Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2016 0:48:11 GMT
There's two marinas in Venice La that have parking for your land vehicle, both are over $100 per month. Both disavow all liability for anything that happens to the vehicle or it's contents or anything attached to it. It may be there when you return, it may not be, it may not have tires or windows anymore, and the trailer may be gone. I found no marinas in Alabama with parking, in fact most who had any parking space allow no overnite parking at all.
Charging $100 per month may be acceptable to one person with one vehicle & trailer, but if there's a floating community of 10, and each seastead is paying $100 for their own land vehicle, that's $1000/mo being sucked out of the community.
I am still pondering the feasability of a 8ft or 10ft trailer, and a trike (3-wheeled motorcycle with small car engine) to pull it, and it all drives onto the water transport, leaving nothing on land. Alternatively, some of the subcompact cars may be enough to pull the trailer, or go shopping without the trailer. Perhaps a tiny Toyota pickup is enough. A 20ft to 25ft large pontoon barge could carry it all, and be powered by the land vehicle when going from the seastead to the marina and back. Transient slip rental is usually pricey, and the two Venice marinas have a minimum 30ft rental. Or there's state parks, where slips or offshore anchoring is first-come-first-served, but free, you can drive off at the ramp and use a small outboard or trolling motor to park the barge away from shore.
With daily transient slip rental being over $60 per day (and you'll likely use it only the daylight hours too!), your break-even cost vs renting the slip full time and leaving the land vehicle there too is 8 trips to town per month. For less than 8 trips, like making one trip every week (or fewer), it's not cost effective to rent a full time slip and land parking for a car/trike/truck. Especially considering anyone can have at your vehicle when you aren't there for weeks at a time.
A full time and full service incubator that also served the established seasteaders, would be very handy to have.
|
|
|
Post by gordien on Jan 23, 2016 6:26:08 GMT
I like your thinking here. I guess it would depend on your size and resources. I would never want to leave my vehicle in a parking lot. A small light weight cargo van could get supplies (with a trailer) and act as a weather right storage unit on the cargo barge. This would make sense for an aqua-village of 10 or less. If it got built up to include students and a few researchers (part time seafarers) which might be around 25 full timers, having a land based could make sense to have a small apartment building with a garage/shop - renting out half of it to pay for itself, maintaining a few units to stay in when visiting land (Dr appts and such). Seems like 1 or 2 trips a month would make sense. A vehicle could be used as an emergency generator.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2016 2:08:34 GMT
It's been roughly 2 months since i wrote my first post on this topic, and it's still very much on my mind. I didn't want to make a huge visual impression when launching a new living space on the water, and a roll-on/roll-off barge takes up a lot of space and tends to look like a land vehicle on a barge. Considering the space taken up on deck, which is prime real estate on the barge to build living or work space, 1/3 to 1/2 of it is going to be car-trailer storage! Imagine a small 2-car garage with your car parked dead center, and you living in the space around it.
I had come up with a nice little trimaran design that would hold a 14ft car with a 8ft-bed trailer, and look exactly like a nice comfy 30ft trimaran, the gotcha is with all narrow designs: you cannot open the car doors! The car fits into a 7ft wide hull easily, but the hull needs to be another 3ft wide each side to wriggle in/out of it. It would be better with 4ft each side, making the overall hull width 15ft, which is no longer a nice looking 30ft tri hull. The width to accomodate the small time frame of the doors being open adds unreasonable cost and weight and engineering challenges, as well as space requirements on the marina the ramp is in.
