Jump to content

WATCH: This is the "kid sized submarine" Elon Musk is hoping can be used at Tham Luang cave


Recommended Posts

Posted
1 minute ago, canopy said:

I assume nothing about their mental and physical distress, just highlighting what doctors have said about their condition. Perhaps it is you that need to do a bit of research for assuming sitting in a cave this long without food would mean they are as good as gold. Try it yourself if you don't believe it. And you know you'd make a really great dive boat operator. You'd just tell everyone not to bother getting certified as is the law because you believe in the power of the human being. It's appalling how eager you are to give these innocent children a shove without thinking a little more about their health and safety or the demands of what they are being asked to do.

OK, thats your opinion, it is different to mine, try to remain polite ?

Have a nice day...

  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Timebandit said:

This is total B.S. and I think I am qualified as I used to design and build mini submarines at Perrry Submarine for 10 Years for the oil industry and US military. I am also a diver. The plan the rescuers have seems to be quite effective. An inflatable that size would have a bouyancy of over a thousand pounds. What an idiot statement. 

 

That's why God invented ballast.

 

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted (edited)

That thing looks way too stiff and inflexible to me. If this is the best thing a 'car in space spaceman' (yeah, right!) genius can do - I think genius is overrated.

 

Edited by Eligius
Posted
11 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

That's why God invented ballast.

 

So in reality you need more space for the ballast?

Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, CGW said:
19 minutes ago, impulse said:

That's why God invented ballast.

So in reality you need more space for the ballast?

 

Here's my point- It's an engineering problem.  There are solutions to just about any that may pop up. 

 

But you have to have something in the works to start solving them.  Or, you can just throw up your arms, claim the idea's not going to work and live with the results.

 

Just to be clear, the solution currently underway was not identified as the safest, or anywhere near an ideal solution.  It was just the safest one that's available in the time crunch before the depleting O2, increasing CO2, or rising water killed the kids and anyone unfortunate enough to be in the cave with them.  Musk was working on a backup plan.  Maybe it didn't come to fruition, but at least he was doing something.  On his dime, no less.  Kudos to the guy for that. 

 

Edited by impulse
  • Like 1
Posted

Can't imagine this capsule can fit throug this one narrow place where the divers have to take off their bottles to pass.
But, if heavy rains would prevent the rescue of the last 5 then I am pretty sure they will knock on Musk's door again.
Of course in general it's just a publicity stunt.

Sent from my ASUS_X008D using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

  • Like 2
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Hank Gunn said:

 

 

First, post #2: "Didn't read the whole article..." I counted a total of 9 sentences and two videos (1:40 and 0:21, totaling 2:01 minutes). Both videos show his solution working, albeit in a controlled environment.

 

Post #4: Watch the video. It's already been tested with someone inside and seemed to work fine.

 

Post #5: There's no training/retraining necessary for a qualified diver who knows about diving equipment. It's simply a "mini-sub" supplied with an air tank, so instead of breathing directly from a mouthpiece, the person is breathing air supplied to the container from the attached SCUBA gear.

 

Post #6: Fourth sentence into the OP "When asked if there was enough room for the pod to maneuver inside the cave, Musk said: "According to divers who have made the passage, yes. However, we also made an exact replica that is inflatable, so that the entire path can be tested without risk of blockage". Also, "He also said he has designed a second pod which is 30cm smaller and which is "almost complete"."

 

And, Post #7: Actually, one of the biggest dangers in a rescue like this, where you've got people who have to use equipment (SCUBA gear) that they're not used to using and are also prone to panicking, a solution like this is much better. Someone in a self-contained unit like that will be unable to cause harm to themselves or to their rescuers if isolated in that device. 

 

On the other thread about E. Musk volunteering his help, people said developing and shipping over equipment would take months. Approx. one day later, with less than 1/3 of the team extracted (last I've seen only four boys have been extracted) and he's developed a very valid, potential solution (especially considering the main challenge of dealing with the lack of diving expertise of the trapped team) that's been tested.

 

Now, is this the perfect solution? No, and I'm not claiming it is, but it certainly appears to be a valid one, especially if the issue of one or more of the kids panicking becomes a concern. It just seems ironic that when a real solution is offered, and not just an empty tweet with a boast or a claim, that people here start responding with an attitude of "ridiculous" without any seeming logical analysis. This is especially true with the fact that on the thread about not apportioning blame on the coach for leading the kids into the cave in the first place, that the majority of people claim that everyone should be "positive".

So just because you think this solution is right you think that the rescuers have to throw away their existing risk assessment(s) and planning which have taken hours to do and then do the same thing with new equipment introduced into the equation?.

Edited by Sheryl
quoted text edited by Moderator to remove 2 sentences in interests of civility
  • Like 1
Posted
5 hours ago, KhunBENQ said:

Without having read the whole article.

Mr Tube: this is a risky rescue operation and not a field trial for some of your ex-centric high tech ideas.

Thanks for your goodwill, handshake and good trip home.

Please find another PR opportunity.

Sorry, I don't agree with you, I think it is an admirable plan and very generous at that, I hope they try it. 

