Floating home prototype sinks at inauguration - GIF

$ 1.5 million floating home prototype sinks at inauguration.

<video controls autoplay loop> <source src="https://diqn32j8nouaz.cloudfront.net/15_million_floating_home_sinks.mp4" type="video/mp4"> Your browser does not support the video tag. </video>


Previously:

https://www.homemadetools.net/forum/...090#post199263
https://www.homemadetools.net/forum/...096#post191501
https://www.homemadetools.net/forum/...501#post139287
https://www.homemadetools.net/forum/...368#post127014
https://www.homemadetools.net/forum/...877#post108805

Bungs anyone, who forgot the bungs?? :headscratch:

They can't keep a house floating on Earth- but are willing to go to Mars to build settlements!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mansworld

They can't keep a house floating on Earth- but are willing to go to Mars to build settlements!

---

About 60% less gravity on Mars. So, if they take this "floating" house to Mars, it might float there.

Back to the drawing board…

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mansworld

They can't keep a house floating on Earth- but are willing to go to Mars to build settlements!

---

I think different groups of "they" are working on the Mars project vs the floating hot project. I hope so anyway!!!!


I am curious what the thing looked like before they put in into the water. It is possible one side hit bottom during launch and that it is not floating, but rather one side sitting on the unlevel bottom.

This is what happened to the Costa Concordia. The ship floated just fine, but it was run hard aground on one side with devastating results.

Attachment 44272

The pod has not sunk, it is just listing because it is not in deep enough water to float properly. Typical false reporting of a situation.

Attachment 44273

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mansworld

They can't keep a house floating on Earth- but are willing to go to Mars to build settlements!

---

Re all this discussion about a manned mission to Mars...



https://www.space.com/24701-how-long...t-to-mars.html

According to NASA...,

https://image.gsfc.nasa.gov/poetry/venus/q2811.html

a one-way trip to Mars would take about nine months. If you wanted to make it a round-trip, all in all, it would take about 21 months as you will need to wait about three months on Mars to make sure Earth and Mars are in a suitable location to make the trip back home.

That's a long time to lock a group of people together in a can and expect everyone to get along.

Awaiting suitable juxtaposition of Mars and Earth; Is it there yet? Is it there yet? Is it there yet?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Toolmaker51

Awaiting suitable juxtaposition of Mars and Earth; Is it there yet? Is it there yet? Is it there yet?

---

I'm convinced that man-on-Mars hype is just NASA's way of keeping their name in view and getting research funding. Just because we put a man on the moon 53 years ago doesn't mean that putting men on Mars is any where near feasible now. Here are some reasons why I say that...

How many people would have to go? A lot of bad things, mechanical and human, can happen on a nine month journey in a can with nothing available beyond what is onboard. Multi-skill tasking is only possible up to a point. Think you can teach a mechanic to perform surgery?

Their spacecraft needs to contain enough of everything - food, water, medicine, fuel, sanitary stuff, etc. - to sustain all those people for two years. It also must contain the return craft or possibly become the return craft if it's light enough to boost itself off Mars. We don't have or envision boosters big enough to launch that from earth; it would need to be assembled, tested, and verified in orbit, something we've never done at this scale, ISS notwithstanding. In addition to carrying or serving as housing, it needs to carry some kind of surface vehicle; the astronauts can't just walk around after landing.

The psychological problems of locking a group of people in a can (they'll have to live in one for at least three months while on Mars as well in transit) is, in my opinion, both untestable and unsolvable. They've got to cooperate closely to survive and bickering, jealousy, or hatred is going to affect that badly.

I could go on but that's enough for now. I'm sure you can all think of other problems that aren't going to be solved in a year or two of study.

I'm sure that someday we'll put humans on some of the rocky planets and moons but I'm not so naive as to believe I'll be around when it happens. For now, stick with robotic vehicles. They've served us very well in the past. They have better "senses" than humans, are cheaper and easier to get there, and we don't feel so bad when one of them dies.

One need look no further than the Biosphere project to see evidence, people failing to cooperate.

By the same token, one could use our own Navy's Submarine Service demonstrating the potential exists.

There must be an echelon, comprised of a true leader (who preferably rose through ranks, not a mere assignee), a clear code of standards, sufficient training for any predictable eventuality, and overwhelmingly positive support from headquarters.

In other words, the only body conceivably 'equipped' to perform would be military based, were it not actual military. Unfortunately, recent degradation of standards, that adhesive which held such groups together, makes selected candidates the only way possible. Wokeism renders this impossible, ignorant that individualism is corrosive, being not contained.

Merely assigning a corps or brigade will NOT work, outside the most elite. Intelligent as they may be, correct types of personnel from a single division isn't going to happen.