I just thought i'd say the problem didn't go away just because i haven't mentioned it in a while.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2016 1:45:34 GMT
Perhaps some sort of trike? Reading my mind, eh? I have feelers out locally for trikes, trike parts, front bike forks, etc.. I have the front of a front-wheel drive car, easily remade to be the rear of a trike. The beauty of a trike as far as ro-ro is if the ramp disappears out from under you, you're almost off the thing instantly, while in a car, you'd be stuck inside it between hulls, or between bottom and the boat. And with a trike, you can hop off and go forward past the front wheel, no side access is required. And a trike inherently has a smaller footprint, and is lighter. If i must load the car aboard, i am pretty sure i will not be in the car while it's dragged aboard, and that will make the ro-ro operation far more complicated. The floatie won't be a single boat hull, because of the space needed to open the doors once aboard, to access the contents of the car. I am not happy with the look of a car on a barge being my living space.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2016 2:05:30 GMT
You also could technically design it to be able to design it to float instead of sink pretty easily. Keep the engine and exhaust high and that will make losing the ramp a little less of a disaster. Redesign my car, putting the engine up where i cannot see the road in front of me? How will this help if the ramp collapses when driving above 6ft of water?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2016 2:25:20 GMT
Redesign my car, putting the engine up where i cannot see the road in front of me? How will this help if the ramp collapses when driving above 6ft of water? Ahh, but on a trike the engine is usually behind you. It is most likely already much lighter than a car too. Welding a couple of airtight tanks on each side should be fairly easy. Heck you could even make it amphibious if you wanted to. Since most trikes use car engines and the attached transaxles and tires, the engine is *exactly* at the height of a car engine. I would not want it any higher, which would tend to make the trike unstable and top heavy. I feel that would also be ineffective in getting the trike aboard if it falls into 6ft of water.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2016 3:07:57 GMT
We seem to have different purposes and ideas for having land transportation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2016 4:48:18 GMT
I am so bloody sorry i mentioned getting off a trike would be safer than being in a car when the doors cannot be opened, in a situation the ramp fails. I had no intention of starting a "moon shot" program to design an avantgarde amphibious trike with the engine up in the air between two floatation chambers. I just feel a common ordinary trike will suit my needs. Sorry i am so boring.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2016 18:19:01 GMT
I'm sorry I upset you Kat. That wasn't the intention. I was just trying to help. I'll stop posting ideas. Nah, you keep on going. If i have learned anything in the last 6 decades, it's that i cannot change anything, i will lose, and humans get dangerous. I was after affordable, practical, and non-attention-getting. You want the fantastic-looking, highest priced, and impractical. You'll have this place looking like a clone of TSI in no time! I left that site too.
|
|
|
Post by jeff on May 11, 2016 23:36:09 GMT
We all have our own ideas and the forum is a way to express those ideas. Knowing Kat a tad better than most, she has her mind set for her reasons, and I understand them a bit better than most.
I like the idea,... but... you don't have to raise the engine, so much as protect it from submersion. How many jet-boats run around with their engine fully exposed?
HOW would I try to do it? Maybe something more like a jet-ski, use a parallel swing-arm setup, and dual CV joints on each shaft, with the ability to raise and lower the swing-arms and wheels, in order to be able to use the chassis as a hull... That covers the rear, but damned if I have any idea for the front end, or how to propel it, in the water.
However, there are also licensing issues, and an amphibious boat/land craft currently cannot be registered as both. That said, with the new amphibious jeep-like thing, and others gaining popularity, it won't be too long before there is a combined registration.
|
|
|
Post by jeff on May 12, 2016 21:13:05 GMT
She has her own solution, and has done her research. Yes, corrosion of metal is a significant concern. One of those problems we'll all have to solve, for each situation.
If I understand correctly, your idea is to create a smaller semi-submersible, so that the buoyancy is below the water, the legs support the upper structure, which is why I posted the Little SSLV as a 'fer-instance'...
katoncat has convinced me that there are several issues to consider. One being that, should the submerged flotation lose its' buoyancy, then the legs should be in some sort of socket, so that they can drop out from under the main structure. That also requires that the structure be capable of floating w/o the legs and chambers. It also opens up other possibilities, such as purposely submerging the leg/buoyancy structure, and utilizing the upper structure and its' reserve buoyancy as a smaller vessel.
For every problem, there are multiple solutions and no single solution is going to be right for every situation.What would work off the coast of Oregon probably won't do as well in the GoMex, because it would have to face hurricanes.