I believe the least fit are the last to come out, it may be worth a try. 

  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, rosst said:

I believe the least fit are the last to come out, it may be worth a try. 

 

Peoples lives are at risk and you want to try an intellectual exercise idea?

  • Like 2
Posted
2 hours ago, tifino said:

 

unless the Tesla batteries can power it in Peyronie Mode

Don't be daft. It has solar cells. No need for batteries.............?

  • Haha 2
Posted
30 minutes ago, sandrabbit said:

So just because you think this solution is right you think that the rescuers have to throw away their existing risk assessment(s) and planning which have taken hours to do and then do the same thing with new equipment introduced into the equation?.

Now where in the hell did I say anything about discarding any risk assessments that have already been performed. Not only did I NOT say anything about that, I also did not claim that this proposed solution should replace any current methodology to get the team out.  From my post: "Now, is this the perfect solution? No, and I'm not claiming it is..."

 

I was merely pointing out how everyone was dismissing out of hand, a very viable option if current practices don't work as well as hoped, and showing how people were dismissing this idea due to what I can only assume from their posts, some bitter, personal bias against Mr. Musk, rather than using basic logic.

  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Hank Gunn said:

Now where in the hell did I say anything about discarding any risk assessments that have already been performed. Not only did I NOT say anything about that, I also did not claim that this proposed solution should replace any current methodology to get the team out.  From my post: "Now, is this the perfect solution? No, and I'm not claiming it is..."

 

I was merely pointing out how everyone was dismissing out of hand, a very viable option if current practices don't work as well as hoped, and showing how people were dismissing this idea due to what I can only assume from their posts, some bitter, personal bias against Mr. Musk, rather than using basic logic.

'Post #5: There's no training/retraining necessary for a qualified diver who knows about diving equipment. It's simply a "mini-sub" supplied with an air tank, so instead of breathing directly from a mouthpiece, the person is breathing air supplied to the container from the attached SCUBA gear.'

 

Well in my opinion this means throwing away the existing risk assessment ...... 

Posted
4 minutes ago, sandrabbit said:

'Post #5: There's no training/retraining necessary for a qualified diver who knows about diving equipment. It's simply a "mini-sub" supplied with an air tank, so instead of breathing directly from a mouthpiece, the person is breathing air supplied to the container from the attached SCUBA gear.'

 

Well in my opinion this means throwing away the existing risk assessment ...... 

Read my point about logic. Not having to learn to use SCUBA equipment/techniques, as well as techniques for cave diving (due to being enclosed in the "capsule"/mini-sub) actually reduces risk, and since it's basically a variation of the current removal/rescue methodology (i.e. dragging evacuees and their tanks (sometimes on their persons, sometimes off) through the cave) there is no real difference in risk assessment (i.e. what to do if a child gets stuck in a passage way).

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, Hank Gunn said:

Read my point about logic. Not having to learn to use SCUBA equipment/techniques, as well as techniques for cave diving (due to being enclosed in the "capsule"/mini-sub) actually reduces risk, and since it's basically a variation of the current removal/rescue methodology (i.e. dragging evacuees and their tanks (sometimes on their persons, sometimes off) through the cave) there is no real difference in risk assessment (i.e. what to do if a child gets stuck in a passage way).

it's a big difference no matter how many times you post it, requiring a change of risk assessment and action planning. In offshore & nuclear installations they make huge changes to planning on minor changes to the plan. 

Edited by sandrabbit
  • Like 1
Posted
2 hours ago, one baht said:

Acute Claustrophobia is a huge point against this type of operation much better to  buddy tow

So it's better if an evacuee suffers an acute claustrophobia/panic attack and does something irrational like accidentally grab a guides mask or breathing apparatus, as opposed to being isolated in a tube, where they can't really do anything. And if you've seen photos of the cave, you'll know that there's a real possibility of suffering "acute claustrophobia" even without being in a tube.

 

So I would disagree with the assertion that it's "much better" to buddy tow.

Posted
2 hours ago, Cake Monster said:

Too damn big, and not flexible

Stick to space rockets.

I guess you also didn't read the OP where it stated that he designed the "pod" to fit within the size constraints as communicated to him by one of the rescuers.

Posted

I used to admire Musk.  No more.  The shameless way he's inserted himself into the the news cycle, self-promoting and distracting from the real work that real experts are doing, is disgusting.  Continuing with press releases and tweets long after the rescue effort has begun (and is not more than half completed) borders on the pathetic. A rich, self-important attention addict.

  • Like 2
Posted
1 hour ago, Timebandit said:

This is total B.S. and I think I am qualified as I used to design and build mini submarines at Perrry Submarine for 10 Years for the oil industry and US military. I am also a diver. The plan the rescuers have seems to be quite effective. An inflatable that size would have a bouyancy of over a thousand pounds. What an idiot statement. 

So you didn't see the prototype being used under water without popping to the surface of the test pool? They obviously worked out the buoyancy/balast equation.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Hank Gunn said:

So you didn't see the prototype being used under water without popping to the surface of the test pool? They obviously worked out the buoyancy/balast equation.

Is that you JAZZDOG?

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...