[PSUBS-MAILIST] Ethical obligation to inform

Sat Jul 15 20:16:41 EDT 2017

Alan,I think we might be over reacting if we think Psubs are dead with rules.  I just had a look at Canadian rules for ammeter built aircraft.  It is not a big deal, in fact you have to demonstrate that at least 50% of the aircraft is home built.  The ministry will consider any engine you want except solid rock fuel LOL Basically  you have to build with proper materials, demonstrate a design that is airworthy and have it inspected.  It would not be the end of Psubs if we had to follow these rules, witch I highly doubt in Canada anyways.  Not that I want rules--that is the last thing I want.
Hank

    On Saturday, July 15, 2017 3:16 PM, k6fee via Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.org> wrote:

 I reiterate, this will be the death of home built non commercial personal submarines. 
Keith T.

Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
-------- Original message --------From: Alan James via Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.org> Date: 7/15/17 1:54 PM (GMT-08:00) To: Personal Submersibles General Discussion <personal_submersibles at psubs.org> Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Ethical obligation to inform 
Hank,you mightn't have seen Scott's post so have copied it below.The MTS (Marine Technology Society) has been around since 1963 & has a sub committee MUV (Manned UnderwaterVehicles). This committee is headed by Will Kohnen mailto:willkohnen at hydrospacegroup.comThey have been approached by authorities to give them some guidelines / rules on how to deal with submersibles, & MUV have set up a committee to do this.  So the stick has already been poked in the beehive! As Jon says, as a group we shouldhave been approached for our input early on; but we still have an opportunity to insist on being involved!Regards Alan
Just a FYI, the HOV group at Underwater Intervention has put together a safety board to make national rules and regulations on all human occupied submarines. They are proposing breing back the deep submergence pilot association to be the official not for profit group hosting the proposals. When they finish, the coast gaurd will be the enforcement agency. They are following alot of how the FAA regulates. Home made submarines that are not classed would fall under an "Experemental" category just like ultralite aircraft. This will be in the USA only for now, but any countries wanting to enforce regulation, would be encouraged to just adopt the same rules as the USA instead of starting from scratch. It is smart that people who really understand submarines are making the rules instead of the rules being made for us by lawmakers after a imminet accedent happens. If anyone would like to contribute, Will Khonen from Interspace is heading up the group. The safety officer from my company  (Pisces VI) is on the board as well as alot of very smart under water professionals.

      From: hank pronk via Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.org>
 To: Personal Submersibles General Discussion <personal_submersibles at psubs.org> 
 Sent: Saturday, July 15, 2017 11:58 PM
 Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Ethical obligation to inform

Seems, poking a bee hive with a stick is bad!  Why do anything?  Alan just say  "In Canada, nobody bothers Psubs"    This all started because a group of attention seekers built a bathtub submarine for the wrong reasons.  I don't think (hope)  they will get hurt-- did you see the look on that kids face when he was having trouble--I bet he needed to change his shorts when he got to shore.  A good scare will stop them from continuing and maybe they will build a space ship out of a hot water tank, before something bad happens.Hank 

    On Saturday, July 15, 2017 5:36 AM, Alan via Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.org> wrote:

 Jon,any thoughts on where we want to go with this?My interest is that as Scott pointed out, other countries will follow the U.S.in this regard. This could well have a positive outcome in that what was a grey area that hadauthorities scratching their heads, can now be clarified & the regulationsquoted. It would make it easy for me & pacify the authorities here if I couldsay in America..... Do there have to be more rules or just a classification of submersibles as being under the same guidelines as other boats of a similar size?Regards Alan

Sent from my iPad
On 15/07/2017, at 2:33 PM, Phil Nuytten via Personal_Submersibles  <personal_submersibles at psubs.org> wrote:

Jon,My two bits for what it’s worth. Potentially hampering rules, legislation, regulations, etc., are just what we don’t need more of . . I am a life-member of MTS, but I think that Psubs  simply asking to be a ‘primary contributor’ would miss the point – BTW, who asked MTS  to become involved in subs – personal or commercial, in the first place?As as a commercial submersible manufacturer, Nuytco is already loaded with world-wide certification agency requirements – I’d hate to see yet another player get their foot in the door! Phil Nuytten  From: Alan via Personal_Submersibles Sent: Friday, July 14, 2017 1:33 PMTo: Personal Submersibles General Discussion Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Ethical obligation to inform OK get your point Jon on not being invited.Lets insist in our inclusion.Carsten is right. There are rules that manufacturers have to abide by in theboat building industry, that a private boat builder doesn't have to.You can point to ABS & GL as guidlines but if you make them rules nobodywill comply. I spent $3000- on technical advice just to interpret The G.L. rules& it would cost $100,000 to get a sub certified. So as Carsten says if you godown the "Rules " path, where does it end!In general society doesn't care too much if you kill yourself as long as you don'tinjure anybody else in the process. In N.Z. children can climb trees without a safety harness, helmet or net underneath. In America I read that over a 10 yearperiod 10% of members of the hang glider association died from accidents.If they were injuring others in the process that would be where the rule makerswould step in. As I have said, the only difference between a submarine & a smallboat with regard to the safety of others ( aside from passengers) is if somebody surfaced in the path of a speeding boat; so keep the law makers happy & just address that issue, perhaps include a ban on diving in shipping lanes!Cheers Alan  
Sent from my iPad
On 15/07/2017, at 3:30 AM, Jon Wallace via Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.org> wrote:

   Alan, 
 My thoughts. 
 Will Kohnen and I are not strangers, neither is PSUBS a stranger to MTS.  As organizations, we have attended their conventions and they have attended ours.  Therefore, I find it rather presumptuous for MTS to consider promoting rules affecting personal submarines without first notifying us that they were doing so and without inviting us up-front as a primary contributor.  Having heard of it second hand through the grapevine as it were, we are now suppose to feel assured that our input and contributions will be valued?  What weight is given to our input?  How do we resolve disputes?  Is there a voting system, or does MTS just accept/discard our contributions arbitrarily because they have "smart people who really understand submarines" on their committee?   Logic has to make sense in all directions so let's try reversing this situation.  How about PSUBS starts a committee to promote the rules and regulations we believe should be used as a guide for government agencies, and to be thorough we will include rules that affect commercial and research submarines as well because we want a unifying set of regulations.  Seamagine, Pisces, Nuytco, U-Boat Worx, Atlantis, and all research submarines such as Alvin will have to abide by the rules that PSUBS submits to the government...and by the way, we aren't going to ask representatives from any of those disciplines to join us but if they hear about this rule making activity via word-of-mouth then we'll tell them they can contribute their ideas.  Sound like a good, rational, logical plan?   I have reached out to the CG and US Navy more than once in the past 21 years to foster a relationship with PSUBS.  The only reaction I have ever gotten from them is that they are not interested in regulating personal submarines.  So why is MTS so intent on creating rules that restrict personal submarines?  That is not a rhetorical question.   Jon 

    On Friday, July 14, 2017 8:48 AM, Alan via Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.org> wrote:

    Jon, Scott said that if anyone wanted to contribute to contact Will Konen. Perhaps you could approach him on our behalf & convey our desire to be involved in the process. There were a couple of Psubbers involved in the submersible side of UI when I was there. I think Vance & Lance! Will had a slot to fill in the lectures & asked me to talk on Psubs ( I declined), so he seems to have a pretty positive attitude toward us. As he heads the submersible side of the UI he has been a target & questioned by groups like Coast Guard about "what do we do about submarines". They have been wanting him to draught regulations for years & he has been trying to avoid it.  In my thinking, the only real issue with submersible operations is surfacing, where a submarine may come up in the path of a surface craft. Perhaps 
_______________________________________________
Personal_Submersibles mailing list
Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.whoweb.com/pipermail/personal_submersibles/attachments/20170716/685bd0b5/attachment-0001.html>