I have ideas for both places, but the GoMex is much closer and I don't have to start from scratch with the Oregon VA... I've been told by some that the water off Oregon is too cold, yet I know scuba-divers further North, in Seattle, WA., that simply don wet-suits.
katoncat has her ideas, I have mine. The differences are almost total, in almost every aspect, but the determination is the same, regardless of reasons, or methods. She is building to float-out as soon as possible. Plus, she is building the capacity to replicate her design, once at sea, as a commercial endeavor.
I'm working toward setting up a residence with a shop, to act as an incubator site, then build my hull, and so on. However, part of my plan is also to be able to provide shore-support for initial projects, such as mail and parcel receiving, and some vehicle parking. In addition to that, I expect to setup a 'permanent' mooring, in excess of my projected needs, to potentially allow additional vessels to tie-up into a small community. However, using my incubator-site and mooring come with my rules, as yet not fully developed, but including the absolute need for non-pollution. I expect to grow food in the water around my place, and don't want people using that area as a toilet, or dump, among other things...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 13, 2016 1:54:29 GMT
Three days ago, i said "We seem to have different purposes and ideas for having land transportation". And my ONLY point about using a trike is it's fairly easy to get off of one in a hurry (like: when accidently going into the water, or inside a confined space of a narrow boat hull). I stated my goals, you added nothing to my goals, you don't seem to know my goals, but you are upset i refused to accept your ideas for my goals.
How is buying that $25,000 amphibious trike, which i cannot register as a boat in the usa, going to help me when the trailer (which i mentioned i'd be towing) has 1000 lbs of stuff on it, and it isn't a boat either? Plus, a single rear wheel isn't great for towing a 1000lbs of trailer. The other trike you showed isn't street legal or water legal.
Before you try to change what i am doing, why don't you find out what i am doing first? You have a huge lack of data in the how, why, when, and where departments.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 13, 2016 2:26:29 GMT
Did you read half of what I wrote? Weld a couple of tanks on the bottom so you don't dunk the engine or the exhaust if the ramp slips. Lots of wiring would be bad. Older car might be better. The survivability of the vehicle in the water, or how well the engine runs when in the water, don't matter to me. I said what mattered to me: getting off the vehicle if underwater and if in a narrow boat hull. I have worked on vehicles from the 1950 and 60's, both cars and boats. You don't know "older car might be better". This is just like the other thread where you have me build a Salt lake and a power plant. You strain to the absurd just to prove a point. You are the one who suggested pumped water hydropower from a salt water source. Of course nonsense is easier to take than the facts. Please go enjoy his nonsense!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 13, 2016 3:11:54 GMT
You create stories to get to support your facts and Elmer invents links to support his website. At least his nonsense is cordial. Your nonsense is why you have to float away in the first place. You are lying. I know humans do that, and seem to default to that whenever they are desperate. The folks at tsi are training you in bad behaviour. All you have to freaking say is "Thanks but I don't want to weld tanks on it" but instead you have to create $25,000 amphibious trikes and hydro-electric damns and be as nasty as possible because that is what you do. That is Kat. Tanks are impractical, you should have run the math and checked the contingencies, that should never have gotten to the point of me needing to say i won't do that. You gave pictures and links to amphibious trike and some German forest trike, i didn't create those. And if i wanted to be nasty, i'd suggest you take your ignorant bratty ass back to tsi and brag about what a good job you did on me. I know you will be lying about this for years to come. That is also about the only reason I can think of that a sane serving Judge would have picked the dog's side over your's. 5 mins with you and the Judge realized that you probably drove the dog crazy as well. You show an stunning lack of awareness of your own lack of facts. I wasn't allowed to talk or show photographs.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on May 13, 2016 3:18:33 GMT
That is also about the only reason I can think of that a sane serving Judge would have picked the dog's side over yours. 5 mins with you and the Judge realized that you probably drove the dog crazy as well. Uncalled for. You may edit, and apologize, but personal attacks have to stop.
|
|