StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I'm supposed to do a 45-minute group presentation for my (bleh) humanities class, and my group picked the Freedom Ship. It's supposed to be a "floating city" of about 40,000 residents and 15,000 crew; it's almost a mile long and 25 stories high.

I'd be very interested in hearing qualified opinions on the economic and (especially) engineering viability of this design.

Various links about the subject:
Official Site
HowStuffWorks.com
Discovery Channel
Popular Science
Popular Mechanics

+


= This agian


Expresse my views well?

Well soon be short 40,000 rich idiots. It's unlikely that it will prove very seaworthy. Just the normal sea going stresses on something that size would be tremendous. Any sort of bad weather would be a major threat to it. A good storm and it would be on the bottom quickly.

Mr. Bean has it slightly wrong....



+



= This agian

It owuld probably cost billions to research and develop, and require a lot of power. And, since it's travelling continously, it would need a constant supply. It might be possible, but it would need a lot of energy to move, and during storms, the proposed airstrip would be impossible to use. It might be years, perhaps decades before anything like it comes out. Besides, there are better ideas than a seagoing community. It's still a better idea than Manji's mile long battleship, though. And there wore dumber concepts, such as a clock in the desert that's supposed to continue ticking for 10,000 years. Even master architects and designers had bad ideas.

The thing is three fucking million tons!!!!!!!!! The construction costs are going to be several hundred billion dollars. And in the end, anyone who could afford to live on it wouldn't want to, because they can just buy a 50 million mansion in California and cut them selves off from the world there.

Modern computer models can't cope with something five times larger then the next biggest ship in the world, and tank tests have resulted in the model sinking. Its 60-mile turning circle and 10 knot speed make maneuvering in a storm impossible.

And of course, if it really becomes independent of nations on shore, then it can't fly there flag, a and could be attacked at will by terrorists and anyone else. Chucking a couple Silkworm missiles into it is not big deal for most anyone.


Skippers and B-52s with iron bombs would work better for sinking it then harpoons Bean. Course if you have a sub, use the torpedos. It would sink from a single salvo.

I'm all for building it, I think it'll be great.
Why you ask?

It will make a superb ship wreck! Tourism will skyrocket with that underwater exhibit, scientists will pay to go underwater to study the stupidest ex-ship in the world, and millions will flock to the spot that 40,000 morons with far too much money sank to the bottom!

Best idea ever.

Evil Jerk wrote:I'm all for building it, I think it'll be great.
Why you ask?

It will make a superb ship wreck! Tourism will skyrocket with that underwater exhibit, scientists will pay to go underwater to study the stupidest ex-ship in the world, and millions will flock to the spot that 40,000 morons with far too much money sank to the bottom!

Best idea ever.

The depth of water I'd want to sink it in would inhibit easy access to the wreck. Read: Challenger Deep..

I have done some research about the freedom ship and I have readed several opinions of experts.
They cannot do it.They do not have even hired a naval architect(because they still do not have the money to pay him).All they have is a civil engineer who literally does not see the difference between a towed barge and a ship.Worse they have not even grasped the complexity of the project.
There are loads of problems which are without answer.
For example where do you drydock the monster for hull maintenance?
My opinion is that as soon as they collect enough money to hire true experts,or just only a naval lawyer for that matter,the whole projetc will sink.

Evil Jerk wrote:I'm all for building it, I think it'll be great.
Why you ask?

It will make a superb ship wreck! Tourism will skyrocket with that underwater exhibit, scientists will pay to go underwater to study the stupidest ex-ship in the world, and millions will flock to the spot that 40,000 morons with far too much money sank to the bottom!

Best idea ever.

As long as there's at least one hot teenage rich bitch that goes down with the ship, I'll be exceedingly happy

Sea Skimmer wrote:

Evil Jerk wrote:I'm all for building it, I think it'll be great.
Why you ask?

It will make a superb ship wreck! Tourism will skyrocket with that underwater exhibit, scientists will pay to go underwater to study the stupidest ex-ship in the world, and millions will flock to the spot that 40,000 morons with far too much money sank to the bottom!

Best idea ever.

The depth of water I'd want to sink it in would inhibit easy access to the wreck. Read: Challenger Deep..

Titanic deep at least

Sea Skimmer wrote:The thing is three fucking million tons!!!!!!!!! The construction costs are going to be several hundred billion dollars. And in the end, anyone who could afford to live on it wouldn't want to, because they can just buy a 50 million mansion in California and cut them selves off from the world there.

