• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Submarine Liner

Look, dude, I just wanna know if we could build one of these things and if it would function. The reason for using it and the level of an extinction wide event is a moot point and not a requirement of the scenario.

As of this moment just run a line through anywhere where extinction level event or anywhere where a cataclysm is mentioned. BTW a cataclysm does not necessarily mean and extinction level event.

Well, to be practical, are we talking about an event where the oceans are still livable? If they were, you could plan to harvest fish, plankton etc. and desalinate drinking water. If they weren't livable, all your food stores would have to be self-contained. Maybe your water too, unless you planned for some serious decontamination. Much harder to put into practice, or maintain for long.

Precisely. Before we can tell whether a cruiseship sized sub would be usable to protect people from a massive calamity on the surface, we need to have some idea of the type of calamity, if only to determine how much it would impact the oceanic environment.
 
Build one, Taccy. Prove us wrong. Build that space runabout thingy while you're at it, we've been waiting on that prototype for quite some time now.
 
Come on, guys, let's be fair. His second post put this entire line of questioning in the realm of theory, and we can treat it as such.

I mean, I'm all in favor of smacking down threads where someone makes wild claims or extolls wacky inventions. But this time taccy has an honest question, so we can try to extend some reasonable answers.

And no, I don't have access to TNZ, and I prefer it that way.
 
We can most certainly deliver some reasonable answers, just as soon as we are asked a reasonable question. We need at least some details about the conditions that this submarine liner will likely have to endure, before we can say one way or another whether or not its possible to build a vessel that can actually endure those conditions.
 
We can most certainly deliver some reasonable answers, just as soon as we are asked a reasonable question. We need at least some details about the conditions that this submarine liner will likely have to endure, before we can say one way or another whether or not its possible to build a vessel that can actually endure those conditions.

Go watch the 2012 trailer then and find out. CLICK HERE.

They build ships to survive the cataclysms, I want to know if the movie is severely over the top and uber sci-fi in regards to such vessels or whether such vessels have any reality to them. Could such vessels be built.

Pretty simple really.
 
Hmmm. Well the premise of the film is that the Myans predicted that December of 2012 would be "the end of time". That said: No. We can't build a cruiseship-sized submarine that is immune to temporal forces, or lack thereof. When time ceases to exist, it will cease to exist underwater as well.
 
Hmmm. Well the premise of the film is that the Myans predicted that December of 2012 would be "the end of time". That said: No. We can't build a cruiseship-sized submarine that is immune to temporal forces, or lack thereof. When time ceases to exist, it will cease to exist underwater as well.

I think you're taking the end of time line a little too literally. They wouldn't be building those boats if there was no chance of survival.
 
Hmmm. Well the premise of the film is that the Myans predicted that December of 2012 would be "the end of time". That said: No. We can't build a cruiseship-sized submarine that is immune to temporal forces, or lack thereof. When time ceases to exist, it will cease to exist underwater as well.

I think you're taking the end of time line a little too literally. They wouldn't be building those boats if there was no chance of survival.

Call their action an act of futility; denial that time itself is coming to an end.

Even if that isn't the theme of the movie itself, those mile high tidal waves pretty much prove that subs would be useless for survival. Oh, sure, a deep submersible like Alvin might escape such a wave by cowering in the Mariana Trench or some such, but there's no way to make a submersible on the scale you're talking about, that could come anywhere near surviving the kind of pressure that are found at such depths.
 
One problem you'll find is that if you're trying to create a craft to carry enough humans to restart the race, you're gonna need something in the range of 5000 breeding individuals* that aren't related to keep the genes fresh for successive generations to prevent inbreeding. And that's hoping that you don't suffer much in the way of casualties from whatever sort i.e accidents, disease, birth/newborn complications, 'artificial deaths' (such as murders) and the like.



*I can't remember where I heard this number, but I think it was a program discussing space colonies.
 
Yeah, the whole idea just isn't plausible. Not as a survival strategy, at any rate. As an actual underwater cruise ship for vacations, maybe. But hardened to withstand a near-extinction level catastrophe, and suitably equipped for years, if not decades, of totally independent sustenance? Not a chance.

Fun movie idea; lousy reality idea.
 
Just a quick thought: tsunamis only become huge waves when they hit a shoreline; in transit they are quite samll. Think of all the ships in the Indian Ocean during the disastrous tsunami a few years back: the vessels away from shore rode out the wave just fine.

If the people in the movie think the problen is a massive destabilization of the earth's crust, then taking refuge on ships far from land makes sense. They just don't know the full nature of the impending disaster.

The Mayans didn't think everything would end when the calendar did; they just thought the calendar would reset. Their calendar had done that before and the world's still here, kinda like the odometer on a car. You don't stop driving your car just because the odometer hits 999,999.9 miles, it just goes to 000,000.0 and starts over again.
 
A bit like a clock. On the approach to midnight you don't anticipate running out of numbers and think OMG!!! IT'S THE END OF TIME!!
 
