James Miller and Ian Koblick discuss, in their book Living and Working in the Sea, the reasons for the decline of the first generation of underwater habitats.
Independence_ Heavy reliance on surface crews and support ships made the missions unnecessarily costly. Surface crews generally provide supplies, food, medical care, and decompression while providing for quick removal in case of bad weather. Surface independence was never achieved with the exception of one three day mission in Hydrolab in 1969 during which a fuel cell on the seafloor provided the labs power. [the oil platform allows for surface / underwater support to exist as one entity, power production via ocean systems can be implemented]
Cost Effectiveness_ The scope and intentions of the research was not long term and so the funding was also temporary. After the proposed study of physiology was completed there were no further plans or instruments for the other areas of marine science and so the funding ended or a new more suitable habitat was built to facilitate a new area of research. [tourism as funding for research in conjunction with phased research plan and/or self propulsion (floating platform as opposed to fixed)]
Lack of Mobility_ With the exception of the Bentos 300 there were no self propelled habitats. The problem being that static habitats severely limit the area which can be studied or require costly surface crews to be moved and/or removed. Technology at this time did not permit for submersibles or divers to travel more than 1000 feet from the habitat for the great risk associated with saturation diving. [a case for the airport terminal / airplane, or floating platform which can be moved in long term intervals around the globe with associated submersible]
Comfort_ The underwater habitats of the first generation were better described as survival shelters than a place for living. Just as in the space station humans were a secondary consideration to the life support machine, but how long can one really "live" in a place with little comfort and social interaction. [alternate program such as tourism brings a social realm which makes the place more active, less isolated and consequently more livable]
New Technology_ Most serious researchers considered it unproductive research because of the amount of time spent fixing and treating the mechanical systems problems. Older or disabled scientists who were not physically capable of the stressful activity of saturation diving could not participate in research even though they might be most highly qualified. New technology allows for one-atmosphere habitats (at surface pressure, no saturation or decompression required) which allow any one to live and work in the underwater environment.
Koblick, Miller. Living and Working in the Sea. Van Nostrand Reinhold Company Inc., 1984.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
further more:
design + affect
Ok the design is you...what is the "affect" you want to have?
to make a coral reef in florida?
i can sink a couple of ships and then go check them out in my submarine to do that.
I think the AFFECT you have in mind is alot greater than that.
ALOT MORE.
what do you want to affect nate?
how are you going to discuss the ramifications of architecture...and design?
Show me that I haven't already seen a diagram of your project in this image:
plus this shape
plus any moive i've ever seen with a city in a bubble
plus archigram's mobile city.
that's been done. see look:
or this?? no. http://www.boingboing.net/2005/05/18/trailer-suspended-50.html
"Hey, look at this amazing pic I found while doing an image search for skyscrapers. It looks to be a mobile home suspended 50 feet in the air with tension lines and stilts. Reminded me of AT-ATs from Star Wars or the walking city that Ron Herron of Archigram concieved."
You want new! you want discussion! you want to affect!!!!!
what is the thesis of the project, what is the thing you want your thesis to do? you could do anything? what is the discussion you want to have with architectural peers in april? why is it this? how does this work to that end?
how are we going to make that happen?
(refer to email for pasted images)
http://www.sfmoma.org/exhibitions/exhib_detail.asp?id=94
http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0314/p18s01-stin.html
hey i thought of you when i saw this exhibition (first link)
the second is an article in the relationship between water and architecture - it has to do with the blur building - thought maybe you would just want to read what they think the relationship is
have you found research on any improvements? is there a second generation in the works, or will this be your task?
Post a Comment