Modern computer models can't cope with something five times larger then the next biggest ship in the world, and tank tests have resulted in the model sinking. Its 60-mile turning circle and 10 knot speed make maneuvering in a storm impossible.

And of course, if it really becomes independent of nations on shore, then it can't fly there flag, a and could be attacked at will by terrorists and anyone else. Chucking a couple Silkworm missiles into it is not big deal for most anyone.


Skippers and B-52s with iron bombs would work better for sinking it then harpoons Bean. Course if you have a sub, use the torpedos. It would sink from a single salvo.

These are not true problems.Cost is a problem but keep in mind that it is not built to warship standard,it is built in prefabricated modules.Also they plan to use slave labor...ehm "third world workers".Steerable diesel electric engines can probably turn the ship on herself,although it certainly will not be agile.The true problems are others.
Maintenance:where do you dridock the monster?
But much more important:how do you avoid it falling apart at the first storm?It would require a massive eenginering effort.
Overall it would seem a Manjii's creation.Unfortunately it is not.

RayCav of ASVS wrote:

Sea Skimmer wrote:

Evil Jerk wrote:I'm all for building it, I think it'll be great.
Why you ask?

It will make a superb ship wreck! Tourism will skyrocket with that underwater exhibit, scientists will pay to go underwater to study the stupidest ex-ship in the world, and millions will flock to the spot that 40,000 morons with far too much money sank to the bottom!

Best idea ever.

The depth of water I'd want to sink it in would inhibit easy access to the wreck. Read: Challenger Deep..

Titanic deep at least

Challenger deep is a real place you known, deepest part of the Mariana's trench, and also the deepest spot in the Earths oceans.

Sea Skimmer wrote:Skippers and B-52s with iron bombs would work better for sinking it then harpoons Bean. Course if you have a sub, use the torpedos. It would sink from a single salvo.

Ram it with Manji's mile long battleship! Finally something it could sink.

Send both monuments to human stupidity to the bottom of the sea.

Admiral Piett wrote:

Sea Skimmer wrote:The thing is three fucking million tons!!!!!!!!! The construction costs are going to be several hundred billion dollars. And in the end, anyone who could afford to live on it wouldn't want to, because they can just buy a 50 million mansion in California and cut them selves off from the world there.

Modern computer models can't cope with something five times larger then the next biggest ship in the world, and tank tests have resulted in the model sinking. Its 60-mile turning circle and 10 knot speed make maneuvering in a storm impossible.

And of course, if it really becomes independent of nations on shore, then it can't fly there flag, a and could be attacked at will by terrorists and anyone else. Chucking a couple Silkworm missiles into it is not big deal for most anyone.


Skippers and B-52s with iron bombs would work better for sinking it then harpoons Bean. Course if you have a sub, use the torpedos. It would sink from a single salvo.

These are not true problems.Cost is a problem but keep in mind that it is not built to warship standard,it is built in prefabricated modules.Also they plan to use slave labor...ehm "third world workers".Steerable diesel electric engines can probably turn the ship on herself,although it certainly will not be agile.The true problems are others.
Maintenance:where do you dridock the monster?
But much more important:how do you avoid it falling apart at the first storm?It would require a massive eenginering effort.
Overall it would seem a Manjii's creation.Unfortunately it is not.

Large warships are also currently built in prefabricated units. The island structures the Nimitz class carriers for example, is lifted into place as a huge 1000-ton chunk. The entire carrier is about 40 of these stacks on top of the lower hull, which has to be built normally.

It would still cost hundreds of billions. As for labor, they want to build it in a lagoon in Venezuela that’s a fairly wealthy country, course a lot that’s from the oil exports. Still they aren’t going to have real third world conditions in which thousands of workers can be hired for the cost of one low level executive.

Turning, currently as I understand it they intend to steer by adjusting engine power. Movable engines would be great, but on that scale are very unlikely to work. Mutual interference would be too great. Actually, looking at the proposed arrangement, its very clear they don’t understand anything about modern propellers. The inefficiently the arrangement will give make me doubt this thing could move even with a quarter billion HP.

When I read this I, too, immediately thought of Manji's
Blimp class Überdreadnought.
I'll have to draw that ship, it's just so funny....