One problem you'll find is that if you're trying to create a craft to carry enough humans to restart the race, you're gonna need something in the range of 5000 breeding individuals* that aren't related to keep the genes fresh for successive generations to prevent inbreeding. And that's hoping that you don't suffer much in the way of casualties from whatever sort i.e accidents, disease, birth/newborn complications, 'artificial deaths' (such as murders) and the like.



*I can't remember where I heard this number, but I think it was a program discussing space colonies.

I had read somewhere that in our past, during an ice age, humanity went through a pinhole of 13 fertile females, we were that close :holds thumb and index finger very close together: to not being (Last caveman's last words: "missed it by that much"). I'll look for a link or something. I'll admit I may have misread, it may be that european humans went through the pinhole, or some other subset.

Broader to the thread topic:

The movie 2012 trailers seem to indicate a huge worldwide tektonic event, so even the deapest oceons would not be safe, particularly the Marianas Trench, which is a tektonic meeting point, no? The movie trailers mention the creation of a "ship" but aren't clear if it is a space vessel or an ocean vessel, but one scene shows a very strange (and big) vessel about to be clobbered by a big ship on a wave. Ooops.

Trolling aside, let's put out this scenario: The reason the Mayans ended their calander in 2012 is they saw a Meteor, perhaps a couple times, did the math, and the meteor would strike the earth in 2012. They didn't really care, it was hundreds/thousands of years away, a bronze age society, what could they do but shrug and keep doing what they do? At any rate, NASA sees the meteor out there, does the math, and it will strike the world in December 2012. Those Mayans! The meteor is big/dense enough to completely send the earth into total tektonic chaos, but probably not big enough to destroy it completely, most importantly, the biosphere. Based on archeological evidence, modeling, and some creative statistics manipulation, they determine the skies will be dark for 10ish years, there will be a resulting Ice Age, but life WILL continue. So, what do we do?

In this scenario, they key is surviving the initial event, since there will be no radiation that prevents living in the open. Being in the open ocean may be a good place to be, assuming the meteor doesn't strike in the ocean you are in. It might make sense to hang out in the center of a continent. Really, survival would be a crap shoot on the planet.

Is there time to create space arks? Are they practical? They would only be required for the actual event, people could probably return to earth in a couple weeks to a month. Caches of food would likly be required, water probably wouldn't be an issue. Unfortunately, it's the rich and powerful that would be on those arks, and are they really the "type" that could survive in a hostile natural world?

As an Average Joe... I'd probably stay somewhat put. Perhaps stock up on some food/drink/ammo. Maybe get a gun for the ammo ;) I can't control the catastrophe, but I'd be more worried about the people before the event, I might leave town. Without radiation, we won't have to worry much about zombies, unless the meteor has some sort of chemical, but zombies are only a problem in numbers, for a short time, so staying out of town would solve that. I wonder what post-appocolyptic society will be like. I fear the folks most prepared for it would not be folks I would want to hang with.

I'm assuming the Movie 2012 will be stupid. There look to be some cool effects, though.
 
No good, won't work. Anything big enough to make even the slightest difference to anything wouldn't be able to go deep enough to avoid any actual disaster. If it's the kind of disaster that they DON'T have to go deep for, they were better off in a cave, or underground bunker in the first place.

The scale of this thing makes it useless. Add in the duration you want to keep it under, and you're done. Too big, have to carry WAY too much food, going to run into problems with air scrubbers and CO2 after you're underwater a while.

Plus, you would NOT be happy being on a submarine for very long. Very tight, no space for yourself, everything is on top of everything else. I spend time on them, just have to take my word for it.

As with most of your big ideas, Tacky, you try to force a solution onto a concept that just isn't any good. Anything this submarine could manage to do, there are easily a DOZEN ways this could be done cheaper, better, with less effort, and saving more people. Anything this sub would do (because it's under water) could be better accomplished by a domed city underwater. That could at least be habitable for a while, whereas your sub would die a quick death. Hiding underwater is unlikely to help, anyway, because anything that makes the land so dangerous that you have to hide underwater from will likely ALSO threaten the water (likely freezing it) or making the land uninhabitable, and thus the sub has nothing to surface FOR, and can't be lived on long-term...
 
Thought for today: why one vessel? I'm thinking it might be an "all eggs in one basket" scenario. Why not lots of little underground shelters, submarines, underwater shelters and so on? Some will survive, some won't. If they're all in the supersub and it happens to be at ground zero, end of story.
 
As with most of your big ideas, Tacky, you try to force a solution onto a concept that just isn't any good.

Firstly, read the thread, this ain't my idea. Last I checked I wasn't a writer or producer for the 2012 film.

Secondly, there's no k in Tachyon.

Noticed you decided to go the nitpick route, and didn't want to talk about the substance of the post? I work with submarines professionally, so would be interested to see you flesh out your discussion here, rather than play games with semantics...
 
Tachy, what exactly do you want to know?

a) will this idea work in the real world, within the realm of real physics?
Answer: No.

b) will this idea work in the film world, strictly within the world of made-up-movie-physics?
Answer: Yes.
 
Saw a preview for this at Transformers 2 yesterday. As far as real-world scientific plausibility... well, this is the same genius who gave us "The Day After Tomorrow" if that tells you something.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top