Good point. If any part of a vessel never fully submerges, can it be termed a submarine?
Comment on Round 2 🚢
empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 year ago
I’m sure it will be a submarine* *maximum operational depth 2 meters from surface to cabin, and must have it’s conning tower, bridge, and snorkel completely exposed at all time
sxan@midwest.social 1 year ago
empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 year ago
Not really, but it will be good enough to get some affluenza fuck to drop $2bil on it
according to their official page they do have it specced out for 4 weeks of fully submerged operation with a max depth of 250 meters. However, literally none of this is real as it’s just a concept model without real engineering or a prototype built, so the chances of it meeting such specs are whatever the fuck you feel like they are.
tryptaminev@feddit.de 1 year ago
For non military or explorative purposes there is absolutely no reason to go that deep. The “submarine experience” at 50m is the same as at 250m. And it smells terribly, because recycling sweaty air only goes that far.
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 year ago
The “submarine experience” at 50m is the same as at 250m
Calmly explaining this to my crewmates on the Titan
roguetrick@lemmy.world 1 year ago
It can be submerged but it can’t cruise on batteries for 4 weeks. It’ll have to put it’s snorkel up.
tpihkal@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Perfect. Now I can ignore the article.
FilterItOut@thelemmy.club 1 year ago
Or, seeing as it’s billionaire bullshit, it will be an ecological disaster. What do you want to offer for the odds that it will have shit navigation, and throws out pings every 3 seconds if submerged? Goodbye local wildlife, recreational diving, and all other activities taking place underwater.