The whole hull of freedom ship is built with prefabricated modules.
As far as I have understood Wasp class LHD are entirely built in modules.
Much more expensive equipments are the main reason for warship high costs.
Back to topic,yes the construction will be in Venezuela but the fitting out will be carried on in places with slave...ehem cheap labor.The plan to complete the hull engines etc in Venezuela but the majority of the rest will be complete elsewhere.

Actually, I was led to believe by several news stories that the planning was quite advanced, which implied that the major physical problems had been solved. Aren't the apartments in the ship already on the market?

As far as I can tell, it's nothing more than a glorified cruise ship.

Actually they are advertising the apartments but they still do not have a true projetc.Or at least until few weeks ago.

Correction.The people can make commitments to buy apartments but they cannot still pay for them for obviou legal reasons.So they are not really selling them yet.
And yes,they still do not have a comprehensive design.

Colonel Olrik wrote: As far as I can tell, it's nothing more than a glorified cruise ship.

That may be the concept,but I would not like to be the guy in charge of drawing the plans for her...

Sea Skimmer wrote:

RayCav of ASVS wrote:

Sea Skimmer wrote: The depth of water I'd want to sink it in would inhibit easy access to the wreck. Read: Challenger Deep..

Titanic deep at least

Challenger deep is a real place you known, deepest part of the Mariana's trench, and also the deepest spot in the Earths oceans.

I know, just saying that it only needs to be Titanic deep for me to be happy. At that depth, any human remains (such as clothing, skin, organs and bones from, say, a teenage rich bitch) would dissolve from the salt water alone.

I have checked.They plan to use steerable diesel electric engines.

Admiral Piett wrote:I have checked.They plan to use steerable diesel electric engines.

Hurray, bring on the 99.9997 inefficiency.

That does confirm that they have not even consulted a naval architect. The arrangement I have seen for Freedom ship would have engines mounts aimed directly at those astern of them at most angles, which is going to make the aft 90 or so engines near useless.


I have a new weapon for sinking it as well. For such tasks I favor mammoth missiles. However my current ultimate MiG-21 sized missile wont be able to cope with something this big with 2 shots, it might need 4! That’s unacceptable..


My new missile shall use the XB-70 as it base. Within the central airframe shall be a 35,000-pound long rod penatraitor warhead. This shall have 8000 of high explosives in it, thermal, 3-milimeter radar,, It will have a huge DU nose back up by titanium for penetration through the target. A solid fueled rocket in the rear with vectored thrust provides guidance

The missile fly as a normal B-70 to the target. When it comes within several miles of the ship it will enter a 70-degree dive. The airframe wings and engines will rip away and expose the penatraitor, which will ignite its rocket and aim for the center of the ships mass.

It will punch clear through and out the bottom, then explode in the water under the ship. The blast, equaling of 12 modern torpedoes, will snap the Freedom ship in half. The hail of mach 4+ debris and fuel from what's left of the main airframe will shred what's left.

Launching will be from a specially fitted 250,000-ton ship using an electromagnetic catapult angled up 10 degrees.

Do you know how they plan to execute maintenaince of the hull?
Removing the modules which form the hull from under the ship and then towing them to a maintenance facility.I do not want to be the person in charge of that.

Sea Skimmer wrote:
I have a new weapon for sinking it as well. For such tasks I favor mammoth missiles. However my current ultimate MiG-21 sized missile wont be able to cope with something this big with 2 shots, it might need 4! That’s unacceptable..


My new missile shall use the XB-70 as it base. Within the central airframe shall be a 35,000-pound long rod penatraitor warhead. This shall have 8000 of high explosives in it, thermal, 3-milimeter radar,, It will have a huge DU nose back up by titanium for penetration through the target. A solid fueled rocket in the rear with vectored thrust provides guidance

The missile fly as a normal B-70 to the target. When it comes within several miles of the ship it will enter a 70-degree dive. The airframe wings and engines will rip away and expose the penatraitor, which will ignite its rocket and aim for the center of the ships mass.

It will punch clear through and out the bottom, then explode in the water under the ship. The blast, equaling of 12 modern torpedoes, will snap the Freedom ship in half. The hail of mach 4+ debris and fuel from what's left of the main airframe will shred what's left.

Launching will be from a specially fitted 250,000-ton ship using an electromagnetic catapult angled up 10 degrees.

Apparently you love ineffcient way of doing things.Take a Collins class SSK
and start to pour Mark 48 torpedoes into the moster.Trust me it is much more cost effective.