Mobile Ocean Basing Systems

Chris707 · August 19, 2010, 02:44:37 PM

Next, the Mobile Ocean Basing System - these have submerged hulls attached to the columns:

400 x 1,200 foot model

1,000 x 4,000 foot variant:

Chris

Chris707 · August 19, 2010, 02:47:30 PM

And then we have what I term "Big Daddy" - a conglomeration of MOBS modules, including a drydock section:

Mossie · August 19, 2010, 03:23:23 PM

Doesn't look anything like Shirley Crabtree.... (I think only the Brits will get that, you'll see what I mean if you Google the name)!!!

Very nice concepts, kind of a modern version of HMS Habbakuk but not as cold, just a giant offshore platform.

Chris707 · August 19, 2010, 03:29:47 PM

Indeed! Habbakuk was the first thing that came to mind when i saw these.

Mossie · August 19, 2010, 04:15:39 PM

I'm not sure why this reminded me, maybe the tower block style, but a light came on in my head about the Freedom Ship. This was being touted as the ultimate way of living for the mega-rich around a decade or so ago. It was an enormous ship that would basically be a floating city, various levels of accomodation, full amenities, train links from one end to the other. It would circumnavigate the globe every two years, chasing a perpetual summer. It wouldn't dock as it was too huge, instead passengers & residents would board via a dock at the rear & via a lflight deck.

Yeah, it was a civilian aircraft carrier. It would have handled aircraft up to the size of commuters to ferry peeps from their exclusive destinations. Playboys could land their Piaggio Avanti & then store it on a hanger deck immediatley below the flight deck. At 1317m it was far larger than any aircraft carrier today & more than twice the length of the current largest ship. Pipe dream, but on a grand scale!

Early concept:

Late concept:

rickshaw · August 20, 2010, 01:55:24 AM

I wonder how these sea base concepts handle storms? Be very interesting structurally to see it withstand even a 10 foot swell.

Hobbes · September 23, 2010, 01:28:09 AM

Quote from: rickshaw on August 20, 2010, 01:55:24 AM
I wonder how these sea base concepts handle storms? Be very interesting structurally to see it withstand even a 10 foot swell.

IIRC the bigger a ship, the better it'll handle storms.

rickshaw · September 23, 2010, 03:30:57 AM

Quote from: Hobbes on September 23, 2010, 01:28:09 AM
Quote from: rickshaw on August 20, 2010, 01:55:24 AM
I wonder how these sea base concepts handle storms? Be very interesting structurally to see it withstand even a 10 foot swell.

IIRC the bigger a ship, the better it'll handle storms.

Not always true. Bigger ships run a danger, particularly if they aren't strong enough, of breaking their backs if their hulls are extremely long.

Mossie · September 23, 2010, 04:56:44 AM

The Mulberry harbours, although different in their construction, are a point in case. The American controlled Mulberry was destroyed in a storm because it was not tethered down properly, whereas the British Mullberry was & survived. I think if it's correctly designed & the right procedures are followed, then a large structure should survive a storm. Wether or not the current engineering parameters could manage such a structure I have no idea.

rickshaw · September 23, 2010, 05:44:16 AM

The assumption is that they would be properly designed. HMSs COURAGEOUS and GLORIOUS in WWI, battlecruisers were excessively long and lacked adequate stiffeness. COURAGEOUS was damaged during a storm when her Captain used excessive speed. A vessel of this size is unprecedented. Loads on it, particularly in bad weather will be quite dangerous IMO. COURAGEOUS's hull was twisted and required months to repair.