The hilariously small whales in some of the pictures are really the best.
165 m private submersible superyacht
121–125 of 125 posts
Re: 165 m private submersible superyacht
#122One small detail I enjoyed: the phone number on that page starts 0043, which is the country code for Austria - a landlocked country.
"Landlocked": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhine%E2%80%93Main%E2%80%93Dan...
I can't recall the details, but there is precedent for someone building large vessels in a shipyard on a river and then discovering that they can't deliver the it because they fucked up their research on bridge clearances.
I think the implication was that nobody bothered to check, which is humorous and so we are willing to jump straight to it. But I suspect the truth is subtler if still as dumb. A tall vessel is likely to have a large draft, so a dry spell may mean bridge clearance but getting stuck on a sandbar (or worse, bedrock). There may be very few days a year where the water level is high enough to avoid sandbars but low enough not to clip the bridge.
Re: 165 m private submersible superyacht
#123The funny about this is that despite all the beautiful pictures, it would probably be a very unpleasant boat to ride in. Submarines by design are not very stable on the surface (think of a cylinder that rolls vs the v-shape of a surface ship that keeps it upright). But underwater, it only does 12 knots. So you have to choose between going really slow or having a smooth ride.
> despite all the beautiful pictures
I don't think any of them are pictures... they look like renderings.
Re: 165 m private submersible superyacht
#124Re: 165 m private submersible superyacht
#125Propulsion: Diesel.
Why? The ultrarich could afford the most environmentally friendly propulsion ( e.g hydrogen for submarines ) . But as if climate change wouldn’t be a thing, the ultrarich simply don’t care about their CO2 footprints. Do they really think they can buy another planet?