Get your fill of sci-fi, science, and mockery of stupid ideas
http://stardestroyer.dyndns-home.com/
If a yacht costs a billion to make how much would it cost in upkeep? I'm pretty sure that it would pretty much fuck anyone actually capable of building it in the first place.Sea Skimmer wrote: If you want total crazy though, the following is actually a slightly serious project though it has no mad buyer.
Streets of Monaco superyacht.
Hm, that's less than I expected. I was thinking 1 billion ->10 years. Well, if you're Abramovich or some other tycoon that might seem acceptable I guess. *shrugs*Sea Skimmer wrote:It'd depend on how much you were underway, how often you actually tie up to dock (not bloody often is likely, saving immense amounts of money) and how many staff you actually had, a serious amount of the ship could be cleaned by robots if you designed it for that for example, this is already done on some of the newest cruise liners. It might be in the range of 50-75 million dollars a year for a pretty high end estimate. If you have a billion dollars to blow on a ship, put away another 1 billion for upkeep and you can play with it for thirteen years by which time it may well need a deep overhaul and be sold off to someone else. If the cost was half that you get 26 years, which is certainly going to be the useful life of the ship. That is a problem with the concept, while a property on land might be fairly stable in value a ship will loose value over time no matter what you do to maintain it. But money is meant to be enjoyed.
Why did they live the way they did then? Not trying to be sarcastic or obtuse but I've always assumed that they did because they could.It is sad that there are super rich out that wish to live like the super rich of old, without really knowing just WHY the old super rich lived they way they did.
I imagine that the increased speed of transportation makes such an "all in one" approach less necessary. You're far more likely to have good hotels and restaurants in your sphere of influence, especially if you're rich enough that flying is a practical option.Scrib wrote:Why did they live the way they did then? Not trying to be sarcastic or obtuse but I've always assumed that they did because they could.Sea Skimmer wrote:It is sad that there are super rich out that wish to live like the super rich of old, without really knowing just WHY the old super rich lived they way they did.
Yeah the classic estate manor really was just a small castle in concept that progressively evolved to have less and less fortification value. Into the early 19th century 'tower houses' were still being built in certain parts of the European world, more or less a castle down scaled to be only a keep. I believe they lasted the longest, in terms of new construction, in Scotland. Once all pretext of fortification went away the structures could become larger and larger without excessive increase in cost.PeZook wrote:Plus, when someone came over to visit, it was unlikely he'd stay for a few hours and then leave: staying as a guest for months wasn't uncommon, because travel took a really long time. Then, if we go far enough into the past, you had the fact that a manor was often an administrative center of your estate as well as a house, thus it needed all the facilities to allow it to function as such: stables to provide transportation, an office, quarters for the middle managers (who were sometimes noblemen themselves!) etc.
You know those long tables with food caterers bring? A servery basically has that set up permanently. If you had a banquet there, people would go up there for the food, then walk back out into the hall. As for pantry? Have you seen the size of that kitchen? What's wrong with storing things in a giant cupboard? Plus, how much preserved food are you expecting to store, exactly?Crossroads Inc. wrote: Despite two huge 'Kitchens' on the ground floor, there appears to be no Walk in Pantry. Putting food just in huge cupboards I don't think would cut it. (unless the 'Servery' room is a pantry of some sort, but why have an extra hallway going from kitchen to dinning room?)
Less focus on the kitchen, more focus on the breakfast room. It's basically a room for the family to eat in private, and for the owners to cook if they want it. Bathroom is for washing of hands, and perhaps a quick bathroom break. No different than running to the bathroom in you own apartment, I am sure.Also in the 'Family' Kitchen there appears to be a bathroom right inside. I don't know about you, but I am not sure I want to hear a 'Flush' if I am right in the middle of cooking dinner.
True. Maybe in the service wing/basement?You would think it could be located elsewhere. Also both on the ground floor and others, there seems to be no 'Laundry Room'. Lots of rooms are labeled, but none just for laundry.
...for the staff member who has to spend hours in that tiny room? Seriously, have you given this any thought at all?
A note on the entrance. To the left there is a 'Cloak room' which is fine, if you have a lot of guests its good to have a place to hang up coats, especially during winter. But Why is there a bathroom through the cloak room?
That one is for the guests.
There is already a small bathroom to the right of the entrance.
Very hard. Because cases and cases of books. Also, a bazaar anteroom? Huh?If anything that second bathroom should be 'flipped' to connect to the Library. Also a note on the Library, it has ONE tiny entrance that is through that bazaar circular ante-room. How hard would it have been to add doors like on the other side that go into the ‘Drawing room’ ?
This is true.Another problem is the Central staircase. Usually the central stair case is directly in front of the main entrance, so people come in and go 'Oo Ah!' and such, here, it is off to the side of the house. You almost wonder if it was originally supposed to be in the middle, but the someone decided to "Flip" the plans around or something.
....what are you smoking? That bathroom is ENORMOUS. Large enough for a massive jacuzzi. I mean, look at it. It's the size of TWO full-sized bathrooms on the left put together. Also, dressing room =/= closet. Also, "tiny" hallways? You have no sense of scale, my friend. Those are your standard apartment hallway. It's the rooms that are oversized.A note on the second floor, the master bedroom is a MESS. You have this huge massive space, and a small tiny bathroom? The closet is also on the other end of the bedroom and bigger then the bathroom itself. The rest of the floor is a mess, you have huge bedrooms and you have to squeeze through tiny hallways to get inside most of them.
Most of your issues are not really problems.Those were the main things the two of us discussed, I am sure there are more issues. Curious what others think.
I recently found a blog online that has the floorplans of a great deal of mansions from the turn of the century and the 'Gilded Age'Sea Skimmer wrote:Yeah the classic estate manor really was just a small castle in concept that progressively evolved to have less and less fortification value. Into the early 19th century 'tower houses' were still being built in certain parts of the European world, more or less a castle down scaled to be only a keep. I believe they lasted the longest, in terms of new construction, in Scotland. Once all pretext of fortification went away the structures could become larger and larger without excessive increase in cost.PeZook wrote:Plus, when someone came over to visit, it was unlikely he'd stay for a few hours and then leave: staying as a guest for months wasn't uncommon, because travel took a really long time. Then, if we go far enough into the past, you had the fact that a manor was often an administrative center of your estate as well as a house, thus it needed all the facilities to allow it to function as such: stables to provide transportation, an office, quarters for the middle managers (who were sometimes noblemen themselves!) etc.
