

I am serious (and tested this out in practice) when i say that a 200ton submarine yacht will have lower maintainance cost than the trailer sailer you mention.

In fact the decision not to use steel was in part motivated by the strong dependance of steel hulls on drydocks, shipyards, gritblasting, and service facilities due to the constant need of maintainance.

It is my intention to cut the friction points with a "standard and insurance driven ship/boat support sistem " that has a natural tendency to "resist and penalize" experimental boats as you mention in a very smart way.

I can imagine that the first generation of submarine yacht owners will be people that plan to live on the submarine yacht, (like peter Madsden) and they will not be permanent guests in "yacht club marina" they will adopt a very independent, almost semi-nomadic lifestyle somewhere half way between yachting and seasteading.

For doing so you need relative big live aboard submarine yacht hulls as a base to start with and this is basicly what i am going for.



Cheers,

Wil